Will the "new" Nikon D7100 lower the price....

Started Feb 24, 2013 | Discussions thread
jnxr Junior Member • Posts: 33
Re: Will the "new" Nikon D7100 lower the price....

bobn2 wrote:

TTMartin wrote:

bobn2 wrote:

TTMartin wrote:

His name is Josh Cruz and he was the speaker who did the presentation on The Future of Science and Technology Careers in Asia and the Philippines.

Well, assuming that is true, it is not exactly clear from the 'evidence' that he presents, is it? So far, we only have your word for who he is, and even if he is this 'Josh Cruz', just working for Intel, presumably in their PR department (or for a consultancy, possibly called 'Connecta') doesn't mean he has any technical knowledge of image sensors. His posts simply don't have the 'look and feel' of a real semiconductor engineer, he can't use the basic vocabulary of that trade.

But, like most things you couldn't figure that out.

I figure out a good deal too much for the the liking of the nonsense peddlers like you. Its totally in your brand-loyalis interests to convince people that my posts are garbled and yours and his nonsense posts are the truth, so that's just what you do. All you convince are those just like you.

-- hide signature --


I know you think you know so much that you don't need to read websites,

So, you believe everything on every website you read? Yes or no? In 'no', how would you decide which web sites to believe, and which not? My answer would be that you can only do so by understanding what is behind the web sites. I've learned a lot from web sites, I've also seen many full of nonsense and misinformation. I have seen web sites written buy people who know a lot more than me, and plenty by people who know a lot less. There is no regulatory body for websites that ensures that they are all good information, so you have to be conversant with the subject material to judge.

and would prefer to continue in your fantasy world making up where he might work. But, if you actual read something instead of just making things up you would have seen that he is an Intel Engineer.

Not proven. He doesn't claim to be an engineer himself, he claims to be a 'manager'.

From the article:
“You really are on the right track,” said Intel engineer Josh Cruz as he spoke to the visiting finalists.

So the author of a web-sete calls him an 'engineer', which tells us nothing at all really.

Also, I love your deflection techniques:

Ignore the semi-conductor engineers question about your qualifications.

It's very unlikely that he is a semiconductor engineer. Intel employs over 100,000 people. I am sure amongst that demographic there are some real boneheads, every organisation has them. In any case, it does not have a fab line in the Philippines, it has them in the USA, Ireland, Israel and China. It used to have a test and packaging plant in the Philippines, but that was closed a few years ago. What it has in the Philippines is a sales office dealing with PC and server components and systems. It's highly unlikely that anyone working for such an operation is a 'semiconductor engineer'. Also, it's really quite unprofessional for someone to drag their employer into discussions onto a public website, dealing with private concerns, as here. I have no intention of bringing my employer into this discussion. Save to say, my level of qualification is easily adequate to be able to write with some authority on these things, and has been peer assessed to be so.

Accuse me of being a brand loyalist, while you a Nikon user are in a Canon forum defending Nikon's products.

I'm a Canon user in a Canon forum talking about Canon cameras. I don't 'defend' Nikon products, I just correct the calumnies that some of the brand loyalist like to spread. I do the same on Nikon forums with respect to Canon products and get the same reaction from the Nikon brand loyalists. I'm used to it - it just shows you all up to be extremely silly.

You claim you don't 'believing the marketing hype of referring to websites', yet you have almost a cult like loyalty to DxOMark.com.

Not at all. I recgnise DxO for what it is, its strengas and weaknesses. It has both, but I am able to work out where its data is useful and where it isn't, rather than making my decisions on brand loyalty and emotional attachment.

Instead of being so full of yourself, and posting meaningless self-glorifying drivel, why don't you go to some other forum and try to make a positive contribution. Since, you are NOT doing that here.

It's not a positive contribution for you, but then your aim is to spread brand loyalist misinformation. For anyone trying to make an informed, even-handed equipment choice, informed, even-handed information is a boon, so I fully intend to keep on doing what I do, and challenge the version of 'truth' put forward by the likes of you and our 'senior manager' friend at every opportunity.

-- hide signature --


-- hide signature --

bobn2 wrote:

My own view is that how anyone chooses to spend their own money is completely up to them ,as is their own taste, and equipment choice. To my mind the single most important thing about a camera, the thing that in the end has the biggest effect on your photography, is how much you feel comfortable with your own camera, even how much pride you have in it. That is a completely different thing for everybody, and people really shouldn't be trying to impose their own views on others. That's when I tend to come into these discussion, when someone tries to validate their own choice by claiming that some data that doesn't show it up so good is false, or putting out spurious data that says theres is better. All you are doing by that is putting down someone else's choice. As in this case, where the proposition is that the 7D's AF is 'better' than the D7000's (or D7100's) because it has 19 cross points. Well, that doesn't prove anything at all, as I pointed out. I don't know which is better. Over on the Nikon forums I'm arguing against people saying the Nikon cameras a 'better' because they have a metal chassis against the Canon plastic chassis, and I say 'no', there is nothing that guarantees metal is better than plastic.

In the end, if people who have already made their choice, or will only ever choose one thing would stop forever trying to justify their choice by doing the alternatives down, then things would be better.

-- hide signature --


Thank you for sharing all this information which I find valuable while making a camera choice. TTMartin, if you do not have anything to refute bob's argument, then please choose to stay out of the discussion. I appreciate the time taken by bob to put forth whatever he had observed. The same information is now available to us for personal review and understanding. Accepting the same information is another story, as a matter of fact, accepting any information depends on the persons perspective. If you believe the information is wrong, then please provide a well informed explanation to your point. If not, please do not go about picking on the person, and calling him a troll.

Bob, I would like to mention that I do feel that metal is stronger than plastic. While this does not guarantee that it makes it better at overall strength or weather sealing, and may only be little more than a marketing gimmick by the camera manufacturers, I do prefer that my camera bodies are made out of metal rather than plastic. It is a matter of personal choice, and I believe that there are a few others like me who feel the same way even if we are never going to get anywhere close to the breaking point of a plastic or metal camera.

Also, it does not explain why camera manufacturers use metal for all of their high end models. They could just do with plastic as it is cheaper, and it should provide almost the same degree of strength and durability. It may be a marketing gimmick, but it works on me.

For some, the material may be irrelevant, but certainly not for me, and those like myself. Imagine the 1Dx made out of plastic! It may be just a feel, and nothing more than the fact that its metal, but some of us prefer it that way, and that makes it an advantage for similar minded people.


Regarding the price of the 7D mark II, they need to price it right. The 7D is already an awesome camera, but if the new one costs close to $2k, it would certainly seem overpriced. Somewhere around $1.5K-$1.6K with 10 fps would make it killer. I just hope they do away with the 1.6x crop factor, as they did with the 1.3x APSH crop. If they do intend to keep it at 1.6x, then they should come out with bodies which have a 1.3x crop factor too, at a new price point, like say $1.6K, then there would be a lot of takers. We all want the best what we can get for our money, and when the competition seems to offer more, Canon need to take note, and provide a good response, otherwise they are going to lose ground. Its inevitable.

Because of the 7100's price, Canon can't possibly think they can sell more of their 60D successor if they price it at the same 1.2K, unless they have something compelling to offer. Unlike the full frame lineup, the 60D lineup is something which is considered by a lot of beginners to DSLR photography, and they might not consider the 70D, if its not similar specd as the 7100, but the cost is just right up there. They can get away with the price on FF bodies, but not the Mid range DX. This is an important segment, which they just cannot afford to lose. Lets see if they price it as they people expect them to.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow