Marty4650

Marty4650

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

Comments

Total: 1994, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
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 33rd 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 6th 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 19th 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 126th 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
In reply to:

upgrader: Even the biggest idiot knows that water and electronics ist not a good idea to mix. My photos dont get better with better water sealing.

No more comment to this „Test“....

Life Recorder makes a good point, but it really is a question of degree.

Any water getting inside your camera is a bad thing, but sea water is a lot worse than distilled water is. An awful lot worse.

Link | Posted on Jan 11, 2018 at 12:06 UTC
On article Panasonic Lumix GH5S vs GH5: What's new? (89 comments in total)
In reply to:

Rich Evans: No IBIS, No 10bit 60fps, No good autofocus, Not good price, Not enough improvement. No GH5s!!!!

Rich, I don't think Panasonic designed this camera thinking 100% of camera users will buy one.

In fact, they would be thrilled if just 1% do actually buy one. Because that means around 250,000 GH5s cameras sold each year...

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 23:33 UTC
In reply to:

Marty4650: Three things easily explain this:

1. Product Maturity - new ones aren't much better than older ones
2. Market Saturation - everyone who wants one has one
3. Consumer Preference - No longer stylish to be the camera guy

Incidentally, the exact same factors are slowing down smartphone sales too. It happens to all tech products over time.

Exactly right. Once a product leaves the mass market and becomes a niche product, for any of a variety of reasons, the only option left is to move rapidly to high end in search of better margins. Leica is already there, even if by accident rather than by design.

Remember Home Audio Systems? These were all the rage around 30 years ago. Everyone had one, and they were constantly upgrading their components. Then the mass market shifted to smaller systems, and eventually soundbars and bluetooth speakers. The companies that survived moved rapidly to the high end, car stero, and to new tech. (Think Bose, Harman Kardon, JBL, Sennheiser.) And then new competitors jumped in.

Markets are rarely static. They change when technology and taste change.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 13:38 UTC

I find that any announcement that needs 11 footnotes is too confusing to grasp.

But I suppose this product wasn't designed for me.

Link | Posted on Jan 9, 2018 at 02:00 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

David Stahl: Had Nikon been able to ship the D850 in volume, the November number might have been better.

Of all the camera makers, Nikon is the LEAST diversified. Around 80% of their revenue comes from selling cameras and lenses. This means they get hit hardest by market contraction.

Panasonic, Sony, Ricoh, and Olympus sit at the other end of the spectrum. For them, camera making is a hobby that doesn't impact their bottom line very much one way or the other.

Canon is somewhere in the middle. They get around half their revenue from things other than cameras. But their camera division is doing pretty well. It is profitable, and it is growing market share.

Link | Posted on Jan 8, 2018 at 22:53 UTC
Total: 1994, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »