Opinion: many people don't know what to buy

In daily life. I sell camera's. Many consumers are confused because of the overflow of chooses they have to make. Most of the advise is only about specs. But that's not the whole story.

I own a dSLR but also a ILC. Sometimes I can hardly choose which one I should pick up on a trip.

How do you choose which type of camera you or somebody else wants? (not make or something).

I also wrote this question on my weblog: http://cor-oskam.blogspot.com/2011/04/why-buying-which-camera-for-who.html

Corros said:

In daily life. I sell camera's. Many consumers are confused because of the overflow of chooses they have to make. Most of the advise is only about specs. But that's not the whole story.

I own a dSLR but also a ILC. Sometimes I can hardly choose which one I should pick up on a trip.

How do you choose which type of camera you or somebody else wants? (not make or something).

I also wrote this question on my weblog: http://cor-oskam.blogspot.com/2011/04/why-buying-which-camera-for-who.html

Click to expand...

What is an ILC?
--
Christakis

http://blog.christakisphoto.com/
(Updated every Monday, Wednesday and Friday)

Interchangeable Lens Camera - likely referring to what are also called Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens cameras (or MILs), Mirrorless cameras, M4:3 cameras (often the term is used to include Samsung & Sony mirrorless models, despite the fact that they don't use an M4:3 sensor).

--
Justin
galleries: http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

zackiedawg said:

Interchangeable Lens Camera - likely referring to what are also called Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens cameras (or MILs), Mirrorless cameras, M4:3 cameras (often the term is used to include Samsung & Sony mirrorless models, despite the fact that they don't use an M4:3 sensor).

--
Justin
galleries: http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

Click to expand...

Ahhhh... Thank you. I don't think I ever came across that acronym before.

Anw, I think it's easy. If you own an ILC, you would get the ILC for trips, simple as that. Easier to carry, would be my first choice every time. I bought an "ILC" with two prime lenses and haven't used my SLR since then. I can only imagine "ILC" which come with zoom lenses and autofocus are even more sweeter

On the other hand, a nice little P&S would do too... Wouldn't mind one of those either...

--
Christakis

http://blog.christakisphoto.com/
(Updated every Monday, Wednesday and Friday)

I've got an 'ILC' as well...and a DSLR...and a compact P&S. All bases covered, as far as I'm concerned. I've always had big camera/little camera - going back to 2002 when I picked up an advanced prosumer P&S and an ultracompact pocketable cam at the same time. I moved to an ultrazoom and an ultracompact, then to a DSLR and an ultracompact. Only recently did I decide the lure of something in between was too hard to pass on - I wanted DSLR quality in a smaller package - not to replace my DSLR but to supplement it. The MIL/ILC was just right. Need to travel light, or taking light-duty scenic/travel snaps, or want low profile? ILC. Need maximum speed, versatility, range, control, or have no need to restrict size or kit? DSLR. Basically going somewhere that I wouldn't even bring a camera, but like having one on me for the just-in-case moments? Ultracompact.

For others, I tend to help friends or relatives select cameras by first eliminating any brand names they've got stuck in their heads...once they are now ready to be open-minded and look around, I figure out the types of subjects or things they feel like they'd want to shoot, how much knowledge they have, how much control over parameters they need or want, and where their budget is...then I rattle off as many models as I can think of which will meet those specifications. I let their personal taste, ergonomics, tests, biases, sale prices, or any other factors guide them in.

--
Justin
galleries: http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg

...if you are a very beginner, but I think the more simple is the model to operate, better will be the introduction process to Photography.

IMO people forget the key point: themselves. Personally I went to a bootstrap learning process and never I felt I made a wrong purchase.

You can find the history of my Photography introduction at the following link (perhaps it can be illustrative) http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1002&message=38017200 .

Regards,
--
O.Cristo - An Amateur Photographer

Opinions of men are almost as various as their faces - so many men so many minds . Franklin

Picking a camera today can be a challenging affair given the multitude of choices out there. In fact, I sometimes think that the selection can be crippling for those new to DSLRs:

http://www.peteranthonyphotography.com/peter-anthony-photography-blog/2010/9/8/the-paradox-of-choice.html

When I get asked about selecting a camera, I often offer someting to the effect of the following advice:

http://www.peteranthonyphotography.com/peter-anthony-photography-blog/2011/2/23/choosing-a-camera.html

Peace
Peter

http://www.peteranthonyphotography.com

which is why a good relyable preferably independent camera shop is worth its weight in gold

phonebook said:

which is why a good relyable preferably independent camera shop is worth its weight in gold

Click to expand...

that's why I love my job!

Corros said:

How do you choose which type of camera you or somebody else wants? (not make or something).

Click to expand...

I ask them what it's for, what's their budget, are they in it to win it or do they just want to press a button. Just those three questions narrows it down quite a bit.

For half my point-and-shoot friends, it's usually safe to say "You won't need anything that costs more than $250, just go down to Costco and pick one of the big names" (Pentax/Nikon/Canon/Olympus/Panasonic...) since chances are they'll never tell the difference. They do just want to press the button, and they'll never even dive into the menus or program modes. I might send them a list of the top picks from various sites and magazines just to be on the safe side.

For the serious ones, first you figure out what they're trying to achieve (portraits? action? landscapes? does it have to fit in a pocket?) and you start talking lenses and systems. Then bodies.

Irrespective of budget, I think most buyers want a camera to be able to cope with everything and provide perfect results, whether they realise it or not.

Of course, EVERY camera/lens is a compromise on some level and it is the fear that the one occasion when you really need the camera to perform it is the area of most compromise!

It seems an unfortunate truth, often illustrated in graphic detail in these forums, that we agonise over failings and what we might miss, rather than the extraordinary abilities of modern cameras.

So, next time you are faced with an uncertain customer, remind him that we can never capture every moment, but to accept the limitations; a case of a glass half full rather than half empty, if you will.

--
2011 : My new year's resolution -
To be positive, not negative.
To help, not to hinder.
To praise, not to criticise.

No need to confuse them with a bloated over-priced DSLR or its menus and settings, and even more confusing lens and flash stuff. When they break their Canon G-thing, they can get another without selling the house on a second mortgage. Give the consumer too much and they will screw it up or overly think it to the point the IQ is less than stellar off any point-and-shoot. Besides, they'll spend a week shooting their len's hood and complaining about 1 hot pixel.

Nice thing that Canon restricted the lousy ends of the lens performance on the G-series and set the shutter speeds so high so they get sharper images than on a DSLR too.

That said, sometimes I grab the Canon G-something since I am almost guaranteed the shot will come out better than slide-ruling and thinking through the DSLR stuff. Anything short of a Nikon D3x and some Nikkor $10,000 lens locked into Auto-All will perform far worse.

Or sell them some 8x10 Linhof with a digital back for $200,000 just to impress the Jone's family next door. Size does far more to impress than any brand will. Sadly, size does matter to many over IQ too.

Mack

phonebook said:

which is why a good relyable preferably independent camera shop is worth its weight in gold

Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more with you. Independent retailers get to know their clients well by developing a long term relationship with them, relatively speaking, and can then help them make a choice that's best for them. I think that is sorely lacking with the larger chain retailers.

Peace
Peter

http://www.peteranthonyphotography.com

An appreciation for size is certainly part of some markets. ILC is only some 7-9% of the US market compared to almost 50% in Japan.

I participate to an ILC forum and I am negatively impressed by people jumping ship all the time, deluding themselves that they'll buy better with another brand.

I think it is typical of Internet sales, and that local feature by which you can buy a camera, try it and then return it. Not a few are doing this at the same time with different cameras. I never heard so far a European doing it, perhaps the mail or regulations discourage it and I am not even trying it. So I am taking a bigger risk.

Brick and mortar shops in my city, Rome, are almost disappearing: they can't compete with German prices on the internet, and mostly sell P&S. No ILC to be seen in their shop windows.

Consumerism and instant digital image has almost killed photography, in the sense that many don't know the fundamentals about exposure, dynamic range, lights, composition but generally attribute their mistakes to the camera, instead of their lack of knowledge. Therefore the frantic search for a better magic wand, with a different brand.

Just a parting note about ILC. They made me rediscover MF, which with an EVF is fast and accurate. Therefore my main customer activity is now in the local fleamarket or ebay. I wish I could open a stall or a shop dedicated to legacy lenses only, with choice dictated only by the beauty of the optics. ILC short distance to flange was a game changer: my camera can take more than 300 lenses of any brand. That's where the fun is for me, given that the price is an order of magnitude less than current AF lenses.

Am.
--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric

amalric said:

Consumerism and instant digital image has almost killed photography, in the sense that many don't know the fundamentals about exposure, dynamic range, lights, composition but generally attribute their mistakes to the camera, instead of their lack of knowledge. Therefore the frantic search for a better magic wand, with a different brand.

Click to expand...

I disagree with this. Since there are more cameras than ever (in phones etc), there is more photography than ever, so by sheer volume, photography is less dead than ever. Yes, you can question whether quantity is quality, but because the volumes are so large, naturally there is a growing volume of people who want to do better. Some will think that means spend more money, but many will know that means upgrading thoughtfully. A quick Google search bears this out:

amalric said:

Tens of millions of additional families are expected to upgrade from compact digicams...According to many studies, it’s definitely such upgraders who are responsible for the annual 25 percent increase in digital SLR sales...

Click to expand...

Some figures I found showed ILC/SLR sales growing faster than pocket camera sales. Again, some percentage of this will merely be throwing money at the problem, but a good percentage of those people will try to use their SLR intelligently.

Even among my friends there are those asking me about cameras because they want to take better pictures, and I am sure these friends never would have bothered in the film days. This is not "almost killing" photography, not when so many people are so curious about taking better pictures. This is a "teachable moment," an opportunity to tell them what photography is really about, and that it is not really about the gadget at all. My local photo school has been expanding to accommodate everyone who wants in. There is no sign of "almost killed photography" that I can see, only a vast expansion of the market and photographers brought on by the democratization of photography by its very ubiquity.

IMHO, and I have seen this over and over, and as much as I hate to say it, a huge majority of the camera-buying public are intellectually lazy. Too lazy to RTFM and truly learn their camera, and too lazy to properly learn about photography. They just want to be ably to press the buttons and have the camera magically produce award-winning photos.

SteveJL said:

IMHO, and I have seen this over and over, and as much as I hate to say it, a huge majority of the camera-buying public are intellectually lazy. Too lazy to RTFM and truly learn their camera, and too lazy to properly learn about photography. They just want to be ably to press the buttons and have the camera magically produce award-winning photos.

Click to expand...

I give you a THUMB UP for your opinion! You're perfectly right: I'm just a hobbyist in photography, but I always took the basic approach that I had to read and test more in order to understand how my camera worked. For instance I got this Moon image with the Olympus SP-800UZ, a camera that didn't even have an M mode:

Nice Moon BTW.

What I really meant, is that the OP argument, people being confused about what to buy in my mind brings about the matter of learning photography before even buying a camera. I remember that while learning darkroom techniques my photographer friends almost made it compulsory that I read the great Feininger.

In the digital age it's even simpler and cheaper. See this:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/

In film one had to learn beforehand because the results of bad technique would be bad, while being expensive.

However if one factors in the cost of scrapping a digital camera and buying a new one every 3 months, as some are doing, One would avoid much expense by choosing a camera according to one's proficiency.

When I bought my first digital dSLR it took me a learning curve of one year to master it, although I was already proficient in photography. There is no way one learns a camera with hundred of settings in 3 months. Nor the scattergun approach will solve anything.

Neither in shooting nor in buying compulsively a new camera, in the illusion of solving a photographic problem, be it sharpness of low light performance, two of the most common and exaggerated problems.

These are not assumptions, this is the reality of NG, where P&Shooters try to grasp ILC technique, give up almost immediately, shaming their camera and jump ship. Great for camera makers, but a sad waste just the same. Even to the Environment.

Am.

--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric

amalric said:

Nice Moon BTW.

What I really meant, is that the OP argument, people being confused about what to buy in my mind brings about the matter of learning photography before even buying a camera. I remember that while learning darkroom techniques my photographer friends almost made it compulsory that I read the great Feininger.

In the digital age it's even simpler and cheaper. See this:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/

In film one had to learn beforehand because the results of bad technique would be bad, while being expensive.

However if one factors in the cost of scrapping a digital camera and buying a new one every 3 months, as some are doing, One would avoid much expense by choosing a camera according to one's proficiency.

When I bought my first digital dSLR it took me a learning curve of one year to master it, although I was already proficient in photography. There is no way one learns a camera with hundred of settings in 3 months. Nor the scattergun approach will solve anything.

Neither in shooting nor in buying compulsively a new camera, in the illusion of solving a photographic problem, be it sharpness of low light performance, two of the most common and exaggerated problems.

These are not assumptions, this is the reality of NG, where P&Shooters try to grasp ILC technique, give up almost immediately, shaming their camera and jump ship. Great for camera makers, but a sad waste just the same. Even to the Environment.

Am.

--
Photostream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/amalric

Click to expand...

You're right that now in the digital era when learning is so easy (btw, thank you very much for the link, I've only had a look at the excellent tutorials there, I'll read them later) people tend to be more and more gear-prone instead of knowledge-prone.

In the film camera time the lack of the basic photo knowledge would spoil entire rolls and they weren't cheap too. Now only the LATEST camera model will do and unfortunetely the makers and reviewers are encouraging this trend...

amalric said:

Brick and mortar shops in my city, Rome, are almost disappearing: they can't compete with German prices on the internet, and mostly sell P&S. No ILC to be seen in their shop windows.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately it's no different in most parts of the world. Much of the U.S. has lost brick-and-mortar camera stores to online retailers or New York superstores.

amalric said:

Consumerism and instant digital image has almost killed photography, in the sense that many don't know the fundamentals about exposure, dynamic range, lights, composition but generally attribute their mistakes to the camera, instead of their lack of knowledge. Therefore the frantic search for a better magic wand, with a different brand.

Click to expand...

I agree with you in a sense there - while the poster above correctly noted that photography in the most general sense is thriving, in that far more people are partaking of photography and buying more cameras - certainly taking more photos than ever before, it is a rare and precious few that have any idea what the camera settings mean and how they affect the shot.

amalric said:

Just a parting note about ILC. They made me rediscover MF, which with an EVF is fast and accurate. Therefore my main customer activity is now in the local fleamarket or ebay. I wish I could open a stall or a shop dedicated to legacy lenses only, with choice dictated only by the beauty of the optics. ILC short distance to flange was a game changer: my camera can take more than 300 lenses of any brand. That's where the fun is for me, given that the price is an order of magnitude less than current AF lenses.

Click to expand...

I must agree there too. Funny, I bought into an ILC last month for no other reason than wanting a third camera to bridge the gap between my large DSLR kit and my ultracompact pocket cam - something with more quality and capability than the compact, but more compact and portable than the DSLR - but not replacing either. I knew of the manual lens popularity, and even reasoned that I'd probably go ahead and get at least 1 adapter to use my old Pentax K-mount lenses gathering dust in my closet from my old ME Super. When I got around to slapping those old lenses on the new ILC body, it was a revelation - how fun and how nostalgic to rotate an aperture ring to the desired setting, then turn that focus ring to focus. Not that I haven't manually focused on my DSLRs as I often do - but it's more of a fall back - I go to it when AF can't get the shot. Now, MF was not just a backup option, but the only way to get the shot...and it was incredibly fun and involving. My intention was to have the ILC kit lens, and maybe the adapter to pair with my existing Pentax lenses. Not even a month later, I've picked up another adapter and 6 more manual lenses...now my ILC kit has 11 lenses, and is likely to continue to grow. Not only is the art of manual focus and manual setting so fun again, but seeing some brilliant and forgotten optics gain a new life. I even bought a great old lens with some fungus inside, and for the first time opened up a lens and cleaned it out myself - something i've never done before and had no knowledge or skill for - yet it too was fun and challenging, and the result was a wonderful fast, sharp prime brought back to life.

--
Justin
galleries: http://www.pbase.com/zackiedawg