Re: Sony NEX sales, question

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by dj_nme, Jun 7, 2010.

  1. dj_nme

    dj_nme Guest

    Rich wrote:
    > The metal bodied one, or the plastic? Which will triumph?


    If they can get the kinks out of the "pre-production" lenses sent out
    for review with the new cameras, then there is a chance that both can
    "survive" in the marketplace.

    I would perhaps like to buy one (maybe the NEX-5) and embed it into an
    old (kaput) Contax III (RF camera) and so use my collection of lenses on
    a "Frankensteined" digital body with an actual RF built into it.
    Sort of like the Cybershot in a Canon AE1 that went around the web a few
    weeks ago, but able to use the real lenses due to the big sensor and
    short flange/sensor distance in the Sony NEX cameras.
    dj_nme, Jun 7, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. dj_nme

    Me Guest

    On 7/06/2010 1:26 p.m., dj_nme wrote:
    > Rich wrote:
    >> The metal bodied one, or the plastic? Which will triumph?

    >
    > If they can get the kinks out of the "pre-production" lenses sent out
    > for review with the new cameras, then there is a chance that both can
    > "survive" in the marketplace.
    >

    If you go to the DPReview site, they've got some samples from a "final
    production" 16mm. It's bad - edge performance is abysmal and a lot of
    CA, not better than the so-called "pre-production" lenses.
    Peddling BS about the "pre-production" status of the original lens
    samples sent to reviewers was a bad move.
    Making such a crappy lens to release with a new system is a big mistake.
    Sony can make some good stuff, but they really blew it on this.
    Me, Jun 7, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. dj_nme

    dj_nme Guest

    Me wrote:
    > On 7/06/2010 1:26 p.m., dj_nme wrote:
    >> Rich wrote:
    >>> The metal bodied one, or the plastic? Which will triumph?

    >>
    >> If they can get the kinks out of the "pre-production" lenses sent out
    >> for review with the new cameras, then there is a chance that both can
    >> "survive" in the marketplace.
    >>

    > If you go to the DPReview site, they've got some samples from a "final
    > production" 16mm. It's bad - edge performance is abysmal and a lot of
    > CA, not better than the so-called "pre-production" lenses.
    > Peddling BS about the "pre-production" status of the original lens
    > samples sent to reviewers was a bad move.


    I did believe that the excuse of "it's a pre-production model" for the
    bad performance of the original version of the lens seemed rather lame.
    Obviously I'm not alone in that belief.

    > Making such a crappy lens to release with a new system is a big mistake.
    > Sony can make some good stuff, but they really blew it on this.


    Every other new system has lived (or died) depending on what the lenses
    are like.
    It's a shame that Sony seems to have forgotten this.
    dj_nme, Jun 7, 2010
    #3
  4. dj_nme

    SMS Guest

    On 07/06/10 5:26 AM, dj_nme wrote:

    > Every other new system has lived (or died) depending on what the lenses
    > are like.
    > It's a shame that Sony seems to have forgotten this.


    Consumers got tired of sub-standard "new systems" a long time ago,
    witness the various attempts to create smaller, "foolproof" alternatives
    to 35mm film (126, 110, Disc, APS), and the whole 4/3 debacle.
    SMS, Jun 7, 2010
    #4
  5. dj_nme

    dj_nme Guest

    SMS wrote:
    > On 07/06/10 5:26 AM, dj_nme wrote:
    >
    >> Every other new system has lived (or died) depending on what the lenses
    >> are like.
    >> It's a shame that Sony seems to have forgotten this.

    >
    > Consumers got tired of sub-standard "new systems" a long time ago,
    > witness the various attempts to create smaller, "foolproof" alternatives
    > to 35mm film (126, 110, Disc, APS), and the whole 4/3 debacle.


    I agree totally.
    Mostly these smaller systems seem to have been designed to gouge money
    from unsuspecting consumers.
    Especially the 35mm film alternatives you listed, which made the film
    much more expensive and in the case of Disc film, totally shunned by the
    infrastructure (main-street, consumer photolabs) that was supposed to
    process it for the consumer (many of the photolabs sent it off to Kodak
    for processing).
    dj_nme, Jun 7, 2010
    #5
  6. dj_nme

    LOL! Guest

    On Tue, 08 Jun 2010 00:14:55 +1000, dj_nme <> wrote:

    >
    >Mostly these smaller systems seem to have been designed to gouge money
    >from unsuspecting consumers.


    Now that's funny.

    Convince the idiot consumer to buy a $500-$3000 camera body, then charge
    them up-the-ass $500-$100,000 (e.g. Canon EF 1200mm f/5.6 L USM costs
    $102,498) per lens in order to make that camera body the least bit
    functional. 10x-1000x's the cost it takes to manufacture each lens. (I used
    to make telescopes, even redesign microscopes, I know what it costs to
    create an excellent lens assembly of most any size.)

    Buying into a DSLR is like charging you $10,000 for a car but
    $10,000-$500,000 per tire. Talk about the "unsuspecting consumer"!

    LOL!

    DSLR peddlers saw fools like you (and the SMS pretend-photographer
    role-playing troll) coming from light-years away.

    You all do P.T. Barnum proud.

    LOL!
    LOL!, Jun 7, 2010
    #6
  7. dj_nme

    SMS Guest

    On 07/06/10 7:14 AM, dj_nme wrote:
    > SMS wrote:
    >> On 07/06/10 5:26 AM, dj_nme wrote:
    >>
    >>> Every other new system has lived (or died) depending on what the lenses
    >>> are like.
    >>> It's a shame that Sony seems to have forgotten this.

    >>
    >> Consumers got tired of sub-standard "new systems" a long time ago,
    >> witness the various attempts to create smaller, "foolproof"
    >> alternatives to 35mm film (126, 110, Disc, APS), and the whole 4/3
    >> debacle.

    >
    > I agree totally.
    > Mostly these smaller systems seem to have been designed to gouge money
    > from unsuspecting consumers.


    <snip>

    The various attempts to create a P&S camera "almost as good as a D-SLR"
    continue this trend of selling products mostly to people that don't
    understand the limitations.

    You've got many people buying ZLR P&S cameras based on megapixels, LCD
    size, and lens range, who are then surprised and upset that the problems
    they had with their smaller P&S cameras are still there (noise, AF lag,
    CA, etc). And to be fair you've got other buyers of ZLR cameras that are
    well aware of the limitations but the advantages (mainly cost) outweigh
    the limitations.

    Some people will say that "unsuspecting consumers" are the legal prey of
    these companies, but in reality it should not be necessary to become
    knowledgeable about pixel dimensions, focusing technology, and optics to
    avoid buying poorly designed products.

    Fortunately, the "unsuspecting consumer" is unlikely to make the same
    mistake twice, and when they are totally exasperated with the ZLR
    they'll go buy a D-SLR and give the ZLR away or sell it to the next victim.

    When someone asks me to take their picture with their P&S camera, it's
    usually outside, and I always make a point of saying something like "I
    can't find the viewfinder" just to see their reaction. Invariably it's
    something like "I didn't realize that it didn't have one when I bought
    this camera, I won't make that mistake again."
    SMS, Jun 7, 2010
    #7
  8. dj_nme

    tony cooper Guest

    On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:28:56 -0700, SMS <>
    wrote:

    >When someone asks me to take their picture with their P&S camera, it's
    >usually outside, and I always make a point of saying something like "I
    >can't find the viewfinder" just to see their reaction. Invariably it's
    >something like "I didn't realize that it didn't have one when I bought
    >this camera, I won't make that mistake again."


    So you send people back with a puzzled "WTF?" expression on their
    face.

    I usually say something like "You want to zip up your fly before I
    take the photo?" or "There's a bee on your shoulder". I like to send
    them back with a photo of a smile on their face.


    --
    Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
    tony cooper, Jun 8, 2010
    #8
  9. dj_nme

    Pete Guest

    On 2010-06-08 01:36:13 +0100, tony cooper said:

    > On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:28:56 -0700, SMS <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> When someone asks me to take their picture with their P&S camera, it's
    >> usually outside, and I always make a point of saying something like "I
    >> can't find the viewfinder" just to see their reaction. Invariably it's
    >> something like "I didn't realize that it didn't have one when I bought
    >> this camera, I won't make that mistake again."

    >
    > So you send people back with a puzzled "WTF?" expression on their
    > face.
    >
    > I usually say something like "You want to zip up your fly before I
    > take the photo?" or "There's a bee on your shoulder". I like to send
    > them back with a photo of a smile on their face.


    I send them back with a smile. I hold their camera up to my eye then
    have that puzzled "WTF?" expression on my face. I've been asked more
    than once "Still using film?"

    --
    Pete
    Pete, Jun 8, 2010
    #9
  10. dj_nme

    GGBrowne Guest

    On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 09:02:21 +0100, Pete
    <> wrote:

    >On 2010-06-08 01:36:13 +0100, tony cooper said:
    >
    >> On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:28:56 -0700, SMS <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> When someone asks me to take their picture with their P&S camera, it's
    >>> usually outside, and I always make a point of saying something like "I
    >>> can't find the viewfinder" just to see their reaction. Invariably it's
    >>> something like "I didn't realize that it didn't have one when I bought
    >>> this camera, I won't make that mistake again."

