Why always Nikon and Canon? What's wrong with Panasonic?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by ABC, Aug 27, 2004.

  1. Heh, heh. I used to be in the retail camera business; we lived in fear
    of Consumer reports, Because they had clout and you never knew what
    they'd recommend.

    One year they recommended a Miranda Sensorex over a Nikon F - mostly
    due to "better reliability"! See, they surveyed owners to see how
    frequently their cameras were in the shop - entirely forgetting the
    "average" Nikon user put 100 times more film through his camera than a
    Miranda owner.
     
    Scott Schuckert, Aug 28, 2004
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. ABC

    G. Innipig Guest

    I really doubt that the good men and women of the press corps are subject to
    herd mentality. They choose Canon, and the odd Nikon, because they deliver
    the goods, reliably, and with good support and backup. Drop your Olympus or
    Pentax, or god help you if you choose one, your Sigma, at Athens: that's it,
    you're finished taking pix; drop your Canon: support, repair, loaners, are
    right there, and the quality of both bodies and lenses are beyond compare.
     
    G. Innipig, Aug 28, 2004
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. ABC

    Charlie Self Guest

    Scott Schuckert notes:
    Used to have a Sensorex. Nice camera that broke about every 15th roll of film.

    Lots of people tend to forget that another reason for all the authorized repair
    shops is the number of pros who use Nikons...most of them bring the cameras in
    for a cleaning and tune up/lube once a year, something other people using other
    brands don't bother with. The pro needs a working camera and is willing to
    spend however much annually to make sure it continues to work. Used to send my
    Canon F1s through the annual tune up process. Back in the early to mid-70s that
    ran about $100 a pop at an authorized repair shop.

    Charlie Self
    "A judge is a law student who marks his own examination papers." H. L. Mencken
     
    Charlie Self, Aug 28, 2004
    #23
  4. Herd mentality, perhaps - but Nikon and Canon have both been pretty much at
    the top of the worldwide photography heap for more than 50 years. Likewise,
    they have capitalized on their superior photography reputation and have
    pretty much defined upper level digital photography as well. The result of
    the very dominant market penetration of those two companies is a much wider
    variety of lenses, flashes, accessories available for Canon and Nikon and it
    will be awhile before those much smaller-market-share companies can even
    come close to catching up, if they ever do. Nikon and Canon, in their
    ever-increasing competition between them, just keep pushing the envelope
    harder and harder, making is unlikely in the extreme that those other three
    companies are going to be able to compete for anything other than a niche in
    the overall dSLR market.

    So, yeah...herd mentality to an extent. But mostly because, as a
    photographic SYSTEM, Nikon and Canon have an edge that those other companies
    are just not going to be able to match anytime soon, if ever.

    HMc
     
    Howard McCollister, Aug 28, 2004
    #24
  5. Falling behind? In dSLRs, Olympus has never really been the game from a
    market share standpoint.

    Olympus made great film SLRs, and pretty good lenses. But they stuck with
    their excellent and lucrative point-and-shoots digital cameras too long and
    missed the dSLR bandwagon. In their defense, they had left the film SLR
    arena and defunctionalized Zuiko as an interchangeable lens manufacturer.
    Re-entering the SLR market at the Nikon or Canon level was going to require
    a huge committment from them and a huge uphill struggle for market share. It
    appears that their solution was to try to define a whole new market
    direction where everyone else would have to start from scratch. It doesn't
    look like 4/3 is going to be much more than a niche, but if some other
    players jumped in, like Fuji, that could change.

    HMc
     
    Howard McCollister, Aug 28, 2004
    #25
  6. True of most dealers; not all.

    Arthur: Could you please add a couple of dashes, a space bar and a
    return to conform your (lack of ) a sig. delimiter? Please?
     
    John McWilliams, Aug 28, 2004
    #26
  7. ABC

    Big Bill Guest

    Obviously, there are a lot of good (even great) pics taken with all
    kinds of cameras.
    But pros don't just spring out of bed one morning, and decide to
    become that way with no experience. They've been taking photos for
    years, and have tried lots of techniques and hardware.
    That so may choose Canon isn't because of a herd mentality, but rather
    because experience tells them that Canon cameras are a very good tool
    to use.

    Bill Funk
    Change "g" to "a"
     
    Big Bill, Aug 28, 2004
    #27
  8. ABC

    Big Bill Guest

    Oops, that should have been, "That so many choose Canon isn't because
    of a herd mentality, but rather because experience tells them that
    Canon cameras are a very good tool to use."

    Bill Funk
    Change "g" to "a"
     
    Big Bill, Aug 28, 2004
    #28
  9. ABC

    Mojtaba Guest


    Your post could be taken serious if you changed "always" with "often".

    Mojtaba (Is often right)
     
    Mojtaba, Aug 28, 2004
    #29
  10. ABC

    Charlie Self Guest

    Mojtaba responds:
    Not necessarily. If a dealer does something in the customer's best interest, he
    does so because that particular action is also in the dealer's best interest.

    Charlie Self
    "A judge is a law student who marks his own examination papers." H. L. Mencken
     
    Charlie Self, Aug 28, 2004
    #30
  11. ABC

    John Doe Guest

    Thank you, thank you, thank you. I thought I was the only one that thought
    Photoshop has slipped from greatness. This is great, now there are two crazy
    people that feel this way. Yesssss, I am not alone!!!!!!
     
    John Doe, Aug 28, 2004
    #31
  12. ABC

    John Doe Guest

    I don't think anyone was saying that. I think cameras are like cars, each
    has their own favorite. I like Fords. As for cameras my first digital was an
    Olympus D300L and for most of my digital life I bought Olympus, that was
    until I bought the 3030 and realized that Olympus was slipping. That was
    when I junked that I bought the Sony CD Mavica 2.3MP. I had used a friends
    for job doing product shots for a web site and out of the 3,000 product
    shots 98% of them came out perfect and need very little editing. It was that
    more than anything that impressed me. However, after a year or so with that
    I am getting a little tired of the finalizing and formatting times on it. So
    I tried a friends Digital Rebel and fell in love with it. I almost bought it
    but decided that the 20D has some features and wanted and had the higher
    resolution so I put a $500 deposit down on it. The only other can I ever
    owned was a Canons EOS Elan 35mm and I liked it but go tired of changing
    lens. This time I plan to have one lens, probably a 28 to 135 or 200. I also
    get the kit with the 18 to 55 just because for $100 and the fact that you
    can't get it any other way. I also found it to be a nice lens, that is the
    one I used on the digital Rebel.

    John
     
    John Doe, Aug 28, 2004
    #32
  13. ABC

    Prometheus Guest

    Without knowing how many Nikon cameras are in use this gives no clue as
    to failure rate, besides choosing a product because it does not have
    local support seems curious. Would you choose a car that has to be
    shipped half way around the world to be repaired over one that can be
    repaired where ever you are?
     
    Prometheus, Aug 29, 2004
    #33
  14. ABC

    Matti Haveri Guest

    [/QUOTE]

    I still have an Olympus OM2N and chose Olympus Stylus/mju300 for my 1st
    digital camera because I was brand-loyal.

    Well, recently the 1+ year old Olympus mju300 broke. When I tried to
    repair it, the local repairman refused to even look at it because
    Olympus now refuses to sell parts to 3rd parties.

    Olympus' own repair has a minimum of ?/$ 224 for anything that requires
    opening the camera. It wasn't worth investing such an expensive repair
    effort to a ?/$ 350 camera.

    Olympus is a good brand but this experience led me to get Nikon Coolpix
    3200 instead. If it breaks I can get some 3rd party repair to even look
    if it can be fixed.

    <
     
    Matti Haveri, Aug 29, 2004
    #34
  15. ABC

    bob Guest

    In order for there to be a race, there needs to be more than one
    participant.

    Obviously you are considering image editors in isolation if you think
    that PhotoShop has been "bested" by something else. In reality, PS is
    part of a comprehensive suite, which includes page layout, illustration,
    web creation, and document management. There simply are no competitors.

    You also don't seem to understand how businesses work. Consider the cost
    of a new copy of Photoshop. Maybe $600. After tax? $400. Depreciated over
    several years, it costs less per year than a modest meal. Consider the
    cost of something else. Suppose its free. But it takes time to learn it.
    That's out of pocket expense. I don't know how much you earn in a week,
    but it really doesn't matter; I'm sure it's more than a meal. But the
    real cost isn't the out of pocket salary expense training someone to use
    new software, it's the opportunity cost of not being able to work on
    paying projects. Oh, and I didn't mention the cost of making the decision
    and presenting it in a meeting.

    Before we would even think about changing image editors, there would need
    to be a clear payback. Either that, or else something that just could't
    be done.

    Bob
     
    bob, Aug 30, 2004
    #35
  16. ABC

    Anonymous Guest

    So what's better than PS?


     
    Anonymous, Aug 30, 2004
    #36
  17. That's the trouble with sheep, they can never see beyond the other
    sheep's asses right in front of them.

    I can think of 4 other applications right off-hand that easily best
    anything that the whole adobe suite can do put together, and dozens
    of other single applications that easily best any individual section
    of adobe's products. But I'll leave it to you to explore the world
    of software and find them. You need a good waking up and a lesson in
    how to open your eyes.

    Go forth and explore my son. You've had your head stuck in dark
    places (of your own choosing or by dictates of others) for far too
    long.

    :)

    Besides, this thread is not for software, it's about cameras. I only
    mentioned adobe at all because it was poignant to the "sheep follow"
    rule of humanity, which you have managed to prove yet again all too
    well with your reply.

    Thanks!
     
    JustPassinThru, Aug 31, 2004
    #37
  18. ABC

    bob Guest

    You're so full of **** it's comical.

    The obvious reason you're not naming names is because you cannot. It
    would be absurd for any application to try to do everything that all the
    titles Adobe publishes can do.

    But please, just for the sake of discussion, name a software package can
    be used to publish websites (not pages, sites) and also can be used to
    publish books, oh, and while you're at it, make sure it edits video,
    still images, sound, and transparant vector art. Right, I'm sure there
    are dozens of them. In your mind.


