Commentary: Engineer/Management Interviews Tell me Nothing

[Canon Rumors]

Thom Hogan has written a nice tongue-in-cheek article about engineering and management “interviews” after significant new products have been announced. He was especially turned off by the “t<a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2015/02/interview-with-head-of-eos-5ds-eos-5ds-r-development/" target="_blank">he key man behind the development of the revolutionary 50.6 Megapixel Canon EOS 5DS…</a>” interview by CPN.</p>
<p>Thom takes the liberty of answering the questions in the interview, but this time with the ‘<em>correct’</em> answers. It’s a fun read.</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/engineermanagement-intervie.html" target="_blank">Read Thom Hogan’s Commentary</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[kiwiengr]

I like this guy's Tripod 101 article, a non pisstake (Aussie / Kiwi expression) article. But, would this Nikon dude do the same sort of Canon pisstake with Nikon?

There is nothing like consistency...

 

[kiwiengr]

In Australia, the 5DS R has already been superseded.....http://www.canon.com.au/en-AU/Personal/Support-Help/Product-Help/Camera-Accessories/EOS-Digital-SLR-Cameras/EOS-5DSR

 

[erjlphoto]

wow, that was just like reading the numerous anti-Canon comments in DP member comments. Does Tom moonlight a lot?

 

[hal2000]

wow, that was just like reading the numerous anti-Canon comments in DP member comments. Does Tom moonlight a lot?

Well, doesn't matter whether he's a Nikon fanboy and what he would say in case of Nikon or whatever.
He's right. The original interview is just daft and pointless.

 

[unfocused]

Hogan's a Nikon user, but his commentaries are pretty non-brand specific. His "interview" was much more informative than the Imagining Resource interview.

Too many "journalists" covering technology are nothing more than fanboys for technology of any sort. They are incapable of asking the tough questions and don't have the courage to stand up to the manufacturers by asking probing questions.

 

[memoriaphoto]

Haha, come on guys! I admit it was entertaining to read, but this interview was used as an excuse to trash Canon. Sophistically framed of course, but obvious! You can see it from space!

Having that said - I liked it! AND I'm getting the 5Ds ;D

 

[Famateur]

In Australia, the 5DS R has already been superseded.....http://www.canon.com.au/en-AU/Personal/Support-Help/Product-Help/Camera-Accessories/EOS-Digital-SLR-Cameras/EOS-5DSR

Kia ora, bro! ;D

The big question: Superseded by what? And is it Canon? :-X

 

[Famateur]

In Australia, the 5DS R has already been superseded.....http://www.canon.com.au/en-AU/Personal/Support-Help/Product-Help/Camera-Accessories/EOS-Digital-SLR-Cameras/EOS-5DSR

Kia ora, bro! ;D

The big question: Superseded by what? And is it Canon? :-X

In all seriousness, I wonder if it's a website hiccup because there are two versions of the 5DS (one being "superseded" by the other)...

 

[mackguyver]

I like this guy's Tripod 101 article, a non pisstake (Aussie / Kiwi expression) article. But, would this Nikon dude do the same sort of Canon pisstake with Nikon?

There is nothing like consistency...

He's a cheerful fellow for sure, but some of his stuff, like the tripod article are right on point. He's grumbled about Nikon's lineup being too similar, but I'm not sure he would would write something like this about Nikon.

For me, I found this article about 25% funny, 25% whiny, and 50% I'm jealous of Canon

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Thom writes critical articles about Nikon as well.

I see the 5Ds as some sort of stop gap measure because Canon is slow at bringing new technology to market. I'd suspect that they are concerned with falling sales, and are making quick and easy upgrades rather than turn out a major new product. The 5DS does have some good features, but overall, its not the camera I want. I do expect that it will be a big profit maker, and that's where Canon seems to excel.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

yup

other than for:"Why are there crop settings in this new camera? Why are there crop settings in our competitor’s cameras? Marketing told us that we needed parity or else they would have to come up with a reason why cropping is bad. "

These modes make a ton of sense! Who wants to waste tons of CF space, HD drive and make the buffer performance and clearance horrible when you don't need to but when you still want nice reach for wildlife or some sports?

And they also allow you to bump up the fps (well so long as you don't shoot Canon) since there are less MP to process making the cameras much more all-around!

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

wow, that was just like reading the numerous anti-Canon comments in DP member comments. Does Tom moonlight a lot?

Actually most of the 'anti-Canon' comments are actually, at their depth, pro-Canon comments from people who have probably shot Canon longer than you have and would rather wish to continue to do so rather than have to switch to Nikon or elsewhere. Although it seems like Canon just doesn't see a reason to listen and apparently has zero fear of lost sales so you should be happy soon as the set of long time Canon shooters who wanted change but didn't get it stop bothering and you can have fun with your 2007 sensor in 2017 and 2027 and perhaps far beyond and applaud yourself for doing everything possible to cheer on Canon to hold back (granted the low ISO DR doens't matter to everyone, but you'd think it does with the way anyone who mentions it isn't as good as other brands posts 100 posts in refutation). Perhaps you'll get zebras and focusing aids, ultra high-end features!!!!, by 2037 in a regular priced body (note how the incredible complex to code and implement AutoISO was dribbled out to Canon DSLRs over a period of well over a decade and micro-focus adjustment was repeatedly taken out and put back into the xxD line so they could keep offering a new feature every other cycle).

Anyway, I mean for many none of those may matter at all, and that's cool, but to those that stuff does matter, they are just trying to prod Canon and not destroy them as most would rather stay using Canon. And it's not like it hurts any of the rest to not get silly little things like AutoISO or whatnot held back because some MBA came up with some scheme and even if you don't need the DR, everyone makes a mistake once in a few thousand shots and if they extra DR let you rescue it, that would be a plus for you too no?

What happens is if bring it up once or twice and don't go all over the top then you get swarmed by 1000 fanboys and the message gets lost and distorted, so it's useless. But then if you respond and counter everything and try to raise enough attention for it to have a chance then you become a pest and it backfires. And then if you get sucked into combating all the "learn how to shoot moron", "have you ever taken a photo geek" and all sorts of other ridiculous nonsense stuff then you just end up becoming a jerk too. So I guess it's all pointless ot bother, especially on some forums.

 

[keithcooper]

I've a lot of time for Thom Hogan's comments.

Sure, he knows and uses Nikon kit, but is happy to call out their deficiencies/benefits as well as any other camera maker.

Indeed I find that many comments disparaging what he writes are often better indicators of the writers' own biases and insecurities ;-)

Ho hum, time to get my coat...

 

[Zerg2905]

Anti-Canon "propaganda", DP style, I'm afraid. But yes, Q&A docs might be full of...you know.

 

[Mitch.Conner]

I've a lot of time for Thom Hogan's comments.

Sure, he knows and uses Nikon kit, but is happy to call out their deficiencies/benefits as well as any other camera maker.

Indeed I find that many comments disparaging what he writes are often better indicators of the writers' own biases and insecurities ;-)

Ho hum, time to get my coat...

+1

 

[Vivid Color]

Hogan's a Nikon user, but his commentaries are pretty non-brand specific. His "interview" was much more informative than the Imagining Resource interview.

Too many "journalists" covering technology are nothing more than fanboys for technology of any sort. They are incapable of asking the tough questions and don't have the courage to stand up to the manufacturers by asking probing questions.

While I agree that sometimes journalists don't ask the right questions, sometimes it doesn't matter what question is asked, the person being interviewed is only going to give certain answers. Often/generally, the person being interviewed is trained to stay on message, generally conveying the company or agency's viewpoint, and not stray into his or her opinion or say something that could put the stockholders at risk. So my take on these interviews is that the Canon reps had a message they wanted to put out and they, for the most part, stayed on point. The exception being the Chuck Westfall interview in which he seemed to have difficulty staying on message for part of the interview. My personal take on these interviews is to not expect too much. As long as the person being interviewed isn't lying or misleading the public, then it is difficult to claim that harm is being done. In America, when one is sworn in to give testimony, one swears to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. But interviewers can't compel answers like the courts can. So, the whole truth is not likely to be told. What we should expect is that we get the truth and nothing but the truth. Would we like more and inside information? Of course, but whether we have a right to it from a privately owned entity is an entirely different matter.

 

[martti]

You can skip the interviews that you know are fake and boring. Read something else.
Canon is making stuff for media presence, not to enlighten or amuse its old users.
The publicity they do is aiming at boosting the sales.
The sell quite well.

 

[sdsr]

I've a lot of time for Thom Hogan's comments.

Sure, he knows and uses Nikon kit, but is happy to call out their deficiencies/benefits as well as any other camera maker.

Right - and its presumably because he's primarily a Nikon user that he devotes more space to complaining about Nikon than he does any other company. (Cf lettherightlensin's post above.)

 

[9VIII]

And they also allow you to bump up the fps (errr.... well so long as you don't shoot Canon) since there are less MP to process making the cameras much more all-around (again, Canon alone can't dare have that though)!!

Ironically, unless firmware has changed recently, the D750 does not give a crop mode boost, Nikon only wants to make sense when you pay them extra for it.