Nikon snobbery is typical

Anthony Agee · Jun 18, 2003

As a former Nikon film SLR devotee, I can tell you that what you experienced at that shop is pretty typical.

The simple fact is that in the year 2003, with photography heading nowhere BUT digital, Sony has the technological edge over the Nikons and the Canons. They can produce and manufacture superior cameras for less money. Yes, they're dumbed down for the folks at Best Buy. Yes, Nikons are aimed more at the "pro". But Nikon SIMPLY cannot compete with Sony in anything less than the Digital SLR field. Anybody who is picked up and used a Nikon 5700 and then used a 717 knows what I am talking about. The 5700 has laughable low-light performance and a shutter simply too slow for any prosumer.

Yes it hurts to say this. Yes, I miss my days as a N70/N90 snob with $800 lenses. Yes, I hate to be confused with Joe Schmoe and his $200 Sony special taking shots of flowers on a cloudy day, but the bottom line is, and Phil Askey even says so in his review, the 717 is superior to every other 5 mp camera on the market.

It won't be too many years before Nikon or Canon will be a subsidiary of Sony....Sony will market their upscale cameras as "Nikons". Just you wait. It is unfortunate, but inevetible.

Anthony Agee · Jun 18, 2003

ack...sorry...I meant this to be a reply to another thread.

Anthony Agee said:
As a former Nikon film SLR devotee, I can tell you that what you
experienced at that shop is pretty typical.

The simple fact is that in the year 2003, with photography heading
nowhere BUT digital, Sony has the technological edge over the
Nikons and the Canons. They can produce and manufacture superior
cameras for less money. Yes, they're dumbed down for the folks at
Best Buy. Yes, Nikons are aimed more at the "pro". But Nikon SIMPLY
cannot compete with Sony in anything less than the Digital SLR
field. Anybody who is picked up and used a Nikon 5700 and then
used a 717 knows what I am talking about. The 5700 has laughable
low-light performance and a shutter simply too slow for any
prosumer.

Yes it hurts to say this. Yes, I miss my days as a N70/N90 snob
with $800 lenses. Yes, I hate to be confused with Joe Schmoe and
his $200 Sony special taking shots of flowers on a cloudy day, but
the bottom line is, and Phil Askey even says so in his review, the
717 is superior to every other 5 mp camera on the market.

It won't be too many years before Nikon or Canon will be a
subsidiary of Sony....Sony will market their upscale cameras as
"Nikons". Just you wait. It is unfortunate, but inevetible.

JoeSchmoe · Jun 18, 2003

Careful what you say about Joe Schmoe, or taking shots of flowers on a cloudy day. Lol.

Anthony Agee said:
Yes it hurts to say this. Yes, I miss my days as a N70/N90 snob
with $800 lenses. Yes, I hate to be confused with Joe Schmoe and
his $200 Sony special taking shots of flowers on a cloudy day, but
the bottom line is, and Phil Askey even says so in his review, the
717 is superior to every other 5 mp camera on the market.

hip2 · Jun 18, 2003

purple fringing alert !

JoeSchmoe said:
Anthony Agee said:

Yes it hurts to say this. Yes, I miss my days as a N70/N90 snob
with $800 lenses. Yes, I hate to be confused with Joe Schmoe and
his $200 Sony special taking shots of flowers on a cloudy day, but
the bottom line is, and Phil Askey even says so in his review, the
717 is superior to every other 5 mp camera on the market.

Click to expand...

snooter · Jun 18, 2003

When I first read it, it took me a moment to realize he wasn't taking a cheap shot at you JoeSchmoe. I was trying to think when I saw you post a crappy flower photo from a cloudy day. darn monikers......

JoeSchmoe said:
Careful what you say about Joe Schmoe, or taking shots of flowers
on a cloudy day. Lol.

Anthony Agee said:

Yes it hurts to say this. Yes, I miss my days as a N70/N90 snob
with $800 lenses. Yes, I hate to be confused with Joe Schmoe and
his $200 Sony special taking shots of flowers on a cloudy day, but
the bottom line is, and Phil Askey even says so in his review, the
717 is superior to every other 5 mp camera on the market.

Click to expand...

Anthony Agee · Jun 18, 2003

lol! sorry I wasn't talking about you or that photo....which doesn't look bad at all.

JoeSchmoe · Jun 18, 2003

Anthony Agee said:
lol! sorry I wasn't talking about you or that photo....which
doesn't look bad at all.

Akkers · Jun 18, 2003

I am sorry, but I disagree with you.

Whilst Nikon and Cannon have a pedigree in optics, Sony has come from integrated circuits and this shows in some of their poor efforts so far (hell they cant get the focus right in 4 years). If you want a snap-happy camera and a posing toy - go for a Sony. If you after a real camera and glass you better look at Nikon and Cannon. You only have to look at these forums to realise how many people are moving to the Nikon/Cannon camps.

My bad experiences and frustrations with 505v and 717 mean that I will never buy a Sony camera again. Thats the bottom line as far as I am concerned.

Capital Man · Jun 18, 2003

Anthony Agee said:
As a former Nikon film SLR devotee, I can tell you that what you
experienced at that shop is pretty typical.

Nikon is OK for news and sports photoraphy, but serious photographers won't settle for anything less than Contax.

lisafx · Jun 18, 2003

JoeSchmoe said:
Careful what you say about Joe Schmoe, or taking shots of flowers
on a cloudy day. Lol.

LOL! I'm glad you caught that Joe. It took me a minute to realize he was not talking about you, but more John Doe (sorry if there's a John Doe here...) ;-)

Lisa
--
LisaFX
http://www.pbase.com/lisafx
Canon S20, Sony S75, F707

lisafx · Jun 18, 2003

Akkers said:
I am sorry, but I disagree with you.

Whilst Nikon and Cannon have a pedigree in optics, Sony has come
from integrated circuits and this shows in some of their poor
efforts so far (hell they cant get the focus right in 4 years). If
you want a snap-happy camera and a posing toy - go for a Sony. If
you after a real camera and glass you better look at Nikon and
Cannon. You only have to look at these forums to realise how many
people are moving to the Nikon/Cannon camps.

Akkers, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and I remember the problems you had with the 717. Still, it is ridiculous to insult all Sony cameras because you had a bad experience. The only Sony users I am aware of who have gone to Nikon or Canon from this forum have done so because they are upgrading to a DSLR. Since Sony doesn't make a DSLR, it would obviously follow that they would have to get a different brand. Most of them seem to still maintain that the 717 is the best camera in its class. If you want to see what kind of "snapshot" people take with this "posing toy" I invite you to check out the Challenge galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/stfchallenge

Lisa

--
LisaFX
http://www.pbase.com/lisafx
Canon S20, Sony S75, F707

JohnK · Jun 18, 2003

Things change so quickly in the digital camera world, remember when the Coolpix 990 was Time Magazine's "Machine of the Year? They could find themselves on top again, but right now, for my money it's the Sony 7*7.

Anthony Agee said:
As a former Nikon film SLR devotee, I can tell you that what you
experienced at that shop is pretty typical.

The simple fact is that in the year 2003, with photography heading
nowhere BUT digital, Sony has the technological edge over the
Nikons and the Canons. They can produce and manufacture superior
cameras for less money. Yes, they're dumbed down for the folks at
Best Buy. Yes, Nikons are aimed more at the "pro". But Nikon SIMPLY
cannot compete with Sony in anything less than the Digital SLR
field. Anybody who is picked up and used a Nikon 5700 and then
used a 717 knows what I am talking about. The 5700 has laughable
low-light performance and a shutter simply too slow for any
prosumer.

Yes it hurts to say this. Yes, I miss my days as a N70/N90 snob
with $800 lenses. Yes, I hate to be confused with Joe Schmoe and
his $200 Sony special taking shots of flowers on a cloudy day, but
the bottom line is, and Phil Askey even says so in his review, the
717 is superior to every other 5 mp camera on the market.

It won't be too many years before Nikon or Canon will be a
subsidiary of Sony....Sony will market their upscale cameras as
"Nikons". Just you wait. It is unfortunate, but inevetible.

--
JohnK

Capital Man · Jun 18, 2003

JohnK said:
Things change so quickly in the digital camera world, remember when
the Coolpix 990 was Time Magazine's "Machine of the Year? They
could find themselves on top again, but right now, for my money
it's the Sony 7*7.

The Sony 7x7 is a huge leap over the Coolpix 99x.

Capital Man · Jun 18, 2003

Akkers said:
I am sorry, but I disagree with you.

Whilst Nikon and Cannon have a pedigree in optics, Sony has come
from integrated circuits and this shows in some of their poor
efforts so far (hell they cant get the focus right in 4 years). If
you want a snap-happy camera and a posing toy - go for a Sony. If
you after a real camera and glass you better look at Nikon and
Cannon. You only have to look at these forums to realise how many
people are moving to the Nikon/Cannon camps.

Sony uses Carl Zeiss optics for its top model digicams. They are far superior to whats on the Nikon "prosumer" cameras.

Furthermore, in the 35mm world, Contax Carl Zeiss lenses blow away Nikon and Canon (but Nikon and Canon have the better camera bodies).

tai · Jun 18, 2003

Everyone is entitled to an opinion and here is mine.

Nikon and Canon, among several other brands, make great lenses for their SLRs, which are also great. My brother and I have used several Canon SLRs and loved them. Canon's lenses, and from what I've seen of Nikon lenses, match very expensive ones from Germany.

But it's clear from long, careful monitoring of Nikon's line of non-SLR digicams that Nikon has not been as aggressive as Sony in putting out top-notch products. One can't even say that their digicam lenses are being held back by poor electronics because of the purple fringing common to a lot of their digicams, a sure sign of a non-optimal lens. In contrast, the lens on the 717, 707, 505v, and 505 are unreproachable, offering fantastic optical quality from wide to tele.

I won't even delve into why Nikons can't seem to get rid of the overblown highlights problem so often seen in Phil's tests here.

Anyone who dismisses Sony and praise Nikon simply because of their respective "pedigrees" are doing a disservice to themselves. I don't know what problems you have had with your 717, but my experience with a 505v and a 707 reflect the experience of many here, which is that Sony's high-end digicams are incomparable to others in their price range.

Tai

Akkers said:
I am sorry, but I disagree with you.

Whilst Nikon and Cannon have a pedigree in optics, Sony has come
from integrated circuits and this shows in some of their poor
efforts so far (hell they cant get the focus right in 4 years). If
you want a snap-happy camera and a posing toy - go for a Sony. If
you after a real camera and glass you better look at Nikon and
Cannon. You only have to look at these forums to realise how many
people are moving to the Nikon/Cannon camps.

My bad experiences and frustrations with 505v and 717 mean that I
will never buy a Sony camera again. Thats the bottom line as far as
I am concerned.

JoeSchmoe · Jun 18, 2003

lisa, you said it so well that i have little to add. these overly general bashes at one brand and paens to others really add nothing substantive to the debate over the merits or demerits of a particular camera. my loyalty is to getting great results from a camera, not to camera pedigree. after all, if it weren't for innovative new comers, there would be less innovation. the low-light focusing of the 717 with the HAF, for example, is a positive, if imperfect, solution to a problem that i do not believe nikon and cannon prosumer cameras have overcome.

lisafx said:
Akkers said:

I am sorry, but I disagree with you.

Whilst Nikon and Cannon have a pedigree in optics, Sony has come
from integrated circuits and this shows in some of their poor
efforts so far (hell they cant get the focus right in 4 years). If
you want a snap-happy camera and a posing toy - go for a Sony. If
you after a real camera and glass you better look at Nikon and
Cannon. You only have to look at these forums to realise how many
people are moving to the Nikon/Cannon camps.

Click to expand...

Akkers, you are certainly entitled to your opinion, and I remember
the problems you had with the 717. Still, it is ridiculous to
insult all Sony cameras because you had a bad experience. The only
Sony users I am aware of who have gone to Nikon or Canon from this
forum have done so because they are upgrading to a DSLR. Since
Sony doesn't make a DSLR, it would obviously follow that they would
have to get a different brand. Most of them seem to still maintain
that the 717 is the best camera in its class. If you want to see
what kind of "snapshot" people take with this "posing toy" I invite
you to check out the Challenge galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/stfchallenge

Lisa

--
LisaFX
http://www.pbase.com/lisafx
Canon S20, Sony S75, F707

Anthony Agee · Jun 18, 2003

I don't even own a Sony Digicam, I'm actually a Canon guy getting ready to buy a 717.

Are you implying that the Nikon prosumer cameras have a superior lens to the 717? The 717 coupled to the Carl Zeiss "glass" (typical camera snob term) is faster and sharper than anything Nikon is putting out for those of us who aren't willing to pony up $2000 for the digital SLRs Nikon offers.

I've had frustrations with all digital cameras, none are perfect yet. There is no greater frustration for a photographer than a slow auto-focus and shutter lag, both of which are exhibited by 717's main competitor, the 5700.

Akkers said:
I am sorry, but I disagree with you.

Whilst Nikon and Cannon have a pedigree in optics, Sony has come
from integrated circuits and this shows in some of their poor
efforts so far (hell they cant get the focus right in 4 years). If
you want a snap-happy camera and a posing toy - go for a Sony. If
you after a real camera and glass you better look at Nikon and
Cannon. You only have to look at these forums to realise how many
people are moving to the Nikon/Cannon camps.

My bad experiences and frustrations with 505v and 717 mean that I
will never buy a Sony camera again. Thats the bottom line as far as
I am concerned.

Anthony Agee · Jun 18, 2003

Capital Man said:
Anthony Agee said:

As a former Nikon film SLR devotee, I can tell you that what you
experienced at that shop is pretty typical.

Click to expand...

Nikon is OK for news and sports photoraphy, but serious
photographers won't settle for anything less than Contax.

Certainly.

I don't profess to be anything other than strictly amateur, but the large majority of the people who talk down to Sony users are the average Nikon/Canon user and/or camera store employee. There is another thread in this forum which was nearly a perfect reproduction of my experience in a camera store where the store essentially told the consumer that the Sony cameras were "toys"...which is exactly what they pitched to me as they tried to steer me to buy the 5700 with the retarded lens rather than the quicker, cheaper, better 717.

Dennis · Jun 18, 2003

Anthony Agee said:
I don't profess to be anything other than strictly amateur, but the
large majority of the people who talk down to Sony users are the
average Nikon/Canon user and/or camera store employee.

Funny - on the Minolta group, they think Sony is just consumer toy stuff, too ... with their "RAW" format and high speed capture on D7hi. Of course, they'll argue that the 28-200 is the best thing in the world (lens speed apparently doesn't matter) and that whole noise issue and the lousy resolution scores relative to other 5MP cameras are "overblown" and "don't really matter in prints". Must be after getting looked down on by Nikon/Canon film users (and certainly DSLR users) for all those years, they like to look down on someone else

I see too many talented photographers do amazing things with any of these cameras (different brands as well as "low end" models) to beat up on any of them. I think overall, Nikon is still trying to "find its way" digitally, while Canon seems to have it together the most (out of all the traditional camera manufacturers). Sony seems to have distinct advantages in producing products in this market, and it amazes me to see how many "non-photographer" people I meet have chosen Sony digicams over Canon/Nikon/Minolta/Pentax/others.

Dennis

Anthony Agee · Jun 18, 2003

I agree with everything said here.

I, too, was once guilty of refusing to even take a look at Sony cameras but it wasn't until I held one in my hands and used it as well as read the reviews here that I understood that things have changed a bit.

Honestly, 5 minutes with the 5700's menu system back-to-back with the Sony's said all I needed to know: Sony knows how to make great consumer products that are easy to learn to use.

I also think Canon has made the best transition to the digital realm. I just wish Canon had a camera to fight the 717/7Hi/5700. The G5 should be nice, but lacks the optical zoom I'm looking for.

Dennis said:
I see too many talented photographers do amazing things with any of
these cameras (different brands as well as "low end" models) to
beat up on any of them. I think overall, Nikon is still trying to
"find its way" digitally, while Canon seems to have it together the
most (out of all the traditional camera manufacturers). Sony seems
to have distinct advantages in producing products in this market,
and it amazes me to see how many "non-photographer" people I meet
have chosen Sony digicams over Canon/Nikon/Minolta/Pentax/others.

Dennis

Nikon snobbery is typical

Member

Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Leading Member

Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

tai

Guest

Senior Member

Member

Member

Forum Pro

Member

Keyboard shortcuts