Raymond Cho

Lives in New Zealand (Aotearoa) New Zealand (Aotearoa)
Joined on Jun 16, 2003

Comments

Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Raymond Cho: If 95% of users rather have their smartphones that leaves a small market that they can tap into. Of that 5% many perhaps the smaller lot is high end compacts, I would think at least half of the 5% are into system camears (mirrorless, dSLRs etc). Even on a website like this I gather maybe most of us here are into system cameras than high end compacts.

All types of users enjoy materialistic goods. Digital has been with us since 2004 when the $1,000US body price barrier was broken. So we've had 13-14yrs of quite accessible digital technology. Some have also tried it, didn't like it, sold it off or stored it away due to the low price. Maybe not once but twice.

Often people that I know ask me about camera equipment to buy. You seen them once or twice with it and then you don't. Many don't enjoy photography but just to take photographs of friends and family and kids and their food. A few might want something under 1lbs, 12x zoom, 1" sensor but that's not gonna happen soon.

Exactly. Loosely speaking now 95% of the market is gone.

A friend said to me, after he wasn't able to get a light compact 12x zoom big sensor camera. He started talking about drones and if it can follow his family down this CBD shopping area. Here we go again .....

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 21:17 UTC
In reply to:

Raymond Cho: If 95% of users rather have their smartphones that leaves a small market that they can tap into. Of that 5% many perhaps the smaller lot is high end compacts, I would think at least half of the 5% are into system camears (mirrorless, dSLRs etc). Even on a website like this I gather maybe most of us here are into system cameras than high end compacts.

All types of users enjoy materialistic goods. Digital has been with us since 2004 when the $1,000US body price barrier was broken. So we've had 13-14yrs of quite accessible digital technology. Some have also tried it, didn't like it, sold it off or stored it away due to the low price. Maybe not once but twice.

Often people that I know ask me about camera equipment to buy. You seen them once or twice with it and then you don't. Many don't enjoy photography but just to take photographs of friends and family and kids and their food. A few might want something under 1lbs, 12x zoom, 1" sensor but that's not gonna happen soon.

Most normal users are into blurry dreamy bokeh portraits. Pictures that look good online. A glow hazy sky behind the person.

Some I know have not just bought one camera but 2 or more cameras and I guess over time they just haven't used it. They love the hype, that full frame Canon 5D IV, that Nikon D850 or D810 in the past, that Sony A7RII and then they cheap out and get a kit lens for it. That flash camera their friend has. So I just said to them, it weighs this much ... you need a camera bag it's not going to fit in your pocket.

For me though, since I don't do sport or action or wildlife. I got a dSLR because that was what was available back then, for now it might be mirrorless. I am happy with a longest lens being a 105mm or even a 85mm.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 20:51 UTC

If 95% of users rather have their smartphones that leaves a small market that they can tap into. Of that 5% many perhaps the smaller lot is high end compacts, I would think at least half of the 5% are into system camears (mirrorless, dSLRs etc). Even on a website like this I gather maybe most of us here are into system cameras than high end compacts.

All types of users enjoy materialistic goods. Digital has been with us since 2004 when the $1,000US body price barrier was broken. So we've had 13-14yrs of quite accessible digital technology. Some have also tried it, didn't like it, sold it off or stored it away due to the low price. Maybe not once but twice.

Often people that I know ask me about camera equipment to buy. You seen them once or twice with it and then you don't. Many don't enjoy photography but just to take photographs of friends and family and kids and their food. A few might want something under 1lbs, 12x zoom, 1" sensor but that's not gonna happen soon.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 20:40 UTC as 25th comment | 5 replies
In reply to:

UllerellU: What a poor excuse ... My phone does not do anything that my RX100 does not, but my RX100 does a lot of things that my cell phone does not do. Starting with the High ISO Resistance, the Optical Zoom range, the dynamic range ...

Yes, maybe one day the mobiles arrive at this, I do not know, but even if they technically arrived at this, they would still be missing the hand controls, personalized FN buttons, control dials, manual focus rings ...

I do not know why mobile phones are being discussed, mobile phones are for those 95% who do not like photography.

And I compare a mobile with my camera to always carry over, but it is that if I have to compare it with my FZ1000 or with my interchangeable lens system, turn off and let's go ..

In the past these 95% had to buy a camera but nowadays they can do without them.

Link | Posted on Oct 31, 2017 at 10:07 UTC

As a Nikon shooter, it would be nice to experience with a different manufacturer. I would enjoy a smaller setup so their DX lenses are probably on the larger size compared to Fuji or Olympus esp their primes and the more compact zooms. If Nikon are going to provide a smaller lineup of lenses that;s more expenses incurred I rather head to a different manufacturer and expense with them.

Link | Posted on Jul 13, 2017 at 22:51 UTC as 60th comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

PieterB: I think by now, a larger part of the potential new buyers know that mirrorless exist. But most new buyers (not the people that frequent these sites) probably still have no clue what mirrorless is.

Yup, but those customers are price sensitive. And dSLRs do look pro. Not sure if normal people in Asia may be using more mirrorless. The ones that come to NZ might be more into landscapes etc .. I mean NZ is all about the outdoors, we don't really have big cities and big malls.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 08:12 UTC
In reply to:

PieterB: I think by now, a larger part of the potential new buyers know that mirrorless exist. But most new buyers (not the people that frequent these sites) probably still have no clue what mirrorless is.

With group activities that I know them personally and in New Zealand seeing the chinese tourists who visit here. But far the most popular cameras are dSLR. With the group I know just one 1 person with a mirrorless, the others are just your entry level dSLRs with kit lenses maybe a cheapo 70-300 etc. The tourists most were dSLRs by 90% many of the chinese had entry dSLRs, some Canon 5D and D800 with f2.8 lenses, grad filters etc maybe because they generally see dSLRs as more serious.

With the group that I know personally, a few have heard of mirrorless when they asked me about photog. I have suggested mirrorless for them if they just want holiday photos and of the kids and want to change lenses. I think price is a big issue for them. Why spend $800US or $1,500US for a body when you can get a entry dSLR with a lens for under $500US? 2 I know got preowned dSLRs, they could get it for $150US like a Nikon D3000/3200.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2017 at 06:06 UTC
In reply to:

Raymond Cho: I obviously wouldn't consider mirrorless for action photography . For walkabout on a weekend or on travel I prefer mirrorless.

Yes, if you want full frame, the Sony A7rII is not cheap and the lenses are not small. For walkabout and travel I am happy with crop sensor. The Fuji zooms are not small either and that's crop sensor (!). I definitely hear you. The way I intend to make it more comfortable for traveling is to use the Fuji with a prime lens and maybe one zoom but not a pro F2.8, but I am ok with that because it simplifies things down and I have used prime lenses with my Nikon Fm2n manual film body. I like how the body is small with a compact lens that you can just hold it by your waist as you walk around and just enjoy the holiday or weekend.

No difference to the past, people with film SLR had lighter systems like Contax T2 and premium compacts.

I find dSLRs bulky to be used casually in a train etc at the tourist site at the park etc.

Yes, the lens certainly a bit smaller but not significantly. The body is significantly smaller. One does get f2.8 at the wider end but for many "tourists" they may be ok with a 3.5. I prefer the primes because they are significantly smaller as a main walkaround lens and then maybe a zoom for something a bit more focus in photography when I have the time away from others. The max load I would consider is a 1 zoom and 1 prime setup.

I just found inside a long distance train taking pictures of each others as one do on vacation and as trivial as what we are eating for lunch in this foreign place - a full frame dSLR and a wide zoom (3.5-4.5) with a 77mm lens cap was just too large. It's also not like I am printing posters need the fastest focus or highest ISO.

Also tempted by a X100 because the 23mm on that is quite a bit smaller than a individual 23mm with a enclosed system one also cannot take other lenses.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2017 at 20:58 UTC

I obviously wouldn't consider mirrorless for action photography . For walkabout on a weekend or on travel I prefer mirrorless.

Yes, if you want full frame, the Sony A7rII is not cheap and the lenses are not small. For walkabout and travel I am happy with crop sensor. The Fuji zooms are not small either and that's crop sensor (!). I definitely hear you. The way I intend to make it more comfortable for traveling is to use the Fuji with a prime lens and maybe one zoom but not a pro F2.8, but I am ok with that because it simplifies things down and I have used prime lenses with my Nikon Fm2n manual film body. I like how the body is small with a compact lens that you can just hold it by your waist as you walk around and just enjoy the holiday or weekend.

No difference to the past, people with film SLR had lighter systems like Contax T2 and premium compacts.

I find dSLRs bulky to be used casually in a train etc at the tourist site at the park etc.

Link | Posted on Jun 12, 2017 at 07:46 UTC as 9th comment | 2 replies
On article Steve Huff: 'Why I love my Micro Four Thirds System' (60 comments in total)

Good for casual use and street photography or holiday camera. Not everyone shoot low light action. I'm happy we gave more choices available.

Link | Posted on May 30, 2017 at 10:56 UTC as 4th comment
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (819 comments in total)
In reply to:

Alan Brown: Pentax ME Super was a camera I could never afford (at the time of release)
However I picked on up recently in a pawn shop for £10 with a 50mm f2 lens. played with it for a short time, replaced the light seals and sold it on eBay for £65.

Well I got that urge out of me.. and BTW Film processing is NOT cheap.. even with process and CD only.

Film photog isn't that much cheaper despite the used cameras. With mostly colour slide film and some b/w that I develop myself. I've spent $8k on digital stuff and $5k on film stuff. Maybe perhaps $4k cos I got a Blad. But back in the days I have with me 1991 magazine and B&H charged nearly $8US for a roll of slides, $4US for professional portrait film and $2US for Kodak Gold. The killer is the scanner though for the handful of film you use. While you can use your smartphone it's not the same ..... then again a flatbed scanner doesn't really fully capitalise on the full potential.

Link | Posted on May 23, 2017 at 08:34 UTC
On article Analog gems: 10 excellent, affordable film cameras (819 comments in total)

Hasselblad 500 series (!). It's been so much affordable now.

Nikon Fm2n was lesser to begin with but it has dropped less than my used bought F100. Both from ~2006. dSRLs have gotten larger over time, even our once humble 50mm F1.8 with its 52mm lens cap.

Link | Posted on May 22, 2017 at 03:08 UTC as 150th comment

People get excited over it but it is expensive to shoot. Taking the price off Fuji we are looking at $10US per roll, $10US for development. $20US just to see what images you have captured. I may go and pick up 1 or 2 pro packs sure and pay $100US and later pay another $100US or $90US for developing but it is not something I would do all that frequently. This 10 rolls likely last me 1 or 2 years.

It shouldn't be about dusting your camera. If people were interested before this announcement they ought to be shooting slides or other film in at lest some small quantities. Before this announcement there were already and still are films that you can get. Up to 2013 one could also still buy Ektachrome.

Link | Posted on Jan 14, 2017 at 10:01 UTC as 7th comment | 1 reply
On article Elevating X-Trans? Fujifilm X-T2 Review (2217 comments in total)
In reply to:

Melinium: My dear X-T1, I'm sorry to tell you this, but you are going to retire in September

love to get the XT1 when the XT3 is out for the mean time I can carry 1 lens less with my dSLR. other priorities. i haven't taken one video either.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 02:55 UTC
On article Hasselblad to announce 'game changer' next week (454 comments in total)

A lot of medium format film and scanning.

