Another Nikon D200 'Leak'

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

This was posted this morning and it certainly one of the more unusual D200
'leaks' that have been posted the past few months.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/ [...] e=15145989

Add a reply

Register or log in to remove.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Dean S. Lautermilch wrote:
> This was posted this morning and it certainly one of the more unusual D200
> 'leaks' that have been posted the past few months.
>
> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/ [...] e=15145989
>
>
>
Thousands of people a day are buying DSLRs around the world... While
Nikon procrastinate, how much are they losing in sales?

--
Douglas...
Have gun will travel... Said his card.
I didn't care, I shot him anyway.
1/125th @ f5.6. R.I.P. Mamiya.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:43345729@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> Dean S. Lautermilch wrote:
>> This was posted this morning and it certainly one of the more unusual
>> D200 'leaks' that have been posted the past few months.
>>
>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/ [...] e=15145989
>>
>>
>>
> Thousands of people a day are buying DSLRs around the world... While Nikon
> procrastinate, how much are they losing in sales?

Not sure about that, but they're certainly not losing money. One thing,
though: Nikon's ability to actually ship a product on time remains to be
seen. Their track record isn't very good. Usually late. Plus, they announce
the product several months ahead of ship dates, which is pretty bizzare.

>
> --
> Douglas...
> Have gun will travel... Said his card.
> I didn't care, I shot him anyway.
> 1/125th @ f5.6. R.I.P. Mamiya.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Kinon O'cann" <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote in message
news:Vbidndlm_48L6KnenZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@comcast.com...

> Not sure about that, but they're certainly not losing money. One thing,
> though: Nikon's ability to actually ship a product on time remains to be
> seen. Their track record isn't very good. Usually late. Plus, they
> announce the product several months ahead of ship dates, which is pretty
> bizzare.

Not when Canon is always first to the street with products. If Nikon didn't
tell their customers a new product was in the pipeline they would lose more
people than they do. For some reason Canon is always first to the market and
always the most expensive, while Nikon seems comfortable to let Canon do
what Canon does, while themselves coming to the market later with less
expensive products (at least in pro digital bodies).

Seems to me it works quite well. If you consider how many photographers
waited for the D2x while the mkII was already out and being universally
praised, it becomes apparent how important it is for Nikon to let Nikon
users know something is coming....sometime....in...the....future :^)

I don't have enough money to jump at the first technological marvel to hits
the streets, so the mkII didn't much matter to me until I had the d2x for
comparison. It does seem strange how two companies take such different views
of the marketplace, but there is no denying that both companies have a
business plan that works.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Kinon O'cann wrote:
> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:43345729@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
>>Dean S. Lautermilch wrote:
>>
>>>This was posted this morning and it certainly one of the more unusual
>>>D200 'leaks' that have been posted the past few months.
>>>
>>>http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=15145989
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Thousands of people a day are buying DSLRs around the world... While Nikon
>>procrastinate, how much are they losing in sales?
>
>
> Not sure about that, but they're certainly not losing money. One thing,
> though: Nikon's ability to actually ship a product on time remains to be
> seen. Their track record isn't very good. Usually late. Plus, they announce
> the product several months ahead of ship dates, which is pretty bizzare.

but my D2x is firmware 1.00, after how many months?
what rev are the canon firmwares at?

>
>
>>--
>>Douglas...
>>Have gun will travel... Said his card.
>>I didn't care, I shot him anyway.
>>1/125th @ f5.6. R.I.P. Mamiya.
>
>
>

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

W.E. O'Neil wrote:
> "Kinon O'cann" <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote in message
> news:Vbidndlm_48L6KnenZ2dnUVZ_s-dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
>
>>Not sure about that, but they're certainly not losing money. One thing,
>>though: Nikon's ability to actually ship a product on time remains to be
>>seen. Their track record isn't very good. Usually late. Plus, they
>>announce the product several months ahead of ship dates, which is pretty
>>bizzare.
>
>
> Not when Canon is always first to the street with products. If Nikon didn't
> tell their customers a new product was in the pipeline they would lose more
> people than they do. For some reason Canon is always first to the market and
> always the most expensive, while Nikon seems comfortable to let Canon do
> what Canon does, while themselves coming to the market later with less
> expensive products (at least in pro digital bodies).
>
> Seems to me it works quite well. If you consider how many photographers
> waited for the D2x while the mkII was already out and being universally
> praised, it becomes apparent how important it is for Nikon to let Nikon
> users know something is coming....sometime....in...the....future :^)
>
> I don't have enough money to jump at the first technological marvel to hits
> the streets, so the mkII didn't much matter to me until I had the d2x for
> comparison. It does seem strange how two companies take such different views
> of the marketplace, but there is no denying that both companies have a
> business plan that works.
>
>
>
I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process
now of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot of
complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about Nikon
or Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.

Ever since my first Canon (AE1), all my (Canon) cameras have had to go
back to Canon for warranty repairs. 2 were replaced outright. I just
can't tolerate paying out $5k for a camera then adding another $6k worth
of accessories only to discover the "system" doesn't work properly.

How dare Canon sell a Speedlite which under exposes 2 stops and claim
it's "ideal" for a DSLr? How dare they use the excuse a 20D is not a
"professional" camera to justify it's poor reliability.

All through the 15 years of Canon ownership, not once did one of my
Mamiya's need repairs - service to be sure, but not repairs. Not once
did my sole Nikon camera ever fail to switch on or shoot a picture yet
all my Canon cameras at one time or another let me down. Clearly the
worst is the 20D.

Nikon may be slack to keep release dates. They may produce cameras not
right up there at the bleeding edge of technology but I don't believe
they sell cameras which have so many design faults in them that a whole
"system" of camera/lens/Speedlites, simply doesn't function properly.

--
Douglas...
Have gun will travel... Said his card.
I didn't care, I shot him anyway.
1/125th @ f5.6. R.I.P. Mamiya.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process now
> of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot of
> complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about Nikon or
> Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>

Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
compared to the other brands.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Rick wrote:
> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
>>I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process now
>>of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot of
>>complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about Nikon or
>>Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>>
>
>
> Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
> about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
> compared to the other brands.
>
>
Not so Rick. The pros I mix with are about 50/50 on Nikon Canon ownership.

--
Douglas...

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Kinon O'cann wrote:

> Not sure about that, but they're certainly not losing money. One thing,
> though: Nikon's ability to actually ship a product on time remains to be
> seen. Their track record isn't very good. Usually late. Plus, they announce
> the product several months ahead of ship dates, which is pretty bizzare.

Not bizarre at all. Many companies do this sort of thing. It's annoying,
but it's marketing.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:43345729@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> Dean S. Lautermilch wrote:
>> This was posted this morning and it certainly one of the more unusual
>> D200 'leaks' that have been posted the past few months.
>>
>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/ [...] e=15145989
>>
>>
>>
> Thousands of people a day are buying DSLRs around the world... While Nikon
> procrastinate, how much are they losing in sales?
>
We sell out of D50 and D70s within a few days. I don't see what the fuss is
about. The public isn't buying $2000+ cameras as fast as D50, XT, DL et al.
The only camera of that level we aren't selling is the KM 5D. because KM
Canada is closing down and isn't shipping...

Reply to Darrell

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Darrell wrote:

> We sell out of D50 and D70s within a few days. I don't see what the fuss is
> about.

If I were Nikon, I'd throw as much FUD out there as possible, to delay
purchasing decisions by uncommitted buyers, or Nikon owners that are
ready to jump ship after waiting for more than a year for a 20D level
camera from Nikon.

If the D200 specs are real, then it's somewhere between the 20D and 5D,
so the price will be interesting.

12 megapixel
3 frames per second at 12 megapixels (raw)
5 frames per second at 6 megapixels (raw)
2.5" LCD

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"bob crownfield" <crownfield@verizon.net> wrote in message
newsZ%Ye.44$j_3.33@trndny07...
> Kinon O'cann wrote:
>> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:43345729@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>
>>>Dean S. Lautermilch wrote:
>>>
>>>>This was posted this morning and it certainly one of the more unusual
>>>>D200 'leaks' that have been posted the past few months.
>>>>
>>>>http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=15145989
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Thousands of people a day are buying DSLRs around the world... While
>>>Nikon procrastinate, how much are they losing in sales?
>>
>>
>> Not sure about that, but they're certainly not losing money. One thing,
>> though: Nikon's ability to actually ship a product on time remains to be
>> seen. Their track record isn't very good. Usually late. Plus, they
>> announce the product several months ahead of ship dates, which is pretty
>> bizzare.
>
> but my D2x is firmware 1.00, after how many months?
> what rev are the canon firmwares at?

Which camera? Canon routinely adds features which require firmware updates.
And yes, they send out bug fixes as well. My 20D has never malfunctioned,
and it was running 1.1.1 when I bought it. It's up to 2.02, since I wanted
to try the wireless products. It's a wonderful camera.

>
>>
>>
>>>--
>>>Douglas...
>>>Have gun will travel... Said his card.
>>>I didn't care, I shot him anyway.
>>>1/125th @ f5.6. R.I.P. Mamiya.
>>
>>

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:4334ba84@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> Rick wrote:
>> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>
>>>I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process now
>>>of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot of
>>>complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about Nikon
>>>or Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
>> about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
>> compared to the other brands.
> Not so Rick. The pros I mix with are about 50/50 on Nikon Canon ownership.
>
>

Ah, so the pros YOU know are a representative sample of the whole world that
owns Canon cameras...thank you for a wonderful example of silopsism.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:_C2Ze.99026$xl6.3675@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process now
>> of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot of
>> complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about Nikon or
>> Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>>
>
> Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
> about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
> compared to the other brands.
>

Another reason you hear more complaints from Canon owners is that most Canon
owners are insecure and suffer from long-term buyer's remorse.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:_C2Ze.99026$xl6.3675@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process now
>> of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot of
>> complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about Nikon
>> or Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>>
>
> Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
> about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
> compared to the other brands.

I don't think that's an accurate representation. It has been acknowledged
for some time now that Canon (and it isn't just in their photo gear) treat
their consumers as Beta testers. Nikon, on the other hand, tends to not do
the same. Yes, Canon is very fast to create fixes and their warranty
procedures are far more than fair, but it does render a less reliable
experince for some consumer than some other manufacturers. Now, as long as
one understands this, as most serious photographers will, there is no harm
done. On the other hand if one doesn't understand this the experience can be
frustrating. Personally I believe this is one reason for Canon's higher MkII
price. They had to set off some money to service warranty exposure.

When I look at Bob Crownfield's comment a couple posts ago I believe this
was his implication, that waiting for a product from Nikon will in most
cases render a more reliable piece.

Now, I am not a Canon basher...because I don't think there is anything to
bash. I shoot Nikon, but I believe both companies, across the entire camera
lineup, offer splendid pieces. I decided to stay with Nikon **because** I
want to shoot thru the center of the glass and eliminate both lens and dome
corners from my images. And as I said in my earlier post, though Canon
seems far too fast to the market and Nikon seems far too slow....they both
have business/marketing plans that clearly work.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Pix on Canvas wrote:
> Rick wrote:
>
>> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>
>>> I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process
>>> now of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot
>>> of complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about
>>> Nikon or Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more
>> complaints about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people
>> who OWN Canons compared to the other brands.
>>
> Not so Rick. The pros I mix with are about 50/50 on Nikon Canon ownership.
>
So, what then is the size of your sample? 6? 12? 100?

--
john mcwilliams

Help stamp out gratuitous apostrophe's and exclamation point's!!!

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ray Wetwrth" <fatass@yahoo.cm> wrote in message
news:IvdZe.1682$uA6.1267@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:_C2Ze.99026$xl6.3675@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>> I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process
>>> now of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot of
>>> complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about Nikon
>>> or Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>>>
>>
>> Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
>> about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
>> compared to the other brands.
>>
>
> Another reason you hear more complaints from Canon owners is that most
> Canon owners are insecure and suffer from long-term buyer's remorse.
>

No, that would be what we call "projection." Seek help.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
news5hZe.43$605.4221@news.uswest.net...
>
> "Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:_C2Ze.99026$xl6.3675@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>> I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process
>>> now
>>> of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot of
>>> complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about Nikon
>>> or Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>>>
>>
>> Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
>> about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
>> compared to the other brands.
>
> I don't think that's an accurate representation.

Think what you like, but the fact is, Canon sells more cameras and thus
there will be more complaints.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"John McWilliams" <jpmcw@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:fuadnRZOwfxiLKjeRVn-oQ@comcast.com...
> Pix on Canvas wrote:
>> Rick wrote:
>>
>>> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>>> news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>>
>>>> I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process
>>>> now of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot
>>>> of complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about
>>>> Nikon or Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
>>> about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
>>> compared to the other brands.
>>>
>> Not so Rick. The pros I mix with are about 50/50 on Nikon Canon
>> ownership.
>>
> So, what then is the size of your sample? 6? 12? 100?

Probably closer to 2.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 14:36:24 GMT, "Ray Wetwrth" <fatass@yahoo.cm>
wrote:

>
>"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:_C2Ze.99026$xl6.3675@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>> I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process now
>>> of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot of
>>> complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about Nikon or
>>> Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>>>
>>
>> Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
>> about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
>> compared to the other brands.
>>
>
>Another reason you hear more complaints from Canon owners is that most Canon
>owners are insecure and suffer from long-term buyer's remorse.
>

Thank you for the insight, Senor Freud.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:BskZe.104682$4i6.54479@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "Ray Wetwrth" <fatass@yahoo.cm> wrote in message
> news:IvdZe.1682$uA6.1267@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>> "Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:_C2Ze.99026$xl6.3675@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>>> news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>>> I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process now
>>>> of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot of
>>>> complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about Nikon
>>>> or Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
>>> about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
>>> compared to the other brands.
>>>
>>
>> Another reason you hear more complaints from Canon owners is that most
>> Canon owners are insecure and suffer from long-term buyer's remorse.
>>
>
> No, that would be what we call "projection." Seek help.
>

You're a a compulsive gadfly, aren't you? An ignorant one, but a gadfly
nonetheless.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Rick wrote:
> "W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
> news5hZe.43$605.4221@news.uswest.net...
>
>>"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>>news:_C2Ze.99026$xl6.3675@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>
>>>"Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>>>news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>>
>>>>I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process
>>>>now
>>>>of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot of
>>>>complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about Nikon
>>>>or Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
>>>about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
>>>compared to the other brands.
>>
>>I don't think that's an accurate representation.
>
>
> Think what you like, but the fact is, Canon sells more cameras and thus
> there will be more complaints.
>
>
Is that your opinion Rick or do you have something to substantiate that?

--
Douglas...
Have gun will travel... Said his card.
I didn't care, I shot him anyway.
1/125th @ f5.6. R.I.P. Mamiya.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Rick wrote:

> Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
> about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
> compared to the other brands.

That is part of it. The other issue is. IMO, that Canon owners (and
Nikon owners) are more secure, and not afraid to voice their complaints,
while owners of some other models are suffering from buyer's remorse
(i.e. Sigma, Olympus) and would see complaining about a flaw as some
sort of admission that they made a mistake.

There is nothing wrong with complaining about flaws in a product that
you've purchased.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ray Wetwrth" <fatass@yahoo.cm> wrote in message
news:IpmZe.806$u44.108@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...

> You're a a compulsive gadfly, aren't you? An ignorant one, but a gadfly
> nonetheless.

One wonders if you even know the definition of the term. Considering your
lack of knowledge in other areas, one has to doubt it.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:4335fcea@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> Rick wrote:
>> "W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
>> news5hZe.43$605.4221@news.uswest.net...
>>
>>>"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>news:_C2Ze.99026$xl6.3675@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>>
>>>>"Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>>>>news:43348e53$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>>>
>>>>>I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the process
>>>>>now
>>>>>of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell of a lot of
>>>>>complaints about reliability of Canon "D" stuff and nothing about Nikon
>>>>>or Olympus or even Minolta camera reliability.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Then you're not listening. And the only reason you hear more complaints
>>>>about Canon than the others is the sheer number of people who OWN Canons
>>>>compared to the other brands.
>>>
>>>I don't think that's an accurate representation.
>>
>>
>> Think what you like, but the fact is, Canon sells more cameras and thus
>> there will be more complaints.
> Is that your opinion Rick or do you have something to substantiate that?
>
>

I don't have them in my hand, but I do know that Canon sells more digital
SLRs than Nikon does. I've read the stats several times before.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Rick wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>Think what you like, but the fact is, Canon sells more cameras and thus
>>>there will be more complaints.
>>
>>Is that your opinion Rick or do you have something to substantiate that?
>>
>>
>
>
> I don't have them in my hand, but I do know that Canon sells more digital
> SLRs than Nikon does. I've read the stats several times before.
>
>
That's like saying I know absolutely that this camera takes a photo but
I don't actually have one to prove it. Anyway... I wasn't talking about
their sales success.

I was talking about your presumption that there would be more complaints
based on the somewhat flawed assumption that all camera makers have a
warranty claim rate which is equal. They don't.

Canon AE1 - Electro shutter design fault.
T90 - Electronics design fault.
T90 Electronics manufacturing faults x5
T90 Quality control issues... Back Focus errors in 11% of (Australian sales)
EOS 620 - Mirror hinge faults.
EOS 630 - Surprise, surprise, no recorded return rate.
EOS 1 - Electronic manufacturing faults x2
EOS 1n - Surprise, surprise, fixed the faults but Reduced shutter life.
EOS 10D - Significant (as in 18%) back focus errors.
EOS 20D - Significant design fault, new firmware didn't totally fix.
EOS 20D - major stuff up with firmware 1.1 upgrade. Killed a large
number of cameras where fix was applied by owner - only fixed by
returning for warranty service.
EOS 20D - Significant design error, lens to body connections. Required
further firmware upgrade which didn't totally fix the problem.
EOS 20D - Significant design error relating to inbuilt flash and image
faults, fixed (for once) by firmware upgrade.
EOS 20D - Significant design error in BG grip requiring a factory
recall. and replacement.

