There are/will be no pro cameras, other than Canon or Nikon

All the rest, including the new Sony proposals are "prosumer" or
"enthusiast" market cameras.
Sony and Olympus talk about "pro" models, but this is just to make
those models attractive to a group of shooters who are definitely not
pros but want something beyond the plastic of the amateur ranks but
that don't cost as much as the pro models from Canon and Nikon.
But the pro ranks are dictated as much by marketing and system support
as the equipment itself so the idea of Olympus, Pentax, Sony, etc,
joining those ranks is somewhat laughable as they are not likely to
set-up the kind of support infrastructure Canon and Nikon have for pro
shooters on the off chance they can grab some of that market. Sony
could, if they wanted to, but they don't.

RichA wrote:
All the rest, including the new Sony proposals are "prosumer" or
"enthusiast" market cameras.
Sony and Olympus talk about "pro" models, but this is just to make
those models attractive to a group of shooters who are definitely not
pros but want something beyond the plastic of the amateur ranks but
that don't cost as much as the pro models from Canon and Nikon.
But the pro ranks are dictated as much by marketing and system support
as the equipment itself so the idea of Olympus, Pentax, Sony, etc,
joining those ranks is somewhat laughable as they are not likely to
set-up the kind of support infrastructure Canon and Nikon have for pro
shooters on the off chance they can grab some of that market. Sony
could, if they wanted to, but they don't.


They couldn't. Canon and Nikon, in their different ways, were able to
reach a market by seeding - Nikon got it done for them in the 1950s
because their cameras were so cheap and so good the users adopted them,
Canon did it by giving away thousands of cameras and lenses to Fleet
Street and the pro (mainly press and agency) establishment in other
countries. They didn't 'give' them as such, they just handed bodies and
desirable lenses to picture editors and told them to try them - and
never asked for them back. It only takes one 600mm f4 or whatever
dropped off with with a big news agency, which only works with Canon
bodies, to produce more than enough sales of bodies and other lenses in
time.

I saw this process happening and the only other company which attempted
the same in the UK - seeding gear into influential large users - was
Olympus. Minolta once made a half-hearted attempt and Peter Abbey, who
was the chief photographer of United Newspapers, was briefly persuaded
to use and recommend Minolta throughout his group. But these were big
regional newspapers, not the dailies or weekend press, and many were
already using Canon, Nikon or Pentax (the system Peter used previously)
with one brand only being adopted by each newspaper. Peter got some PR
promotion in return, but it all came to nothing. Minolta would not give
away the right level of gear.

Instead they did crazy things. They gave Ashvin Gatha two XMs and loads
of lenses. Ashvin was a really nice guy and had an amazing eye for
colour when colour was almost new, 1970s. But he was also a truly crap
photographer - trashed his gear, had no idea about anything technical,
didn't care much whether horizons were straight or focus bang on. He
tried to trade one of his beaten-up XMs for my XE-1 but it was so badly
treated there was no way! Over the years, half the pros they sponsored
were so strange I was barely able to use their work. David Fairman -
pointillism photo-effect from every image, like giant grain - no
evidence of the camera at work! One guy who painted elephants, famous
elephant artist. Used the cameras as a notebook. His final work was
PAINTINGS. Absolutely crazy. They even issued a limited edition painting
repro. It was like saying look, photography really isn't any good. They
once championed a guy who lived on the Cape Verde islands and
specialised in paying impoverished locals to pose nude. And their big
star was David Hamilton - a success in his time, but reviled as a
kiddy-porn pioneer. At least they won over his frien Lucien Clergue to
the system, and by supporting Lucien, helped foster the Arles festival.

Sony has got off to a bad start picking one Magnum photographer who is
technically uninterested and artistically goofy, the most obscure
personal reasons needing to be explained before you can judge if his
shots are not just snaps; and a chart singer who really, honestly, shows
nothing to photographers.

Canon somehow has managed to pick and sponsor photographers'
photographers - the ones who end up lecturing, exhibiting, writing
books, getting TV series.

It would take an entire generation, and a very different eye for
potential proteges and endorsers, for Sony to oust Canon from their
'bought in' position. Nikon won their place by other means; they earned
it, they didn't buy it. I don't think time will ever take that away from
them, like Leica. Leica earned their place, Contax tried to take it (and
failed). Nikon won their place and Canon, unlike Contax, succeeded.

David

RichA skrev:
Sony and Olympus talk about "pro" models, but this is just to make
those models attractive to a group of shooters who are definitely not
pros but want something beyond the plastic of the amateur ranks but
that don't cost as much as the pro models from Canon and Nikon.

Pro cameras in the sense you're thinking of require a kind of backing /
lense pool etc that Minolta never had, and sony sure doesn't have. So no.

The flagship model will be build to withstand professional use - the
build, efficiency and image quality that the professionals would be
sadisfied with. But the target will not be professionals, but rather the
amatours that want professional grade equipment. And ofcourse, probably
some professionals will buy it but it's important for the marked to have
such a top model.

And as usual, it's the a100 and a10? that will be the ones that take
home the money.

"Geir Eivind Mork" wrote in message
...
: RichA skrev:
: Sony and Olympus talk about "pro" models, but this is just to make
: those models attractive to a group of shooters who are definitely not
: pros but want something beyond the plastic of the amateur ranks but
: that don't cost as much as the pro models from Canon and Nikon.
:
: Pro cameras in the sense you're thinking of require a kind of backing /
: lense pool etc that Minolta never had, and sony sure doesn't have. So no.
:
: The flagship model will be build to withstand professional use - the
: build, efficiency and image quality that the professionals would be
: sadisfied with. But the target will not be professionals, but rather the
: amatours that want professional grade equipment. And ofcourse, probably
: some professionals will buy it but it's important for the marked to have
: such a top model.
:
: And as usual, it's the a100 and a10? that will be the ones that take
: home the money.
:

Waiting quietly in the wings is the "REAL" Professional camera maker.
Their soon to be released MF digital SLR will most certainly be a
Professional camera in the true sense of the word... Who is it? Starts
with P and ends with X.

On 10 Mar 2007 16:06:41 -0800, "RichA" wrote:

All the rest, including the new Sony proposals are "prosumer" or
"enthusiast" market cameras.
Sony and Olympus talk about "pro" models, but this is just to make
those models attractive to a group of shooters who are definitely not
pros but want something beyond the plastic of the amateur ranks but
that don't cost as much as the pro models from Canon and Nikon.
But the pro ranks are dictated as much by marketing and system support
as the equipment itself so the idea of Olympus, Pentax, Sony, etc,
joining those ranks is somewhat laughable as they are not likely to
set-up the kind of support infrastructure Canon and Nikon have for pro
shooters on the off chance they can grab some of that market. Sony
could, if they wanted to, but they don't.

I ask again: what makes you think your pronouncements are significant?
What credentials do you posess that would add weight to what you say?

--
The New York Times reported
Barack Obama made investments
in companies owned by his
campaign donors, then tried
to help them with legislation.
He says he didn't know he owned
their stock. Scooter Libby
watched his performance and
gave it a seven.

RichA wrote:
All the rest, including the new Sony proposals are "prosumer" or
"enthusiast" market cameras.
Sony and Olympus talk about "pro" models, but this is just to make
those models attractive to a group of shooters who are definitely not
pros but want something beyond the plastic of the amateur ranks but

One of the reasons I don't reply to you very much is that I'm always
wanting to write: "That's the stupidest thing you've written yet."

But I tire of writing that again and again as you seem to have endless
pits of greater stupidity to draw on.

"David Kilpatrick" wrote in message
...

I won't requote it because of the length, David, just wanted to say it was
most interesting.

Neil

On Mar 11, 11:56 am, Alan Browne
wrote:
RichA wrote:
All the rest, including the new Sony proposals are "prosumer" or
"enthusiast" market cameras.
Sony and Olympus talk about "pro" models, but this is just to make
those models attractive to a group of shooters who are definitely not
pros but want something beyond the plastic of the amateur ranks but

One of the reasons I don't reply to you very much is that I'm always
wanting to write: "That's the stupidest thing you've written yet."

But I tire of writing that again and again as you seem to have endless
pits of greater stupidity to draw on.

Awww did his widdle MINOLTA feewings get hurt?

D-Mac wrote:

Waiting quietly in the wings is the "REAL" Professional camera maker.
Their soon to be released MF digital SLR will most certainly be a
Professional camera in the true sense of the word... Who is it? Starts
with P and ends with X.

Perhaps, but a camera that's had to have been revised to meet the market
before it has ever been beyond being a "clay model" doesn't bode well.
(And I hope I'm wrong)
There is also a marketing position which Canon have nailed. Many
amateurs buy in to an SLR system with expectation that one day, when
they're good enough, they'll make enough money from photography to be
able to buy a pro model. Canon has this path open better than any other
dslr maker. No. 2 position holder (Nikon) doesn't do so well - the
expensive D2x isn't really capable of significantly better image quality
then the new entry level D40x - the D2x just comes with a far better
feature set.
For Pentax, to have a digital medium format camera isn't going to
increase their sales of entry dslrs - which is where the volume market is.

One of the reasons I don't reply to you very much is that I'm always
wanting to write: "That's the stupidest thing you've written yet."

But I tire of writing that again and again as you seem to have endless
pits of greater stupidity to draw on.

Awww did his widdle MINOLTA feewings get hurt?

No, he just called you on what you a a persistent troll that keeps
buzzing around this newsgroup like a pesky little mosquito.