    >>
    >> So you send people back with a puzzled "WTF?" expression on their
    >> face.
    >>
    >> I usually say something like "You want to zip up your fly before I
    >> take the photo?" or "There's a bee on your shoulder". I like to send
    >> them back with a photo of a smile on their face.

    >
    >I send them back with a smile. I hold their camera up to my eye then
    >have that puzzled "WTF?" expression on my face. I've been asked more
    >than once "Still using film?"


    If I saw you doing that with a camera without an OVF or EFV I'd reach over
    and try to get my camera back safely. While saying, "Excuse me, but I think
    I'll find someone that knows how to use a camera. Thanks for trying
    anyway." Then mumble to myself as I walked away, starting with things like,
    "What a fucking idiot! Can you imagine he claimed to know anything at all
    about cameras? Amazing that they let him out in public. For him not to even
    be able to see how to obviously use this camera I can only imagine what
    kind of crapshots he takes with ANY camera. If he knows how to use any
    camera at all that is. Amazing, simply amazing, that someone like that
    would even offer to try to take a photograph for me. What a fucking DOLT!
    ....." Then tell all my friends later about the total buffoon that I had met
    earlier.

    And I wouldn't be the least bit wrong in any of those assessments of you.
    GGBrowne, Jun 8, 2010
    #10
  11. dj_nme

    Pete Guest

    On 2010-06-08 11:23:18 +0100, GGBrowne said:

    > On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 09:02:21 +0100, Pete
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> On 2010-06-08 01:36:13 +0100, tony cooper said:
    >>
    >>> On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:28:56 -0700, SMS <>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> When someone asks me to take their picture with their P&S camera, it's
    >>>> usually outside, and I always make a point of saying something like "I
    >>>> can't find the viewfinder" just to see their reaction. Invariably it's
    >>>> something like "I didn't realize that it didn't have one when I bought
    >>>> this camera, I won't make that mistake again."
    >>>
    >>> So you send people back with a puzzled "WTF?" expression on their
    >>> face.
    >>>
    >>> I usually say something like "You want to zip up your fly before I
    >>> take the photo?" or "There's a bee on your shoulder". I like to send
    >>> them back with a photo of a smile on their face.

    >>
    >> I send them back with a smile. I hold their camera up to my eye then
    >> have that puzzled "WTF?" expression on my face. I've been asked more
    >> than once "Still using film?"

    >
    > If I saw you doing that with a camera without an OVF or EFV I'd reach over
    > and try to get my camera back safely. While saying, "Excuse me, but I think
    > I'll find someone that knows how to use a camera. Thanks for trying
    > anyway."


    I've had that happen.

    > Then mumble to myself as I walked away, starting with things like,
    > "What a fucking idiot! Can you imagine he claimed to know anything at all
    > about cameras? Amazing that they let him out in public. For him not to even
    > be able to see how to obviously use this camera I can only imagine what
    > kind of crapshots he takes with ANY camera. If he knows how to use any
    > camera at all that is. Amazing, simply amazing, that someone like that
    > would even offer to try to take a photograph for me.


    I never offer to take photos for anyone, sometimes I'm asked.

    > What a fucking DOLT!
    > ...." Then tell all my friends later about the total buffoon that I had met
    > earlier.
    >
    > And I wouldn't be the least bit wrong in any of those assessments of you.


    After 45 years of using cameras with an OVF, the habit is hard to break :)

    --
    Pete
    Pete, Jun 8, 2010
    #11
  12. dj_nme

    Peter Guest

    "tony cooper" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 09:28:56 -0700, SMS <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>When someone asks me to take their picture with their P&S camera, it's
    >>usually outside, and I always make a point of saying something like "I
    >>can't find the viewfinder" just to see their reaction. Invariably it's
    >>something like "I didn't realize that it didn't have one when I bought
    >>this camera, I won't make that mistake again."

    >
    > So you send people back with a puzzled "WTF?" expression on their
    > face.
    >
    > I usually say something like "You want to zip up your fly before I
    > take the photo?" or "There's a bee on your shoulder". I like to send
    > them back with a photo of a smile on their face.
    >



    I tell them to look at the parrot on my shoulder. It keeps them from staring
    into the lens and usually gets a natural smile. Just a variation of your
    technique.

    --
    Peter
    Peter, Jun 8, 2010
    #12
    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. Allan
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    890
    Tim V.
    May 1, 2006
  2. Rich
    Replies:
    61
    Views:
    2,342
    Bob Larter
    Jul 13, 2009
  3. Rich

    Cruddy P&S sales drop for Sony, DSLR sales jump

    Rich, Aug 1, 2009, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    462
  4. RichA
    Replies:
    15
    Views:
    1,177
  5. Bruce

    Re: Sony NEX sales, question

    Bruce, Jun 6, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    351
    Bruce
    Jun 7, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page