The "consumerization" of the low end....

The most glaring example of this is without doubt the Nikon D40. A
truly dismal step down from the D50, engineered by Nikon for one
purpose, to artificially maintain a price point by degrading the
feature set of the D50. Was it REALLY needed that they shave a few
mm's off each side of an already diminutive DSLR? Are they aiming it a
race of adult of child size? Does a few dozen grams really make any
difference when carrying a camera?? There have been other examples of
this consumerization, Olympus's complete gutting of their fine C-line
of P&S cameras turning them into nothing but Kodak-clone plastic JUNK
with marginal performance. Hilariously, Olympus concentrated so much
effort in this dismal endevour, they failed to see the futu They
are now stuck with only ONE DSLR for the North American market, the
innovative and until recently overpriced E-330!!!

Pretty soon, the lines will be drawn hard. The "enthusiasts" cameras
keep improving (Canon's 20D, 30D and soon the 40D) being good examples
of this, the Nikon D200 being close to a pro model. But the consumer
end is marketed with two dictates from TPTB: Useless extra megapixels
and cost-control.

To look at a Canon 30D and a Nikon D40 is to see a chasm in quality
difference. But, with the cult-drones and the paid reviewers fawning
over it, along with a neurotic need for "tiny" everything by clueless
consumers, the D40 will sell very well indeed. Meanwhile, anyone with
even a modicum of sense looking for a bulletproof entry-level camera
will snag one of the leftover D50s for about $400 off Ebay.

RichA wrote:
Meanwhile, anyone with
even a modicum of sense looking for a bulletproof entry-level camera
will snag one of the leftover D50s for about $400 off Ebay.

Does this mean you are buying a D50?

Scott

In article .com,
Scott W wrote:

RichA wrote:
Meanwhile, anyone with
even a modicum of sense looking for a bulletproof entry-level camera
will snag one of the leftover D50s for about $400 off Ebay.

Does this mean you are buying a D50?


While I didn't see the original post (because he's killfiled), I can
tell you that he doesn't meet the minimum qualifications of his own
post, even if he was ever going to actually own a camera in his life
instead of just knocking them all.

All right, everyone now, to the tune of Monty Python's "Spam" song:

Plastic plastic plastic plastic, plastic plastic plastic plastic,
wonderful plastic, lovely plaaaastiiic...
___
/ -/
0/ 0/.

--
You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a
reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating
the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for
independence.
-- Charles A. Beard

RichA wrote:
The most glaring example of this is without doubt the Nikon D40. A
truly dismal step down from the D50, engineered by Nikon for one
purpose, to artificially maintain a price point by degrading the
feature set of the D50.

I, for one, am delighted that DSLRs are coming down in size and weight. I
expect the quality of pictures to be undiminished.

Hoorah for Nikon!

David

RichA wrote:

The most glaring example of this is without doubt the Nikon D40. A
truly dismal step down from the D50, engineered by Nikon for one
purpose, to artificially maintain a price point by degrading the
feature set of the D50.

Due to improvements in its image processing engine, it can provide
better images than the D50.

Was it REALLY needed that they shave a few
mm's off each side of an already diminutive DSLR?

Do you have giant hands? see the Canon D400.

Are they aiming it a
race of adult of child size?

Don't be so pathetic and people might take you more seriously.

Does a few dozen grams really make any
difference when carrying a camera?? There have been other examples of
this consumerization, Olympus's complete gutting of their fine C-line
of P&S cameras turning them into nothing but Kodak-clone plastic JUNK
with marginal performance. Hilariously, Olympus concentrated so much
effort in this dismal endevour, they failed to see the futu They
are now stuck with only ONE DSLR for the North American market, the
innovative and until recently overpriced E-330!!!

Pretty soon, the lines will be drawn hard. The "enthusiasts" cameras
keep improving (Canon's 20D, 30D and soon the 40D) being good examples
of this, the Nikon D200 being close to a pro model. But the consumer
end is marketed with two dictates from TPTB: Useless extra megapixels
and cost-control.

Now your just ranting again. Stop it with the info overload and just
take some pictures.

To look at a Canon 30D and a Nikon D40 is to see a chasm in quality
difference. But, with the cult-drones and the paid reviewers fawning
over it, along with a neurotic need for "tiny" everything by clueless
consumers, the D40 will sell very well indeed. Meanwhile, anyone with
even a modicum of sense looking for a bulletproof entry-level camera
will snag one of the leftover D50s for about $400 off Ebay.

Leftover? There's still plenty for sale in stores near me. Had the D40
been around when I was looking at an entry level choice I would have
certainly considered it.

Doc

"RichA" wrote in message
ups.com...
snip
with marginal performance. Hilariously, Olympus concentrated so much
effort in this dismal endevour, they failed to see the futu They
are now stuck with only ONE DSLR for the North American market, the
innovative and until recently overpriced E-330!!!

Forgot about the E500?

RichA wrote:

The most glaring example of this is without doubt the Nikon D40. A
truly dismal step down from the D50, engineered by Nikon for one
purpose, to artificially maintain a price point by degrading the
feature set of the D50. Was it REALLY needed that they shave a few
mm's off each side of an already diminutive DSLR?

I think so, yes. I'm seriously considering buying one for the
occasions when I want to take a camera, but not a big DSLR. It's an
attractive alternative to, say, something like the Coolpix 8800.
Indeed, maybe DSLRs like the D40 will kill Coolpix 8800-class cameras
stone dead. That's where it's aimed, not the current DSLR market.

Andrew.

Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
"RichA" wrote in message
ups.com...
snip
with marginal performance. Hilariously, Olympus concentrated so much
effort in this dismal endevour, they failed to see the futu They
are now stuck with only ONE DSLR for the North American market, the
innovative and until recently overpriced E-330!!!

Forgot about the E500?

It's been discontinued.

Andrew Haley wrote:
RichA wrote:

The most glaring example of this is without doubt the Nikon D40. A
truly dismal step down from the D50, engineered by Nikon for one
purpose, to artificially maintain a price point by degrading the
feature set of the D50. Was it REALLY needed that they shave a few
mm's off each side of an already diminutive DSLR?

I think so, yes. I'm seriously considering buying one for the
occasions when I want to take a camera, but not a big DSLR. It's an
attractive alternative to, say, something like the Coolpix 8800.
Indeed, maybe DSLRs like the D40 will kill Coolpix 8800-class cameras
stone dead. That's where it's aimed, not the current DSLR market.

Andrew.

I can hardly wait for the 1.5 sensored, pressed phenolic and cardboard
DSLRs to hit
the market.

RichA wrote:
I can hardly wait for the 1.5 sensored, pressed phenolic and cardboard
DSLRs to hit
the market.
So put your money where you mouth is. You keep telling us how the cost
saving using plastic are not worth the loss in quality, so stop all
this bellyaching and go out and buy a metal camera.

Scott