Nikon regresses in the low end, leaving one to wonder about their situation

In article ,
Rich A wrote:

No ultrasonic dust cleaner? The genius pioneered by Olympus is now standard
on all major cameras, so why would they take it away from the D3400 (D3300
it)?

it's an entry level camera so it doesn't get all of the features the
higher end cameras have and the dust cleaners don't really matter much
anyway.

In article ,
RichA wrote:

No ultrasonic dust cleaner? The genius pioneered by Olympus is now
standard
on all major cameras, so why would they take it away from the D3400
(D3300
it)?

it's an entry level camera so it doesn't get all of the features the
higher end cameras have and the dust cleaners don't really matter much
anyway.

You are insane if you really believe that. I used Olympus cameras since 2008
and have NEVER had to clean the sensor of one. Meanwhile, old Nikon's,
Pentax's, etc., that didn't have it always needed sensor cleaning.

i've used nikon slrs without sensor cleaning and haven't had any issue
and have disabled it on my current nikon slr because it's simply not
needed every single time the camera is power cycled.

i run it once in a while only if needed but i could also use a rocket
blower like i used to.

On 2016-08-18 23:53:26 +0000, RichA said:

On Thursday, 18 August 2016 12:24:07 UTC-4, nospam wrote:
In article ,
Rich A wrote:

No ultrasonic dust cleaner? The genius pioneered by Olympus is now standard
on all major cameras, so why would they take it away from the D3400 (D3300
it)?

it's an entry level camera so it doesn't get all of the features the
higher end cameras have and the dust cleaners don't really matter much
anyway.

You are insane if you really believe that. I used Olympus cameras
since 2008 and have NEVER had to clean the sensor of one. Meanwhile,
old Nikon's, Pentax's, etc., that didn't have it always needed sensor
cleaning.

I perfected my sensor wet cleaning skills with my dust magnet D70. I
had to clean that sensor several times a week depending on the number
of lens changes I made on a particular shoot. Having that camera got me
over all squeamishness when it comes to dealing with persistent sensor
dust on any exposed sensor.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 19/08/2016 00:53, RichA wrote:
[]
You are insane if you really believe that. I used Olympus cameras since 2008 and have NEVER had to clean the sensor of one. Meanwhile, old Nikon's, Pentax's, etc., that didn't have it always needed sensor cleaning.

I'm inclined towards the view that it's a cost-cut too far. Can there
be any other reason than cost-cutting? I'm very surprised that Nikon
has dropped that, and equally surprised that they have nothing
respectable to offer in mirrorless cameras.

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

On 8/19/2016 5:24 AM, David Taylor wrote:
On 19/08/2016 00:53, RichA wrote:
[]
You are insane if you really believe that. I used Olympus cameras
since 2008 and have NEVER had to clean the sensor of one. Meanwhile,
old Nikon's, Pentax's, etc., that didn't have it always needed sensor
cleaning.

I'm inclined towards the view that it's a cost-cut too far. Can there
be any other reason than cost-cutting? I'm very surprised that Nikon
has dropped that, and equally surprised that they have nothing
respectable to offer in mirrorless cameras.



Some high priced professional photographers have expressed concern that
they could not charge as much if they show up with light weight cameras
that look like toys to a layman customer. I am offering a suggestion
that concerns in that market may be factors.

--
PeterN

On 19/08/2016 13:48, PeterN wrote:
[]
Some high priced professional photographers have expressed concern that
they could not charge as much if they show up with light weight cameras
that look like toys to a layman customer. I am offering a suggestion
that concerns in that market may be factors.

I would have thought that at the bottom end of the market, the customer
may have heard of Canon and Nikon, and when similarly-priced (in the UK)
offerings are compared, the Canon appears to win hands-down. Or an I
missing something?

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

In article , David Taylor
wrote:

You are insane if you really believe that. I used Olympus cameras since
2008 and have NEVER had to clean the sensor of one. Meanwhile, old
Nikon's, Pentax's, etc., that didn't have it always needed sensor cleaning.

I'm inclined towards the view that it's a cost-cut too far. Can there
be any other reason than cost-cutting?

yes, because the target market doesn't need it.

people said the same thing when nikon removed the motor in the d40. how
could they remove such a key feature?? it will make zillions of lenses
obsolete! it turned out that the d40 went on to be the top selling
nikon slr at the time.

people buying an entry level slr generally buy one lens and leave it
attached, so the lack of a focus motor didn't make a difference with
the d40, and if the lens isn't removed, dust is not likely to be a
problem so there's not a huge need for a dust shaker, which isn't that
big of a deal even if lenses are removed because newer sensors aren't
as much of a dust magnet as the older ones.

I'm very surprised that Nikon
has dropped that, and equally surprised that they have nothing
respectable to offer in mirrorless cameras.

mirrorless is a different issue entirely.

In article , David Taylor
wrote:

Some high priced professional photographers have expressed concern that
they could not charge as much if they show up with light weight cameras
that look like toys to a layman customer. I am offering a suggestion
that concerns in that market may be factors.

I would have thought that at the bottom end of the market, the customer
may have heard of Canon and Nikon, and when similarly-priced (in the UK)
offerings are compared, the Canon appears to win hands-down. Or an I
missing something?

yes

On 8/19/2016 9:53 AM, David Taylor wrote:
On 19/08/2016 13:48, PeterN wrote:
[]
Some high priced professional photographers have expressed concern that
they could not charge as much if they show up with light weight cameras
that look like toys to a layman customer. I am offering a suggestion
that concerns in that market may be factors.

I would have thought that at the bottom end of the market, the customer
may have heard of Canon and Nikon, and when similarly-priced (in the UK)
offerings are compared, the Canon appears to win hands-down. Or an I
missing something?


I should have been more specific. I was referring only to the mirrorless
camera issue


--
PeterN

On 2016-08-19 15:12:16 +0000, PeterN said:

On 8/19/2016 9:53 AM, David Taylor wrote:
On 19/08/2016 13:48, PeterN wrote:
[]
Some high priced professional photographers have expressed concern that
they could not charge as much if they show up with light weight cameras
that look like toys to a layman customer. I am offering a suggestion
that concerns in that market may be factors.

I would have thought that at the bottom end of the market, the customer
may have heard of Canon and Nikon, and when similarly-priced (in the UK)
offerings are compared, the Canon appears to win hands-down. Or an I
missing something?


I should have been more specific. I was referring only to the
mirrorless camera issue

There are quite a large number of wedding photographers who have moved
from DSLR systems to the Fujifilm X series, particularly the X-Pro2 and
X-T2, largely because of the silence of an electronic shutter, and very
good IQ. There is the added bonus of a lighter load and a few other
features.
My disclaimer; as you know I am a Nikon DSLR shooter who has had his
photography enthusiasm revived by my exposure to the Fujifim X cameras.

http://www.fujiholics.com/blog/6w6zagrmtwwzejlyxz57zcdbegswlk
https://fujifilm-blog.com/2016/07/20/10773/
http://www.thewanderinglensman.com/2016/07/the-fujifilm-triador-is-it-quadrad.html

--


Regards,

Savageduck