DSLR Gear No Idea

So, Sony has launched a new advertisement campaign called DSLR Gear No
Idea. It's a series of video clips on Youtube that makes fun of people
that use large DSLR cameras while not always knowing how to handle
them, here's an example:

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnaIFjJkuzQ

Viral marketing, the idea here is that you'll share this with the
friends you have that may fit one of the categories. The videos
themselves are marketing free, other than a link to the Youtube
channel, which itself has a link to Sony's NEX cameras [1] where they
claim that you get "DSLR quality without the difficulty". There they
have similar videos, but with more of a advertising message:

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=998_4YeeDbc

As a DSLR-owner I can totally identify with bringing a large camera to
my kids sporting events and that may end up making me look a bit
silly, like the guy in the video. But there is a reason why I bring a
D3s with a 70-200/2.8 lens there, it's because of the outstanding
performance of both the lens and the camera in ways the Sony NEX can't
match. I have no doubt that the NEX is a fine camera, but when it
comes to capture my kids in motion, it can't stack up to a real DSLR
camera with a quick lens. Basically, the entire premise of the video
is that the NEX is good for those that have DSLR but really doesn't
know how to use them.

And I think it's interesting that once given the NEX-7, the dad in the
video doesn't look any less of a fool, he just have a slightly smaller
camera in his hands.

And another point is that Sony sells DSLR camera. How does these
videos make the Sony DSLR owners feel? Sony making fun of their Sony
cameras. It's not like Sony is trying to sell to a target group where
they otherwise have no products, they are effectively marketing
against their other products here. Weird!

1: http://www.sony.com.au/productcategory/nex-camera


--
Sandman[.net]

http://jonaseklundh.se/pages/Dslr_Gear_No_Idea?lang=en

In article ,
Tony Cooper wrote:

On 31 May 2013 09:27:40 GMT, Sandman wrote:

As a DSLR-owner I can totally identify with bringing a large camera to
my kids sporting events and that may end up making me look a bit
silly,

I have two grandsons who play in "Babe Ruth" baseball leagues. And,
yes, I lug my Nikon to all the games. Because of the fences around
the field, I bring a milk crate to stand on so I can shoot over -
instead of through - the chain link fence.

Most of the other parents/grandparents use their phones or iPads to
take photos. One mother has a Nikon with a "Vari-Angle" viewfinder
that allows her to hold the camera over her head, and over the fence,
and shoot.

Several of the parents - even ones using phone and pad cameras - have
asked me to take photographs of their kids in action and email the
results to them. I do so, of course.

I've never felt silly in this activity.

Me neitehr, but perhaps others have thought you looked silly? I think
that's the point of the ads anyway. The dad is just taking pictures, but
to other's he is looking silly.

The irony, to me, is that him looking silly is based more on how he
moves and skips about rather than what type of camera he is using, and
when switching to the NEX, he looks exactly as silly.



--
Sandman[.net]

In article , Sandman
says...
But there is a reason why I bring a
D3s with a 70-200/2.8 lens there, it's because of the outstanding
performance of both the lens and the camera in ways the Sony NEX can't
match. I have no doubt that the NEX is a fine camera, but when it
comes to capture my kids in motion, it can't stack up to a real DSLR
camera with a quick lens.

Sony has developed a sensor with on-sensor phase AF. That sensor will
likely be available on a future NEX camera. Coupled with a fast lens,
that new NEX should perform as well as a normal DSLR.

But the point is that many not so knowledgeable people buy huge DSLRs
which essentially are overkill for them. And then they always use them
with the kit lens. These people would be better served with a more
compact mirrorless camera (be it a NEX, m4/3 or Samsung NX).
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

On 01/06/2013 09:04, Alfred Molon wrote:
[]
Sony has developed a sensor with on-sensor phase AF. That sensor will
likely be available on a future NEX camera. Coupled with a fast lens,
that new NEX should perform as well as a normal DSLR.

Nikon already have something like this - perhaps it's Nikon's
development perhaps it's purchased from Sony.

But the point is that many not so knowledgeable people buy huge DSLRs
which essentially are overkill for them. And then they always use them
with the kit lens. These people would be better served with a more
compact mirrorless camera (be it a NEX, m4/3 or Samsung NX).

Having used both bridge cameras and DSLRs there really is no comparison
in either the viewfinder or the operational speed. You can be much more
precise in timing with a DSLR, and the multi-second gap in getting the
view back in a bridge camera after taking makes tracking of fast moving
objects at high zooms much more difficult. Do the CSC cameras also
suffer from delay and poor EVFs?

On the other hand, the larger zoom range of the bridge camera can make
photos easy to get which would require very heavy and very bulky lenses
on a DSLR or on a Sony NEX camera.

My own feeling is that, for many people, a compact travel camera such as
one from the Panasonic range would be quite adequate, and a bridge
camera for those needing slightly more. The higher image quality from
the DSLR-sized sensor simply isn't needed, although the higher
sensitivity might be welcomed for indoor shooting.
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

In article ,
Alfred Molon wrote:

But there is a reason why I bring a
D3s with a 70-200/2.8 lens there, it's because of the outstanding
performance of both the lens and the camera in ways the Sony NEX can't
match. I have no doubt that the NEX is a fine camera, but when it
comes to capture my kids in motion, it can't stack up to a real DSLR
camera with a quick lens.

Sony has developed a sensor with on-sensor phase AF. That sensor will
likely be available on a future NEX camera. Coupled with a fast lens,
that new NEX should perform as well as a normal DSLR.

Well, they didn't wait until this future for the ads

Plus, as of now, there are not fast superzoom lenses for the NEX (as far
as I know) and definitely not 70-200/2.8 equivalent, which is what you
would want to use when capturing kids in motion from the sidelines.

And even if they did develop a fast superzoom lens, it would be as big
as cumbersome as the gear they're making fun of in these videos, so...

But the point is that many not so knowledgeable people buy huge DSLRs
which essentially are overkill for them.

That I agree with, and also mentioned in my post.

And then they always use them with the kit lens. These people would
be better served with a more compact mirrorless camera (be it a NEX,
m4/3 or Samsung NX).

Agree 100%. Although the videos doesn't really make fun of people with
kit lenses, but rather the superzoom 70-200 or 150-500 lenses for tasks
that doesn't require it. Like this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnaIFjJkuzQ

Even if you're a clueless DSLR user, you wouldn't be using a huge
superzoom for selfshots. It's satire, I know, but I am trying to find
sanity in the madness



--
Sandman[.net]

In article ,
says...

In article , Sandman
says...
But there is a reason why I bring a
D3s with a 70-200/2.8 lens there, it's because of the outstanding
performance of both the lens and the camera in ways the Sony NEX can't
match. I have no doubt that the NEX is a fine camera, but when it
comes to capture my kids in motion, it can't stack up to a real DSLR
camera with a quick lens.

Sony has developed a sensor with on-sensor phase AF. That sensor will
likely be available on a future NEX camera. Coupled with a fast lens,
that new NEX should perform as well as a normal DSLR.

But the point is that many not so knowledgeable people buy huge DSLRs
which essentially are overkill for them. And then they always use them
with the kit lens. These people would be better served with a more
compact mirrorless camera (be it a NEX, m4/3 or Samsung NX).

I don't know that a "more compact mirrorless camera" would serve them
any better than the DSLR. If it was substantially cheaper and had an
eye-level finder built in it might serve them as well but so far I'm not
seeing the mirrorless coming in at any kind of significant cost saving.

What would serve many of them better is a good bridge camera.

In article , david-
lid says...

On 01/06/2013 09:04, Alfred Molon wrote:
[]
Sony has developed a sensor with on-sensor phase AF. That sensor will
likely be available on a future NEX camera. Coupled with a fast lens,
that new NEX should perform as well as a normal DSLR.

Nikon already have something like this - perhaps it's Nikon's
development perhaps it's purchased from Sony.

But the point is that many not so knowledgeable people buy huge DSLRs
which essentially are overkill for them. And then they always use them
with the kit lens. These people would be better served with a more
compact mirrorless camera (be it a NEX, m4/3 or Samsung NX).

Having used both bridge cameras and DSLRs there really is no comparison
in either the viewfinder or the operational speed. You can be much more
precise in timing with a DSLR, and the multi-second gap in getting the
view back in a bridge camera after taking makes tracking of fast moving
objects at high zooms much more difficult. Do the CSC cameras also
suffer from delay and poor EVFs?

On the other hand, the larger zoom range of the bridge camera can make
photos easy to get which would require very heavy and very bulky lenses
on a DSLR or on a Sony NEX camera.

My own feeling is that, for many people, a compact travel camera such as
one from the Panasonic range would be quite adequate, and a bridge
camera for those needing slightly more. The higher image quality from
the DSLR-sized sensor simply isn't needed, although the higher
sensitivity might be welcomed for indoor shooting.

In my case I bought the SLR because I was losing shots to shutter lag.
Now I use it almost exclusively in a studio so the higher sensitivity
matters, but the thing that makes is almost irreplaceable is the 65mm
MP-E that is tack-sharp at 5x magnification.

On Fri, 31 May 2013 14:01:44 +0200, Sandman wrote:
: In article ,
: Tony Cooper wrote:
:
: On 31 May 2013 09:27:40 GMT, Sandman wrote:
:
: As a DSLR-owner I can totally identify with bringing a large camera to
: my kids sporting events and that may end up making me look a bit
: silly,
:
: I have two grandsons who play in "Babe Ruth" baseball leagues. And,
: yes, I lug my Nikon to all the games. Because of the fences around
: the field, I bring a milk crate to stand on so I can shoot over -
: instead of through - the chain link fence.
:
: Most of the other parents/grandparents use their phones or iPads to
: take photos. One mother has a Nikon with a "Vari-Angle" viewfinder
: that allows her to hold the camera over her head, and over the fence,
: and shoot.
:
: Several of the parents - even ones using phone and pad cameras - have
: asked me to take photographs of their kids in action and email the
: results to them. I do so, of course.
:
: I've never felt silly in this activity.
:
: Me neitehr, but perhaps others have thought you looked silly? I think
: that's the point of the ads anyway. The dad is just taking pictures, but
: to other's he is looking silly.
:
: The irony, to me, is that him looking silly is based more on how he
: moves and skips about rather than what type of camera he is using, and
: when switching to the NEX, he looks exactly as silly.

Two points:

Those Sony ads were obviously staged.

I know exactly how silly I look, lugging around a DSLR (especially shooting
events, where I usually lug two of them, complete with two battery packs on my
belt). If it bothers you to look silly, you have no business dabbling in
serious photography. Stick to your cell phone camera, and look like a yokel
instead of a jackass. ;^)

Bob

On Fri, 31 May 2013 21:10:39 -0400, Tony Cooper
wrote:
:
: As I mentioned, I bring a milk crate to the game to stand on in order
: to be able to shoot over the chainlink fence instead of through it.
: This is a milk crate for those not familiar with them:
: http://milkcratedigest.com/wp-conten..._milkcrate.jpg
: That may have looked silly at first, but several other photographers
: have asked to use it when their son or grandson was up at bat. Not so
: silly.

A crate identical to that one is three feet away from me as I type this. I
didn't realize it's strong enough to stand on. Live a lot, learn a little.

Bob

On 2013.06.01 12:49 , Robert Coe wrote:

Those Sony ads were obviously staged.

If it bothers you to look silly, you have no business dabbling in
serious photography. Stick to your cell phone camera, and look like a yokel
instead of a jackass. ;^)

Perfectly put.

People shooting with an iPhone look cool.

Of course the photos usually don't.

As to being a DSLR jackass, if one digs around these groups one will
find a discussion about shooting vests which could point out a really
serious, maybe professional, photographer or be the height of wannabeism.

I know a few local clubs where some members sport shooting jackets when
out and about - and I've seen their many excellent photos as well. I
guess looking like a jackass doesn't equate to bad photos.

--
"A Canadian is someone who knows how to have sex in a canoe."
-Pierre Berton