Marty4650

Marty4650

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

Comments

Total: 1814, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

Interesting stuff.... but still not worth $10 per month for the rest of my life.

They have to do better than this if they want me on their subscription plan.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 21:14 UTC as 13th comment | 8 replies

The NY Times, despite all their progressive socialist ideology, really wants to make money. And one sure way to make money is to exploit your workers.

Many companies do exactly the same thing by having more "part time" and fewer "full time" workers to save the benefit costs. They use contractors for the same reason. Some even make all their employees "salaried" to avoid paying overtime.

They game the system for their own advantage, and workers pay the price for it. But honestly, I don't think the NY Times is any different than any huge corporation in that regard. You might expect them to be better, because they keep pretending they care about these things. But those are foolish expectations.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 21:00 UTC as 9th comment | 2 replies
In reply to:

fberns: I never understood Samsung's insanely stupid camera division. It took them ages to build at least a bit of a lens slection that makes more or less sense. (Fuji did a much much better job with starting their lens programme) and finally they had a wonderful camera just to find out they better stop the whole thing?

I really don't believe "Samsung acted too slow."

Samsung NX was the SECOND MILC system, coming six months after Olympus joined Panasonic in and four months before Sony jumped in with Sony E. Samsung NX was 21 months ahead of Nikon 1, and two full years ahead of Fuji X.

By the end of 2012, there were:

> 33 AF lenses for M4/3
> 12 AF lenses for Sony E
> 11 AF lenses for Samsung NX
> 6 AF lenses for Nikon 1
> 5 AF lenses for Fuji X

Samsung was one of the very first companies to enter the MILC market, and they initially produced several decent lenses for it. They didn't leave the market because they were too slow. It probably had more to do with profitability and their failure to meet very aggressive targets they set for themselves.

I seem to recall Samsung saying they would be the MILC market leader by 2012. By then, they probably had perhaps a 10% share.

In the end, Samsung pulled the plug on their cameras because they weren't making money and they aren't a camera company.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2017 at 18:23 UTC
In reply to:

Biowizard: So based on a statistically significant sample (90 million is not bad), the average number of lenses per camera sold is only 1.44?! Less than one and a half lenses per camera?!!

Why bother with a lens mount at all? Seems most folks would be better off with a large-sensor "Bridge" camera!

Brian

@ Biowizard...

This is nothing new. According to CIPA, camera makers ship around 1.7 lenses per ILC camera sold each year. And this has been true for at least the past 20 years.

Canon might be averaging fewer lenses, due to all the Digital Rebel cameras they sell at Walmart and Target. Many of those buyers never go beyond the kit lens, and if they do it is "the other kit lens" they get.

Incidentally, also according to CIPA statistics, the average lens brings in more revenue than the average camera does.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2017 at 11:09 UTC
In reply to:

fberns: I never understood Samsung's insanely stupid camera division. It took them ages to build at least a bit of a lens slection that makes more or less sense. (Fuji did a much much better job with starting their lens programme) and finally they had a wonderful camera just to find out they better stop the whole thing?

Even though Samsung hasn't produced a lens in over two years, their APSC lens catalog is competitive with Sony E's offerings, and almost as good as Nikon DX and Canon EF-S.

If you want to complain about lenses, then pity the Canon EOS-M user. They have almost as many bodies as lenses! And how about those Leica TL and SL users?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 22:00 UTC
In reply to:

Eric Ouellet: I think that one of the major reason of bad reception was due to DPReview and all other reviewers. Most of you (reviewers) have taken so much time to come out with a review that it killed a lot of potential buyers enthusiasms. I was mystifyed by how long you took to review a so wonderful camera. It was remarkably long considering all the new features it was bringing. It look likes you were paid by Nikon or Canon to delay its review. Also, you made a big point against H.265 either if it is the best format ever created for video. H.265 is the format that everybody should be looking for. For today and the future. DPreview and other reviewers are big part of the death of that wonderful camera. Shame on you DPReview!

I can think of many better reasons that a camera review is delayed. And none of them involve being paid off by Nikon or Canon.

I assume Dpreview is anxious to review ANY significant new camera, if they can get their hands on a production copy, and they have reviewers available to do the work right after it is available.

The conspiracy theories all sound nice, but they just don't make logical sense. Amazon makes money selling stuff, and they don't care which brand you buy as long as you buy it from them. Their business model is based on profit, and not on taking bribes.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 18:12 UTC
In reply to:

grasscatcher: Would love to see collaboration between Samsung and Panasonic. Both have different products, but seem to have similar philosophies on bringing the latest, greatest tech to market in an easily-useable package.

True.

I was specifically thinking about other APSC camera makers who didn't make their own sensors. Like Nikon, Leica or Pentax. That 28MP Samsung sensor might have given them a competitive advantage in their APSC products.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 18:06 UTC
In reply to:

Graham Austin: if they decided to come back and go with one of the other lens mounts, they would do amazingly well I think. It was just too soon to switch to a whole new ecosystem for me.. now I am fully off canon and have put my cash in the Fuji and Sigma systems. Could have easily have been Samsung and Sigma

When Samsung exited the camera market... the entire market was down 50%.

I think it is unlikely they might reenter now that the market is down 75%.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 16:40 UTC
In reply to:

JEROME NOLAS: Who will buy it at this price??? Insane!!!

This explains why we don't have a universal lens mount. When everything else is equal, then price decides.

If it weren't for proprietary lens mounts it would be hard to sell an equivalent lens for 50% more. And it also explains why Sigma, Tamron and Tokina are so successful selling lenses for Nikon, Pentax, Sony and Canon.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 15:53 UTC

I think part of Samsung's problem was the reluctance of Japanese consumers to buy Korean electronic products. And this is due to some feeling of national pride in their own domestic brands.

The Japanese market is really crucial for camera sales. While Japan only has 1.7% of the world's population, and 6.6% of the world's GDP, they bought around 20% of all the MILC cameras every shipped by CIPA.

This is a huge hurdle for any Korean maker, or for any other "foreign made" company.

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 15:48 UTC as 76th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

grasscatcher: Would love to see collaboration between Samsung and Panasonic. Both have different products, but seem to have similar philosophies on bringing the latest, greatest tech to market in an easily-useable package.

Samsung could really be disruptive if they would produce a modern four thirds sensor for Olympus and Panasonic.

And if it was a big improvement over the current Sony 20 MP four thirds sensor, they could sell a lot of them. But I can only assume that the market potential is too small to justify the R&D expense involved.

Still.... I have to wonder why their truly outstanding 28 MP APS-C sensor never found its way into any other brand's cameras? Was it lack of interest by other camera makers, high price, or lack of Samsung wanting to sell them?

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 15:35 UTC
On article RIP Lightroom 6: Death by subscription model (1428 comments in total)

As people hold onto their cameras longer, the need for upgraded editing software diminishes, After all, the big reason to upgrade was always "I bought a new camera, and my software doesn't support it."

Adobe probably saw this coming when they decided to move to subscription only software. And it was a very good business decision for them, based on their record profits in recent years.

Someday in the future, the only option for the casual user who wants to avoid monthly subscription fees might be the software that came with the camera, GIMP, or Photoshop Elements, if it still exists as a non-cloud product.

And I really think someday Elements will go subscription only too.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 22:23 UTC as 478th comment
In reply to:

labradoodler: Wow! Nice gesture,but what about the Cameras folks lost?Not Sigma,s brief I know,but lets see how many makers match this.

No doubt, if it resulted in a big surge of new sales, then every lens maker would be tripping over themselves to invent more goodwill gestures for their customers.

Every goodwill gesture comes at a cost, and that cost must be passed on to the customer 100% of the time.

I do believe it is nice of Sigma to do this, and they probably will reap a public relations benefit from doing it, but the cost will be built into the price of future products. Fortunately, the cost will probably be very small. Just a few cents per lens very likely.

