Canon screwed themselves (or did they?)

The consensus seems to be a jump from the 350 to the 400 isn't worth it
from an image improvement perspective, and may actually be a bad idea
if the lowest noise is your goal. However, there are other things the
camera has that might swing the pendulum.
However, Nikon, Pentax and Sony-Minolta's 10 megs have clear advantages
over their 6 megapixel predecessors. Nikon, was the smartest
concerning this because the D80 body is identical to the D50! They
didn't even go the extra mile to adopt the superior D70 body for the
D80. This has allowed them to keep costs at a bare minimum, only
allowing for a new sensor. For that they get a nice price increase and
it's possible and likely the new D80 is cheaper to build than the D70!
The sensor's physical size remained the same, only the pixel count
changed. Look for Nikon's profits to increase substantially because of
this.
Meanwhile, Olympus keeps (IMO) shooting themselves in the foot with
their incoherent marketing, once again a step-behind the competition by
releasing a 10 meg with refinements, to the European and Asian markets
only.

Nikon have lost a huge amount of users. Although good manufactures, Canon
is the DSLR market share leader by far and there is a reason for that.



"RichA" wrote in message
oups.com...
The consensus seems to be a jump from the 350 to the 400 isn't worth it
from an image improvement perspective, and may actually be a bad idea
if the lowest noise is your goal. However, there are other things the
camera has that might swing the pendulum.
However, Nikon, Pentax and Sony-Minolta's 10 megs have clear advantages
over their 6 megapixel predecessors. Nikon, was the smartest
concerning this because the D80 body is identical to the D50! They
didn't even go the extra mile to adopt the superior D70 body for the
D80. This has allowed them to keep costs at a bare minimum, only
allowing for a new sensor. For that they get a nice price increase and
it's possible and likely the new D80 is cheaper to build than the D70!
The sensor's physical size remained the same, only the pixel count
changed. Look for Nikon's profits to increase substantially because of
this.
Meanwhile, Olympus keeps (IMO) shooting themselves in the foot with
their incoherent marketing, once again a step-behind the competition by
releasing a 10 meg with refinements, to the European and Asian markets
only.

Stu wrote:
Nikon have lost a huge amount of users. Although good manufactures, Canon
is the DSLR market share leader by far and there is a reason for that.

I know Nikon has lost a lot of pro photographers, one pro can't be
disadvantaged relative to another or it can cost them money. The D2Xs
does not compare to the 1DsMkII or 5D image wise. But I wonder how
many non-pro enthusiast Nikon users have actually jumped ship?

"Stu" wrote in message
...
Nikon have lost a huge amount of users. Although good manufactures, Canon
is the DSLR market share leader by far and there is a reason for that.


I was chatting to a sports photographer in Melbourne after the Grand Final,
and she (Yes, 'she') confirmed that Canon had taken the pro sports market
from Nikon.

Eddie

Eddie wrote:
"Stu" wrote in message
...
Nikon have lost a huge amount of users. Although good manufactures, Canon
is the DSLR market share leader by far and there is a reason for that.


I was chatting to a sports photographer in Melbourne after the Grand Final,
and she (Yes, 'she') confirmed that Canon had taken the pro sports market
from Nikon.

Eddie


They did that long before DSLRs.
Good marketing when the cameras with distinctive white lenses are so
visible in TV coverage etc - even if some are now not Canon lenses.
On the back of it they rule the cheap end of the market for dslrs and
compacts with comparatively poorly specified products.

EddieThey did that long before DSLRs.
Good marketing when the cameras with distinctive white lenses are so
visible in TV coverage etc - even if some are now not Canon lenses.
On the back of it they rule the cheap end of the market for dslrs and
compacts with comparatively poorly specified products.

Canon also loaned lenses to registered pros, where Nikon doesn't seem
to. Lets see buy a $6K 400mm lens or have it loaned to you for a
sporting event. Guess what most photographers would do. These are no
money asked loans, not rentals. You just have to prove that you are a
published pro.

Tom

frederick wrote:
They did that long before DSLRs.
Good marketing when the cameras with distinctive white lenses are so
visible in TV coverage etc - even if some are now not Canon lenses.
On the back of it they rule the cheap end of the market for dslrs and
compacts with comparatively poorly specified products.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean to imply here.

Canon owns pro 35mm digital because they're offering cameras with great
performance, with low noise, and with 35mm sensors. All of these
factors come into play in the pro market, and Canon's definitely
outperforming the competition on all of these fronts. They own and
control both their (less expensive than others') chip production as
well as their whole "DiGiC" image-processing unit... and the interplay
between the two of these is key to their low noise success. That they
own both means they can keep prices down for consumers without having
to pay a fixed price to another company for chips. It's a smart
business model, that they've funded well, and it is working for them.

As for their consumer cameras, I don't know how "well-specified" they
are, but everytime I help a friend pick a point and shoot digital, I
find that Canon's offerings deliver better pictures. As sexy and
interesting as some of, say, Panasonic's new offerings are, they're
just too noisy. Sony's got some decent gear, but even Nikon's point and
shoots aren't really impressing.

Meanwhile, people need to stop pretending like the Digital Rebel line
is pretending to be something it isn't. I'm not the kind of
photographer who would have bought a film Rebel, and I never did. The
Digital Rebel line is the same camera with digital guts. If you were
the kind of photographer that had an Elan, then you're out of luck if
you're expecting that the Rebel is the camera you're looking for... you
want the 20d or 30d. People can call it plasticy, cheap, or whatever
the Hell they please... but it still delivers beautiful pictures,
better than most of the competition in this price segment, at a low
price in a body that hasn't changed much from the time it was a film
camera. The target market for the camera doesn't care, and they aren't
the consumers you'd expect to care. The more serious photographers that
would care aren't meant to consider the Rebel. It's as simple as that.

Will

"RichA" wrote in message
oups.com...
The consensus seems to be a jump from the 350 to the 400 isn't worth it
from an image improvement perspective, and may actually be a bad idea
if the lowest noise is your goal. However, there are other things the
camera has that might swing the pendulum.
However, Nikon, Pentax and Sony-Minolta's 10 megs have clear advantages
over their 6 megapixel predecessors. Nikon, was the smartest
concerning this because the D80 body is identical to the D50! They
didn't even go the extra mile to adopt the superior D70 body for the
D80. This has allowed them to keep costs at a bare minimum, only
allowing for a new sensor. For that they get a nice price increase and
it's possible and likely the new D80 is cheaper to build than the D70!
The sensor's physical size remained the same, only the pixel count
changed. Look for Nikon's profits to increase substantially because of
this.
Meanwhile, Olympus keeps (IMO) shooting themselves in the foot with
their incoherent marketing, once again a step-behind the competition by
releasing a 10 meg with refinements, to the European and Asian markets
only.

not all is in pixels. If you ask me, Canon could even stay at 8M and still
gain. Maybe even more if that would casue lower noise. For majority 8M is
too much still. But then again, that move would kill more expensive 30D...
Other things matter. 20D and 30D were still very similar. Yet 30 is selling.
Because 20D doesn't anymore. Same here. They (or will) stopped manufacturing
350D. It's an improvement. Not to replace existing 350 with it. But it's
because development goes on. And, since, new, improved model MUST come out
every year or so. Cars get more and more advanced. WIth more power. Yet many
of us don't sell our existing and buy a new one jsut because new one have 8
HP more than ours.

On 8 Oct 2006 11:15:05 -0700, "RichA" wrote:

The consensus seems to be a jump from the 350 to the 400 isn't worth it
from an image improvement perspective,

This is true for almost any single product jump.

Most people don't jump to a newer model (of anything) until there are
2 (or more) model upgrades. E.g. most camera owners didn't jump from
10d to 20d, but some did jump from 10d to 30d. Most didn't jump from
300d to 350d, but some did jump from 300d to 400d. Most didn't jump
from G1 to G2, but some did jump from G1 to G3. Etc. (I don't know
the Nikon product line well enough to give similar examples but I'm
sure they exist there as well.) I own a Canon 1DMII, I'm not jumping
to a 1DMIIN. That doesn't mean the N isn't a good camera - it is
selling like hotcakes but I bet that most buyers are either A)
replacing an older (than the 1DMII) body or B) are first-time buyers
in the DSLR market.

jc

--

"The nice thing about a mare is you get to ride a lot
of different horses without having to own that many."
~ Eileen Morgan of The Mare's Nest, PA

I have to agree "JC Dill".


"JC Dill" wrote in message
...
On 8 Oct 2006 11:15:05 -0700, "RichA" wrote:


This is true for almost any single product jump.

Most people don't jump to a newer model (of anything) until there are
2 (or more) model upgrades. E.g. most camera owners didn't jump from
10d to 20d, but some did jump from 10d to 30d. Most didn't jump from
300d to 350d, but some did jump from 300d to 400d. Most didn't jump
from G1 to G2, but some did jump from G1 to G3. Etc. (I don't know
the Nikon product line well enough to give similar examples but I'm
sure they exist there as well.) I own a Canon 1DMII, I'm not jumping
to a 1DMIIN. That doesn't mean the N isn't a good camera - it is
selling like hotcakes but I bet that most buyers are either A)
replacing an older (than the 1DMII) body or B) are first-time buyers
in the DSLR market.

jc

--

"The nice thing about a mare is you get to ride a lot
of different horses without having to own that many."
~ Eileen Morgan of The Mare's Nest, PA