Interesting article posted by Kirk Tuck...All the cameras are better than you are

Started Mar 4, 2014 | Discussions
Bhima78 Senior Member • Posts: 2,819
Re: Unnecessary....
1

Guy Parsons wrote:

Kirk Tuck wrote:

facts is facts mate.

True, it is the truth, but it is unnecessary in the context.

The true reason why larger cameras to M4/3 are preferred in USA (and even now in China) is the common belief that "bigger is better" in those countries. It's zero to do with education standards.

Regards...... Guy

And honestly, m4/3 and other mirrorless cameras have just recently become competitive performance wise to DSLRs. Especially the progress in focusing.

 Bhima78's gear list:Bhima78's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M10 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS Sigma 60mm F2.8 DN Art +7 more
DonSC Senior Member • Posts: 1,032
No idea what it is

but Canon and Nikon shooters just don't get the advantages. It's like the whole idea that a mirrorless camera might be better in some respects just doesn't compute for them. It's funny but also sad.

Jack Hass Regular Member • Posts: 392
Re: Pretty sure that's just Kirk's sense of humor ;)
2

danstroud wrote:

Although maybe there is a direct correlation between education rates and M4/3 adoption. Hmm…

As long as you are calling me smart i agree 

-- hide signature --

May Satan forever guide you.

MOD Tom Caldwell Forum Pro • Posts: 37,055
Straight from the heart
2

DaveLemi wrote:

This is well thought out and delves into what is sufficient-

http://ripecamera.blogspot.com/2014/03/all-cameras-are-better-than-you-are.html

Kirk's site-

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2014/03/important-announcement-from-ceo-of.html

Quite true, straight from the heart and truth should not offend.  I also think that almost any camera on the market might be good enough for the purpose its user might need.

But from the dawn of photography there has been this primal urge that if better gear is bought then the images will be better without any more application than simply pressing the shutter  (to a point this might een be true). This always sells camera gear and this forum and all others is 99% devoted to finding and recommending that new lens or camera that will make that one magic image of a lifetime.

More often just that one-time lucky catch.  In target shooting the idea is to find the bulls eye and then continue to do it.  Does not quite relate to photography skills which are more related to if you take enough images there is bound to be a good one in there somewhere, ammo is cheap.  Give a target shooter a machine gun and he is bound to hit the bulls eye sooner or later.

Of course it might be a male version of "a new pair of shoes will make me happier".  

-- hide signature --

Tom Caldwell

Jack Hass Regular Member • Posts: 392
Re: No idea what it is
1

DonSC wrote:

but Canon and Nikon shooters just don't get the advantages. It's like the whole idea that a mirrorless camera might be better in some respects just doesn't compute for them. It's funny but also sad.

I think there is a lot of pride associated with purchases. Some people more than others, like to think they made the smart choice when so many others didn't. That pride is the same reason they chose that system long ago, they thought it would elevate them to new hights in competition. To admit another system is better at something is to admit they are using an inferior object, and that they might have misjudged. Psychology plays a huge part in brand choice, more than one might imagine. An interesting article HERE, when i read it i couldn't help but picture Canikon owners with massive cameras, suspended from the neck by massive neck straps.

Ive read stuff like this for years, and i try to do just the opposite. I pay no attention to fluff advertisement. I pay attention to the practical issues users and reviewers discuss. If it doesn't apply to me, i could care less. This is why the massive lens selection of Canon and Nikon doesn't sway me, i will never spend $4k on any lens. MFT has very nice lenses for good prices. If i were a pro i may feel different, but im not.

-- hide signature --

May Satan forever guide you.

gak44 Regular Member • Posts: 300
Re: Unnecessary....
3

Bhima78 wrote:

And honestly, m4/3 and other mirrorless cameras have just recently become competitive performance wise to DSLRs. Especially the progress in focusing.

Not when value-for-money enters the equation.

I switched to M43 forthe size and weight advantages, and then only because of worsening arthritis. Dollar for dollar Canon and Nikon DSLRs offer better performance.

 gak44's gear list:gak44's gear list
Sony RX100 III Panasonic FZ1000 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 +9 more
MOD Tom Caldwell Forum Pro • Posts: 37,055
Re: Unnecessary....

Guy Parsons wrote:

Kirk Tuck wrote:

facts is facts mate.

True, it is the truth, but it is unnecessary in the context.

The true reason why larger cameras to M4/3 are preferred in USA (and even now in China) is the common belief that "bigger is better" in those countries. It's zero to do with education standards.

Regards...... Guy

I read the gist of Kirk's article as that most reasonable quality cameras used intelligently and within their original design parameters are more than ample for user needs today. It is an over-capitalisation situation driven by marketing and festered by ourselves on forums where we get endless pleasure from discussing what new gear might improve our photography. I remember clearly being very impressed by images shown in a magazine taken by an excellent pro photographer using a D30 (not a 30D) with a 3mp aps-c sensor about 13 years ago. I doubt if it would have seemed any better on the very latest and greatest today.

I gave up on the dslr churn at the 5D and have found no need to own a MkII or MkIII.

Much of the lower sales of MILC type camera might be explained by a longer retention rate as the photo-making public also decides that their present camera doe not need to be replaced as often.

In the US a deep core of conservatism might also be another reason why dslr bodies remain popular and dslr sales in general are holding up as improving wealth and living standards in many Asian countries convince many to adopt that "proper dslr camera", an icon promoted by marketing to be aspired to, and now within financial reach. Not much more than a time delayed version of the same thing that makes them remain popular in the USA.

This is as much the "proper camera" symptom and a parallel to the (lack of) "good enough" feelings.

Sometimes we need to fit that pinhole or Holga lens to our cameras and go out there and take interesting images ...

-- hide signature --

Tom Caldwell

Jack Hass Regular Member • Posts: 392
Re: Unnecessary....

gak44 wrote:

Bhima78 wrote:

And honestly, m4/3 and other mirrorless cameras have just recently become competitive performance wise to DSLRs. Especially the progress in focusing.

Not when value-for-money enters the equation.

I switched to M43 forthe size and weight advantages, and then only because of worsening arthritis. Dollar for dollar Canon and Nikon DSLRs offer better performance.

This completely depends on what you need. SLRs do some things better, like predictive AF, and apsc/FF have higher resolution. But, perhaps you don't shoot action. Perhaps you don't print large. I personally tend to crop a lot as my shots are not always planned out, but i find 16mp more than enough. If new models offer more i will take it, but it's not like im complaining now. I would much rather have cdaf without worry of BF/FF, i would much rather have peaking in my VF. I would much rather have no vibration in my camera, and a shutter that will last a million shots instead of 100k. These are the things i would sacrifice if i jumped to Canikon and left my GX7.

I totally get size and weight are a big benefit for some, but there are far more benefits than just that. If you are not aware of the others, that's too bad. The only reason i would switch to a DSLR is if top notch predictive tracking was a MUST.

-- hide signature --

May Satan forever guide you.

SkiHound Veteran Member • Posts: 3,462
I agree
2

I sporadically read Kirk's blog. He brings an interesting perspective. Sort of a gear geek but a gear geek who approaches gear from the perspective of how does it help him as a professional photographer. A certain level of technical performance is probably a requisite for making great photos. But there are millions and millions of technically excellent but boring photos. That would include most of the photos I take. IMO, composition, light, subject matter, color, etc. far and away trump things like lines of resolution, high iso pixel level noise, and dynamic range. Those things we talk about as IQ. I've seen lots of great photos that are grainy, or noisy, or which aren't tack sharp; they're great photos because of the emotional response they produce when we view them. We are blessed with so many wonderful cameras that do amazing things. And yes our cameras are better than we are. Now there are probably folks with special technical needs. If I was much of a sports shooter I wouldn't shoot the m43, just think there are better tools, but the new m43 cameras sure as hell beat the hell out of my first SLR, a Pentax Spotmatic, as a sports camera. If I was printing at 20 X 30 or larger, I'd get a FF, but I've not printed bigger than 14 x 11 for a while. People would be much better off picking cameras that worked for them ergonomically and then focusing on improving their eye and technique. That's my take, at any rate.

Corkcampbell
Corkcampbell Forum Pro • Posts: 18,528
I think we all know it has nothing to do with education.
10

The reasons for m4/3 adoption are clear, including portability, video capabilities, and the realization that most of us don't need full frame sensors and expensive white lenses.

His education comment may have been tongue-in-cheek. I just finished working for a decade at a university in Beijing, and am now studying the Korean education system. These two systems are designed to help students pass tests, not innovate. Most of my Chinese students (who all go to the US and UK to finish their bachelor's degrees and get master's degrees), just return to work in some bank because of family connections. In ten years, I've only had one student return with an idea of starting a business, but she is a woman which makes it almost impossible in the Chinese business culture. Even the Chinese government is worried about this situation (lack of innovation skills). As for Korea, it seems to be similar. Great TOEFL and GMAT scores, and a degree from a US university means you can find a "better" spouse...

Anyone complaining about the US education culture is probably doing it on an Apple or Windows computer, sitting on a Boeing plane, and checking his or her Facebook/Whatsapp account at the same time, and contemplating getting an MBA from an EU school...oh, wait...MBA from the EU...?

-- hide signature --

"Knowledge is good." Emil Faber

 Corkcampbell's gear list:Corkcampbell's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Sony Cyber-shot DSC-RX10 Sony RX100 III Sony RX10 III Leica C-Lux +8 more
s_grins
s_grins Forum Pro • Posts: 12,774
They are better, I'm not. What can I do?
1
-- hide signature --

Camera in bag tends to stay in bag...

 s_grins's gear list:s_grins's gear list
Panasonic G85 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Sigma 30mm F2.8 EX DN Sigma 60mm F2.8 DN Art Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-140mm F3.5-5.6 O.I.S +3 more
Tony Tomlin
Tony Tomlin Contributing Member • Posts: 690
Re: I agree

I was reviewing 12 year old photos that I took with a Canon S30 (3 megapixels) Damn they're good, maybe as good as my E-PL5!!

-- hide signature --
 Tony Tomlin's gear list:Tony Tomlin's gear list
Olympus 12-40mm F2.8
jhinkey
jhinkey Senior Member • Posts: 2,813
Re: No idea what it is

DonSC wrote:

but Canon and Nikon shooters just don't get the advantages. It's like the whole idea that a mirrorless camera might be better in some respects just doesn't compute for them. It's funny but also sad.

Well, I'm glad then that I have a D800 and a GX7, GH2 and G5 . . . and they live happily next to each other - obviously they don't share the same storage drawer - that would be sacrilege . .

But seriously, I think you lump too many people into thinking the same. I see many like me that have both systems and know their respective strengths and weaknesses and don't get wrapped up in sensor size-based dogma.

 jhinkey's gear list:jhinkey's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-TS3 Panasonic LX100 Nikon D800 Sony a7R II Panasonic G85 +27 more
sigala1 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,890
It's not true
1

DaveLemi wrote:

This is well thought out and delves into what is sufficient-

http://ripecamera.blogspot.com/2014/03/all-cameras-are-better-than-you-are.html

Kirk's site-

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2014/03/important-announcement-from-ceo-of.html

He makes fun of the supposed need or desire to be able to shoot available light photographs, but photographers were doing that with f/1.4 lenses and fast (albeit grainy) film decades before the introduction of digital cameras.

Yet when I first got an E-PM1 withi the kit lens, it was NOT good enough to take an available light photo in regular incandescent lighting. Uprgrading to an E-M5 and the Panasonic 25mm f/1.4 lens opened up a whole new world of photography.

Guy Parsons
Guy Parsons Forum Pro • Posts: 31,628
Re: I think we all know it has nothing to do with education.

Culture makes the difference, even though Japan ranks highest in the world in education, it is just coincidence that they also buy many times more Pens than OM-D as one size example. Japan likes small and functional.

Education http://worldtop20.org/the-worlds-best-20-education-systems-rankings-third-quarter-report

Human development index http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index

Camera sales http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/?s=BCN

Choose the rank or chart that satisfies you, particularly the education one as there's various floating about.

Regards...... Guy

 Guy Parsons's gear list:Guy Parsons's gear list
Olympus PEN E-P5 Sony RX100 VI Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-P3 Olympus PEN E-PL5 +2 more
gak44 Regular Member • Posts: 300
Re: Unnecessary....
2

Jack Hass wrote:

gak44 wrote:

Bhima78 wrote:

And honestly, m4/3 and other mirrorless cameras have just recently become competitive performance wise to DSLRs. Especially the progress in focusing.

Not when value-for-money enters the equation.

I switched to M43 forthe size and weight advantages, and then only because of worsening arthritis. Dollar for dollar Canon and Nikon DSLRs offer better performance.

This completely depends on what you need. SLRs do some things better, like predictive AF, and apsc/FF have higher resolution. But, perhaps you don't shoot action. Perhaps you don't print large. I personally tend to crop a lot as my shots are not always planned out, but i find 16mp more than enough. If new models offer more i will take it, but it's not like im complaining now. I would much rather have cdaf without worry of BF/FF, i would much rather have peaking in my VF. I would much rather have no vibration in my camera, and a shutter that will last a million shots instead of 100k. These are the things i would sacrifice if i jumped to Canikon and left my GX7.

I totally get size and weight are a big benefit for some, but there are far more benefits than just that. If you are not aware of the others, that's too bad. The only reason i would switch to a DSLR is if top notch predictive tracking was a MUST.

I do not think you understood my comment.

What I said is that DSLRs offer better value-for-money, not that they are "better" than M43. Having switched I would not go back to DSLRs. I know that I am paying a premium for the size and weight reduction, and am content to do so.

 gak44's gear list:gak44's gear list
Sony RX100 III Panasonic FZ1000 Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 +9 more
rhlpetrus Forum Pro • Posts: 25,859
I didn't read it
1

Not true in full generality, but it's mostly true, at least for ILCs. But take any skilled BIF shooter and they will easily outplay most cameras, meaning that when using a more able camera for action results will be much much better.

-- hide signature --

Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/
Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

 rhlpetrus's gear list:rhlpetrus's gear list
Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D +4 more
Cheezr
Cheezr Senior Member • Posts: 1,178
Re: His attitude sucks.....

Guy Parsons wrote:

DaveLemi wrote:

This is well thought out and delves into what is sufficient-

http://ripecamera.blogspot.com/2014/03/all-cameras-are-better-than-you-are.html

Kirk's site-

http://visualsciencelab.blogspot.com/2014/03/important-announcement-from-ceo-of.html

Quote (re M4/3) " And while the adaptation rate in the U.S. (lower education standards than most of the rest of the world) has been slow many parts of the world are snapping them up and eroding market share of the conventional mirrored digital cameras."

I'm an Aussie (most intelligent species in the world!) and even I'm offended by his attitude.

Regards.... Guy

I am an American, and regrettably he is correct, IMO.

-- hide signature --

Life is uncertain, eat dessert first.

Jacques Cornell
Jacques Cornell Forum Pro • Posts: 11,095
f2.8 zooms
1

gak44 wrote:

Jack Hass wrote:

gak44 wrote:

Bhima78 wrote:

And honestly, m4/3 and other mirrorless cameras have just recently become competitive performance wise to DSLRs. Especially the progress in focusing.

Not when value-for-money enters the equation.

I switched to M43 forthe size and weight advantages, and then only because of worsening arthritis. Dollar for dollar Canon and Nikon DSLRs offer better performance.

This completely depends on what you need. SLRs do some things better, like predictive AF, and apsc/FF have higher resolution. But, perhaps you don't shoot action. Perhaps you don't print large. I personally tend to crop a lot as my shots are not always planned out, but i find 16mp more than enough. If new models offer more i will take it, but it's not like im complaining now. I would much rather have cdaf without worry of BF/FF, i would much rather have peaking in my VF. I would much rather have no vibration in my camera, and a shutter that will last a million shots instead of 100k. These are the things i would sacrifice if i jumped to Canikon and left my GX7.

I totally get size and weight are a big benefit for some, but there are far more benefits than just that. If you are not aware of the others, that's too bad. The only reason i would switch to a DSLR is if top notch predictive tracking was a MUST.

I do not think you understood my comment.

What I said is that DSLRs offer better value-for-money, not that they are "better" than M43. Having switched I would not go back to DSLRs. I know that I am paying a premium for the size and weight reduction, and am content to do so.

One of the big attractions of m43 for me was the availability of f2.8 zooms for about 1/3 the cost of FF equivalents. In my book, that's better value for money.

-- hide signature --

jacquescornell.com

 Jacques Cornell's gear list:Jacques Cornell's gear list
Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX85 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 45mm F1.8 +39 more
Bhima78 Senior Member • Posts: 2,819
Re: f2.8 zooms

Jacques Cornell wrote:

gak44 wrote:

Jack Hass wrote:

gak44 wrote:

Bhima78 wrote:

And honestly, m4/3 and other mirrorless cameras have just recently become competitive performance wise to DSLRs. Especially the progress in focusing.

Not when value-for-money enters the equation.

I switched to M43 forthe size and weight advantages, and then only because of worsening arthritis. Dollar for dollar Canon and Nikon DSLRs offer better performance.

This completely depends on what you need. SLRs do some things better, like predictive AF, and apsc/FF have higher resolution. But, perhaps you don't shoot action. Perhaps you don't print large. I personally tend to crop a lot as my shots are not always planned out, but i find 16mp more than enough. If new models offer more i will take it, but it's not like im complaining now. I would much rather have cdaf without worry of BF/FF, i would much rather have peaking in my VF. I would much rather have no vibration in my camera, and a shutter that will last a million shots instead of 100k. These are the things i would sacrifice if i jumped to Canikon and left my GX7.

I totally get size and weight are a big benefit for some, but there are far more benefits than just that. If you are not aware of the others, that's too bad. The only reason i would switch to a DSLR is if top notch predictive tracking was a MUST.

I do not think you understood my comment.

What I said is that DSLRs offer better value-for-money, not that they are "better" than M43. Having switched I would not go back to DSLRs. I know that I am paying a premium for the size and weight reduction, and am content to do so.

One of the big attractions of m43 for me was the availability of f2.8 zooms for about 1/3 the cost of FF equivalents. In my book, that's better value for money.

Hrmm... I'm not seeing that. My DSLR 2.8 Sigma standard zoom (17-50) with OIS was only $500. There is nothing in the m43 line that has those specs for anywhere near that price. Well, unless you plan to buy a fuji x-e1 (only $800 WITH that stellar 2.8-4 lens).

I'm personally waiting for companies like sigma to start shaking things up in this space to get more lens competition going. Though with my luck they'll probably make an APS-C sized Foveon mirrorless interchangeable camera.

 Bhima78's gear list:Bhima78's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M10 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G X Vario 35-100mm F2.8 OIS Sigma 60mm F2.8 DN Art +7 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads