Marty4650

Marty4650

Lives in United States NC, United States
Works as a Retired Industrial Engineer
Joined on May 20, 2005

Comments

Total: 1939, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Marty4650: Those ratings are based on unit sales. If they were based on revenue, then the MILC group might be:

1. Sony
2. Olympus
3. Canon

There really aren't very many Sony MILC cameras or lenses selling for less than $1,000.

ZoranHR...... source please.

:)

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 22:31 UTC

Wow.... I give him a lot of credit. He took it apart, put it back together, and it STILL WORKED! I know I wouldn't dare take apart a $5,000 camera, because I know I would never be able to put it back together again.

But it does illustrate how complex these devices are and why they cost so much. A lot of engineering genius went into it.

I just hope he didn't void his warranty by taking it apart. That could be a very expensive mistake.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 20:07 UTC as 29th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

photoholiko: Those Leica snobs are not going to mount any lens under $1K on their overpriced cameras.

And I agree with your logic.

I was replying to Lobbamobba's statement that "a Digital M is just a few hundred dollars more than this lens."

And that is true only under two conditions:

if you buy a 12 year old Digital M is well worn shape.
and only if you think $1,000 is "a few hundred dollars."

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 16:37 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: Those ratings are based on unit sales. If they were based on revenue, then the MILC group might be:

1. Sony
2. Olympus
3. Canon

There really aren't very many Sony MILC cameras or lenses selling for less than $1,000.

Did you happen to notice the words "might be?"

I never made a definite claim, I merely suggested that Sony's MILC revenue was probably higher since their cameras and lenses cost a lot more. After all, their market shares aren't that far apart (28%, 21%, 20%)

What is it with the internet? Whenever someone disagrees with someone else's opinion on ANYTHING .... they DEMAND A SOURCE!

How about showing me your source, that proves I am wrong?

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 16:31 UTC
In reply to:

photoholiko: Those Leica snobs are not going to mount any lens under $1K on their overpriced cameras.

Maybe I missed something, but this article is about a $7,000 Leica M10 and a $600 lens. This camera is a lot more than "just a few hundred dollars more than the lens."

Even the cheapest "digital M" you can find today is around $1,800 for a 12 year old used M8. Again... more than just "a few hundred dollars more" than this lens.

You should reconsider your own logic. And your math.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 16:22 UTC
In reply to:

io_bg: How can "Leica" and "budget" co-exist in the same sentence? ;)

They can't.

There is no way on earth that anyone who buys an $8,000 camera will go shopping for a budget lens. Budget lenses have their place for Canon or Nikon but not for Leica. This is precisely why Sigma exists!

What next? Budget floor mats for Bentleys?

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 14:51 UTC
In reply to:

chriswy: Interesting, isn't it? I know many might feel it unreasonable as online community suggests otherwise. However Japan itself has about 17% of entire camera market, which is big.

Data doesn't lie but Internet will. Many might think we are reading all about the world. But Internet actually pushes you what they think you want to see based on your online behavior data. In the end, Internet makes people live in a world they love to see, which, In this story, "Canon is dead".

Agreed.

Japan is only one market, but it a huge one for the camera industry. They represent only 1.6% of the world's population, but buy 17% of the cameras made. So the importance of this market is obvious.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 13:37 UTC
In reply to:

zakaria: And finally Pentax is #3 in DSLR!!
That was Ricoh object!!🤔

Which is an interesting goal to have. Finishing a distant third in a three way race.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 13:33 UTC

Those ratings are based on unit sales. If they were based on revenue, then the MILC group might be:

1. Sony
2. Olympus
3. Canon

There really aren't very many Sony MILC cameras or lenses selling for less than $1,000.

Link | Posted on Jan 18, 2018 at 11:50 UTC as 27th comment | 9 replies

For the die-hard narcissist the endoscope is the ultimate selfie camera.

Link | Posted on Jan 17, 2018 at 08:35 UTC as 4th comment | 1 reply

Can anyone say it would be a bad thing if all "before and after" photos were unretouched and unaltered in any way?

Changing an image in any way to help sell something is deceptive advertising. Whether a ban is needed is debatable, because most sensible people already know they will not look like the model after they use that cosmetic, or take that diet loss pill.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2018 at 19:50 UTC as 17th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

stratplaya: In a few years they'll want to ban make up as well.

Progress?

I think all forms of deceptive advertising should be banned.

And that includes the hamburger that looks nothing like the photo that advertises it.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2018 at 17:42 UTC
In reply to:

sirhawkeye64: I hate to say it, but good luck with holding other companies accountable. Yes, I agree that "photoshopping" models for beauty magazines for the sake of making some look different than what they really are is not right (or honest, I mean basically saying "you'll look good in this piece if you look like this") but I'm sure many will do whatever gets people to buy their products, even if that means "photoshopping" to shave off some pounds, etc.

If you are a large retailer like CVS, then you have a lot of clout. Those other companies could lose a valuable sales outlet at worse, or have their packaging stickered with "digitally altered" at best. In either case, they lose sales.

The interesting question is whether they would apply the same theory to "makeup altered" images for wrinkle creams. Because that practice is just as deceptive as photo shopping an image.

Link | Posted on Jan 16, 2018 at 17:39 UTC
In reply to:

mick232: Too little too late!

It isn't the only advantage, but it is a big one for many people. And high quality glass comes in all sizes.

As far as grips and controls go, I think both DSLRs and MILC cameras are offering them today. You can have pretty much anything you want with either format, but the MILC camera will always have the potential to be smaller due to having no mirror box and fewer parts.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2018 at 18:10 UTC
In reply to:

mick232: Too little too late!

A DSLR will always be a DSLR. Which means it will have to be bigger, thicker, and heavier. If these things don't matter to you, then they are irrelevant, but if they do then they matter.

Currently the DSLR has a slight advantage over MILC for sports and action photography and for AF speed. But that advantage is shrinking rapidly. So someday you will have the option of selecting something that works just as well, but is a lot smaller.

It really just depends on if you value smaller and lighter. If you don't, then you still have those big fat DSLRs.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2018 at 14:34 UTC
In reply to:

mick232: Too little too late!

Yes... but I was talking about leading the mass market. Which is why I used Toyota and Canon as examples of market leaders, and not Mercedes and Leica.

And while Nokia was the market leader many years ago, today they have a very tiny share of the smartphone market. Apple's revenue is around 190 billion Euro.

Link | Posted on Jan 13, 2018 at 02:16 UTC
In reply to:

mick232: Too little too late!

Max.... I really think it is possible. Both companies have the resources and expertise to pull it off. If I had to bet on one, it would be Canon.

We probably will have to wait ten years to find out.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 22:58 UTC
In reply to:

mick232: Too little too late!

Perhaps Pentax didn't execute any better than Nikon or Canon did? Remember, it is not when you show up that matters, it is whether you can execute best.

I seem to recall that Olympus, Panasonic, Fujifilm, Kodak, and Samsung once made DSLRS too. But they all moved on to something else. Odds are, they just couldn't compete.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 22:19 UTC

I hope the rumor is true.

Nikon needs a new lens mount going forward that can be used for both APSC and Full Frame MILC to take full advantage of mirrorless technology. This will have the dual advantage of creating more modern lenses, rather than recycling 30 year old designs, and will create a strong revenue stream for them to sell new lenses.

Those users who want to use their DSLR lenses will have adapters. They will eventually get over it just like the Canon users did when Canon created the EOS mount, and just like Olympus users did when Olympus and Panasonic created M4/3.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 21:50 UTC as 125th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

mick232: Too little too late!

It is never too late.

The first innovators rarely end up as market leaders. It is those who execute best who end up with that title. And those are usually firms that came to the party late.

Where is Daimler, Nokia, Kodak and Altavista today? Instead those markets are being led by Toyota, Apple, Canon and Google.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 21:42 UTC
Total: 1939, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »