jamesf99
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.7 #15 · D700: Canon breathe sigh of relief. | |
32067dlm wrote:
First, I'm neither new to the forum (despite my low numbers, I've recently got a new login), and I'm certainly not new to digital photography. I'm anything but confused. I've been watching the Canon vs Nikon debates since the 10D/D100 were announced. I've watched Canon continually make incremental improvements at a higher frequencey than Nikon. While Nikon has released fewer cameras, they've had more significant upgrades (e.g., 10D, 20D, 30D, 40D vs D100, D200, D300). In three generations, Nikon has out developed Canon. I doubt anyone here is in disagreement (exept fanboys). What I was saying earlier, is that if Canon give us something "new" incorporating the existing capabilities with fewer brain dead replacements, it will cost more - $3k to $4k. To those screaming for "what we deserve", yet expecting a price of $2k, that's foolish.
My point is simple, Nikon invested R&D money, developed a good system, and has deployed that system across the D3, D700, and the D300. Canon has given the 1D series, the 5D, and the 40D, all different focusing for example. That must drive Canon's R&D costs up.
What I expect: an incremental upgrade in features, with a reasonable upgrade in IQ.
What I'd like: better IQ, pro level focus, user adjustable auto ISO, MLU
What I don't care about: 16+ MP, my 5D has enough resolution, warmed over 40D focusing, built in flash that can't reach over my 24-70.
It's foolish to make assumptions based on the number of posts someone has. It's not like this is some great learning resourse where my IQ increases with each post. Your number of posts don't serve as a badge of honor, nor do they make you any more knowledgable. With the amount of nonsence spewed across this forum (including most of the stuff I post), it'd be easy to rack up "points", but I'm just a guy who's interested in photography, who has a photography business and who often has better things to do with my time....Show more →
I responded too quickly but I edited it. Sorry......
I would never say that Canon hasn't delivered more products, in less time than Nikon, up until the last couple of years, and their reasons for doing so were not altogether altruistic. It's what Intel did and is called "churning the market". Good for Canon, bad for consumers. Nikon on the other hand, until the D3, couldn't produce a product worth buying IMO, so as far as out developing Canon, I'm not sure (AF aside) I'd agree. They've just always provided features while Canon is parsimonious and withholds as much as possible, even on their top of line with the 1Ds3.
What people are really asking for, and yes deserve for the money they're paying these days if they would stop believing the mfgs, is better products. I don't care how many I debates I have to have about this, the costs are out of line.
Canon released it's top of the line professional AF system on a sub $1k camera in 1998 (and boy did I want one, but I purchased the 1VHS that came out a few years later). That AF system (45 point) was used on every professional DSLR and film camera made until the horrendously poor replacement was foisted upon the public in 2007. That working AF system has had all R&D costs returned and is effectively "free". All these other poor implementations may be derivatives, who knows. Strip the working parts out and sell the handicapped base functionality as something special. The 30d was a joke (20d Mk 1.5). The 5d is a 30d with FF. Nikon did similar things in their "s" releases so there's precedence for the game.
If you're satisfied with 12MP and the churn, then you never need upgrade again. There are many of us that do need more, are sick of the incremental churning, and are willing to pay for what we're asking, myself included. I budgeted for a 1Ds3, but after buying 2 1D3's, and seeing the mediocre things Canon did with the 1Ds3; it's got a sensor, on top of a questionable AF system, a cheap LCD, old processor engineering (Digic 3 was released on a P&S camera 2-3 years ago), and other inexcusable deficiencies I decided I'd had enough. That camera is grossly over priced and IMO, very disappointing (yes, IQ aside, and I know that's important/paramount).
We're all so warped by the prices we've seen. Is it $7k more expensive to produce a 1Ds3 than a 40d? There's never been a strong correlation between the price of some of these items/features and actual mfg cost, there's only been Canon's (as with most mfgs) desire to withhold and differentiate.
And to your other point, I'd say no; number of posts, length of time in a forum, or years of exposure to digital mean nothing in some cases. I know many participate in internet forums and have learned little to nothing in years; regardless of how many times things are explained to them or how many posts they have. Others join and are argumentative right away, so in a quick response, the join date, the number of posts, may skew the impression. I started lurking/reading forums in 1999, joined another forum by early 2002, and have seen the same things play out. It is clearly not foolish, but again, I apologize for that assumption.
I agree with your comment about "better things to do". I enjoy talking to other photographers when I'm not working on something else, and it can be engaging, fun, and humorous at times. At other times, it can be frustrating and inexplicably difficult.
|
