Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

How did Nikon take a back seat to Canon?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 1:56:31 AM

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

It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
it isn't much competition at all.
It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
the digital ball, to a degree at least.
-Rich

More about : nikon back seat canon

Anonymous
April 16, 2005 1:56:32 AM

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

RichA <none@none.com> writes:

> It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
> end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
> The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
> top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
> No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
> the digital ball, to a degree at least.

How did it happen?

I'm not an expert in the field, but Canon's been doing digital imaging
with CMOS imagers quite a long time before digital cameras caught on.

Does Nikon even have a line of pro video cameras? High speed copiers?

I suspect the answer to question question lies in the the intellectual
capital in those product lines which positioned Canon very well for
this shift in technologies.

But this should be an interesting thread.

Best Regards,
--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 3:26:26 AM

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

RichA wrote:
> It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
> Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons.

I don't know about pro-level because I am not a pro but at the entry
and mid-level, I don't think you can go wrong with either of the four
brands - Canon, Nikon, Minolta and Pentax. All four make very capable
digital SLR cameras. Rest's all marketing.

- Siddhartha
Related resources
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 4:00:20 AM

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

This is one of those threads where Nikon people are going to support Nikon
and Canon people are going to support Canon. I don't think Nikon has
dropped the ball, but it depends on how you look at it, and it's all very
subjective. Each company obviously has a plan and a niche. I still use old
Nikon F's that dates back to the late 60's for film work -- and the cameras
work perfectly. To me, that says a lot about a company, so I will continue
to stand by Nikon, not to mention the fact that I can use those older lenses
on my new D70. That means a lot to me as a consumer. I don't put down
Canon cameras, and feel they have a good product and reputation. I just
don't think their cameras are "that" much better than Nikon's, assuming they
are better.


"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:eor061hrs5svqfnvh4pdml7ai5kk2dug4m@4ax.com...
> It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
> Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
> Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
> such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
> comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
> system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
> market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
> the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
> against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
> D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
> take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
> always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
> immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
> EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
> long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
> to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
> it isn't much competition at all.
> It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
> end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
> The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
> top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
> No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
> the digital ball, to a degree at least.
> -Rich
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 7:09:45 AM

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

"RichA" wrote ...

> No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
> the digital ball, to a degree at least.

---------------------------

I agree. It also seems clear Minolta, Pentax, Olympus, and all the others
haven't recovered that fumble.

Rob
April 16, 2005 7:09:46 AM

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

It's pure marketing, only Canon owners feel they have to upgrade their dSLR
cameras every 9 months. It's all hype ooooooo the XT has 8 megapixels, big
deal that's not really all that big a jump from 6.3 mp. Mind you you'll
never have to clean dust off of a Canon sensor, as the camera will be
discontinued by then.

HYPE!!!!!

;) 
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 8:35:45 AM

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

Nicholas Childs wrote:
> > You'll need some true sales figures to prove you haven't swallowed
Canon
> marketing hook line and sinker.
> The other small issue I'm concerned with - does the fact that Canon
releases
> more models really mean there are more Canon shooters, or are there
fewer
> shooters with more cameras......?
> I think you'll find that Nikon claims to be not far from owning 50%
of the
> market - how they measure or their opposition measure is anyone's
guess....
> I think you'll definitely find different answers in different
markets/area
> too.
> Before you ask for reasons to back up a fact, you'd better have a
fact,
> otherwise we're all talking about marketing budgets and perception.

I belong to DCP, a digital photo challenge site, the site keeps track
of how many people own which cameras, Canon by fare is the most popular
of the DSLRs.

Here is a link to the camera part of the data base, click on the
manufacturer and you will get a list of cameras and how many owns for
each model.

http://dpchallenge.com/camera.php

For the most pat DSLRs are close enough in value that if you already
own lenses for one that will be the one that makes the most sense to
buy, for me this was Canon. If I owned a number of Nikon lenses I
would have probably bought Nikon, why throw away good equipment?

I do think Canon has some of the best cameras but unless you are
talking about the very high end cameras, like the 1Ds Mark II, Canon
has only got a slight lead on the others. Things have a way of changing
and I would not be surprised to see someone else dominate the market at
some point in the future.

Scott
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 11:20:02 AM

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

"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:eor061hrs5svqfnvh4pdml7ai5kk2dug4m@4ax.com...
> It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
> Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
> Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
> such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
> comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
> system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
> market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
> the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
> against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
> D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
> take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
> always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
> immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
> EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
> long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
> to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
> it isn't much competition at all.
> It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
> end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
> The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
> top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
> No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
> the digital ball, to a degree at least.
> -Rich

It was just determination on Canon's part - they had the resources and the
money, so they worked to corner the market. It wasn't subtle, it wasn't
pretty, they just built a line of competent cameras, threw a lot of money
into a very comprehensive marketing plan - and there they are.

Nikon will come along fine however. I doubt they'll ever eclipse Canon in
sales or market share, but they will be a strong number two as long as the
continue to make cameras that are better engineered than Canon.

I agree with you that the 1D Mk II dominates its class - its only real
competition is the D2HS, but that camera has lost a lot of PJ and sports
ground to the 1D MkII.. The $5000 D2X seems to be competing quite handily
against the $8000 1DS Mk II, with most reviews that I've seen reporting that
the Nikon has a distinct edge. So, Nikon's still in the ball game, and once
they bring out a camera that beats the 20D at the same price, and once they
address the Drebel XT, and it certainly seems inevitable, Nikon will do
fine.

HMc
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 11:22:40 AM

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

"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:eor061hrs5svqfnvh4pdml7ai5kk2dug4m@4ax.com...
> It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
> Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
> Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
> such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
> comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
> system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
> market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
> the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
> against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
> D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
> take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
> always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
> immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
> EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
> long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
> to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
> it isn't much competition at all.
> It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
> end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
> The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
> top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
> No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
> the digital ball, to a degree at least.
> -Rich

You'll need some true sales figures to prove you haven't swallowed Canon
marketing hook line and sinker.
The other small issue I'm concerned with - does the fact that Canon releases
more models really mean there are more Canon shooters, or are there fewer
shooters with more cameras......?
I think you'll find that Nikon claims to be not far from owning 50% of the
market - how they measure or their opposition measure is anyone's guess....
I think you'll definitely find different answers in different markets/area
too.
Before you ask for reasons to back up a fact, you'd better have a fact,
otherwise we're all talking about marketing budgets and perception.
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 11:22:41 AM

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

"Nicholas Childs" <onimod@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4338e.12881$5F3.8367@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
> news:eor061hrs5svqfnvh4pdml7ai5kk2dug4m@4ax.com...
>> It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
>> Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
>> Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
>> such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
>> comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
>> system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
>> market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
>> the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
>> against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
>> D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
>> take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
>> always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
>> immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
>> EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
>> long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
>> to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
>> it isn't much competition at all.
>> It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
>> end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
>> The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
>> top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
>> No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
>> the digital ball, to a degree at least.
>> -Rich
>
> You'll need some true sales figures to prove you haven't swallowed Canon
> marketing hook line and sinker.
> The other small issue I'm concerned with - does the fact that Canon
> releases more models really mean there are more Canon shooters, or are
> there fewer shooters with more cameras......?

It may just mean that there are more used Canon digitals on the market than
other brands, too... ;-)

> I think you'll find that Nikon claims to be not far from owning 50% of the
> market - how they measure or their opposition measure is anyone's
> guess....
> I think you'll definitely find different answers in different markets/area
> too.
> Before you ask for reasons to back up a fact, you'd better have a fact,
> otherwise we're all talking about marketing budgets and perception.
>
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 11:47:59 AM

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

RichA <none@none.com> wrote:

> It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level, Nikon DSLRs
> lag behind Canons.

I'm probably being trolled here, but why do you believe this?

Andrew.
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 1:07:31 PM

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

"Nicholas Childs" <onimod@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4338e.12881$5F3.8367@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
> news:eor061hrs5svqfnvh4pdml7ai5kk2dug4m@4ax.com...
>> It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
>> Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
>> Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
>> such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
>> comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
>> system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
>> market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
>> the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
>> against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
>> D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
>> take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
>> always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
>> immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
>> EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
>> long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
>> to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
>> it isn't much competition at all.
>> It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
>> end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
>> The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
>> top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
>> No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
>> the digital ball, to a degree at least.
>> -Rich
>
> You'll need some true sales figures to prove you haven't swallowed Canon
> marketing hook line and sinker.
> The other small issue I'm concerned with - does the fact that Canon
> releases more models really mean there are more Canon shooters, or are
> there fewer shooters with more cameras......?
> I think you'll find that Nikon claims to be not far from owning 50% of the
> market - how they measure or their opposition measure is anyone's
> guess....
> I think you'll definitely find different answers in different markets/area
> too.
> Before you ask for reasons to back up a fact, you'd better have a fact,
> otherwise we're all talking about marketing budgets and perception.

And of course don't forget that 72% of statistics are made up.
April 16, 2005 1:09:33 PM

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

.. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
> to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
> it isn't much competition at all.

Don't you just love it when Like for Like is compared

The D100 should be compared to Canons D60.

The D60 was replaced very quickly because of its faults.

The D100 has never been replaced and it still sells well.

Paul, a Canon user
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 1:49:05 PM

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

"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:eor061hrs5svqfnvh4pdml7ai5kk2dug4m@4ax.com...

<<snip>>

> It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
> end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
> The strategy could backfire badly...

I don't think Nikon was hoping to milk the film market, at least not in the
sense that they had a strategy to do so. Like many other companies, I
believe Nikon's management was simply caught flat-footed in the face of the
amazingly rapid growth of the digital camera market, simlar to the way in
which American luxury car makers were almost taken down by the growth of
the demand for newer-styled, higher-performance, non-domestic cars such as
the Lexus. In particular, I think Nikon had absolutely no about clue how
active the dSLR market would become in such a short time and they ought to
seriously re-vamp their technical marketing department.

Being out of touch is a risky business practice, as exemplified by a South
America president who wails, "...but I thought the people loved me!" as he
looks up into the business end of a 9mm pistol held by a
previously-unnoticed Army colonel staging a surprise coup.

Oops.
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 1:58:41 PM

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

RichA wrote:
[]
> It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
> end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
> The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
> top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
> No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
> the digital ball, to a degree at least.
> -Rich

I can't speak for the DSLR market, but in other digital cameras where is
Canon's 24mm wide-angle camera (Nikon 8400) or their 8MP image stabilised
camera (Nikon 8800). Perhaps Nikon simply have a different perspective
on the market and where they might make the best return?

David
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 2:15:45 PM

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

"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1113632786.829722.138860@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> RichA wrote:
>> It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
>> Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons.
>
> I don't know about pro-level because I am not a pro but at the entry
> and mid-level, I don't think you can go wrong with either of the four
> brands - Canon, Nikon, Minolta and Pentax. All four make very capable
> digital SLR cameras. Rest's all marketing.
>
> - Siddhartha

How many actually make large format digital cameras like the Pentax's, do
Canon?
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 2:19:32 PM

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

"Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:lB58e.13035$5F3.3053@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1113632786.829722.138860@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> RichA wrote:
>>> It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
>>> Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons.
>>
>> I don't know about pro-level because I am not a pro but at the entry
>> and mid-level, I don't think you can go wrong with either of the four
>> brands - Canon, Nikon, Minolta and Pentax. All four make very capable
>> digital SLR cameras. Rest's all marketing.
>>
>> - Siddhartha
>
> How many actually make large format digital cameras like the Pentax's, do
> Canon?

Well medium anyway! Like the new 645.
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 2:19:33 PM

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

"Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:UE58e.13038$5F3.10749@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> news:lB58e.13035$5F3.3053@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1113632786.829722.138860@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>> RichA wrote:
>>>> It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
>>>> Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons.
>>>
>>> I don't know about pro-level because I am not a pro but at the entry
>>> and mid-level, I don't think you can go wrong with either of the four
>>> brands - Canon, Nikon, Minolta and Pentax. All four make very capable
>>> digital SLR cameras. Rest's all marketing.
>>>
>>> - Siddhartha
>>
>> How many actually make large format digital cameras like the Pentax's, do
>> Canon?
>
> Well medium anyway! Like the new 645.
>
Pentax has a digital 645?? I knew Mamiya did, but didn't know about
Pentax...
Do you have a link to info?

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
April 16, 2005 2:19:34 PM

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

Skip M wrote:
> "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
> news:UE58e.13038$5F3.10749@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>>"Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
>>news:lB58e.13035$5F3.3053@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>>>"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:1113632786.829722.138860@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>>RichA wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
>>>>>Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons.
>>>>
>>>>I don't know about pro-level because I am not a pro but at the entry
>>>>and mid-level, I don't think you can go wrong with either of the four
>>>>brands - Canon, Nikon, Minolta and Pentax. All four make very capable
>>>>digital SLR cameras. Rest's all marketing.
>>>>
>>>>- Siddhartha
>>>
>>>How many actually make large format digital cameras like the Pentax's, do
>>>Canon?
>>
>>Well medium anyway! Like the new 645.
>>
>
> Pentax has a digital 645?? I knew Mamiya did, but didn't know about
> Pentax...
> Do you have a link to info?
>


With the new KODAK KAF-18000CE, an 18 million pixel image sensor...


http://www.dpreview.com/news/0503/05031502pentax645digi...
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00...
http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/news/articles/story_283...
http://forum.shutterbug.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&Num...
http://www.digitalcamerawebsites.com/node/408


--
jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 2:19:35 PM

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

Thanks!

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
"Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
news:1162arrppsgopcb@corp.supernews.com...
> Skip M wrote:
>> "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
>> news:UE58e.13038$5F3.10749@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>>>"Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
>>>news:lB58e.13035$5F3.3053@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>
>>>>"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:1113632786.829722.138860@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>>RichA wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
>>>>>>Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons.
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't know about pro-level because I am not a pro but at the entry
>>>>>and mid-level, I don't think you can go wrong with either of the four
>>>>>brands - Canon, Nikon, Minolta and Pentax. All four make very capable
>>>>>digital SLR cameras. Rest's all marketing.
>>>>>
>>>>>- Siddhartha
>>>>
>>>>How many actually make large format digital cameras like the Pentax's,
>>>>do Canon?
>>>
>>>Well medium anyway! Like the new 645.
>>>
>>
>> Pentax has a digital 645?? I knew Mamiya did, but didn't know about
>> Pentax...
>> Do you have a link to info?
>>
>
>
> With the new KODAK KAF-18000CE, an 18 million pixel image sensor...
>
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0503/05031502pentax645digi...
> http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00...
> http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/news/articles/story_283...
> http://forum.shutterbug.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&Num...
> http://www.digitalcamerawebsites.com/node/408
>
>
> --
> jer
> email reply - I am not a 'ten'
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 2:45:35 PM

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

Lets all admit it, all of the major brands are in a no win competition with
technology changing at such a rapid pace, and they all have great products.
I personally prefer Canon and Nikon, but the bottom line is knowing the
capabilities of your own photographic expertise, and the limitations of your
equipment. You can do a lot of good in post editing, but if you are not a
good photographer, it will show, no matter if you are using a Hasselbad or a
Kodak, digital or film. i think only good things will come from all of this
competition for the largest market share, and it will also force us all to
be our best.

"RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:eor061hrs5svqfnvh4pdml7ai5kk2dug4m@4ax.com...
> It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
> Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
> Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
> such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
> comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
> system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
> market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
> the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
> against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
> D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
> take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
> always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
> immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
> EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
> long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
> to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
> it isn't much competition at all.
> It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
> end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
> The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
> top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
> No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
> the digital ball, to a degree at least.
> -Rich
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 4:00:23 PM

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

RichA wrote:


Re: How did Nikon take a back seat to Canon?

"My laurels look wrinkled, I must have rested on them one night"
-attributed to Julius Ceasar.
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 6:14:37 PM

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

In message <dumdncQ6ZKg3Gf3fRVn-1g@rogers.com>,
" Darrell" <dev/null> wrote:

>It's pure marketing, only Canon owners feel they have to upgrade their dSLR
>cameras every 9 months. It's all hype ooooooo the XT has 8 megapixels, big
>deal that's not really all that big a jump from 6.3 mp. Mind you you'll
>never have to clean dust off of a Canon sensor, as the camera will be
>discontinued by then.
>
>HYPE!!!!!
>
>;)

If one can afford it, it would be worth going from the 10D or the 300D
to the 20D or 350D even if they were still 6MP. The new cameras are
much faster in both continuous shooting and review, auto-focus better,
and have less noise (despite smaller sensels).
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 6:32:53 PM

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

On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 00:00:20 -0600, "Sheldon"
<sheldon@XXXXXXXXsopris.net> wrote:

>This is one of those threads where Nikon people are going to support Nikon
>and Canon people are going to support Canon. I don't think Nikon has
>dropped the ball, but it depends on how you look at it, and it's all very
>subjective. Each company obviously has a plan and a niche. I still use old
>Nikon F's that dates back to the late 60's for film work -- and the cameras
>work perfectly. To me, that says a lot about a company, so I will continue
>to stand by Nikon, not to mention the fact that I can use those older lenses
>on my new D70. That means a lot to me as a consumer. I don't put down
>Canon cameras, and feel they have a good product and reputation. I just
>don't think their cameras are "that" much better than Nikon's, assuming they
>are better.

Last fall I decided due to a book project and a year of working with a
Nikon Coolpix to see what digital was all about to make the investment
in a serious digital system.

I has originally planed to go with Nikon. Had used and owned them in
the past. But the more I looked it be came apparent for a long term
investment in professional equipment and current high performance,
Canon was the way to go.

I went with the 20D after looking at the D100 and D70. I had use of a
20D for an afternoon and had spent a couple of hours in a shop with
the D100 and D70. It was just the better camera for the money and
Canon appears to have better growth path to a full frame digital
system.

The only complaint I have with Canon is their introduction of the EF-S
lenses. Bodies may come and go but good glass is forever. I will only
buy EF Canon primes and L lenses. That's so I'll be ready for either
new 2500- 1500 dollar full frame body or a good deal on a used 1DmkII.

**********************************************************

"A combat photographer should be able to make you see the
color of blood in black and white"


David Douglas Duncan
Speaking on why in Vietnam
he worked only in black and white
http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/exhibitions/online/ddd/
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 6:54:56 PM

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

On 4/16/05 7:20 AM, in article 426102a6$0$91678$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com,
"Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

> The $5000 D2X seems to be competing quite handily
> against the $8000 1DS Mk II, with most reviews that I've seen reporting that
> the Nikon has a distinct edge. So, Nikon's still in the ball game, and once
> they bring out a camera that beats the 20D at the same price, and once they
> address the Drebel XT, and it certainly seems inevitable, Nikon will do
> fine.
>
> HMc
>
As someone else already noted in this thread - how about backing up our
statistics with some facts. Please site sources of those *most* reviews
that you mention that give the DX2 a "distinct edge" over the the 1Ds Mk II?
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 7:33:02 PM

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

"C Wright" <wright9_nojunk@nojunk_mac.com> wrote in message
news:BE86916F.2229E%wright9_nojunk@nojunk_mac.com...
> On 4/16/05 7:20 AM, in article 426102a6$0$91678$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com,
> "Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>> The $5000 D2X seems to be competing quite handily
>> against the $8000 1DS Mk II, with most reviews that I've seen reporting
>> that
>> the Nikon has a distinct edge. So, Nikon's still in the ball game, and
>> once
>> they bring out a camera that beats the 20D at the same price, and once
>> they
>> address the Drebel XT, and it certainly seems inevitable, Nikon will do
>> fine.
>>
>> HMc
>>
> As someone else already noted in this thread - how about backing up our
> statistics with some facts. Please site sources of those *most* reviews
> that you mention that give the DX2 a "distinct edge" over the the 1Ds Mk
> II?
>

How about you prove me wrong?

1DS MkII vs D2X comparisons are all over the web. You don't know how to use
Google?

HMc
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 7:58:45 PM

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

C Wright wrote:

>>
> As someone else already noted in this thread - how about backing up
> our statistics with some facts. Please site sources of those *most*
> reviews that you mention that give the DX2 a "distinct edge" over the
> the 1Ds Mk II?

Try here for starters:
http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2X_revlast.html#top_page

;-)
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 9:10:15 PM

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

RichA wrote:

> It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
> end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
> The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
> top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
> No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
> the digital ball, to a degree at least.
> -Rich


Canon is bigger company with a larger marketing & R&D budget. I think
they can afford to introduce models more often, and perhaps even
manufacture them more cheaply because of their size and their use of
propriety technology.

One reason noone else is producting a full frame dSLR is that its just
too expensive to acquire the chips from an outside source. Of course
that will change.

I also think that as a larger company, Canon can absorb more losses and
write-downs on their camera lines to gain market share - a loss leader.

Canon does seem to get to the market 6 months or so ahead of Nikon with
each major advance and seems to be much more willing abandon a product -
evena top end one - for the next revision.

--

J

www.urbanvoyeur.com
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 9:17:51 PM

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

In article <1113651344.877320.233400@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
Scott W <biphoto@hotmail.com> wrote:

[ ... ]

>I belong to DCP, a digital photo challenge site, the site keeps track
>of how many people own which cameras, Canon by fare is the most popular
>of the DSLRs.

All that *really* means is that more Cannon owners are attracted
to that site, and are willing to post information about what they own.

I'm not at all sure that I even *care* what a "digital photo
challenge site" is about. Certainly not enough to visit it -- let alone
to join it.

Enjoy,
DoN.

--
Email: <dnichols@d-and-d.com> | Voice (all times): (703) 938-4564
(too) near Washington D.C. | http://www.d-and-d.com/dnichols/DoN.html
--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 9:58:06 PM

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

On 4/16/05 10:58 AM, in article
VCa8e.13398$G8.9122@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk, "Siggy"
<thesignatory@thisblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

> C Wright wrote:
>
>>>
>> As someone else already noted in this thread - how about backing up
>> our statistics with some facts. Please site sources of those *most*
>> reviews that you mention that give the DX2 a "distinct edge" over the
>> the 1Ds Mk II?
>
> Try here for starters:
> http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2X_revlast.html#top_page
>
> ;-)
>
>
That review, if not here, has been discussed quite thoroughly on rec.photo.
digital in the recent past. Bjorn Rorslet even had to amend his own test
results because his original comparison 'test' was so contrived. That said,
Bjorn's review is indeed a citation for one review. Now I'm still looking
for citations for all those other reviews that give the DX2 a "distinct
edge."
For the record, both currently and in the past, I have used both Nikon and
Canon SLRs. While I have not used a DX2 I'm sure that it is a great camera
- and would not mind owning one! I just don't think that a contrived 'test'
is helpful to any of us.
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 9:58:07 PM

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

"C Wright" <wright9_nojunk@nojunk_mac.com> wrote in message
news:BE86BC5E.22368%wright9_nojunk@nojunk_mac.com...
> On 4/16/05 10:58 AM, in article
> VCa8e.13398$G8.9122@text.news.blueyonder.co.uk, "Siggy"
> <thesignatory@thisblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> C Wright wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>> As someone else already noted in this thread - how about backing up
>>> our statistics with some facts. Please site sources of those *most*
>>> reviews that you mention that give the DX2 a "distinct edge" over the
>>> the 1Ds Mk II?
>>
>> Try here for starters:
>> http://www.naturfotograf.com/D2X_revlast.html#top_page
>>
>> ;-)
>>
>>
> That review, if not here, has been discussed quite thoroughly on
> rec.photo.
> digital in the recent past. Bjorn Rorslet even had to amend his own test
> results because his original comparison 'test' was so contrived. That
> said,
> Bjorn's review is indeed a citation for one review. Now I'm still looking
> for citations for all those other reviews that give the DX2 a "distinct
> edge."
> For the record, both currently and in the past, I have used both Nikon and
> Canon SLRs. While I have not used a DX2 I'm sure that it is a great
> camera
> - and would not mind owning one! I just don't think that a contrived
> 'test'
> is helpful to any of us.
>

Yes, yes, yes. The words "contrived test" keep coming up on the Canon EOS
section of DPR too, no matter who has done the test. Any test that
approximates the D2X to the 1DS Mk II is a "contrived test", right?. Those
guys on the Canon forums on DPR really have their panties in a bunch over
this new Nikon. I think it's hilarious, and sadly predictable.

HMc
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 10:07:03 PM

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

"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net>
> The only complaint I have with Canon is their introduction of the EF-S
> lenses. Bodies may come and go but good glass is forever. I will only
> buy EF Canon primes and L lenses. That's so I'll be ready for either
> new 2500- 1500 dollar full frame body or a good deal on a used 1DmkII.

I agree. Maybe this is a bad move that will backfire on Canon later on?
Sticking to John's strategy will cost more, making me and others buying
afewer lenses, and cutting Canons profit in the long run?
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 11:15:13 PM

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

"Paul" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:D 3qh7t$ad1$1@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
>. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
>> to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
>> it isn't much competition at all.
>
> Don't you just love it when Like for Like is compared
>
> The D100 should be compared to Canons D60.
>
> The D60 was replaced very quickly because of its faults.
>
> The D100 has never been replaced and it still sells well.
>
> Paul, a Canon user

I am a Nikon and Canon user. At work I use the Nikon D100 and the D1x and
at home I have the D60, 20D, and 1D. Each system has strong and weak points
and both systems are simply very good. However...

The D100 should really not be compared to the D60. It is true both cameras
were announced at about the same time, but the D60 is really only a D30 with
a different sensor. All other features are essentially identical between
the D30 and D60. The D60 did include SLIGHTLY improved AF over the D30, but
this was more a firmware change vs a hardware change. And, the D30 was just
short of 2 years old when the D60 replaced it in the lineup. So, by
comparing the D100 to the D60 you are really comparing cameras who's basic
designs are at least 21 months seperated.

As far as the D100 selling well, I sure wish we could get some real numbers
on that. I would be willing to bet the D100 sells well among folks who
already have Nikon gear, but probably does not pull new users into the
system.

C!
April 16, 2005 11:35:46 PM

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

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005 21:56:31 -0400, RichA <none@none.com> wrote:

>It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
>Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
>Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
>such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
>comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
>system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
>market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
>the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
>against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
>D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
>take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
>always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
>immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
>EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
>long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
>to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
>it isn't much competition at all.
>It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
>end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
>The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
>top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
>No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
>the digital ball, to a degree at least.
>-Rich


I don't think Nikon lag behind at all. I think it's horses for
courses - maybe the Canon's are better in terms of pure picture
quality but that's not necessarily everyones only criteria.

Comparing a Canon Rebel XT to a Nikon D70 is a bit like comparing a
Subaru Imprezza to a BMW 330i - the Imprezza has better 'performance'
but there's no prizes for guessing which one will fall to bits first,
or be the most enjoyable to own.

Yes I'll admit i'm a Nikon user (having said that I have a cheap Canon
digital camcorder that only sees the light of day once a year for two
weeks in the summer) as I rate the build quality and other things
above out and out picture quality. (No, I am not a BMW driver).
Anonymous
April 16, 2005 11:35:47 PM

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

>
> I don't think Nikon lag behind at all. I think it's horses for
> courses - maybe the Canon's are better in terms of pure picture
> quality but that's not necessarily everyones only criteria.
>
> Comparing a Canon Rebel XT to a Nikon D70 is a bit like comparing a
> Subaru Imprezza to a BMW 330i - the Imprezza has better 'performance'
> but there's no prizes for guessing which one will fall to bits first,
> or be the most enjoyable to own.
>
> Yes I'll admit i'm a Nikon user (having said that I have a cheap Canon
> digital camcorder that only sees the light of day once a year for two
> weeks in the summer) as I rate the build quality and other things
> above out and out picture quality. (No, I am not a BMW driver).

Well, I am absolutely biased, as I'm a Nikon user, but I think your analogy
is a good starting point. I think BMW to Mercedes might be a better analogy
though. Within their model lines, there are some comparable cars, the
Mercedes C to the BMW 3, for example, but they are targeted at slightly
diferent markets. In some cases there are not comparable models.

I don't think you can look at Canon and Nikon with direct comparisons. The
D70 slots in between the Rebel and 20D, even though it has a little less
'horsepower', it's a fine camera. The D2X to 1DsMk2 isn't a reasonable
comparison, since the latter is significantly more expensive. The 1DMk2 to
D2X is a better price comparison, but I'd take the D2X with 12mp any day.
Oh wait, I did.

I own the D70, D100 and D2X. The first two are great cameras and at the
current pricing the D70 is a heck of a deal. The D2X is miles ahead and an
incredible camera. The 1DsMk2 may be full frame, but whoopde doo, I don't
care.

Tom
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 12:33:16 AM

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

"Colic" <no_spam@no.spam.com> wrote in message
news:5vd8e.19891$8Z6.118@attbi_s21...
>
> As far as the D100 selling well, I sure wish we could get some real
> numbers on that. I would be willing to bet the D100 sells well among
> folks who already have Nikon gear, but probably does not pull new users
> into the system.
>
> C!
>
The D70 is more interesting. Nikon claims they have sold over 1 million D70s
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 1:10:56 AM

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

"Jer" <gdunn@airmail.ten> wrote in message
news:1162arrppsgopcb@corp.supernews.com...
> Skip M wrote:
>> "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
>> news:UE58e.13038$5F3.10749@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>>>"Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
>>>news:lB58e.13035$5F3.3053@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>
>>>>"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:1113632786.829722.138860@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>>>
>>>>>RichA wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
>>>>>>Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons.
>>>>>
>>>>>I don't know about pro-level because I am not a pro but at the entry
>>>>>and mid-level, I don't think you can go wrong with either of the four
>>>>>brands - Canon, Nikon, Minolta and Pentax. All four make very capable
>>>>>digital SLR cameras. Rest's all marketing.
>>>>>
>>>>>- Siddhartha
>>>>
>>>>How many actually make large format digital cameras like the Pentax's,
>>>>do Canon?
>>>
>>>Well medium anyway! Like the new 645.
>>>
>>
>> Pentax has a digital 645?? I knew Mamiya did, but didn't know about
>> Pentax...
>> Do you have a link to info?
>>
>
>
> With the new KODAK KAF-18000CE, an 18 million pixel image sensor...
>


Apparently the Pentax is rather good.
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 1:14:23 AM

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

>
> Here is a link to the camera part of the data base, click on the
> manufacturer and you will get a list of cameras and how many owns for
> each model.
>
> http://dpchallenge.com/camera.php
>

Amazing how statistics can lie, this is true only for visitors to this site
and if they bothered to register, I know I didn't.
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 1:17:09 AM

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

>
> How about you prove me wrong?
>
> 1DS MkII vs D2X comparisons are all over the web. You don't know how to
> use Google?

Yeah he started it so he has to prove it, nah nah nah nah nah! You must know
some links where you got your info, just share, we will find it eventually
you know.
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 1:44:27 AM

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

"JohaN" <johanaulin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:bvc8e.134699$dP1.473196@newsc.telia.net...
> "John A. Stovall" <johnastovall@earthlink.net>
>> The only complaint I have with Canon is their introduction of the EF-S
>> lenses. Bodies may come and go but good glass is forever. I will only
>> buy EF Canon primes and L lenses. That's so I'll be ready for either
>> new 2500- 1500 dollar full frame body or a good deal on a used 1DmkII.
>
> I agree. Maybe this is a bad move that will backfire on Canon later on?
> Sticking to John's strategy will cost more, making me and others buying
> afewer lenses, and cutting Canons profit in the long run?
I've heard that the smaller sensor may be the new standard for DSLR's. I'm
not happy with that, but it opens up a new market for lenses made especially
for DSLR's. With Nikon hanging onto the same lens mount they've been using
for decades, many of us can keep using the lenses we already have, which
cuts Nikon's profits, but makes their customers, who have already invested
in a lot of equipment, happy.
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 2:29:45 AM

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

> As far as the D100 selling well, I sure wish we could get some real numbers
> on that. I would be willing to bet the D100 sells well among folks who
> already have Nikon gear, but probably does not pull new users into the
> system.

I switched to Nikon, and specifically D100 x 2

--
Michael
Remove brains to reply
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 2:30:41 AM

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

On 4/16/05 3:33 PM, in article 42617610$0$50235$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com,
"Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:

>
> "C Wright" <wright9_nojunk@nojunk_mac.com> wrote in message
> news:BE86916F.2229E%wright9_nojunk@nojunk_mac.com...
>> On 4/16/05 7:20 AM, in article 426102a6$0$91678$bb4e3ad8@newscene.com,
>> "Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote:
>>
>>> The $5000 D2X seems to be competing quite handily
>>> against the $8000 1DS Mk II, with most reviews that I've seen reporting
>>> that
>>> the Nikon has a distinct edge. So, Nikon's still in the ball game, and
>>> once
>>> they bring out a camera that beats the 20D at the same price, and once
>>> they
>>> address the Drebel XT, and it certainly seems inevitable, Nikon will do
>>> fine.
>>>
>>> HMc
>>>
>> As someone else already noted in this thread - how about backing up our
>> statistics with some facts. Please site sources of those *most* reviews
>> that you mention that give the DX2 a "distinct edge" over the the 1Ds Mk
>> II?
>>
>
> How about you prove me wrong?
>
> 1DS MkII vs D2X comparisons are all over the web. You don't know how to use
> Google?
>
> HMc
>
>
>
You are the one who mentioned all of these "reviews" - how about you provide
the citations? I have most of the major digital camera review sites
bookmarked and have not yet seen any of them give the DX2 a "distinct edge."
Just because some Nikon guy, or some Canon guy for that matter, says one
camera is superior to the other does not mean a thing without some objective
tests to back it up. And, yes, I know how to use Google.
Chuck
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 2:30:42 AM

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

These 4, mentioned in the last week or so on DP:

http://www.fotomagazin.de/
http://www.naturfotograf.com/index2_PC.html
http://db.riskwaters.com/public/showPage.html?page=bjp_...
(British Journal of Photography - you need a subcscription to view, but the
title of the article, a "shootout" of 1DS MkII against the D2X is titled
"David beats Goliath"...)
http://www.diglloyd.com/diglloyd/infos/D2X-vs-1DsMII/D2...
....Lloyd Chamber's review. He's taken the unique step of charging $34 to
read his review of 1DS vs MkII. I won't give away his conclusions, but
suffice it to say it's been widely reported and confirmed by Lloyd that he
has sold his 1DS Mk II.
..
Now, you don't have to, but I'd be interested to have you cite any reviews
that indicate that the $3000 price difference between the two cameras is
justified. I alway thought the D2X would be brought out to compete with the
1D MkII. A lot of people in both camps were taken aback when all the
comparisons were with the 1DS MkII. I don't think anyone has even thought to
compare the D2X to the poor 1D MkII.

HMc



> You are the one who mentioned all of these "reviews" - how about you
> provide
> the citations? I have most of the major digital camera review sites
> bookmarked and have not yet seen any of them give the DX2 a "distinct
> edge."
> Just because some Nikon guy, or some Canon guy for that matter, says one
> camera is superior to the other does not mean a thing without some
> objective
> tests to back it up. And, yes, I know how to use Google.
> Chuck
>
April 17, 2005 3:25:42 AM

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

"Nicholas Childs" <onimod@gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:4338e.12881$5F3.8367@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "RichA" <none@none.com> wrote in message
> news:eor061hrs5svqfnvh4pdml7ai5kk2dug4m@4ax.com...
> > It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
> > Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
> > Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
> > such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
> > comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
> > system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
> > market to a great degree. Now, no one would bother comparing
> > the D70 against the 20D, but they might compare the Rebel XT
> > against the D70. Apparently, Nikon is introducing the
> > D50 which could be a sub-$800 DSLR (with a lens) and it could
> > take a big chunk of the consumer market. Granted, Canon could
> > always drop the price on the Rebel XT, but that won't happen
> > immediately. But the top end is arguably dominated by Canon's
> > EOS 1D Mk II since Nikon's D2X isn't in the same class by a
> > long shot. It could be argued that the D100 is the competition
> > to the Canon 20D, but according to retailers I've spoken to,
> > it isn't much competition at all.
> > It almost looks like Nikon has neglected (to a degree) the digital
> > end of the market to milk the last few dollars out of the film end.
> > The strategy could backfire badly, with Canon taking and holding the
> > top echilon in professional photography, once held by Nikon.
> > No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
> > the digital ball, to a degree at least.
> > -Rich
>
> You'll need some true sales figures to prove you haven't swallowed Canon
> marketing hook line and sinker.
> The other small issue I'm concerned with - does the fact that Canon
releases
> more models really mean there are more Canon shooters, or are there fewer
> shooters with more cameras......?
> I think you'll find that Nikon claims to be not far from owning 50% of the
> market - how they measure or their opposition measure is anyone's
guess....
> I think you'll definitely find different answers in different markets/area
> too.
> Before you ask for reasons to back up a fact, you'd better have a fact,
> otherwise we're all talking about marketing budgets and perception.
>

