Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because of theJapan slowdown and camera release p

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by RichA, Jun 1, 2011.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    RichA, Jun 1, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because of theJapan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On Jun 1, 8:36 am, Bowser <> wrote:
    > On 6/1/2011 8:20 AM, RichA wrote:
    >
    > >http://dpreview.com/reviews/nikonp300/page10.asp

    >
    > > That list of "cons" is really terrible.  $325.00 for that camera?  Not
    > > in this lifetime.

    >
    > Even more amazing is that they gave this POS a 70% rating.


    The only reason they reviewed it is because it is a Nikon. Even Nikon
    doesn't care about the P&S division.
    RichA, Jun 1, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RichA

    nospam Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because of the Japan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    In article
    <>,
    RichA <> wrote:

    > http://dpreview.com/reviews/nikonp300/page10.asp
    >
    > That list of "cons" is really terrible. $325.00 for that camera? Not
    > in this lifetime.


    that list of cons is not that bad. wait until dpreview reviews the
    sigma sd1, assuming they even bother wasting their time.
    nospam, Jun 1, 2011
    #3
  4. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because of theJapan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On Jun 1, 1:19 pm, Bruce <> wrote:
    > Bowser <> wrote:
    > >On 6/1/2011 8:20 AM, RichA wrote:
    > >>http://dpreview.com/reviews/nikonp300/page10.asp

    >
    > >> That list of "cons" is really terrible.  $325.00 for that camera?  Not
    > >> in this lifetime.

    >
    > >Even more amazing is that they gave this POS a 70% rating.

    >
    > Nikon lost its way with P&S digicams several years ago, and there is
    > no sign of getting back on track.  
    >


    Remember the Coolpix 990/5 and 8800 with tears in your eyes.
    RichA, Jun 1, 2011
    #4
  5. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because ofthe Japan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On 6/1/2011 10:24 PM, Rich wrote:
    <snip>
    > I'd suggest to Nikon, forget any more forays into the +$400 realm (not
    > that particular camera) P&S's, then resurrect the 2/3" sensor, limit it
    > to 10 megapixels and give it interchangeable lenses.


    Exactly what qualifications do you have that Nikon, or any other
    business entity would take anything you say seriously.


    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Jun 2, 2011
    #5
  6. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because of theJapan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On Jun 2, 4:48 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    > Rich <> wrote:
    > >Bruce <> wrote in
    > >news::

    >
    > >> RichA <> wrote:
    > >>>On Jun 1, 1:19 pm, Bruce <> wrote:
    > >>>> Bowser <> wrote:
    > >>>> >On 6/1/2011 8:20 AM, RichA wrote:
    > >>>> >>http://dpreview.com/reviews/nikonp300/page10.asp

    >
    > >>>> >> That list of "cons" is really terrible.  $325.00 for that camera?
    > >>>> >>  Not in this lifetime.

    >
    > >>>> >Even more amazing is that they gave this POS a 70% rating.

    >
    > >>>> Nikon lost its way with P&S digicams several years ago, and there is
    > >>>> no sign of getting back on track.  

    >
    > >>>Remember the Coolpix 990/5 and 8800 with tears in your eyes.

    >
    > >> I'm not sure about the tears, but I agree that those two were probably
    > >> the last good Nikon P&S digicams.  The 995 was introduced in 2001 and
    > >> the 8800 in 2005.  Says it all, really.

    >
    > >I'd suggest to Nikon, forget any more forays into the +$400 realm (not
    > >that particular camera) P&S's, then resurrect the 2/3" sensor, limit it
    > >to 10 megapixels and give it interchangeable lenses.

    >
    > Your suggestion comes a bit late, Rich, given that Nikon has already
    > decided on the basis of its mirrorless system.  But you will no doubt
    > take pleasure in telling the newsgroups that Nikon got it wrong ...


    No camera ever meets someone's requirements 100%, until the Japanese
    embrace modularity. Until then, anyone is free to say anything they
    want.

    > ... along with Olympus, Canon, Pentax, Panasonic, Leica, Ricoh and all
    > other manufacturers who wish they had you leading their design teams.


    All you can do is look at performance. Nikon is up, Canon is way
    down, Pentax has a terrible market share but it is apparently making
    money, Olympus market share has halved in the last five years and
    Sony...?
    RichA, Jun 2, 2011
    #6
  7. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because of theJapan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On Jun 2, 12:25 am, PeterN <> wrote:
    > On 6/1/2011 10:24 PM, Rich wrote:
    > <snip>
    >
    > > I'd suggest to Nikon, forget any more forays into the +$400 realm (not
    > > that particular camera) P&S's, then resurrect the 2/3" sensor, limit it
    > > to 10 megapixels and give it interchangeable lenses.

    >
    > Exactly what qualifications do you have that Nikon, or any other
    > business entity would take anything you say seriously.
    >
    > --
    > Peter


    I buy and use a lot of cameras? Unlike professional reviewers who
    seem to have cameras (or claim they do) for months and miss all the
    problems the users find.
    RichA, Jun 2, 2011
    #7
  8. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because of theJapan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On Jun 1, 10:59 pm, "Neil Harrington" <> wrote:
    > RichA wrote:
    > > On Jun 1, 1:19 pm, Bruce <> wrote:
    > >> Bowser <> wrote:
    > >>> On 6/1/2011 8:20 AM, RichA wrote:
    > >>>>http://dpreview.com/reviews/nikonp300/page10.asp

    >
    > >>>> That list of "cons" is really terrible. $325.00 for that camera?
    > >>>> Not in this lifetime.

    >
    > >>> Even more amazing is that they gave this POS a 70% rating.

    >
    > Some of the features (fast 24mm equiv. at the short end, built-in HDR, a few
    > interesting trick "filters") I think give it a certain appeal for buyers
    > interested in those things -- and anyway it won't be selling for $325 very
    > long; like most recent Coolpixes it will quickly come down in price, I'll
    > bet.
    >
    >
    >
    > >> Nikon lost its way with P&S digicams several years ago, and there is
    > >> no sign of getting back on track.

    >
    > > Remember the Coolpix 990/5 and 8800 with tears in your eyes.

    >
    > And the 8400, and even the slightly earlier 8700.
    >
    > Happily, I don't have to remember 'em, I bought all three 8xxx models new
    > and don't expect ever to sell them. While they have some shortcomings
    > compared to newer hardware (chiefly, the almost comically small LCDs) they
    > are still impressive cameras.
    >
    > But there just isn't a market for magnesium-bodied cameras of those types
    > anymore. They'd be too expensive to build today, and could never compete
    > with plastic-bodied DSLRs.


    No, but a small body with small (within telephoto lens and speed
    constraints) lenses could be a seller at $800 or so.
    Sony's NEX seems to be doing pretty well. I think.
    RichA, Jun 2, 2011
    #8
  9. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because ofthe Japan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On 6/2/2011 8:26 AM, RichA wrote:

    > No camera ever meets someone's requirements 100%, until the Japanese
    > embrace modularity. Until then, anyone is free to say anything they
    > want.
    >



    And you illustrate the point perfectly, that it is not necessary to have
    any knowledge to spout.



    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Jun 2, 2011
    #9
  10. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because ofthe Japan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On 6/2/2011 8:26 AM, RichA wrote:
    > On Jun 2, 12:25 am, PeterN<> wrote:
    >> On 6/1/2011 10:24 PM, Rich wrote:
    >> <snip>
    >>
    >>> I'd suggest to Nikon, forget any more forays into the +$400 realm (not
    >>> that particular camera) P&S's, then resurrect the 2/3" sensor, limit it
    >>> to 10 megapixels and give it interchangeable lenses.

    >>
    >> Exactly what qualifications do you have that Nikon, or any other
    >> business entity would take anything you say seriously.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Peter

    >
    > I buy and use a lot of cameras? Unlike professional reviewers who
    > seem to have cameras (or claim they do) for months and miss all the
    > problems the users find.


    Specifically?
    Does your use of cameras give you any more qualifications to give
    business advice?

    Have you done cost analysis, on behalf of the business entity.
    And what about market research.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Jun 2, 2011
    #10
  11. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because ofthe Japan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On 6/2/2011 12:11 PM, Neil Harrington wrote:
    > RichA wrote:
    >> On Jun 1, 10:59 pm, "Neil Harrington"<> wrote:
    >>> RichA wrote:
    >>>> On Jun 1, 1:19 pm, Bruce<> wrote:
    >>>>> Bowser<> wrote:
    >>>>>> On 6/1/2011 8:20 AM, RichA wrote:
    >>>>>>> http://dpreview.com/reviews/nikonp300/page10.asp
    >>>
    >>>>>>> That list of "cons" is really terrible. $325.00 for that camera?
    >>>>>>> Not in this lifetime.
    >>>
    >>>>>> Even more amazing is that they gave this POS a 70% rating.
    >>>
    >>> Some of the features (fast 24mm equiv. at the short end, built-in
    >>> HDR, a few interesting trick "filters") I think give it a certain
    >>> appeal for buyers interested in those things -- and anyway it won't
    >>> be selling for $325 very long; like most recent Coolpixes it will
    >>> quickly come down in price, I'll bet.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>> Nikon lost its way with P&S digicams several years ago, and there
    >>>>> is no sign of getting back on track.
    >>>
    >>>> Remember the Coolpix 990/5 and 8800 with tears in your eyes.
    >>>
    >>> And the 8400, and even the slightly earlier 8700.
    >>>
    >>> Happily, I don't have to remember 'em, I bought all three 8xxx
    >>> models new and don't expect ever to sell them. While they have some
    >>> shortcomings compared to newer hardware (chiefly, the almost
    >>> comically small LCDs) they are still impressive cameras.
    >>>
    >>> But there just isn't a market for magnesium-bodied cameras of those
    >>> types anymore. They'd be too expensive to build today, and could
    >>> never compete with plastic-bodied DSLRs.

    >>
    >> No, but a small body with small (within telephoto lens and speed
    >> constraints) lenses could be a seller at $800 or so.
    >> Sony's NEX seems to be doing pretty well. I think.

    >
    > Hmmm. I got the idea from some review or other that the NEXs weren't that
    > popular, but I may have misinterpreted something. I haven't had much
    > interest in Sony stuff anyway.
    >
    > Checking Adorama just now, I see that most of Sony's other
    > interchangeable-lens cameras, both conventional DSLRs and the pellicle
    > models, are "currently back ordered" and with "no estimated time of
    > arrival." I wonder what that signifies? Is Sony dropping all other ILCs and
    > concentrating entirely on the NEX line, I wonder?
    >
    > I think I'd better eBay off my load of Maxxum lenses. Probably should have
    > done that already.
    >
    >

    I wouldn't change my socks, based upon something rich posts.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Jun 2, 2011
    #11
  12. RichA

    tony cooper Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because of the Japan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 12:44:49 -0400, PeterN
    <> wrote:

    >>

    >I wouldn't change my socks, based upon something rich posts.


    That comma placement is funny enough to comment on. The meaning given
    by that placement is that you refuse to change your socks because of
    something Rich posted. I hope that's not what you meant.
    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Jun 2, 2011
    #12
  13. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because ofthe Japan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On 6/2/2011 12:54 PM, tony cooper wrote:
    > On Thu, 02 Jun 2011 12:44:49 -0400, PeterN
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>>

    >> I wouldn't change my socks, based upon something rich posts.

    >
    > That comma placement is funny enough to comment on. The meaning given
    > by that placement is that you refuse to change your socks because of
    > something Rich posted. I hope that's not what you meant.


    I just received a new shipment of commas. I have to use them up before
    my license to use them expires.


    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Jun 2, 2011
    #13
  14. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because of theJapan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On Jun 2, 8:59 am, Bruce <> wrote:
    > RichA <> wrote:
    > >I buy and use a lot of cameras?  Unlike professional reviewers who
    > >seem to have cameras (or claim they do) for months and miss all the
    > >problems the users find.

    >
    > Many so-called "professional reviewers" get someone else to do the
    > testing.  Then they write an article based on the other person's
    > conclusions, usually without giving them any recognition.  
    >
    > Many less-than-professional reviewers *have never even touched* the
    > equipment they are "reviewing", let alone used it.
    >
    > Many "reviewers" are swayed by offers to keep the equipment they
    > review, either for free or for a silly cheap price.  This almost
    > guarantees a favourable "review".
    >
    > Some manufacturers send review samples that are carefully selected or
    > even hand built to ensure good performance and therefore a good
    > "review".  
    >
    > Samples of cheap lenses suddenly acquire stellar performance
    > characteristics through selection and/or careful centering of lens
    > elements.  They get great reviews, but no-one can ever buy one in a
    > store that performs remotely as well as the review sample.


    Called, "submitting a ringer."

    > Finally, a manufacturer/importer with a healthy advertising budget can
    > use the fear of withdrawal of their advertising account as an
    > incentive to encourage positive magazine reviews.
    >
    > All of this has gone on for decades.  


    Sadly. I know personally of a magazine editor who lost his job
    because he refused to do that. Now, the magazine reviews are vague,
    all positive and disposible.

    > The only way to be sure that you got a good item is to buy it from a
    > store with a good returns policy and test it yourself.  If it falls
    > short, return it.  But most people just trust reviews.


    I try not to buy and return stuff, because I know that they have to
    cut the price by 5% (at least in Canada) and sell it as returned. I
    usually buy it and then just sell it if I find I don't like it. With
    camera equipment, provided the interval between buying and selling
    isn't long, you get back a decent enough portion of what you paid. I
    consider any loss to be rental charge.
    RichA, Jun 3, 2011
    #14
  15. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because of theJapan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On Jun 2, 10:39 am, PeterN <> wrote:
    > On 6/2/2011 8:26 AM, RichA wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Jun 2, 12:25 am, PeterN<>  wrote:
    > >> On 6/1/2011 10:24 PM, Rich wrote:
    > >> <snip>

    >
    > >>> I'd suggest to Nikon, forget any more forays into the +$400 realm (not
    > >>> that particular camera) P&S's, then resurrect the 2/3" sensor, limit it
    > >>> to 10 megapixels and give it interchangeable lenses.

    >
    > >> Exactly what qualifications do you have that Nikon, or any other
    > >> business entity would take anything you say seriously.

    >
    > >> --
    > >> Peter

    >
    > > I buy and use a lot of cameras?  Unlike professional reviewers who
    > > seem to have cameras (or claim they do) for months and miss all the
    > > problems the users find.

    >
    > Specifically?
    > Does your use of cameras give you any more qualifications to give
    > business advice?
    >
    > Have you done cost analysis, on behalf of the business entity.
    > And what about market research.
    >
    > --
    > Peter


    Of course not, most of it is a wish list, nothing more. But if the
    mfg's don't make much money on commodities like P&S's, why not try
    something new?
    Look at micro-4/3rds penetration in Japan. It was something new.
    RichA, Jun 3, 2011
    #15
  16. RichA

    PeterN Guest

    Re: Poor Dpreview. Forced to review rubbish like this because ofthe Japan slowdown and camera release pull-backs

    On 6/3/2011 11:11 AM, RichA wrote:
    > On Jun 2, 10:39 am, PeterN<> wrote:
    >> On 6/2/2011 8:26 AM, RichA wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> On Jun 2, 12:25 am, PeterN<> wrote:
    >>>> On 6/1/2011 10:24 PM, Rich wrote:
    >>>> <snip>

    >>
    >>>>> I'd suggest to Nikon, forget any more forays into the +$400 realm (not
    >>>>> that particular camera) P&S's, then resurrect the 2/3" sensor, limit it
    >>>>> to 10 megapixels and give it interchangeable lenses.

    >>
    >>>> Exactly what qualifications do you have that Nikon, or any other
    >>>> business entity would take anything you say seriously.

    >>
    >>>> --
    >>>> Peter

    >>
    >>> I buy and use a lot of cameras? Unlike professional reviewers who
    >>> seem to have cameras (or claim they do) for months and miss all the
    >>> problems the users find.

    >>
    >> Specifically?
    >> Does your use of cameras give you any more qualifications to give
    >> business advice?
    >>
    >> Have you done cost analysis, on behalf of the business entity.
    >> And what about market research.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Peter

    >
    > Of course not, most of it is a wish list, nothing more. But if the
    > mfg's don't make much money on commodities like P&S's, why not try
    > something new?
    > Look at micro-4/3rds penetration in Japan. It was something new.



    No further comment needed.

    --
    Peter
    PeterN, Jun 3, 2011
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Invalid Address

    Forced video AND forced audio from Universal

    Invalid Address, Jan 8, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    32
    Views:
    2,192
    John Savard
    Jan 18, 2004
  2. =?Utf-8?B?dW51c3VhbHBzeWNobw==?=

    Poor reception, poor connection, and dropped signal

    =?Utf-8?B?dW51c3VhbHBzeWNobw==?=, Jun 7, 2006, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    3,822
    Doug Sherman [MVP]
    Jun 7, 2006
  3. Mainlander
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    674
    Mark Harris
    Jul 10, 2003
  4. arno sebastian
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,701
    arno sebastian
    Apr 30, 2010
  5. RichA
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    243
    RichA
    Jun 22, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page