September 02, 2014, 03:31:50 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Chuck Alaimo

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 63
256
Canon General / Re: Consumer DSLRs “dead in 5 years”
« on: October 27, 2013, 05:59:19 PM »
The odd curiosity is that Sony, despite dominating the professional video marker since forever, despite developing most of the technology that comprises a DSLR sensor, have never really caught the publics imagination in the way that Canon and Nikon had (a problem they inhereted from Minolta to be fair)
So is Alpha dead?  Is NEX dead? Now this new system.

What about SLT?  Wasn't that going to kill of the SLR?  If I had bought into Sony DSLRs when they first arrived, and then bought say an a700 or a900, I would be pretty pithed off.

Every year they change the game, and every second year they change it again.

Folk spending serious money on kit are in it for the long haul.  Nikon may have DxO foaming at the mouth for now, but all it takes is a camera launch and those who blow with the wind will be coming back to Canon.

Sony are pretty knackered as an entirity, they've been making grand claims for the last few years about market share projections etc, yet continually re-invent, re-lauch.  There is no consistency, no grand vision.

If you have L or AF-D lenses, you've bought into a system.  You'll play the long game.  Sony just aren't.

An Sony know this, thus the efforts to make bodies that folk can adapt their lenses to.

Sony have historically bought in low end canon lenses for their cheaper camcorders and point and shoots, and used zeiss designs for their decent stuff, in the high end broadcast market it's always been fujinon or canon lenses.

Maybe Sony just don't like make lenses, or have realised that the only way they are going to compete is to let their users adapt their existing canon or nikon lenses.

I find it hilarious to see all these metabones EF to NEX adaptors, blackmagic EF etc,  If I had a free choice of lenses to use for video, canon EF would be actually quite far down the list... no iris ring, mostly not parfocal, rubbish scales.

Don't get me wrong, I love them for stills, and I have them so use them for video, and get results I'm pleased with, and I'm going to use a c100 because of these same lenses I've berated.

But the point is, Sony have brought out an interesting camera, in much the same way as Minolta always did interesting things (wireless flash and off film E-TTL years before anybody else) it's not going to topple Canon or Nikon, because of breadth of range, quality and sheer fanboy loyalty.

the biggest point here is the "Every year they change the game, and every second year they change it again."  sony has their hands dipped into way too many buckets right now.  As the debate regarding the future of canon/nikon continues - all this energy into what cell phones are doing to the market - for nikon, I'd be more worried on the reliance on sony for their exmor sensors.  Sony may make some great stuff, but, they make a ton of it across many lines ---  new playstation, new Vaio's, oh, they make monitors too, cd players, recievers, speakers, cell phones, etc etc etc .... in terms of photography, the commitment to maintaining a product is, well, spotty at best.  Not the kind of thing working pro's will want to invest in --- as a working pro, yeah, give good running, solid cameras and lenses, marginal upgrades, sure, I will take them ---- in fact --- I'd rather marginal upgrades over lets jump the shark upgrades----

which yeah, brings us to mirrorless ----- why isn't canon or nikon putting a ton into mirrorless ---because why would they?  they have tons of people who have invested into the current lens system ---and they want more ---would you want canon to release a statement like:

We apologize to our DSLR userbase, because due to budgets we are dropping all R&D on the 14-24mm 2.8L in order to put all our time and energy into mirroless tech."

Or worse, "we regret to inform you than we are dropping the DSLR format and moving to mirrorless bodies.  all of your lenses are now obsolete, please refer to our listy of EOs-M lenses...."

The way i see it, mirrorless tech will be a part of the future, but, only when the EVF will be as good in all situations as a OVF, and ---when the size factor is changed to allow for larger mirrorless bodies that will use EF lenses!  If the only benefit to mirrorless is size and weight, then it will not be for pro use --- those are standard consumer needs... So, mirrorless needs to grow up if it wants to stay around and be more than a novelty item

257
Canon General / Re: Consumer DSLRs “dead in 5 years”
« on: October 27, 2013, 05:42:45 PM »
The Sony A7 is a nail in the coffin of Canon’s full frame line-up but it’s consumer apathy which will finally close the lid.

http://www.eoshd.com/content/11409/consumer-dslrs-dead-5-years

ahhhh...I remember betamax, and laser disks....ahhhhh...great formats right....

the best in their times.
but that doesn´t mean much...

Yup, because other formats won the battle --- as most point out, beta was far superior to VHS, but, in the end, VHS won.  Sometimes the better thing does not win.

258
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Spec List Surfaces [CR1]
« on: October 27, 2013, 05:04:03 PM »
No, the 1DX does have fast frame rates which I'm willing to give up and it has that awful 1 series body which I will never buy or even consider.

I don't get all this hate on 1 series body style, with so many grips sold and so many using grips - I don't get it, why wouldn't you want a second set of controls for portrait orientation shooting????????

It's heavy, too big, doesn't fit in my waist bag, and it useless to me on 99.9% of my shots.  I have shot 150,000 shots on cameras without grips and have never even shopped around for a grip for them.  Every time I shoot on someone else's gripped camera I find it uncomfortable, and every time I've use a 1 series I've found them next to impossible to use at all.  I have little hands and can't even touch the shutter release with my hand positioned properly on the grip.

an average sized hand should fit a 1 series body fine, or any other body with a grip.  You have smaller than average hands, so, unless you get a custom design body, then your stuck with camera bodies designed for average sized hands.

If the grip is too big, how do you even hold a non gripped 5d, or a 7d?  Sounds like you need a much smaller body in general...


either way, the point is, your also asking for 1d specs in a much smaller cheaper body, just not happening....if the grip is too big for you, then so will this new 7d....

and PS...not attacking you directly, your like the sixth person I have seen on here hating on the built in grip...

259
Canon General / Re: Consumer DSLRs “dead in 5 years”
« on: October 27, 2013, 04:59:23 PM »
The Sony A7 is a nail in the coffin of Canon’s full frame line-up but it’s consumer apathy which will finally close the lid.

http://www.eoshd.com/content/11409/consumer-dslrs-dead-5-years

ahhhh...I remember betamax, and laser disks....ahhhhh...great formats right....

260
it is very simple. Canon and Nikon are being punished for not having brought to market DSLRs that are both affordable and interesting to regular-income photo enthusiasts. Lack of  interesting products ... less sales. 1 Million less incrementally boring DSLR-iterations ... hahaha, I love it. Customers are king, after all.

Two years ago (late 2012) Canon and Nikon missed the boat. No compelling and affordable APS-C DSLRs. No D400. No 7D II. Pricing closer to USD 1000 than to 2000. Of course with built- in GPS, Wifi, and in Canon's case EX-RT radio flash trigger. And fully articulated LCD (not just tilt!). For Canon the old 45-point 1 AF system plus a kick-ass 24MP APS-C sensor, half a notch better DR and Hi-ISO than the Nikon D7100 sensor. Nikon would have easily gotten away with the D7100 sensor and AF system (Multicam 3500DX).

And today, CaNikon are missing the boat again, because they have no mirrorless FF MILCs ready now and it looks they will not even have one ready within the year.

These days, only a few budget-restricted, conservative die-hards insisting on OVF are willing to swallow marketing-crippled FF DSLRs (6D, D610) still priced at more than 1500. All others are buying Fuji APS-C instead and/or are will be buying innovative and more affordable FF-mirrorless cams.

CaNikon are in for a lot of punishment. Well deserved.


??????   i think your asking for a miracle here and I think your wrong on a bunch of levels --- innovating the $1000 level bodies I think at this point is a death wish - the $1000 body segment of the market is exactly the folks saying why spend money when my phone can do the trick.  You can't draw blood from a stone - and i said this before - even cell phone makes will suffer from this too because what else can you do at this stage that's revolutionary????  DR, it's been done, it's been argued, it's been the dead horse beaten and you know what.. an increase in DR may be a major improvement for the pro/ serious enthusiast crowd ....