I'm not saying this to rain on their parade. Just pointing out that every business expense must be recovered in their sales margins.

It doesn't matter if they donate money to a good cause, or simply burn it, the cost will be passed on to their customers. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 20:01 UTC
On article Have it your way: which 24MP Canon should I buy? (235 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: I don't want any of them, but I have to admit this is smart marketing strategy for Canon. By using the same parts in seven different cameras they keep their production costs down, and their profit margins up.

And the truth is... an awful lot of potential customers don't need 4K video. So Canon will gladly sell to them and let everyone else fight over the video enthusiast niche.

Mike, you could be right. It certainly could be read that way. In that case I offer my apologies to CCD.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 13:30 UTC
On article Have it your way: which 24MP Canon should I buy? (235 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marty4650: I don't want any of them, but I have to admit this is smart marketing strategy for Canon. By using the same parts in seven different cameras they keep their production costs down, and their profit margins up.

And the truth is... an awful lot of potential customers don't need 4K video. So Canon will gladly sell to them and let everyone else fight over the video enthusiast niche.

I haven't owned or used a Canon camera in over 20 years, and I clearly stated "I don't want any of them."

Is that your definition of a "Canon fanboy?"

Am I a "fanboy" because I stated the obvious fact that Canon sells a lot of cameras and makes a profit while doing so?

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 13:24 UTC
On article Have it your way: which 24MP Canon should I buy? (235 comments in total)

I don't want any of them, but I have to admit this is smart marketing strategy for Canon. By using the same parts in seven different cameras they keep their production costs down, and their profit margins up.

And the truth is... an awful lot of potential customers don't need 4K video. So Canon will gladly sell to them and let everyone else fight over the video enthusiast niche.

Link | Posted on Oct 18, 2017 at 12:49 UTC as 66th comment | 4 replies

Expensive modular accessories make the most sense for things you use for decades and not for things you use for just a couple of years. Things like drill presses or riding lawn mowers, and not things like cell phones.

These modules are destined to end up in thrift shops when the underlying device is replaced, or when Polaroid stops selling film for them. Moreover, they defeat the entire convenience advantage of the cell camera phone by making it heavier, thicker, and requiring you to carry extra parts. These are gimmicks for people who love gimmicks, and they never become successful products.

This is really reminiscent of the Ricoh GXR modules. Something like 20 modules were planed, and only 6 were actually created. Ultimately, the entire system crashed and burned.

Link | Posted on Oct 17, 2017 at 11:13 UTC as 5th comment | 2 replies
On article Nikon D850 Review (2033 comments in total)
In reply to:

vFunct: Nikon won the photography wars. All other camera companies can shut down now. They are unnecessary, since Nikon can do everything better than them.

Literally no reason to not buy a Nikon D850 over any other camera.

It was a nice try for the mirrorless manufacturers while they lasted. Oh well I guess their owners get a nice consolation prize in the form of a lovely souvenir that they can place on their desk as a decoration piece while they use the D850 for actual photography.

And despite all this.... Canon continues to outsell Nikon. And the gap is growing wider.

I wish someone could explain why the "best camera" doesn't sell the most?

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 19:36 UTC

While I have absolutely no need for 4K video, I think many others do and will expect it in a $1,000+ compact camera today.

But I suppose we will see. Canon seems to know what they are doing, because their market share keeps growing despite all their "blunders."

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 10:55 UTC as 145th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

elementare: None can justify a F2.8-5.6 in a 24-70mm zoom today in a compact camera when you have produced a 24-120 f2-3.9 years ago and when you have a panasonic lx100 with a f1.7-2.8 in the same lens range that cost half. The previous Canon 24-70mm f2.8 for full frame cost the same. Epic Fail.

The LX100 uses a 4/3 sensor, or at least a large part of it. You might be thinking of the LX10, which does use a 1 inch sensor.

Link | Posted on Oct 16, 2017 at 10:50 UTC
Total: 1814, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »