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.

"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

JC Dill wrote:
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.

There are still several millions of people who will buy their first
DSLR. Many of them, and some of us existing Canon shooters, are
impressed by pixel counts.

--
John McWilliams

Why don't you go screw yourself?

Randall Ainsworth wrote:
Why don't you go screw yourself?

Projecting?

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?

RichA wrote:
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.


You have obviously never looked at a D50 and D80 side by side.