But, the $1000 body crowd is gonna be falling in line with that cell phone crowd...and they don't need DR, they don't need mp's...they need that easy way to facebook it..  Many of these users will love that wifi, they may even shoot in raw, but, right after shooting use the picture viewer on the phone, then use some phone based editing software, then instagram and faebook it.  Pros and entusiasts are looking for different things (i have to wonder at some here, the whole lack of gps in a 5d3 crowd, that i think is not the norm - but hey, a sale is a sale, for every person buying the 6d for the gps wifi, there is another person buying it for the good FF sensor and basic interface).

And then there's the whole mirrorless thing?  Mirrorless is a new market finding its way, it may become a dominant format, or, it may go the way of betamax ---- and, let me get this right, you want revolutionary DSLR's and Revolutionary mirrorless - i say pick one or the other and put your resources there...

ohhh and sorry, maybe some casual users/ entusiasts/ people looking for a decent camera to bring on vacation are going for the  Fuji APS-C and or olympus models --- but, I have not seen one pro/semipro/emerging pro show up to any kind of event with one of those. 

In summation, I just don't understand where your coming from...

261
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Spec List Surfaces [CR1]
« on: October 27, 2013, 04:42:18 PM »
Good.  Now release a 5D4 along with it with the same everything except sensor size, pixel density and frame rate.

I'll buy both together.

That camera is called EOS 1Dx.

No, the 1DX does have fast frame rates which I'm willing to give up and it has that awful 1 series body which I will never buy or even consider.

I don't get all this hate on 1 series body style, with so many grips sold and so many using grips - I don't get it, why wouldn't you want a second set of controls for portrait orientation shooting????????

262
I just want to bang my head against the wall and scream when I read comments following stories like this. It's as if only Neuro, Chuck and a handful of others actually read the stories.

Photonius had a decent analysis but then pulled a conclusion out of thin air that I'm still scratching my head over.

So, the only way to get a lot of people to buy new cameras is with a substantial innovation in sensor technology.

Was that intended as sarcasm or a joke?



no, just some unfinished thought left standing. I meant if you want to get existing owners to upgrade (and thus create a  new purchase cycle, ( like in the past from 4 to 10 MPs or whatever), you really need some mouthwatering new features, e.g. a new sensor that is a serious jump over all current products, or some other neat feature that's not just a gimmick. Live view was a pretty neat feature when it came.
Of course sensors are very mature at this point, so it's difficult to see how that could improve a lot, but the dual pixels of the sensor in the 70D could be  a precursor to a whole bunch of things.

Ha! Now I understand.

I was confused because your post was so thoughtful and rational and then all of a sudden it seemed like you took a peculiar turn. I certainly agree with the basic premise. Just his week I succumbed to a 5DIII. I hesitate to say an "upgrade" from the 7D, because I still love the 7D and intend to keep using it.

I debated long and hard between a 6D, waiting for the 7DII and pulling out, what for me was, all the stops and going for a 5DIII. Part of my justification was that it is so good I think it will satisfy me for years to come. I think a challenge facing all camera makers, but especially Canon and Nikon, is that their products are now so good that there is little reason for buyers to jump to the next generation.

So, I guess I agree with the premise that it will take some "mouth watering" new features to get many current owners to upgrade. Personally, I'm not sure that for full frame sensors there is much that can be done to entice current owners. I'm amazed at how well the 5DIII sells (check out Amazon's best selling DSLRs). It's incredible to me that a $3,000 camera is selling as well as $500 cameras. I've got to think that many of those buyers are like me – rationalizing it as a camera that will satisfy them for the next 10 years or so.

With APS-C I think there is still sufficient room for improvement to entice current owners to upgrade. If the 7DII makes some significant improvements in the sensor, I'll have a hard time resisting. But, I'll also want 5D quality autofocus and a few other goodies.

Frankly, I think another challenge all manufacturers face is not only that the technology has matured, but the customer base is aging out.  I think it is going to be very hard for Canon and Nikon to attract younger buyers and I think some of the their recent models show they are pretty desperately trying anything they can think of, but don't seem to be having much success.

The best hope for Canon and Nikon (at least temporarily) may be an expanding world economy. If the economies in the currently underdeveloped world improve, they may get a temporary boost, as they have with China. Other than that, I'm guessing all manufacturers will have to learn to live with a market that is growing at a much slower pace than in the past several years.

Canon and Nikon may actually be the best positioned to adapt to the changing market, because until the explosion of digital technology, I'm pretty sure the growth in the film and SLR market was pretty modest.

customer base is aging out.
Yes, that's what I sort of was thinking of also with my point 3 - no newcomers. Older people grew up in an age without digital devices. Snapshots where taken with polariod, or Instamatics, later P&S cameras. A bit more serious users would have had to get an SLR. But the sensor was  exchangeable (film - no upgrade incentive for the body), and once you had a decent body, it could last a long time. AF was a technological breakthrough, leading to be an upgrade cycle.   So, the old-time SLR customer base is certainly one that can be catered to with dSLRs.
However, young people of the P&S variety (what would have been a polaroid/instamatic customer base etc. in the past) are satisfied with their smart phones now. I don't think most of these would ever have been customers of SLRs in the past either. The customer segment that sticks with smart phones nowadays might perhaps be larger than the comparable instamatic customer segment of the past, because of the following points:
The display devices and the internet. In the past, for high quality stuff, people would often use slides, to be projected and viewed, perhaps with friends.  This is now superseded by monitors and TVs, which presently deliver much less resolution than what cameras deliver. Further, images are quickly spread via internet. So, on the one hand you don't need supergreat resolution, because most display devices don't handle it. Second, you can look now at so many good pictures on the internet, we are virtually flooded by it.
So, a newcomer might think "Do I really need a dSLR" to take yet another picture of a duck or the New York skyline - I'll never compete with what's out there, so I shoot mostly for memories, and the phone will do. So, overall, the incentive to step from a "good enough" to dSLR might be less than in the past, because of all the new technologies.

Seriously, for all the ones clamoring for a D800. How many high-tech landscape images do we need? 99.9 % of people view on monitors or tv, so 36 MPs is mostly overkill. Large prints? How many are really printed big and hung on the limited wall space there is? So, the final market for the full capabilities of a D800 is actually rather limited.


Expanding world economy. 
Yes, this is a classic practice for hundreds of years, if your home market is saturated, expand. That's why there was this push for the global economy, to expand markets, to keep the growth model. Alas, who are you going to sell to next? The martians? So, an alternative (taken by e.g. Apple) is innovation - but there is only such much innovation until some technical limitation hits (e.g. how much can you still improve an iphone, it's a similar problem to dSLRs), which requires then a breakthrough again. For many portable devices a real bottleneck is the battery that is limiting, because that limits how much processing power you can stick into the device.  Even in a dSLR, if you had more processing power, you could probably jack up many things, providing more precessing power for various features, including imaging processing, i.e. frame rate, automatic lens correction, diffraction reduction, noise reduction, etc.

again, great points.  I don't think it's as bleak and growth starved as you though - for instance, following your model - boy meets girl, boy and girl go out, now during the day time that cell phone gets you great shots, but once the sun goes down, all those shots are blurry (one day that will even change as they push to make smaller sensors take in more light).  Girl gets frustrated.  Boy buys girl a nice camera (a dslr).

I know your not saying the dslr market is dead, but, yeah, it is narrowing down to mostly the upgrading crowd, but there are still going to be newcomers - just not as many as in the past decade.

I think cell phones also face the same issue as slr's - just like lots of websites, the drive to innovate a product that's already innovated leads to a lot of marginal upgrades, or upgrades that just don't make sense, or upgrades that do make sense but not with the general consumer client.  Take that d800, it's a monster on paper, but, unless you need that kind of power are you taking the leap?  Of course, some will buy it because it's a monster on paper, and rarely use it, kind of like the good old i need a nicer car than the neighbors idea, its a status symbol.  Either way, cell phones face the same issue, what else do you do that isn't a marginal upgrade?  Of course, it's harder to say no to cell upgrades because they aren't really designed to last for more than a year and a half - and thats one thing i am glad for --- even rebels have a decent shelf life.  It is one of the things that surprise me about the cell phone market actually, how easily we are all duped into buying these things that break so easily (it's cheap if you can make your phone last that 2 years...heehaw...cheap upgrade ---but if it dies in a year...your coughing up close to an slr's $$$ on a phone!!!)

Either way, there is still a market for slr's.  I said it before - we're between product cycles on upper end models.  And the entry level bodies, those are the ones people are stepping into less and less due to cell phone silliness.  It should be interesting to see what these #'s do in 2014 - with Canon putting the 7d2 on the market, and maybe the big mp beast, and whatever nikon has on the release table.  If these models do kick ass, then canon will have a turn around in 2014, then a slow 2015 as they ramp up for the 5d4 and the 1dx2

263
I just want to bang my head against the wall and scream when I read comments following stories like this. It's as if only Neuro, Chuck and a handful of others actually read the stories.

Photonius had a decent analysis but then pulled a conclusion out of thin air that I'm still scratching my head over.

So, the only way to get a lot of people to buy new cameras is with a substantial innovation in sensor technology.

Was that intended as sarcasm or a joke?



no, just some unfinished thought left standing. I meant if you want to get existing owners to upgrade (and thus create a  new purchase cycle, ( like in the past from 4 to 10 MPs or whatever), you really need some mouthwatering new features, e.g. a new sensor that is a serious jump over all current products, or some other neat feature that's not just a gimmick. Live view was a pretty neat feature when it came.
Of course sensors are very mature at this point, so it's difficult to see how that could improve a lot, but the dual pixels of the sensor in the 70D could be  a precursor to a whole bunch of things.

Ha! Now I understand.

I was confused because your post was so thoughtful and rational and then all of a sudden it seemed like you took a peculiar turn. I certainly agree with the basic premise. Just his week I succumbed to a 5DIII. I hesitate to say an "upgrade" from the 7D, because I still love the 7D and intend to keep using it.

I debated long and hard between a 6D, waiting for the 7DII and pulling out, what for me was, all the stops and going for a 5DIII. Part of my justification was that it is so good I think it will satisfy me for years to come. I think a challenge facing all camera makers, but especially Canon and Nikon, is that their products are now so good that there is little reason for buyers to jump to the next generation.

So, I guess I agree with the premise that it will take some "mouth watering" new features to get many current owners to upgrade. Personally, I'm not sure that for full frame sensors there is much that can be done to entice current owners. I'm amazed at how well the 5DIII sells (check out Amazon's best selling DSLRs). It's incredible to me that a $3,000 camera is selling as well as $500 cameras. I've got to think that many of those buyers are like me – rationalizing it as a camera that will satisfy them for the next 10 years or so.

With APS-C I think there is still sufficient room for improvement to entice current owners to upgrade. If the 7DII makes some significant improvements in the sensor, I'll have a hard time resisting. But, I'll also want 5D quality autofocus and a few other goodies.

Frankly, I think another challenge all manufacturers face is not only that the technology has matured, but the customer base is aging out.  I think it is going to be very hard for Canon and Nikon to attract younger buyers and I think some of the their recent models show they are pretty desperately trying anything they can think of, but don't seem to be having much success.

The best hope for Canon and Nikon (at least temporarily) may be an expanding world economy. If the economies in the currently underdeveloped world improve, they may get a temporary boost, as they have with China. Other than that, I'm guessing all manufacturers will have to learn to live with a market that is growing at a much slower pace than in the past several years.

Canon and Nikon may actually be the best positioned to adapt to the changing market, because until the explosion of digital technology, I'm pretty sure the growth in the film and SLR market was pretty modest.

Very good points -especially the bit about the economy in general shrinking. 

264
EOS Bodies / Re: Wait for the Canon 5D Mark IV or get the Mark III?
« on: October 25, 2013, 04:22:54 PM »
I'd say it's 1 to 1.5 years out.
We better start a new thread on the potential specs of 5D MK IV really soon ;D

i won't be satisfied unless it is over 80MP's with 1342 stops of DR, I also want it to make coffee, and have 2 million AF points....lol

265
People that are satisfied taking pictures with there phones most likely never where in the DSLR market to begin with.
Thats just the social pic snappers people that like good quality pics will always want a DSLR but hey its recession/crisis. My free spendable income keeps going down as insurancen, Food and everything keeps going up in price and my income isnt going up.
so i simply do not have money for thoustant dollar bodys and multi thousant dollar lenses.
The last generation canon lensen have had some seriously absurd price gains which most normal non professionals simply can no longer afford.



I agree here, it's not the smartphones eating into the dSLR market, the smartphones kill the P&S cameras.
I think several things come together for dSLRs:

1) the dSLR market is quite mature now. In a decade, a remarkable improvement happened in sensor technology, so there was incentive to switch from film to digital, there was incentive to upgrade to a new model dSLR. So, there was a big "bubble" so to speak of pent up demand that could be satisfied. Many people that would buy a dSLR have one by now probably. Now, I think the market will return more to a level situation where you go through normal replacement cycles. People will think twice before they buy a new body, "does it really give much more than what I already have?" That's why Canon and everybody is also pushing the video area, to keep adding new features and thereby a market sector not yet saturated. Even that is not enough anymore, as camera makers are looking into medium format, and security camera businesses.
Pushing more megapixels (D800) down the throat of people is probably not giving the huge sales increases hoped for - many people realize that files get huge and the improvement in quality is minimal if one doesn't invest time and effort to get the maximum out of the sensor. And most images are viewed on screens that don't have such a high resolution. Likewise, the dynamic range wars (whether 12 or 14 stops) are incremental gains that will not cause a huge boost to the market.
 Of course, there will always be pros, and tech users that go for the top - as with computers, where gamers build their own customized ultimate gaming machines, but this is a limited market.

2) As pointed out, weak economy, people need to save.

3) Maybe less newcomers to the market. There tend to be fads of what's a hot hobby, maybe the hype for pictures is somewhat dying down, people being oversaturated with images flooding the web.


So, the only way to get a lot of people to buy new cameras is with a substantial innovation in sensor technology.

Agreed!  Well, mostly agree - "it's not the smartphones eating into the dSLR market, the smartphones kill the P&S cameras."  A product gets replaced when either A something better comes around, or B, it gets broken, lost, stolen, you baby pukes on it, you brother drops it in the pool,  - or you use it all the time and it's just time to replace it, etc etc etc.    If when you leave the house you look at your little slr bag say 90% of the time, i don't want to lug that around then it's gonna be used less, less miles = less wear and tear, less chances for it to be broken and or stolen, or any of the other calamities mentioned above.  If you use it less, then the need to upgrade is less, and while yeah there are obvious benefits of going from like a rebel to a 70d, or a 6d, etc etc, is there a need when my cell phone seems to do just fine and hell, i can bring my cell phone anywhere ---

And this is a biggie here --- think of how many awesome events people would love to bring their cameras too but can't because the venue does not allow pro gear (which most venues describe as anything with an interchangeable lens).  Stuff like that leads to a lot of leaving the camera at home...

this i do think would lead to less people taking the leap into the slr market - which leads right to where I totally agree --- the slr market is a mature market, less people are jumping in.  Last year both canon and nikon released pro bodies and people bought them, that buying frenzy has slowed and we're now between product cycles.  Yeah, there's a new rebel and the new 70d, and nikon has their equivalent models --- and if you ask me, that's the market that will suffer from the growing use of cell phones.

Let's face it, the marketing side is based off of the upgrade path:

1 - wow, loving taking pics on my cell phone, but want more control
2 - nice, bought my first P&S
3 - lost it, just bought the next model up
4 - the limitations are frustrating me - time to upgrade - first slr
5 - now it's time to buy lenses

that was the basic path, you can add step 6 and 7 and 8 for those that want to take the next step --- but for the bulk of the consumer market.  But now we are in the social network age, and this is where cell phones jack everything up.  the average consumer cares more about instant access than quality.  Yeah, the slr shot can be printed huge, but does that get my picture to facebook any easier?  Adding wifi to slr's does help on this side, but, I think slr's at least in the consumer bracket need a more robust web interface if they are to compete with cell phones in that market.

Of course, then there's the pro market, which will care about quality, which will whine about DR, banding, all the stuff we hear all the time here.  But the pro market would be the mature part, the part that will only upgrade where it makes sense - and other than a few lenses, there's not much new and interesting going on - and - one should point out that there shouldn't be - pros don't want to be recycling camera bodies every year - for most pros the natural 3-4 year cycle is about how long we want to be using a body.  Other than that, it's lenses, and with L lenses we all know they hold their value and they don't degrade in quality as fast as a camera body - so new lens sales don't happen as often (unless they do kick ass rebate, just snagged me a 24mm 1.4 new because with the 4% back from B&H and the $200 rebate, that's close enough to used cost to make the leap).     

266
I would much rather have an extra battery in my pocket than a large hunk of magneseum hanging off the bottom of my camera just to double the battery capacity.

It's not so much about battery capacity as it is about ergonomics, and better balance with larger lenses.  After a day of shooting with a 70-200/2.8 or 100-400 on a non-gripped body, my hand hurts. With a gripped body, it does not - And the integrated grip of the 1-series bodies makes them more comfortable to hold than other bodies with an accessory grip.

Yeah,
i have been shaking my head at the posts regarding the grip...  LOL guess weather sealing ...whgo cares about that right, lets make the grip removable and expose some parts to moisture that wouldn't have been exposed with an integrated grip....ugggg

267
Not releasing anything interesting except the 70D could have something to do with it.
Yep. When your competitors are experimenting with new models and new lines, and all you're doing is giving minor updates to your existing stuff, you lose market share. Ask Apple.

Did you not read what neuroanatomist said above?  Canon's competitors, who supposedly have superiorproducts, are having a worse time of it!

Where does he say that?


food for thought --- http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/08/us-nikon-earnings-idUSBRE9770EH20130808

268
Not releasing anything interesting except the 70D could have something to do with it.
Yep. When your competitors are experimenting with new models and new lines, and all you're doing is giving minor updates to your existing stuff, you lose market share. Ask Apple.

Did you not read what neuroanatomist said above?  Canon's competitors, who supposedly have superiorproducts, are having a worse time of it!

love how people pretty much read the title here and filled in the blank with what seems obvious to THEM ---it must be the D800...  but both canon and nikon are getting their buts kicked by cell phones.

So if you want innovation, it's time for canon and nikon to cut their P&S offerings and start making at least parts for cell phone, if not their own cell phone.  Either of them could design and manufacture sensors and little lenses for cell phones, so that would probably be the smarter path rather than trying to pry peoples galaxies and iphones from their hands. 

269
Lagging behind the opposition in the mega pixel stakes can't help either

Last i checked, it's lesser quality, lesser mp's that are winning here - cell phones are the thing eating into sales, not nikons new bodies.  It's the convenience factor - convenience and accessibility.  No one that's thinking, should I get a powershot or just use my iphone is thinking, but there's that d800...lol

270
6D Sample Images / Re: Anything shot with a 6D
« on: October 22, 2013, 04:40:14 PM »
a few new ones for ya.


Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 63