Tony Northrup´s rumors for 2018....

[scottkinfw]

I don't know why he gets so much hate. He said right upfront his predictions would be wrong and even gave examples of how he was wrong last year. I think people hear what they want to hear with people they dislike. Him and Chelsea inspire me in a different way than say Ben Horn or Ted Forbes, but I enjoy their content. I guess i am in the minority.

One thing is that if the predictions will be wrong, then why bother posting- other than self-centered hucksterism. He is stongly biased against Canon and minimizes their strengths, ignores them, or misrepresents them. So for me it is a matter fo honesty, integrity.

 

[9VIII]

Are people not allowed to be wrong? I am wrong about something everyday.

But it's delivered with the veneer of 'rightness' and 'you can trust me', etc. that makes his thing a bit professorial, and that sort of role should be strictly factual, IMHO.

Again, no ill will towards what he does. It's just not for me.

- A

Tony Northrup really is the Youtube version of Ken Rockwell.

I have found both to be helpful in one way or another over the years, but the total lack of accountability means they live in this gray area where you can never take anything they say very seriously, and the success of the business is limited to tricking entry level consumers into paying for a PDF full of “tips”, which I consider to be just a tweak on Rockwell’s strategy of begging for small donations.

 

[reef58]

I don't know why he gets so much hate. He said right upfront his predictions would be wrong and even gave examples of how he was wrong last year. I think people hear what they want to hear with people they dislike. Him and Chelsea inspire me in a different way than say Ben Horn or Ted Forbes, but I enjoy their content. I guess i am in the minority.

One thing is that if the predictions will be wrong, then why bother posting- other than self-centered hucksterism. He is stongly biased against Canon and minimizes their strengths, ignores them, or misrepresents them. So for me it is a matter fo honesty, integrity.

As a Canon shooter I have not found him biased against them. He usually has something negative to say about every camera he reviews. I think he is disappointed with Canon's latest offerings, but he is a tech geek so I understand why.

 

[JoSto]

I am very interested in Youtube as a platform. The main Problem with Photography Youtube ist that there are limited topics.

There may be 8 major Camera releases per year, makes 16 videos if one makes a preview & review to everone. If you want to get a major Youtuber who makes his living with the videos, one wants to make 2 at least every week. That is 110 videos per year, minimum. Target: 130-140

Theory about Photography is limited and you will hold back some topics for your books. So after the first few month of youtube there is nothing more to add. As a result, there are 20-30 Videos with substancial information per year, 50 portfolio-reviews if done weekly. The remaining 50 Videos are fillers with nonsense content.

One can blame Youtube for the situation. Tony does what is nessecery to gain a huge subscription basis. Cant blame him about that because he makes his living with that.

 

[Maiaibing]

I don't know why he gets so much hate. He said right upfront his predictions would be wrong and even gave examples of how he was wrong last year. I think people hear what they want to hear with people they dislike. Him and Chelsea inspire me in a different way than say Ben Horn or Ted Forbes, but I enjoy their content. I guess i am in the minority.

Lots of people seemingly love bashing those who make a living off their approach to digital photography - while providing free information, tests and reviews to all of us. Ken Rockwell also gets a lot of hate. DxO also springs to mind.

Even haters here find Northrup's predictions interesting enough to fill up this thread with reactions (...).

I'm happy there are so many different sites out there that provide tons of very useful information for free. And I admire the very, very few out there who have turned their hobby into their business.

No one has go to web sites that bring nothing to them. No one forces anyone to click on any sites they don't like or find interesting.

So maybe better to drop mindless bashing and instead encourage the ones you think are doing a good job out there.

 

[9VIII]

Lots of people seemingly love bashing those who make a living off their approach to digital photography...

Because it’s 99% marketing and 1% content.
Tony is just as capable of mis-informing people as he is of providing useful information and he does both regularly.

Tony’s “busuness” is his personality, he markets his face, not cameras or photographs.
If you took “Tony Northrup” out of the “Tony Northrup Channel” those videos would be worth nothing, half the time he can’t even get a spec sheet right, but enough mindless “followers” view him as a celebrity and want to associate with his syle (and probably just want to emulate his lifestyle) so they consume all his content and live vicariously through the videos.

 

[AlanF]

Are people not allowed to be wrong? I am wrong about something everyday.

But it's delivered with the veneer of 'rightness' and 'you can trust me', etc. that makes his thing a bit professorial, and that sort of role should be strictly factual, IMHO.

Again, no ill will towards what he does. It's just not for me.

- A

The top listed synonyms in http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/professorial for "professorial" are: accomplished; educated; scholarly; scientific; studied; and well-educated, which are the complete opposite pf Tony Northrup's reviewing and for which I agree entirely with "Again, no ill will towards what he does. It's just not for me."

There are sites that are "professorial", such as lensrentals, the-digital-picture, lenstip, ephotozine, photozone, amateurphotographer, cameralabs etc etc that I respect and take notice of and learn from but Tony Northrup gives every impression of knowing far less than many CR members.

 

[Maiaibing]

Lots of people seemingly love bashing those who make a living off their approach to digital photography...

Because it’s 99% marketing and 1% content.
Tony is just as capable of mis-informing people as he is of providing useful information and he does both regularly.

Tony’s “busuness” is his personality, he markets his face, not cameras or photographs.
If you took “Tony Northrup” out of the “Tony Northrup Channel” those videos would be worth nothing, half the time he can’t even get a spec sheet right, but enough mindless “followers” view him as a celebrity and want to associate with his syle (and probably just want to emulate his lifestyle) so they consume all his content and live vicariously through the videos.

Thank you for highlighting my points. 8)

 

[Scud49]

I don't know why he gets so much hate. He said right upfront his predictions would be wrong and even gave examples of how he was wrong last year. I think people hear what they want to hear with people they dislike. Him and Chelsea inspire me in a different way than say Ben Horn or Ted Forbes, but I enjoy their content. I guess i am in the minority.

I'm with you 100% - I very much enjoy their insight and commentary.

 

[Richard CR]

I think it would be an interesting January 1st post for all the various rumor sites to post all at the same time their predictions on the coming year.

See who gets it closest

 

[reef58]

Lots of people seemingly love bashing those who make a living off their approach to digital photography...

Because it’s 99% marketing and 1% content.
Tony is just as capable of mis-informing people as he is of providing useful information and he does both regularly.

Tony’s “busuness” is his personality, he markets his face, not cameras or photographs.
If you took “Tony Northrup” out of the “Tony Northrup Channel” those videos would be worth nothing, half the time he can’t even get a spec sheet right, but enough mindless “followers” view him as a celebrity and want to associate with his syle (and probably just want to emulate his lifestyle) so they consume all his content and live vicariously through the videos.

I am not a huge fan. I somewhat follow his channel and enjoy the photo review videos. If there is something I am interested in buying I will usually watch his and other videos for content. Maybe you are right about some of his "followers" as far as me you could not be more wrong. Who knows. If you like to watch photo critiques you have Kelby's Grid, Polin which I cannot watch, and Tony. There just aren't many folks providing lots of gear review content.

 

[RGF]

Please summarize, as I can’t bear to watch that goofball.

5Ds Mark II
$4,499
50 or 75 MP
5D Mark IV body
1080p

7D Mark III
$2,299
7D Mark II body
24 MP, no AA
12 FPS, 1DX II focus system
4K full-width

90D
$1,499
24MP, AA
80D body
7D Mark II focus system
4K full-width

M3
$3,499
FF mirrorless with adapter
EVF
30 MP, AA (5D Mark IV)
4K cropped (no Motion JPG)

I have high interest in the 7D M3, so-so interest in the 5Ds M2 (depends upon buffer size, FPS, and DR), and M3 to look at. would be nice to have lighter 5D M4 but only if it works very well.

 

[scottkinfw]

I gave up on him. Biased against Canon on so many past reviews it isn't funny.

I would tak anything he says with a truck load of salt.

Scott

 

[scottkinfw]

Please summarize, as I can’t bear to watch that goofball.

5Ds Mark II
$4,499
50 or 75 MP
5D Mark IV body
1080p


The prices seem a bit steep? Anyone els think so?

Scott
7D Mark III
$2,299
7D Mark II body
24 MP, no AA
12 FPS, 1DX II focus system
4K full-width

90D
$1,499
24MP, AA
80D body
7D Mark II focus system
4K full-width

M3
$3,499
FF mirrorless with adapter
EVF
30 MP, AA (5D Mark IV)
4K cropped (no Motion JPG)

 

[scottkinfw]

I don't know why he gets so much hate. He said right upfront his predictions would be wrong and even gave examples of how he was wrong last year. I think people hear what they want to hear with people they dislike. Him and Chelsea inspire me in a different way than say Ben Horn or Ted Forbes, but I enjoy their content. I guess i am in the minority.

That's fine, and I'm glad you enjoy his content, but he should stick his strengths -- stuff that inspires or shares opinion.

100% agree

Scott

But this forum has identified countless "Ugh, no that's not how it works at all, Tony" sort of moments where he is spreading information that is not exactly based in fact. And I'm being kind in saying that. Others here will not pull punches in response to some of the things he's said.

- A

 

[mistaspeedy]

I gave up on him. Biased against Canon on so many past reviews it isn't funny.

I would tak anything he says with a truck load of salt.

Scott

I don't see his bias against Canon in his reviews. I have watched his channel for many years, and he used to recommend Canon over Nikon and Sony most of the time. As technology changed, and the competitors offered better and better cameras and lenses, his recommendations changed.
He was recommending the 7D mark II until the Nikon D500 came out (and some new glass available on the Nikon mount). He was recommending the Canon 5DsR as being better than the D810 in most cases... the new D850 changed this. For sports he ignored everything Sony until the A9 came out.
For video he seems to recommend 4K Panasonic cameras, unless you really need a vlogging camera with reliable autofocus (Canon dual-pixel).
This video mentions superior Canon glass, and why he wants to jump to Nikon but can't.... at that point in time, certain Nikon glass was lacking... now new lenses are out now and his recommendations have changed accordingly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jva08HY6uLE

So... I'll leave it at that.... we are all free to believe if someone is biased or not.... I just thought I'd leave my impression of the situation.

PS: I'm not some sort of Tony Northrup fanboy... I'm not saying every review or conclusion he has ever made is perfect. My main point is that he is not a 'Canon hater' or 'Nikon/Sony' fanboy. He'll review a product a let us know what his impressions of the product truly are (regardless of whether or not his conclusions are correct).

 

[LSXPhotog]

I don't watch hi videos because it takes a lot of energy to not comment back to him - which is what they want.

There is about a 0% chance we see a full-frame mirrorless camera called the M3 - a camera name already used...so it's great to see he did his research. BUT, I have always thought that they should make the EF-mount be included via removable adapter and, once removed, could accept EOS-M lenses in a crop mode. This would help drive development of the M-mount as well as insure that we see the new camera retain the ability to adapt vintage lenses. A big fear of mine is that if a mirrorless camera comes out that accepts EF lenses, it means the longer flange distance will not allow it to have the benefits of mounting other glass on it.