September 29, 2016, 01:03:35 AM

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 [10]
91
EOS Bodies / Re: Analyzing where Canon lags behind in the market
« Last post by Mikehit on September 28, 2016, 04:52:07 PM »

The thing that bugs me in this forum, is that people who want to discuss areas where they feel Canon is lagging behind, are made to shut up by killer phrases like "they sell more units than everybody else. hence they are right. period."
We come back (yet again) to what is meant by 'lagging behind'.
Every manufacturer has to make compromises in manufaturer of a product. And yes, I do mean 'every manfacturer'
The view of some (notably the videographers) seem to imagine that Canon could (some even insist, should) cover all grounds by exceeding the specs of every other competitor. A small number say that in not doing so Canon are committing commercial suicide, implying they know better than the number on manufacturer how to manufacture and sell cameras.

So the question is not what technology Canon must introduce but what compromises they need to make to meet the needs of the target market, not every tom dick and harry. It seems that you an others are unable to grasp that concept and when people say they are happy with the compromises Canon makes at that price point you decry them as being fanboys, small minded lemmings or unambitious.

Sony may make a wonderful videographers tool but there are distinct shortcomings in other areas notable AF as a working tool. Not to mention their after-sales service which, believe it or not, has to be funded by the sales price of cameras.
And given the financial reports of Sony, do you want to buy a fantastic product from a company whose finances continually raise concern or do you want a company with a long, and profitable history?
As I say, compromises.


I don't consider this a healthy and fruitful discussion culture.

Why is continually banging the drum about Canon's financial and technical incompetence any more fruitful than saying 'actually Canon are doing a lot of things right and their sales numbers provide evidence of that'?

There are many areas where in my opinion Canon is blowing minds. And these are discussed here as well. Why is it not possible to have a reasonable discussion on where Canon might need to catch up with competitors?

Quote
What I wrote is that people who use "units sold" as their sole measure to justify buying canon to themselves, are simple minded. To me this is not quite the same. To you?
We have not said that sales are justification for buying it. We said sales are evidence Canon is getting the technological balance right. Quite a different point.


I have n problem with people saying 'Canon could introduce these technologies'. What is irritating is then extending that to say by not incorporating [what I want] Canon is an incompetent business.

If you recall it was the OP who compared the specs of the C1300 and the specs of the N3400 and said the N3400 was a better entry level camera. We have merely pointed out that if it was a better camera why is is outsold by the C1300 - a question none of the Canon-knockers have even ventured to explain, sticking instead with their 'Canon is doomed to failure' mantra

Fruitful discussions need 2 participants.
92
EOS Bodies / Re: Analyzing where Canon lags behind in the market
« Last post by romanr74 on September 28, 2016, 04:50:56 PM »
I don't consider this a healthy and fruitful discussion culture.

So you believe it's helpful and fruitful contribute to the discussion culture by suggesting that people who choose to buy Canon gear are small-minded lemmings?

 ::)

Go read my posts again and try to understand them switching your fantasy off... yes?

PS: My post you selectively quoted was btw an attempt to pacify the discussion but you do not seem to be interested in that...

Why don't you read your own posts again.  Then google the word 'metacognition'. 

the usual fanboy sales numbers bullS___...
If for you guys it is satisfactory to know that Canon is selling the most units, for you to justify to yourself to stick to Canon, this is wonderful for you... Apparently not everybody is such a simple mind...
Yes it is simple minded. It is switching ones brain off and trusting that the masses will be right...
You're getting ever more credible as a discerning customer, my dear lemming. Canon is very happy to have you guys...

Neuro, you really didn't read them... or you didn't understand them. Where do you read from me that people "who choose to buy Canon gear are small-minded lemmings"? What I wrote is that people who use "units sold" as their sole measure to justify buying canon to themselves, are simple minded. To me this is not quite the same. To you?
93
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Recommendations and experience doing AFMA on a 5D3
« Last post by AlanF on September 28, 2016, 04:49:28 PM »
Unfortunately, the "automatic" procedure is only semi-automatic for the 5DIII and now the 5DIV. They can't program the change of AFMA and so you have to dial it in yourself.
94
Lenses / Re: A New 85L is on the Way [CR2]
« Last post by Larsskv on September 28, 2016, 04:47:14 PM »
Why do you see it as an 'excuse', rather than an articulation of why some people prefer certain types of optics for certain applications? Perhaps this is because you assume everyone wants the sharpest possible lens with loads of contrast etc. You may - fair enough - but not everyone does, especially when it comes to photographing people.

lenses that produce a more organic, human rendering

That's the most creative excuse for a poor performing lens I've ever seen. There  is nothing human/organic about a piece of glass/metal, whether it's made in the 50's by Leica or in 2016 by Zeiss.

Give me a sharper lens over old technology optics any day.

People like evaluating lenses based on sharpness because it's easily measured, quantitative, and can be represented (albeit poorly) by a single number.  Most people have little to no comprehension of optical technology, and therefore fail to understand the compromises that must be made in other, more subjective aspects of optical performance in favor of maximal sharpness. 

Put bluntly, a simple criterion is a good match for a simple mind.

I have read this article a couple of times. The author claims complex modern high performance lenses doesn't render depth as well as older lens designs, and I think he may have a point.

http://petapixel.com/2016/03/14/problem-modern-lenses/

I've examined pictures from different lenses I've had, and found the the Sigma35ART makes somewhat flat looking images. The much simpler Canon 28 f2.8 IS on the other hand makes pictures with more depth in them, I think.

The problem is that it is hard to replicate results that shows differences in depth rendering between lenses. Light, distance, shadows, focal lengths and aperture comes into play. Even so, I found especially that 28 f2.8 to make images with a lot of depth in them, compared to many other lenses.

I didn't agree to the article at first, but after looking at my own pictures, I changed my mind, and now find the article to be very interesting. I don't know if his theory is correct, but i think he is on to something.
95
EOS Bodies / Re: Analyzing where Canon lags behind in the market
« Last post by neuroanatomist on September 28, 2016, 04:40:06 PM »
I don't consider this a healthy and fruitful discussion culture.

So you believe it's helpful and fruitful contribute to the discussion culture by suggesting that people who choose to buy Canon gear are small-minded lemmings?

 ::)

Go read my posts again and try to understand them switching your fantasy off... yes?

PS: My post you selectively quoted was btw an attempt to pacify the discussion but you do not seem to be interested in that...

Why don't you read your own posts again.  Then google the word 'metacognition'. 

the usual fanboy sales numbers bullS___...
If for you guys it is satisfactory to know that Canon is selling the most units, for you to justify to yourself to stick to Canon, this is wonderful for you... Apparently not everybody is such a simple mind...
Yes it is simple minded. It is switching ones brain off and trusting that the masses will be right...
You're getting ever more credible as a discerning customer, my dear lemming. Canon is very happy to have you guys...
96
EOS Bodies / Re: Analyzing where Canon lags behind in the market - Share your thoughts
« Last post by Maximilian on September 28, 2016, 04:39:37 PM »
It's fascinating all the time that when the Canon bashers get confronted with rational and more than less objective arguments they withdraw to the same subjective arguments like "fan boy", "must do better or be doomed" and so on.

Funny, that the Canon marketing and market model seems to work.
Funny, that in a free enterprise economy we customers have eventually just one scope of influence: to vote with our purse.
Funny, that some people still believe they could have an influence on that by posting on some internet fora.
Funny, they still believe that although market development and market share tells a different story throughout the last few years.

Of course I'd like Canon to built me my customized do-what-I-want camera, offer it to me for free and put a EF 600/4LII as givaway on top, but I am to rooted and realistic to know that this is further away form reality than we are from the big bang background noise. ::)

Summary:
If someone else has a better offer for you than Canon, please move on.
But please don't try to evangelize those who have a different point of view.
97
Sports / Re: Military Aircraft: airshows, operational, whatever, lets see what you have!
« Last post by Erik X on September 28, 2016, 04:38:25 PM »
A 37-litres Rolls Royce Griffon V12...

Out of a Shackleton? Don't see many of those these days  :(

Griffon was also used in Spitfire Mk XII and beyond, Swedish Airforce bought a number of Mk XIX so I guess it comes from one of those. But then again, Mk XIX did not have doble props? It might be possible to tell from the engine mount but thats above my level  :D  It is possible this engine was imported as military surplus..
It would definitely clean the garden from autumn leaves in notime!
98
Sports / Re: Military Aircraft: airshows, operational, whatever, lets see what you have!
« Last post by zim on September 28, 2016, 04:29:13 PM »
Now that is one hell of a lawnmower!!   :o
99
EOS Bodies / Re: Analyzing where Canon lags behind in the market
« Last post by romanr74 on September 28, 2016, 04:26:08 PM »
I don't consider this a healthy and fruitful discussion culture.

So you believe it's helpful and fruitful contribute to the discussion culture by suggesting that people who choose to buy Canon gear are small-minded lemmings?

 ::)

Go read my posts again and try to understand them switching your fantasy off... yes?

PS: My post you selectively quoted was btw an attempt to pacify the discussion but you do not seem to be interested in that...

PPS: And NancyP just before did an attempt to bring the discussion back to the original topic - thank you!
100
EOS Bodies / Re: Analyzing where Canon lags behind in the market
« Last post by neuroanatomist on September 28, 2016, 04:24:19 PM »
I don't consider this a healthy and fruitful discussion culture.

So you believe it's helpful and fruitful contribute to the discussion culture by suggesting that people who choose to buy Canon gear are small-minded lemmings?

 ::)
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 [10]