Look on Pbase (http://www.pbase.com) at the number of pictures put up by
each DSLR brand, Canon has twice as many as the nearest camera make (Nikon).
Any election can be predicted with less than 1,000 people so I can assume
without making an ass of myself that there are twice as many Canon DSLR
cameras as Nikons. Are they better? as a Canon owner I would tend to
beleive I made the right choice and so do many others, twice as many as
Nikon owners in fact.

Jean
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 3:42:28 AM

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

On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 03:09:45 GMT, "Basic Wedge" <basic-wedge@shaw.ca>
wrote:

>"RichA" wrote ...
>
>> No one is questioning Nikon's quality, but it's clear they've dropped
>> the digital ball, to a degree at least.
>
>---------------------------
>
>I agree. It also seems clear Minolta, Pentax, Olympus, and all the others
>haven't recovered that fumble.
>
>Rob
>

I'd give some kudos to Pentax. They're current DSLR is actually
a nice camera, and it has a size advantage as well, for those
who value that. But Olympus (sorry to say, since I like them)
is in a bad situation. They have a mediocre 8 meg DSLR and a
really nice DSLR (the E1) that languishes with 5 megapixels.
-Rich
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 3:50:22 AM

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

On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 10:45:35 -0500, "Bill and Lisa"
<mc5WWW@cox-internet.com> wrote:

>Lets all admit it, all of the major brands are in a no win competition with
>technology changing at such a rapid pace, and they all have great products.
>I personally prefer Canon and Nikon, but the bottom line is knowing the
>capabilities of your own photographic expertise, and the limitations of your
>equipment. You can do a lot of good in post editing, but if you are not a
>good photographer, it will show, no matter if you are using a Hasselbad or a
>Kodak, digital or film. i think only good things will come from all of this
>competition for the largest market share, and it will also force us all to
>be our best.

However, Canon, due to marketing, or just word of mouth has succeded
in doing something that no one has done yet; Turned the buyers of
$200 instant film cameras into the buyers of $900 DSLRs. Two
retailers told me (yeah, I know it's not a big sample) that they
have never seen a camera like the Rebel and the new XT upsell
consumers like these Canon's have. They are actually taking a large
percentage of "never used SLRs before" people and turning them into
buyers of DSLRs. That kind of market conversion is impressive.
-Rich
April 17, 2005 3:50:23 AM

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

> However, Canon, due to marketing, or just word of mouth has succeded
> in doing something that no one has done yet; Turned the buyers of
> $200 instant film cameras into the buyers of $900 DSLRs. Two
> retailers told me (yeah, I know it's not a big sample) that they
> have never seen a camera like the Rebel and the new XT upsell
> consumers like these Canon's have. They are actually taking a large
> percentage of "never used SLRs before" people and turning them into
> buyers of DSLRs. That kind of market conversion is impressive.
> -Rich


Those retailers might have a good point.

I was in the market to buy a digi a few months ago. I was about to pick
up a Panosonic p&s. I began kicking around the idea of purchasing a dslr
sometime afterward. Looked at the 300D (hated the ergonomics) & D70
(liked a lot). Then, the xt came out... after 10 minutes of playing with
in the store and I was whipping out my credit card as fast as I could.
--
Slack
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 3:51:07 AM

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

On Sat, 16 Apr 2005 12:00:23 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>RichA wrote:
>
>
>Re: How did Nikon take a back seat to Canon?
>
>"My laurels look wrinkled, I must have rested on them one night"
> -attributed to Julius Ceasar.

et tu, Rebel XT?
-Rich
Anonymous
April 17, 2005 4:56:11 AM

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

In article <eor061hrs5svqfnvh4pdml7ai5kk2dug4m@4ax.com>,
RichA <none@none.com> wrote:
>It's pretty clear that in the entry and the pro level,
>Nikon DSLRs lag behind Canons. It's interesting that
>Canon, the also-ran of SLRs would be able to jump into
>such a huge lead. Granted, Canon always had the most
>comprehesive group offering of any SLR company, their
>system was the best, but Nikon always ruled the professional
>market to a great degree.

I have no idea Nikon and Canon compare at an absolute scale. In some
cases and in some areas, Nikon has better solutions, in other cases Canon
is best.

What does matter (I think) is that Canon built up an advantage in long
lenses with faster AF and IS and managed to capture a very visible part of
the pro market.

For some reason, something went quite wrong at Nikon with sensor design.
The D1 had a good sensor at the right time. After that came the D1X which
can be described as a hack. Then nothing happened for a relatively long
time and Nikon presented the D2H. And now Nikon is probably back in the
game with the D2X.

It is as if Nikon falls a sleep sometimes. They had the right idea with
the F3AF. Then they introduced the wrong the AF system and it took them
a very long time to recover.

They were on the right track with the D1 and then it took them ages to
introduce the D2H. Very strange.

But the D2X may be quite popular with people who need long lenses.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
!