    Besides, my post wasn't about software, it was about how businesses make
    decisions, which is directly related to the original post and most of the
    thread. You have managed to prove that some people don't understand that
    there is a whole world out there (as opposed to the dream world that
    exists in your head).

    Since you couldn't name a software package in response to my first
    challenge, here's an easy one for you. Name a vector art package besides
    Illustrator that my service bureau uses. Doh! Failed again!

    "Jump up, look around,
    Find yourself some fun,
    No sense in sitting there hating everyone.
    No man’s an island and his castle isn’t home,
    The nest is for nothing when the bird has flown." < Ian Anderson

    Bob
     
    bob, Aug 31, 2004
    #38
  19. ABC

    gsum Guest

    Nothing Is Easy but if you want a photo editor that has 90%
    of Photoshop's functions and has a right mouse control that
    works correctly, you can get a fully licensed old version of Corel Draw
    (includes Photopaint) for a tenner in the UK.

    I have PS CS and Corel, and find that the only significant PS function
    missing in Corel is Highlight/Shadow. Corel is much faster and easier to
    use for e.g. cloning due to the dual mouse control.

    Graham
     
    gsum, Aug 31, 2004
    #39
  20. There are 4 beyond the antiquated one that you are still trying to
    justify for yourself. Go look for them. Besides those, there are
    dozens of individual programs that easily surpass what any region of
    feature that adobe's garbage can do. Is it that much more difficult
    to click on a short-cut to run an independent program than a menu or
    toolbar button if you can accomplish the same things with even
    greater flexibility, speed, and more advanced features? You sure do
    have some strange views on things, sitting there trying to convince
    yourself and all others to be stuck inside of one outdated software
    package just because it can all be done under one corporate logo. I
    have this suspicion that you secretly applaud the Borg on Star Trek
    from your room in your mother's basement. (Or more likely are just
    one of the thousands of corporate puppet-shills hiding out on usenet
    under aliases, your role now failed as trying to represent adobe. If
    that's the case, then I'm sorry that I outted you, because your
    pathetic failure at it will mean they will now have to hire someone
    else to do their menial public-brainwashing work for them. Oh well.)
    I have 2 others in mind at the moment (no, wait, make that 3). Go
    hunt them down. I doubt your service bureau uses them though. Any
    company and its employees usually have their collective heads up
    their asses because they've invested in something as archaic as
    abode's crap and are forced to stick with it. Such is the drawback
    to capitalism and capitalists, they can't get out of the eventual
    self-destructive rut they've created for themselves. The usual
    cyclic rise and fall of capitalist based organizations. Their
    problem, not mine. Nor is it a problem for those individuals that
    are not similarly handicapped, (handicapped as you are, from your
    own admission).
    1. Your comments so far are the typical self-absorbed
    self-justifying bleating that sheep are proud of as they march off
    to be sheared or slaughtered. Or what any lemming would say as he
    tried to explain why he had to run to that cliff, "I HAVE TO! THERE
    ARE NO OTHER OPTIONS!" Just as you want to steadfastly believe there
    are no other software options. I can never understand why people
    choose to be this way. It's so disheartening when I see such blatant
    displays of it.

    2. People like you don't really deserve my help, attention, nor
    time. I'm not about to do your homework for you because of some
    childish manipulative comments that you type on usenet -- unless you
    you are capable of paying me in the manner I choose, and you can't
    afford what it would cost (I guarantee you of that). Alongside
    photography as a major interest in life I research and analyze
    software for a living, testing sometimes up to a thousand software
    packages a year for functionality and features then pass my findings
    along to those that value what I do best. I don't usually assist
    people like you for free more than I already have. And most
    certainly not if your company will benefit from it at my expense.

    3. I'm actually doing you a favor by not answering your questions
    directly, but you don't realize that yet. Sheep rarely do until one
    day a light goes off in their head and they stop being sheep. It's
    rare when it happens. But very much worth the effort of *not*
    helping them -- to force them to stop choosing to be sheep on their
    own. If I just hand answers to sheep they're still just being lowly
    sheep. In my sphere of influence I don't enable people to remain
    acting as mindless following sheep. They either stop being sheep or
    I walk away from them, it's that simple. I don't embrace
    slaughter-house animals as equals worthy of intellectual discourse.

    4. The only thing I will help you with though, for free, is to
    suggest that you take your head out of those dark places where you
    stuck it before you embarrass yourself further.

    5. In cases such as yours, I usually end up having to remind myself
    of this simple but sage advice: "Never try to teach pigs to sing. It
    only frustrates the teacher and irritates the pigs." It makes it
    easier for me to walk away from them.

    If you must, at least play your desperate games for attention on
    someone else that will fall for such manipulative childishness. I
    have better things to do. Typing at ~150 wpm, this short reply to
    you was no effort. I figure this is about all that you are worth --
    but not more than this.

    Ba-a-a-ah bye.
     
    JustPassinThru, Aug 31, 2004
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.