Suspicion torments my heart

I may just be getting suspicious as I get older , but the number of posts from new posters or those with next to no posts suddenly becoming active with regard to the 1DmkIV makes me just a bit sceptical about the validity of the posts. They appear on both sides of the discussion form the 1DmkIV is awesome to the 1DmkIV is bested by the D3s. So it rather begs the question are these new posters , long term posters too cowardly to post under their regular identity , folk just wanting to cause mischief or perhaps perish the thought , paid shills from Canon or Nikon. And it seems to work very well fuelling either the fears or fervours of the respective forum fan boys.

Whilst we all have our favourite gear in all honesty and if for some unknown reason your current gear was replaced with similar gear from the other maker. I would suggest that after a wee spell getting used to the ergonomics { one of the most important differences between the systems} . I think we would all be able to continue with work just as good . Some cameras may have a small advantage in a certain area , but there are simply no bad DSLR cameras being made from anyone.

I honestly think that unless you work in an incredibly unique niche both systems deliver some truly excellent equipment . And many arguments that rage here as profound as arguing which flavour of ice cream is better , the many benefits of vanilla vs. the woes of raspberry ripple{ though the truth is Rum & Raisin rules }. I am prepared to wager that both the 1DmkIV and Nikon D3s will be excellent cameras and in the hands of the talented will deliver stunning results.
Jim

jim stirling said:

I may just be getting suspicious as I get older , but the number of posts from new posters or those with next to no posts suddenly becoming active with regard to the 1DmkIV makes me just a bit sceptical about the validity of the posts. They appear on both sides of the discussion form the 1DmkIV is awesome to the 1DmkIV is bested by the D3s.

Click to expand...

I don't know if I agree with you or not.

But, for sure, there is something that has become part of the internet: people being paid for navigating and creating nicks in public opinion sites and then starting to disseminate propaganda.

This may have been happening with the last bellicosity with Gaza and Israel, this may be happening in my country with people spreading stuff to support some of the political parties, while badmouthing the rival parties. I think this could be happening in several strategic fora.

I don't know if that's the case, and I don't know if it has transcended to the corporation level (companies paying people to make propaganda and a bit of badmouthing and putting rivals down). Who knows?

As I say, I don't know if this is actually happening, but I do know that this is a possibility. It is indeed possible.

Therefore, I don't go reading stuff in the internet (nor in dpreview) assuming that every opinion is legit, I just happen to think that, when reading something strange, chances are that it could be propaganda. Of course there are nice dpreview users that have been participating for months and years, and that have a coherent way of argumentation. In the end it is up to the internet user to ascertain what info is valuable, what is dismissible, and to tell both apart and make good use of the internet.

--
Jaime

http://jaimsthesweetspot.wordpress.com/

Working in marketing area I can assure you that this is happening. It has its own terminology - "viral marketing". At which level it is coordinate by companies themselves it is a question, because we have also retailers, fun clubs, owners of frequently visited web pages etc. There are agencies who makes their specialization in this area. We have to live with it, either we like it or not.

I find this discussion very interesting. I retired a couple years ago and now have a lot more time to "search the net". One of my biggest discoveries is it is very difficult to find credible, believable, well informed sources. This applies to photography, politics, virtually any topic. I cherish the few sites that I can follow with some confidence. I also am more and more aware of the feeling of being manipulated by people with questionable knowledge but strong, polarizing opinions. I've learned to be more discrimanating more skeptical on everything I read. Remember "Wag the Dog". Technology today is ripe for being exploited by someone with an agenda both innocent as well as dishonest motives.

I'm looking forward to one really good, detailed, relatively objective review of the 1D4 such as is done by Rob Galbraith or DP Review staff. Until then, there's a mixed bag of interesting, but not real valuable posts on the topic. Makes me wonder if there were a rating system on each posts the "group" could pretty quickly downgrade the trolls and obvious misinformers.

DanO986 said:

... I've learned to be more discrimanating more skeptical on everything I read.

Click to expand...

That goes without saying. People has to use intelligence to tell apart bad from good sources.

DanO986 said:

...Makes me wonder if there were a rating system on each posts the "group" could pretty quickly downgrade the trolls and obvious misinformers.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I've thought of this too. There are internet community spaces where people's comments can be up/downvoted by other users, and it adds up, day by day, to the overall 'karma' of each user. Then you have to be beware of people's comments history, and to know that some people creates new nicks all the time (you dismiss their opinions, then).

Cheers

--
Jaime

http://jaimsthesweetspot.wordpress.com/

Jaims said:

People has to use ...

Click to expand...

Sorry about my bad English, guys. People have to.
--
Jaime

http://jaimsthesweetspot.wordpress.com/

While there is no doubt some of this going on, it is equally as frustrating to actually have a valid issue, posted to a forum with proof or simply ask if anyone has seen it before, and then get jumped on, sworn at, insulted, and flamed in every which way imaginable. I could just as easily make a case that there are Canon employees trolling the forums looking to refute any complaints made about their cameras by flaming people with issues to try and make them look incompetent. So the knife cuts both ways. The anonymity of the Internet is a two-edged sword.

The number of posts someone has made may or may not be relevant in my mind. I read a lot more posts than I write to.

Bob

I am also inclined to believe that this may in fact be true. I myself spend some time in the marketing business, and this is an area that is much discussed. You sell monitors for example, if you were a customer, where would you search first, and where you would value the opinion more? Yeah thats right, in a forum!

Companies manipulate public consecus. I've seen people bashing camera's, whole brands, in their first post. Not simply saying that that X is better than Z. But actually saying that Z is crap.

Peoples motive to get online and to register in a forum, is mostly to seek advice.

The pattern of a succesfull propaganda are very simple. Has to do with Psychology. Create a bad rumor the first days of the new product's release. If the first 4-5 things you read about X model, are bad, then it makes an impact and it is very difficult to overcome this impression. Even if after you read tenths of good posts, the insecurity has been planted for good, and then starts spreading like wildfire.

If we, that we spend so many hours in the forums, have trouble understanding a bad~fake rumor from a good~ true, then guess what is the impact of these "innocent" rumors to the buyers that dont make any serious research before buying.

ever think to wonder that some people just are excited and happy with there new purchaces?

I personally like the rivalary between nikon and canon.

The end result, better cameras with better features.

+1 for the canin 1dmk iv, very happy upgrade from a 5d.

and ever thought that new posters are just that, new to the site?

jim stirling said:

I may just be getting suspicious as I get older , but the number of posts from new posters or those with next to no posts suddenly becoming active with regard to the 1DmkIV makes me just a bit sceptical about the validity of the posts. They appear on both sides of the discussion form the 1DmkIV is awesome to the 1DmkIV is bested by the D3s. So it rather begs the question are these new posters , long term posters too cowardly to post under their regular identity , folk just wanting to cause mischief or perhaps perish the thought , paid shills from Canon or Nikon. And it seems to work very well fuelling either the fears or fervours of the respective forum fan boys.

Whilst we all have our favourite gear in all honesty and if for some unknown reason your current gear was replaced with similar gear from the other maker. I would suggest that after a wee spell getting used to the ergonomics { one of the most important differences between the systems} . I think we would all be able to continue with work just as good . Some cameras may have a small advantage in a certain area , but there are simply no bad DSLR cameras being made from anyone.

I honestly think that unless you work in an incredibly unique niche both systems deliver some truly excellent equipment . And many arguments that rage here as profound as arguing which flavour of ice cream is better , the many benefits of vanilla vs. the woes of raspberry ripple{ though the truth is Rum & Raisin rules }. I am prepared to wager that both the 1DmkIV and Nikon D3s will be excellent cameras and in the hands of the talented will deliver stunning results.
Jim

Click to expand...

I think you'll find a lot of the posts slamming the Canon 1d mk4 are actually from Canon users who have become disgruntled by the path Canon has chosen for it's pro-line cameras.

If you're a working pro and you look over the fence and see a camera (from a rival manufacture) delivering superior performance in the key areas you make your living, it's only natural you would feel cheated. This fact is then further compounded by Canon's big wigs, who, prior to release of the mk4, proudly acclaimed 'they had consulted with professionals to help them deliver the ultimate tool yadda yadda'... in fact, I suspect Canon consulted with no-one. They new Nikon had them beat, so in defiance they retreated from the front line, tail between their legs and attempted to foolishly trumpet weak aspects of the camera (Hi def video and 16mp) that pros simply don't want. Canon are deserving of the flak.

DanO986 said:

I find this discussion very interesting. I retired a couple years ago and now have a lot more time to "search the net". One of my biggest discoveries is it is very difficult to find credible, believable, well informed sources. This applies to photography, politics, virtually any topic. I cherish the few sites that I can follow with some confidence. I also am more and more aware of the feeling of being manipulated by people with questionable knowledge but strong, polarizing opinions. I've learned to be more discrimanating more skeptical on everything I read. Remember "Wag the Dog". Technology today is ripe for being exploited by someone with an agenda both innocent as well as dishonest motives.

I'm looking forward to one really good, detailed, relatively objective review of the 1D4 such as is done by Rob Galbraith or DP Review staff. Until then, there's a mixed bag of interesting, but not real valuable posts on the topic. Makes me wonder if there were a rating system on each posts the "group" could pretty quickly downgrade the trolls and obvious misinformers.

Click to expand...

Dan, I agree almost in everything you said… I stopped cold when reading Rob Galbraith or DPR…

I recall the time when books were THE source of information. Going to the library was the “reveal the truth” experience.

Today, sadly, internet has real and fake information all over the place and people trust it.

Wag the Dog. Excellent movie!

I don’t participate much in this forum because I spend more time in other duties/family/hobbies than in forums. When the 1D4 was announced my participation went to the sky. Being the only reason I wanted the camera, but I was thinking of buying a Nikon to start a double system.

I do read and check reviews and comparisons, but I don’t trust most of them, including the ones you mentioned. I asked and downloaded several RAW files from the 1D4 and the D3s and played with both to my liking. Later, I visited B&H and played with the D3 a little and found it “nice”. With that information, clearly I saw, for my needs, that Nikon would be better. Since I’m invested in Canon and having some cameras; I gave more time to think about starting a second system with a pro camera no lenses, etc; then decided to get the 1D4.

I still think one day I should have both systems but when the economy is better. In the meantime, the important part is to enjoy life, take pictures and be as happy as one can be.

So, despite white papers, professional photographers, reviewers, internet… the best judge is yourself. And if you make your homework, don’t rush, compare what really is important to you and take all in consideration (even money for vacation!) then nothing beats the camera you get.

--
Jorge

Topaz Group
http://www.flickr.com/groups/topaz/

atncentral
http://www.atncentral.com/

jim stirling said:

I may just be getting suspicious as I get older , but the number of posts from new posters or those with next to no posts suddenly becoming active with regard to the 1DmkIV makes me just a bit sceptical about the validity of the posts.

Click to expand...

When they appear, they generally almost immediately end up in my ignore list (like that ridiculous "News Shooter" character). Fanboys— both real and imaginary, whether for or against any particular brand I might happen to use— typically offer little value to the discussion.

--
'Passion will make you crazy, but is there any other way to live?' —Kara Saun

http://www.oqlus.com/

Furano,

We are in almost complete agreement. Like you, when the 1D4 came out, my interest in this forum jumped significantly. I had a 1D3 for over two year and sold it recently. I took many photos with it that I'm proud of and missed more than I liked due to my own ineptitude combined with a sub-par focusing system. I sold it in preparation to upgrade to the 1D4 most likely, although I will say I've looked more at the Nikon D3s in the past two months than I ever expected to. In the end, I have a whole bag of "L" Canon lenses from 16-35 up to a 600 mm f/4 and half a dozen in between. I like the Canon lenses and just cannot see moving to another brand. I really do like the ergonomics of Canon 1D cameras and it's too expensive to change. I mainly shoot birds, wildlife, and increasingly landscapes. I have seriously thought about a 5D2 and may yet pick one up. It seems like a fantastic FF camera albeit not a very responsive focusing system for my birds and wildlife work. I really want a 5D2 and a 1D4. Hard to drop $7.5K right now, but I may before the year is over. The current discussion about high ISO advantage of the D3s seems pretty certain although the feature is not overly important to me. My first requirement is a camera that focuses rock solid in most situations. The IQ is probably good and certainly so in the below 800 ISO where I shoot. I do see the 1D4 as more like a 1D3n than a significant upgrade. In a couple more years the 1D5 may end up being the big upgrade. had it not been for my concerns with focusing on the 1D3, I would have kept the camera for much longer. I still have my 7 year old 20D and it performs well in many cases. It clearly lacks enough megapixels and the focusing is very dated relative to new cameras like the 7D and 1D4, frankly any 1D camera.

My comments about Rob Galbraith and DP Review staff were based upon those being the best I've found and the most I trust. If you have a better review site, I'd welcome the link.

jim stirling said:

I honestly think that unless you work in an incredibly unique niche both systems deliver some truly excellent equipment . And many arguments that rage here as profound as arguing which flavour of ice cream is better , the many benefits of vanilla vs. the woes of raspberry ripple{ though the truth is Rum & Raisin rules }. I am prepared to wager that both the 1DmkIV and Nikon D3s will be excellent cameras and in the hands of the talented will deliver stunning results.

Click to expand...

As someone who used to shoot a Canon film SLR and ended up, many years later, with a Nikon D80 because at the time and for what I wanted to pay, it was the best option for me... you are just making too much sense.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It's easy to argue about equipment and technique, but hard to argue with a good photograph -- and more difficult to capture one .



Gallery and blog: http://esfotoclix.com
Special selections: http://esfotoclix.com/store
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22061657@N03

MaxPhoton said:

jim stirling said:

I may just be getting suspicious as I get older , but the number of posts from new posters or those with next to no posts suddenly becoming active with regard to the 1DmkIV makes me just a bit sceptical about the validity of the posts. They appear on both sides of the discussion form the 1DmkIV is awesome to the 1DmkIV is bested by the D3s. So it rather begs the question are these new posters , long term posters too cowardly to post under their regular identity , folk just wanting to cause mischief or perhaps perish the thought , paid shills from Canon or Nikon. And it seems to work very well fuelling either the fears or fervours of the respective forum fan boys.

Whilst we all have our favourite gear in all honesty and if for some unknown reason your current gear was replaced with similar gear from the other maker. I would suggest that after a wee spell getting used to the ergonomics { one of the most important differences between the systems} . I think we would all be able to continue with work just as good . Some cameras may have a small advantage in a certain area , but there are simply no bad DSLR cameras being made from anyone.

I honestly think that unless you work in an incredibly unique niche both systems deliver some truly excellent equipment . And many arguments that rage here as profound as arguing which flavour of ice cream is better , the many benefits of vanilla vs. the woes of raspberry ripple{ though the truth is Rum & Raisin rules }. I am prepared to wager that both the 1DmkIV and Nikon D3s will be excellent cameras and in the hands of the talented will deliver stunning results.
Jim

Click to expand...

I think you'll find a lot of the posts slamming the Canon 1d mk4 are actually from Canon users who have become disgruntled by the path Canon has chosen for it's pro-line cameras.

If you're a working pro and you look over the fence and see a camera (from a rival manufacture) delivering superior performance in the key areas you make your living, it's only natural you would feel cheated. This fact is then further compounded by Canon's big wigs, who, prior to release of the mk4, proudly acclaimed 'they had consulted with professionals to help them deliver the ultimate tool yadda yadda'... in fact, I suspect Canon consulted with no-one. They new Nikon had them beat, so in defiance they retreated from the front line, tail between their legs and attempted to foolishly trumpet weak aspects of the camera (Hi def video and 16mp) that pros simply don't want. Canon are deserving of the flak.

Click to expand...

Exactly what the OP is talking about, a comic book character with an agenda spouting conspiracy & doom and gloom theories regarding Canon. You can't see past your own little world.

I'm one of those that has been around for about a year and don't say much, but I've spent a lot of time here lately cause I'm interested in the New MkIV, I've been debating between the 5DmkII and the new MkIV, while I mainly shoot landscape I also enjoy wildlife and find my current 50d does not allow high enough ISO to get a lot of the shots I'd like to get.

My conclusion lately from everything I've been reading is I'm confused, but I'm starting to beleive that while just maybe the NikonD3 may be a little better, the MKIV sounds like it's a fantastic camera and will fill my needs extremely well.

I'm looking for good higher ISO preformance but more importantly IQ is the most important with the ability to print 20 x 30 prints.

So I may be a little quilty of being more active lately, than normal but there is a real reason for it. It does get a little hard to sift through all of the info here, cause there is some pretty big controversy over this new MkIV.

I'm here reading everything trying to find out all the pros and cons of the new mkIV.

Janal

I'm in the market to upgrade one of my 5Ds to better photograph wildlife and BIF; the 1D Mk IV has me interested. Rather than rely on a cross-section of reviews of uncertain provenance, I will watch for sample shots posted in here and in various Nature and Wildlife forums. When I see a good number of great photos shot with the 1D Mk IV, I'll order one - not before.

Osiris Ani said:

Osiris Ani said:

I may just be getting suspicious as I get older , but the number of posts from new posters or those with next to no posts suddenly becoming active with regard to the 1DmkIV makes me just a bit sceptical about the validity of the posts.

Click to expand...

When they appear, they generally almost immediately end up in my ignore list (like that ridiculous "News Shooter" character). Fanboys— both real and imaginary, whether for or against any particular brand I might happen to use— typically offer little value to the discussion.

--
'Passion will make you crazy, but is there any other way to live?' —Kara Saun

http://www.oqlus.com/

Click to expand...

Well he ended up posting up his shots and opinions about his new MKIV, I guess because you don't agree with them he's become a "fanboy" to be ignored? What real world experiences of value have you added to the discussion?

The thing is: You're allowing yourself to be drawn to an "in-depth" level of analysis that can (and should) be considered but which, as factor of pondering while establishing an opinion, must also be minored at all costs.

This is a common error often committed by decision makers even at the most surprising high levels of decision.

The inputs you're referring to should be considered only as "add-ons" to a vast "white nose" pool of opinions from which the actual picture regarding a product will emerge.

They must never be considered at their face/absolute value, unless they come from a formal "credible" source, one which has repeatedly, over the times, proven itself worthy. (...Even these ones should only be factored in with a proportional weight factor).

If this attitude (trying to isolate what emerges as definite concept from the mentioned pool of "white noise" inputs) is successfully adopted, no amount of "viral marketing" will ever matter because it is physically impossible (or inefficiently expensive) to generate enough "planted information" to surpass the genuinely generated one.

Using this approach, I was able to "see" the problems in the 1DMKIII AF from very early on.

Using the same approach, I can now see an extremely favorable image starting to emerge in what regards to the 1DMKIV.

Viral Marketing or no Viral Marketing, Trolls or no Trolls, the truth always has its ways of showing itself.

PK

--
“Loose praise may feed my ego but constructive criticism advances my skills”
************************************************************
-------------------------------------------------
http://www.pbase.com/photokhan
(PBase Supporter)

Janal said:

I'm one of those that has been around for about a year and don't say much, but I've spent a lot of time here lately cause I'm interested in the New MkIV, I've been debating between the 5DmkII and the new MkIV, while I mainly shoot landscape I also enjoy wildlife and find my current 50d does not allow high enough ISO to get a lot of the shots I'd like to get.

My conclusion lately from everything I've been reading is I'm confused, but I'm starting to beleive that while just maybe the NikonD3 may be a little better, the MKIV sounds like it's a fantastic camera and will fill my needs extremely well.

I'm looking for good higher ISO preformance but more importantly IQ is the most important with the ability to print 20 x 30 prints.

So I may be a little quilty of being more active lately, than normal but there is a real reason for it. It does get a little hard to sift through all of the info here, cause there is some pretty big controversy over this new MkIV.

I'm here reading everything trying to find out all the pros and cons of the new mkIV.

Janal

Click to expand...

There's no controversy, you won't find one MKIV owner here that doesn't love the camera. I owned a 50D and 7D along with the MKIII and now MKIV. You might want to take a look at the 7D as well if you're OK with the 1.6X crop, it's a fantastic cam and a real step up from the 50D in terms of AF, high ISO and file quality.