September 18, 2014, 03:59:30 AM

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 ... 64
256
If Canon would make reasonably priced gear, more people would buy.

Maybe canon and nikon should do what cell phone companies do --- go with the contract system and give people ridiculously cheap upgrades every 2 years, but then jack up the price as a standalone device.  Cell phones aren't exactly cheap anymore.  People tend to forget that if they are buying one outside of the upgrade period, it's $500-700....

Also, I guess nikon is so much cheaper because it's only canon that needs to make more reasonably priced gear.... (sarcasm)

257
Canon General / Re: Consumer DSLRs "dead in 5 years"
« on: October 28, 2013, 12:49:43 PM »
So you're saying that if the fan bois can't sell their stuff then they won't buy anything new?

No, what I am saying is that the "sale" of the secondhand gear doesn't register on Canon or Nikon or whoever's sales graph. So, even though lots of people are buying DSLR's, the manufacturers are not receiving any revenue.

Wait now, this is conditional ---  i see it in this scenerio - if it's the good old, it's easy to be a photog and i have disposable income so i am investing, then 3 months later, this is hard i am making no money sell it...yeah...this doesn't register much on the sales graph.  But, if its the other scenario of, I want the next model up, so I sell my old body and buy new...that is the kind of person that will continue to do that and they will be on the sales graph in one way or another.

258
Canon General / Re: Consumer DSLRs "dead in 5 years"
« on: October 28, 2013, 12:42:06 PM »
One main reason many people buy consumer DSLRs?  To take photos of their children playing sports.
One key area where mirrorless cameras are lacking?  Autofocus tracking
Conclusion?  Consumer DLSRs are here for a while longer.

i read that all the time.

yet i have to know ONE family that bought a DSLR because of a child.

my sister has a 3 year old girl.... father takes pictures with an iphone.
they did buy a fujifilm P&S when when the child was born.. but they rarely use it.

my cousin has a 4 year old boy and a 5 month old girl.
parents take images with their smartphones.
 
...

of course i can only speak from my own experience.
and i guess in america it´s something different with the "soccer moms".

I bought a T1i/500D when my first daughter started moving around and the AF and shutter lag on the Superzoom P&S couldn't keep up with her. 

Sounds like you don't have kids, although your relatives do.  That may mean you don't routinely attend events for school aged kids and their parents.  As the parent of a child in kindergarten, I attend lots of school events, parties, field trips, etc.  I'd say about 15% of the parents at the school have a dSLR, mostly entry-level but at least one other FF.  At a community gymnastics exhibition in which my daughter participated last year, there were lots of dSLRs in use, not just Rebels with kit lenses, but 7D and 5DIII bodies, some with white L zooms (and in a dimly lit gym with flash prohibited, I wonder if anyone without a dSLR got a usable shot of their kid performing).

As you point out, the 'soccer mom with dSLR' is a cliché.  As you point out, it's a different geography.  I have noticed that Canon seems to advertise frequently in parenting magazines and during family TV shows.  North America is a large market, with a lot of parents!

But of course, 7Ds and 5Ds aren't "consumer level DSLRs" they are pro cameras and if they have L lenses then even more so with the whole system. The parents with the el cheapo cameras, trying to cover their child's event, especially indoors or at night, or far in the distance, will be frustrated and either get those better cameras that can handle the job or stick with their phone for after-event shots and hope a friend/relative managed to get a shot of the kid during the event.
Also, how many of the cheap DSLR using people have the latest one? I tend to still see a lot of T2i and D90s if they're DSLRs and I can understand, they bought them back when they were Hot and don't see the need for an upgrade, especially when the same level of cameras like Rebels haven't improved an inch since that camera, or they recently got a good deal/bought them used and are fine with that. Otherwise all the cool new cameras I see around this part of town are Mirrorless, Panny and Oly are all over and even the mirrorbox DSLRs are often Olympus ones too.

I say it's fine the low end DSLRs die out, most people using them shouldn't be. They're used by those either aiming to become good in photography, which means they might as well get the level or two up from the start instead of wasting money with the "upgrade path" by buying everything in between they end up rarely using. Or, they like posing as pros all cool with a real nice camera and such, those types will get better photos out of their phones anyways (and even with the big 'ol DSLR around their neck they still use the phone more often with the instant connectivity and all).

I really doubt that for the parents with 7d's and 5d's and L lenses that this was their first slr purchase.  When your kid is born, you may think, my iphone is good enough, uuntil you realize you may actually want a print, then you buy a rebel, then your kid grows and you learn a bit about your rebel.  As your kid goes from toddler to active 5-10 year old, you realize you want something faster and better to grow with them.  Or, you hold off until your confronted with the scenario Neuro mentioned above, crappy light gym and no flash is allowed.  And it doesn't just haveto be sports either, if you kid is in theater classes, doing plays and musicals, good luck getting decent iphone shots

259
Canon General / Re: Consumer DSLRs “dead in 5 years”
« on: October 28, 2013, 12:32:23 PM »
Agree that the economy is hurting dSLR sales.   Perhaps smartphones have a minor impact but in the end they may actually help dSLRs.   Smartphones are too limited - consumers will eventually get tired of wide angle snaps, they will hunger for more.

I think this is wishful thinking. People are NOT growing tired of their smartphones as cameras at all. The iphone has been the most popular camera on flckr for years now. And with all the other social apps out there....smartphones will only become more popular. Apple & its competitors are coming out with better and better cameras on their phones. Along with better apps and software. Some really creative stuff out there. Plus all the third party attachments like the olloclip.

The iphone really is a creative tool for photographers. I'm a convert. Will it replace the DSLR? Nah. But I love it.


Disagree...I get it all the time from cell phoner's...They know i am a photographer and if it's nighttime they take a few shots and get frustrated....because...with the flash on they look like ghosts but i turn it off it's blurry!!!!  Hell this is even true for P&S users too.  Yeah you can get silly and brace your phone on the table, turn the flash off and maybe get a shot if the AF locks...but yeah, I do see it a lot- now most of these people aren't rushing out to buy an slr because of it, but, a few do...

And, seen a few like this too...yup, most i just want a better camera folk never take it out of green mode...but curiously,. they also never look at the manual.

My lone Sony mirrorless experience was trying to help a cousin out who bought one, didn't look at the manual but thought I'd just ask chuck....And yeah, wow did that EVF look like puke!!!!  Either way - Some will actually read the manual, some won't.  Some will learn the features, some wil barely get past taking the lens cap off. 

Regardless of that though, cell phones are used now primarily for their convenience - not their quality, and yeah during daylight they take really nice shots.  Turn the lights down though and it's blur city!



260
Canon General / Re: Consumer DSLRs "dead in 5 years"
« on: October 28, 2013, 12:22:13 PM »
Well, maybe the smartphones will die to an be replaced by smartwatches or googleglases...



doubtful, but, I wouldn't doubt a return to smaller is better.  As cell phones get more advanced, they get bigger and bigger, and the screens get bigger, more glass...that's a whole lot of surface to break.  while these devices are super convenient, they do break easily and eventually that may backlash.  I think googlglass is DOA...but...things like the smartwatches, that may entice people!


261
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Spec List Surfaces [CR1]
« on: October 27, 2013, 11:46:25 PM »
Scepticism aside, I wonder how Canon will be able to place a 7D MkII in its current product line?

+1

With FF cameras now selling for $1700-2000, I just don't see Canon coming up with a 7DII.
There's just no place in the lineup for it.


it has a place....because none of the FF options have anywhere near the fps the 7d2 will have.  the 7d2 is not for me by any means, but, it will be for a lot of people (sports, wildlife, etc, etc)

262
EOS Bodies / Re: Wait for the Canon 5D Mark IV or get the Mark III?
« on: October 27, 2013, 08:17:36 PM »
My money is on early 2015 (literally, I am saving for the big upgrade as I have 3 EFS lenses to replace).

We should do a poll :-) ... Imho Canon cannot do a 5d3->5d4 (sensor) update which would outperform the 1dx, and I don't see a 1dx2 in 2015.

At the same time unless Canon gets under severe market pressure imho the now collected gimmicks (wifi, gps, touchscreen, dual af sensor for (amateur) video) don't warrant an update a la Nikon d600->d610 yet... the 5d3 is a competent stills camera and a terrific video camera with Magic Lantern raw video, so why rock the boat?

My money is on early 2015 (literally, I am saving for the big upgrade as I have 3 EFS lenses to replace).Incidentally there was a rumour on this site last year that there would not be a 7D2 but a higher specced replacement for the 60D - hasn't that come true??

This rumor was about that there wouldn't be a 7d2 _at_all_ but Canon would re-merge 60d+7d1 into a 50d-like update ... which isn't what happened.

hmm...I gotta wonder if that may not be correct...  It kind of depends on a few things.  For 1 --- 1 series bodies tend to have a longer period of time from announcement to hitting  the shelves.  The 1dx was announced well before the 5d3, but, the 5d3 was on the shelves well before the 1dx.  Also, if the 5d4 held a similar fps rate...most of the other features can/could match the 1dx2.  My guess is also that the dev of both would run together.  the 5d4 will be the slower, smaller 1 series body.  of course the 1 series would keep it's built in grip and more robust construction - and be the king of fps! 

The kink here is what happens with the big mp body --- what will the form factor/price point be?  I think canon will be less worried about cannibalizing 1dx sales with a 5d4 if they also have a big mp beast on the table. 

Last speculative guess --- think summer olympics - with that comes the new bodies....so 2016....

263
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Spec List Surfaces [CR1]
« on: October 27, 2013, 08:03:46 PM »
This is pure speculation though...this is a rumor of a spec list, nothing confirmed....but you somehow feel that this sensor will be that much better than the mk3's?

Why is "dual pixel" speculation?

the speculation part wasn't referring to dual pixel specifially...it was more in general that this is a cr1 rumor, so it can only be viewed as speculation. 

264
so yes times are changing.. but the problem is... the innovations you guys want will not solve the problem.

I agree with you on many of your points, Lichtgestalt, but the problem is one of Canon (and the entire dSLR industry's) own making.  Cranking out an "updated" camera every three years at an exorbitant price-premium with minimal, if any, feature changes, is not a way to run a business or get brand loyalty.  Yes, it's worked for Apple, but they are the lone wolf in this regard and can run their business that way due to their rabid fanbase.  dSLR users by nature, are a much more finicky bunch that won't be duped by minor spec improvements.  The "check out our new dual-pixel AF!!  Now give us 1,200 of your hard earned dollars!!" marketing approach just doesn't work on the majority of us.  We're simply not that impressed by the cost per feature.  And as you stated, many of us already have dSLRs and the image quality is fine, so getting us to shell out $3,200 for the next FF consumer model is a tough sell.  Heck, the 8 year old 10MP 40D is still more than plenty for the average enthusiast, and one of the first bodies I recommend to new dSLR shooters.

That said, I still think massive innovations can be made.  I, for one, am still clamoring for a sensor that mimic's the dynamic range of film.  I don't need 40+ MP, but having better shadow performance would be something I would gladly pay for.  (and something I am still envious of regarding the D800)

But this is all nit-picking silliness that only demonstrates the point I think we all agree on... the dSLR manufacturers are on an unsustainable trajectory.  Without major shifts, and I'm not sure what those shifts should be, they will only hasten their own loss of market share.

What feature would be so dazzling then?  ISO's have been pushed from a usable 1600 to a usable 12,800 or higher....not dazzling.  Pixel peepers here will always site the Exmor DR, but in all the ad's I see for nikon, the selling factor is more like "look, ashton kutcher uses a nikon - he's cool, you want to be cool, buy nikon."  I don't see many ads saying...14 stops of DR....  dual pixel AF...a nice development - but again, mind blowing it isn't.

If this is true - "Heck, the 8 year old 10MP 40D is still more than plenty for the average enthusiast, and one of the first bodies I recommend to new dSLR shooters," then isn't it safe to say we don't even need the marginal updates.  the 8 year old 40d is enough, so why bother putting all that R&D money into developing anything?   

Also, if this 8 year old tech is still more than plenty for most then how can you say this - "But this is all nit-picking silliness that only demonstrates the point I think we all agree on... the dSLR manufacturers are on an unsustainable trajectory.  Without major shifts, and I'm not sure what those shifts should be, they will only hasten their own loss of market share."  Time will tell, if i am right then this is just a market correction, we've had the bubble now things can level out.  Or, is the threat f the cell phone so big that it will cause the whole damn market to crumble?  I highly doubt it, but realize this ---if my theory is right then don't expect mind blowing changes....   

265
There was a big balloon in digital imaging, that balloon has pretty much hit it's apex, now the balloon is settling into a more natural state... which means sales are slowing....as you said..."10% or more growth can't go on forever."  The market will contract, and or, is contracting.  We saw it with computers too, tech goes in waves, new tech hits, new things get the bubble effect until you hit a point where the upgrades are marginal. 

well that´s exactly what i wrote before, yes.   ;)

it´s just that cars have a different "dynamic" then cameras.
thats why you still see the market grow after all the years.
and new envolving markets like china help.

a car is not only a object of utility, it´s a social status symbol.
and cars have not seen a real competition since they exist.
subways, airplanes, trains don´t count. they are not made as individual driving vehicles.

that´s why i think it´s apples and oranges.
even when i agree with the points made about cameras.  :)
the car is just one example.  the bicycle is another...the stove, the fridge, the sink, plumbing.. or go the other way, power drills, circular saws.  Or we could take it even in another direction, musical instruments.  I guess no one plays the violin any more because what there have been no revolutionary changes in the design.

Markets will continue when there is a NEED for a product - and back to the car thing - a car is not a status symbol in all cases.  Yes, certain cars are - but unless your rich, its a utility, it gets you to work in the morning and home at night - and once it stops serving that need as well, it gets replaced.  The boom in the digital world that we've seen over the last decade is because we went from 2 MP camera's that did not stand up to the original film camera's in any way.  We've gone from that to what we have now in a short time.  And until the next big tech shift comes, we're gonna be dealing with a more stabilized market --- which isn't necessarily a bad thing...

266
wow...so the automobile must be dead too because there have been no earth shattering upgrades in decades!!!!

apples and oranges as usual when someone brings a car analogy.   ;)

Quote
the car example is just one of what we see and use and buy regularly ---- LOL --- by the logic of it must revolutionize or the market dies...

stop growing does not mean dying.

and again, cars are a status symbol. more then rebel DSLR´s.
it doesn´t look good when you drive a rusty 2002 corrolla. 

and are their new alternatives to cars?
has the car market seen a competition like cameras have with smartphones?
notice i wrote cameras not DSLR´s. :)

i don´t see how the camera market can grow when the wide base (low end DSLR and P&S) is breaking away.

Quote
As another poster stated --- the dslr market has matured, and that means we are now gonna be buying stuff because we need it more than because oh my it's got all these bells and whistles...AKA, my body is hitting the edge the shutter's lifespan, gee, maybe it's now worth it to just have a new shutter installed??  Is that really such a bad thing that maybe we can find ourselves with less disposable tech??

it´s sure not a bad thing.
and a reason you can not expect the 10% increase per year to go on forever.


Realize that your end statement only proves not only my point, the point of a few others here ---

There was a big balloon in digital imaging, that balloon has pretty much hit it's apex, now the balloon is settling into a more natural state... which means sales are slowing....as you said..."10% or more growth can't go on forever."  The market will contract, and or, is contracting.  We saw it with computers too, tech goes in waves, new tech hits, new things get the bubble effect until you hit a point where the upgrades are marginal. 

You say my car anaology doesn't rwork...apples and oranges...most car analogies here are trying to say this model is like a toyota and this is like a BMW ---all i am saying is this isn't a matter of product a being better than the other product:

As many have said - camera bodies are tools to get a job done.  We've been in the ballon, now the ballon is contracting...so the updates will not be revolutionary, they will be marginal --- the decision to buy a new camera body won't be because my business will be harmed because the other guy has better tech, but like any other tool - you replace it when needed...that's the car analogy too, your not buying the same model car but a newer version for the feature set, your buying it because the old one was worn out!

with that said, even though the bubble is contracting, I am betting we will see improvements that are slightly more than evolutionary, but nothing earth shattering.

267
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS 7D Mark II Spec List Surfaces [CR1]
« on: October 27, 2013, 06:24:14 PM »
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...

My 5D fits my hand like it was made for me.  My 20D is just a tiny bit too small but still comfortable.  My T2i is way too small and horribly uncomfortable to use for any length of time.


Quote
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....

I am not.  I'm not asking for the built in grip, the weather sealing, or the high frame rate of the 1Dx.  I'm asking for a 5D4 with the same basic sensor technology and features of the rumor.  The 5D3 is almost there except for the sensor.


This is pure speculation though...this is a rumor of a spec list, nothing confirmed....but you somehow feel that this sensor will be that much better than the mk3's?  It's still an APS-C, so even if it's the very best APS-C sensor ever made the look and feel of a FF sensor may still win.   Either way, I can't accept this as a rational statement because as far as any of us are concerned this sensor does not exist!  Come back to me with this statement in a year when we at least start seeing some test images and other data.  This is a CR1 rumor for crying out loud.

And, personal preference.... I don't want the 5d4 to be that at all....leave the sports line to the 7d and the 1dx, for the 5d4 I like what the current 5d3 has to offer...keep the frame rate the same, up the MP's, 2 CF card slots, improved low ISO performance, and yeah, a bit better low light (not that what is currently there is bad at all)...

 

 

268

So, your argument is what, then... there's no innovation left?  dSLRs are dead? 

not for us enthusiast and pros.
but there will be diminishing returns we will have to face.
who really needs 80MP cameras? only a very small percentage.
and of course there will be some pixelpeeper who even buy a gigapixel camera. ;)

DR can be improved and that´s something i like to see.
but most consumers don´t care much about DR.
it´s again the enthusiast and pros who are interested in better DR.

but i guess the low end is pretty much dead in a few years, yes.


Quote
And do you really want to argue that some markets can't grow forever?

yes. history proves me right. :)
smartphones are pretty new... they will see their decline too.
at some point there will be a new technology replacing traditional smartphones. 

and i think you can not really compare communication technology to cameras.
we all have an urge and need to communicate.. but not everyone is a photographer.

ps:
and apple is a status symbol for some.. as crazy as that sounds.
it´s not rational. they feel bad when they don´t have the latest and their colleagues have.

it reminds me a bit on the 80s when i was in school.. some kids where "hip" because of their trainers....  ::)


wow...so the automobile must be dead too because there have been no earth shattering upgrades in decades!!!!

just because we've hit diminishing returns that doesn't mean people won't buy, it's just buying on a different schedule.  I mean, is there anything reallly oh god ground breaking between that 2002 toyota corrola and the 20010 toyota corrolla you just bought?  A few bells and whisltles, but, its the same size, handles the same, ohh..the old one was blue tand this one is green...did you trade in that 2002 corrolla because oh my, i need that reverse camera?  or, was it because the 2002 needed a new exhaust system, and the suspension was shot, and the check engine light was on, and it was topping 175,000 miles....

When tech is in a growth mode, yes, we see lots more sales because each new product cycle does have a more tangible benefit ---but, what's more to do other than marginal upgrades?  Hell, I'd even take that ...screw sensor design, lets find a way to increase the sync speed for FF shutters....I'd love that, it would rock, but is it revolutionary?   No, it's a marginal upgrade.

the car example is just one of what we see and use and buy regularly ---- LOL --- by the logic of it must revolutionize or the market dies...it's true, yeah (sarcasm), this is why hammer sales are down, I mean, when was the last revolutionary upgrade to the hammer! 

As another poster stated --- the dslr market has matured, and that means we are now gonna be buying stuff because we need it more than because oh my it's got all these bells and whistles...AKA, my body is hitting the edge the shutter's lifespan, gee, maybe it's now worth it to just have a new shutter installed?????  Is that really such a bad thing that maybe we can find ourselves with less disposable tech????????

269
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

270
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.

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 [18] 19 20 ... 64