If you bought a new car and it needed even two new engine in the first
nine months, there would be hell to pay. How on earth can you seek to
presume every camera manufacturer in the world puts out this many faulty
camera models and tops it off with that unreliable, runaway sales
success, a 20D? The only thing separating Canon from Bronica is the
sales rate.

In all that time since buying an AE1, I shot continuously with Mamiya,
Fuji and Nikon cameras without any failures or need for repairs other
than one brief moment of madness when I bought a Bronica.

Rick, you really need to get your sights in perspective or you'll keep
seeing information where there is none. As for your (wrong) assumption I
mix with 2, Pro photographers...

I run a printing service for Professional Photographers. I speak to them
on a daily basis. I take work from other highly dedicated, non
Professional Photographers too. So that must make at least 3... More
than 2 is several, do you know how many make up "a lot" or "many"?
--
Douglas...

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:433653f8$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> That's like saying I know absolutely that this camera takes a photo but I
> don't actually have one to prove it.

No, it is not. There is no relation between those two statements
whatsoever. The information should be easy to find. Don't be lazy, go find
it. I KNOW I saw it, so it's not important to me, but if you're that
interested, do a google search.

Anyway... I wasn't talking about
> their sales success.
>
> I was talking about your presumption that there would be more complaints
> based on the somewhat flawed assumption that all camera makers have a
> warranty claim rate which is equal. They don't.

You STATE that, but offer no proof other than your anecdotal evidence, which
is worthless.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:nMpZe.138076$p_1.76544@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> "Ray Wetwrth" <fatass@yahoo.cm> wrote in message
> news:IpmZe.806$u44.108@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
>
>> You're a a compulsive gadfly, aren't you? An ignorant one, but a gadfly
>> nonetheless.
>
>
> One wonders if you even know the definition of the term. Considering your
> lack of knowledge in other areas, one has to doubt it.
>

Res ipsa loquitur.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ray Wetwrth" <fatass@yahoo.cm> wrote in message
news:2tyZe.30$cF6.11@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:nMpZe.138076$p_1.76544@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>> "Ray Wetwrth" <fatass@yahoo.cm> wrote in message
>> news:IpmZe.806$u44.108@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>> You're a a compulsive gadfly, aren't you? An ignorant one, but a gadfly
>>> nonetheless.
>>
>>
>> One wonders if you even know the definition of the term. Considering
>> your lack of knowledge in other areas, one has to doubt it.
>>
>
> Res ipsa loquitur.

Yes they do...and what they say about you isn't pretty at all.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 23-Sep-05 20:36, Darrell wrote:
> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:43345729@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
>>Dean S. Lautermilch wrote:
>>
>>>This was posted this morning and it certainly one of the more unusual
>>>D200 'leaks' that have been posted the past few months.
>>>
>>>http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=15145989
>>>
>>
>>Thousands of people a day are buying DSLRs around the world... While Nikon
>>procrastinate, how much are they losing in sales?
>>

Feel free to browse annual sales reports of Canon and Nikon...
Maybe this will put the things into perspective.

>
> We sell out of D50 and D70s within a few days. I don't see what the fuss is
> about. The public isn't buying $2000+ cameras as fast as D50, XT, DL et al.
> The only camera of that level we aren't selling is the KM 5D. because KM
> Canada is closing down and isn't shipping...

:-) That's one way to drop ones own sale shares!

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 17:38:30 +1000, Pix on Canvas
<canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

>Rick, you really need to get your sights in perspective or you'll keep
>seeing information where there is none. As for your (wrong) assumption I
>mix with 2, Pro photographers...

Mix what -- bodily fluids?

>
>I run a printing service for Professional Photographers. I speak to them
>on a daily basis. I take work from other highly dedicated, non
>Professional Photographers too. So that must make at least 3... More
>than 2 is several, do you know how many make up "a lot" or "many"?

Wrong -- more than two is "a few". Several is considerably
higher.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 14:27:10 GMT, "Ray Wetwrth" <fatass@yahoo.cm>
wrote:

>
>"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>news:nMpZe.138076$p_1.76544@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>> "Ray Wetwrth" <fatass@yahoo.cm> wrote in message
>> news:IpmZe.806$u44.108@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>> You're a a compulsive gadfly, aren't you? An ignorant one, but a gadfly
>>> nonetheless.
>>
>>
>> One wonders if you even know the definition of the term. Considering your
>> lack of knowledge in other areas, one has to doubt it.
>>
>
>Res ipsa loquitur.
>

Temetipsum spurcitiari.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

<kashe@sonic.net> wrote in message
news:tk3ej15soc1cetuaoee4uv6b2a4b496e6n@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 25 Sep 2005 17:38:30 +1000, Pix on Canvas
> <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
>
> >Rick, you really need to get your sights in perspective or you'll keep
> >seeing information where there is none. As for your (wrong) assumption I
> >mix with 2, Pro photographers...
>
> Mix what -- bodily fluids?

Your crudeness is only exceeded by your ignorance of the digital camera
market. . .

> >
> >I run a printing service for Professional Photographers. I speak to them
> >on a daily basis. I take work from other highly dedicated, non
> >Professional Photographers too. So that must make at least 3... More
> >than 2 is several, do you know how many make up "a lot" or "many"?
>
> Wrong -- more than two is "a few". Several is considerably
> higher.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Rick wrote:
> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:433653f8$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
>>That's like saying I know absolutely that this camera takes a photo but I
>>don't actually have one to prove it.
>
>
> No, it is not. There is no relation between those two statements
> whatsoever. The information should be easy to find. Don't be lazy, go find
> it. I KNOW I saw it, so it's not important to me, but if you're that
> interested, do a google search.
>
> Anyway... I wasn't talking about
>
>>their sales success.
>>
>>I was talking about your presumption that there would be more complaints
>>based on the somewhat flawed assumption that all camera makers have a
>>warranty claim rate which is equal. They don't.
>
>
>
> You STATE that, but offer no proof other than your anecdotal evidence, which
> is worthless.
>
>
Pretty much like you information, eh?

--
Douglas...
Have gun will travel... Said his card.
I didn't care, I shot him anyway.
1/125th @ f5.6. R.I.P. Mamiya.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:433738f4$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>
> Pretty much like you information, eh?
>

Nope. Again, my information is factual. I don't have the stats in front of
me, but I have read them. They are objective reality. Anecdotal evidence
is evidence of only one person's personal experiences. I could dismiss such
evidence by citing my own personal experiences, which are of no problems
with any of my Canons, and of our local newspaper, which switched from Nikon
to Canon for their photographers because of too many problems with Nikon.
But anecdotal evidence doesn't prove anything.
The facts I cited are objective.
There is also one other fact: that you have no argument and are simply
being an ass.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Rick wrote:
> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
> news:433738f4$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
>>Pretty much like you information, eh?
>>
>
>
> Nope. Again, my information is factual. I don't have the stats in front of
> me, but I have read them. They are objective reality. Anecdotal evidence
> is evidence of only one person's personal experiences. I could dismiss such
> evidence by citing my own personal experiences, which are of no problems
> with any of my Canons, and of our local newspaper, which switched from Nikon
> to Canon for their photographers because of too many problems with Nikon.
> But anecdotal evidence doesn't prove anything.
> The facts I cited are objective.
> There is also one other fact: that you have no argument and are simply
> being an ass.
>
>
Goad all you like. The fact remains that without a grain of information
about who or what I am, you dismiss my statements as "anecdotal" while
at the same time making anecdotal claims yourself... Nice fellow. You'll
fit in well in this group.

My claims are actually statistics. Yours are hearsay. I don't know of a
newspaper of any recognizable banner which does not use Nikon gear
unless the Journo's are supplying their own cameras.

So when you have no argument yourself, you resort to name calling in an
attempt to have the last say... Good one Rick. Got any more cheap shots?

--
Douglas...

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:43375da8$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> Rick wrote:
>> "Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:433738f4$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>
>>>Pretty much like you information, eh?
>>>
>>
>>
>> Nope. Again, my information is factual. I don't have the stats in front
>> of me, but I have read them. They are objective reality. Anecdotal
>> evidence is evidence of only one person's personal experiences. I could
>> dismiss such evidence by citing my own personal experiences, which are of
>> no problems with any of my Canons, and of our local newspaper, which
>> switched from Nikon to Canon for their photographers because of too many
>> problems with Nikon.
>> But anecdotal evidence doesn't prove anything.
>> The facts I cited are objective.
>> There is also one other fact: that you have no argument and are simply
>> being an ass.
> Goad all you like. The fact remains that without a grain of information
> about who or what I am, you dismiss my statements as "anecdotal" while at
> the same time making anecdotal claims yourself... Nice fellow. You'll fit in
> well in this group.
>
> My claims are actually statistics. Yours are hearsay. I don't know of a
> newspaper of any recognizable banner which does not use Nikon gear unless
> the Journo's are supplying their own cameras.
>
> So when you have no argument yourself, you resort to name calling in an
> attempt to have the last say... Good one Rick. Got any more cheap shots?
>
> --
> Douglas...

Let him be--he's no doubt living in his parent's basement and obviously isn't
a very happy person.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Ray Wetwrth" <fatass@yahoo.cm> wrote in message
news:9LJZe.152$OH3.63@newssvr23.news.prodigy.net...
> Let him be--he's no doubt living in his parent's basement and obviously
> isn't a very happy person.
>

ROFL! Yes, that must be it. I disagree with you about the quality of Canon
cameras, so naturally I MUST be somehow morally reprobate. People like you
are utterly predictable.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Pix on Canvas" <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:43375da8$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...

>>
> Goad all you like.

No thanks, I will leave that to people with your temperment.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:qtkZe.133279$p_1.95313@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...

> Think what you like, but the fact is, Canon sells more cameras and thus
> there will be more complaints.

That's either a grossly ignorant extrapolation, or the mother of all
non-sequitars.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
news:CyUZe.48$rx4.1641@news.uswest.net...
>
> "Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:qtkZe.133279$p_1.95313@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
>> Think what you like, but the fact is, Canon sells more cameras and thus
>> there will be more complaints.
>
> That's either a grossly ignorant extrapolation, or the mother of all
> non-sequitars.
>
>

How so? Assuming that both companies have approximately the same percentage
of lemons per X number of cameras sold, if one company sells more cameras,
they will have more lemons as well. There is nothing ignorant about it,
aside from the responses it has engendered on the usenet.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:MOUZe.108105$4i6.34479@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
> news:CyUZe.48$rx4.1641@news.uswest.net...
>>
>> "Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:qtkZe.133279$p_1.95313@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>
>>> Think what you like, but the fact is, Canon sells more cameras and thus
>>> there will be more complaints.
>>
>> That's either a grossly ignorant extrapolation, or the mother of all
>> non-sequitars.
>>
>>
>
> How so?

Well, to start with, you are now claiming your "fact" in the above comment
is an "assumption" in the following comment.

> Assuming that both companies have approximately the same percentage of
> lemons per X number of cameras sold,

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
news:1ZUZe.50$rx4.1883@news.uswest.net...
>
> "Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:MOUZe.108105$4i6.34479@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>
>> "W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
>> news:CyUZe.48$rx4.1641@news.uswest.net...
>>>
>>> "Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>>> news:qtkZe.133279$p_1.95313@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>>
>>>> Think what you like, but the fact is, Canon sells more cameras and thus
>>>> there will be more complaints.
>>>
>>> That's either a grossly ignorant extrapolation, or the mother of all
>>> non-sequitars.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> How so?
>
> Well, to start with, you are now claiming your "fact" in the above comment
> is an "assumption" in the following comment.
>
>> Assuming that both companies have approximately the same percentage of
>> lemons per X number of cameras sold,

No, you're incorrect. The FACT is that Canon sells more cameras than Nikon.
The only presumption is that they have an equivalent percentage of lemons.
I don't know that the percentage is the same for a FACT, but I would be
willing to bet it's true.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:39VZe.148827$p_1.51493@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
> news:1ZUZe.50$rx4.1883@news.uswest.net...
>>
>> "Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:MOUZe.108105$4i6.34479@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>>
>>> "W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
>>> news:CyUZe.48$rx4.1641@news.uswest.net...
>>>>
>>>> "Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:qtkZe.133279$p_1.95313@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>>>
>>>>> Think what you like, but the fact is, Canon sells more cameras and
>>>>> thus there will be more complaints.
>>>>
>>>> That's either a grossly ignorant extrapolation, or the mother of all
>>>> non-sequitars.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> How so?
>>
>> Well, to start with, you are now claiming your "fact" in the above
>> comment is an "assumption" in the following comment.
>>
>>> Assuming that both companies have approximately the same percentage of
>>> lemons per X number of cameras sold,
>
>
> No, you're incorrect. The FACT is that Canon sells more cameras than
> Nikon.

"thus there will be more complaints". You cannot run and hide from the
relationship you estabablished in your posted assertion. It is not a fact
that there are more complaints because there are more units sold, unless you
cite proof to the contrary (something a bit more concrete than "I would be
willing to bet it's true" ).

> The only presumption is that they have an equivalent percentage of lemons.
> I don't know that the percentage is the same for a FACT, but I would be
> willing to bet it's true.

Then there is no fact.

Either way you cut it, granting you the right to divide your comments now
that you see the error or holding you to the reality of your stated
position, it remains an ignorant extrapolation. The fact that you cannot see
that is even more informative.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
news:MBVZe.57$rx4.2120@news.uswest.net...
> Then there is no fact.

Yes, there is: the fact is and HAS BEEN (if you'd been paying attention
rather than trying to look for some nitpick to latch onto) that Canon sells
more cameras than Nikon.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:fKVZe.104390$xl6.9071@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
> "W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
> news:MBVZe.57$rx4.2120@news.uswest.net...
>> Then there is no fact.
>
>
> Yes, there is: the fact is and HAS BEEN (if you'd been paying attention
> rather than trying to look for some nitpick to latch onto) that Canon
> sells more cameras than Nikon.

That's idiotic. The point of your comment wasn't that Canon sells more
cameras, but that one hears more complaints about Canon because they makes
sells more cameras. You are the one who created the linkage, which is
probably why you are the one who cannot see the fault.

You are the poster child for those who seem unable to find the distinction
between accuracy and truth.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
news:yiWZe.60$rx4.2176@news.uswest.net...
>
> "Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:fKVZe.104390$xl6.9071@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>> "W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
>> news:MBVZe.57$rx4.2120@news.uswest.net...
>>> Then there is no fact.
>>
>>
>> Yes, there is: the fact is and HAS BEEN (if you'd been paying attention
>> rather than trying to look for some nitpick to latch onto) that Canon
>> sells more cameras than Nikon.
>
> That's idiotic. The point of your comment wasn't that Canon sells more
> cameras, but that one hears more complaints about Canon because they makes
> sells more cameras.

Yes, that was the point, but asshats kept trying to argue that since I
didn't have a link to give them that I couldn't claim Canon sold more
cameras than Nikon. You are trying to jump into the middle of that argument
with ANOTHER argument.
And no, it's not idiotic. Your attitude is idiotic, not my statement.

Reply to Rick

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Pix on Canvas <canvaspix@yahoo.com.au> writes:

> I got sick of waiting for a D200 and bought a D2X. I'm in the
> process now of disposing of the last of my Canon gear. I hear a hell
> of a lot

What do you have? I'm looking for an EOS digital setup.

--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
comp.os.vms,- The Older, Grumpier Slashdot
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
EPIC, The Architecture of the future, always has been, always will be.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:gPWZe.108119$4i6.48171@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> "W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
> news:yiWZe.60$rx4.2176@news.uswest.net...
>>
>> "Rick" <swtravlr@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
>> news:fKVZe.104390$xl6.9071@tornado.tampabay.rr.com...
>>> "W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
>>> news:MBVZe.57$rx4.2120@news.uswest.net...
>>>> Then there is no fact.
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, there is: the fact is and HAS BEEN (if you'd been paying attention
>>> rather than trying to look for some nitpick to latch onto) that Canon
>>> sells more cameras than Nikon.
>>
>> That's idiotic. The point of your comment wasn't that Canon sells more
>> cameras, but that one hears more complaints about Canon because they
>> makes sells more cameras.
>
> Yes, that was the point, but asshats kept trying to argue that since I
> didn't have a link to give them that I couldn't claim Canon sold more
> cameras than Nikon. You are trying to jump into the middle of that
> argument with ANOTHER argument.
> And no, it's not idiotic. Your attitude is idiotic, not my statement.

You're nuts. I'm not jumping into any argument you are having with others. I
responded to a very particular comment made by you as quoted here: "And the
only reason you hear more complaints about Canon than the others is the
sheer number of people who OWN Canons compared to the other brands."

That claim by you is clear as a bell. You simply and clearly responded to my
post by saying that Canon gets more complaints because Canon sells more
cameras. This is unrelated to anything and anyone else you were arguing
with/about. It is you who are trying to create a link between the two
conversations...when none exists.

Your statement remains incorrect, inaccurate and without any pertinent cite.
Basically, you are wrong with regard to the complaint issue. Which is the
only issue I responded to.

But here's a bone for an arrogant dog:
You are right with regard to Canon selling more cameras to consumers than
any other maker. Premier makes more cameras (over 2 million a month), but
they are primarily a B2B operation. Canon is the largest selling camera
maker in the world by a fair amount. They are not the largest selling
SLR/DSLR maker in the world, despite their brief lead while the mkII was on
market and D2x had not hit the streets.

Reply to Anonymous

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"W.E. O'Neil" <we_o@anesthesiaop.net> wrote in message
news:SBXZe.40$Q34.953@news.uswest.net...
> You're nuts.

And you're plonked.

Reply to Rick

Forum Digital Camera : Digital Camera General - Another Nikon D200 'Leak'

Please mind

Focus On

Another Nikon D200 'Leak'

Forum Digital Camera : Digital Camera General - Another Nikon D200 'Leak'

Please mind