Link | Posted on Jun 22, 2016 at 10:54 UTC as 9th comment
On article Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows (1391 comments in total)
In reply to:

nathondetroit: The only thing that sucks about this generation of cameras is that we're paying more money for less features. There are benefits of usability, and some construction/durability benefits, but in general stripping cameras down to their basics should yield some cheaper bodies as well.

Why not replace a mode dial with a shutter speed dial on the D3200? Why not replace a high res screen with a low res one? (Think M9–If the screen isn't the primary finder, then its performance isn't a necessity). There could be a pretty "hip" plastic rendition of these cameras...

Once "simple" and "retro" break through the "premium" class of cameras, there will be a huge reaction; Throw some real dials on entry levels cameras and give purist consumers a chance to reap the benefits on technological advancement–not pay a premium to get a luxury replication of bricks of the past.

motor vehicles get cheaper over time despite features crammed in ... what's the next major camera technology going to cost us then .... and look at the cheap point and shoot cameras they're not $500.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2013 at 09:04 UTC
On article Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows (1391 comments in total)
In reply to:

Debankur Mukherjee: The body should be without grip and auto focus to call it a true retro design....

i woudl jsut shoot film myself, was shooting Fuji ProC 160 just a moment ago today. It's never gonna be a retro as a Leica digital, it's like a Fuji with a grip? And even Leica digital isn't that retro. A sensor output isn't gonna be like TriX or HP5+. Some places like Japan film is still quite popular than other countries. You can walk in and buy a brick of 20 rolls of film.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2013 at 04:57 UTC
On article Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows (1391 comments in total)
In reply to:

Marksphoto: Looks like the F2 is back and looking good, but where is the chrome?

I was waiting for a camera which would give me the option of using simple layout such as shutter speed dial, apperture dial and we need a WB dial with ISO dial so that we can create perfect jpegs on the fly without the hassle of going into the comlex menus to do the same thing 4 simple dials would do for manual mode shooters.

love a real manual focus only. just like the good old days. hope it doesn't have pop up flash too. aperture ring only, shutter dial on top only, no func button, DOF preview and a lens removal button and a bright viewfinder. a mechanical screw in cable release on the shutter button. if only ....

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2013 at 04:52 UTC
On article Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows (1391 comments in total)
In reply to:

nathondetroit: The only thing that sucks about this generation of cameras is that we're paying more money for less features. There are benefits of usability, and some construction/durability benefits, but in general stripping cameras down to their basics should yield some cheaper bodies as well.

Why not replace a mode dial with a shutter speed dial on the D3200? Why not replace a high res screen with a low res one? (Think M9–If the screen isn't the primary finder, then its performance isn't a necessity). There could be a pretty "hip" plastic rendition of these cameras...

Once "simple" and "retro" break through the "premium" class of cameras, there will be a huge reaction; Throw some real dials on entry levels cameras and give purist consumers a chance to reap the benefits on technological advancement–not pay a premium to get a luxury replication of bricks of the past.

even in the film days when new they were cheaper. F100 body $1000US, $2000US was it for the F5 top of the line, much cheaper was the FM3A or FM2N. these days it's $3,000 or $6,000 is it and the non pro $2,000US D610/600 for a F80 full frame film camera in the day.

if they wanted reto they could have just made it manual focus ONLY. if one really go retro i mean look at APUG analogue forum you can place that $6,000US less the NIB condition film body of your choice then the $5,000+ into film and lab every 4 years.

Link | Posted on Nov 3, 2013 at 04:49 UTC
On article Retro Nikon 'DF' emerges from the shadows (1391 comments in total)
In reply to:

Kodachrome200: Everyone is saying this is going to be 3000 bux and to me this is just nuts. no way it is. this is just like when every one said the d800 was going to be 4400 it made no sense in the market. this is an attempt to gain some of the cool factor mirrorless has and have a hit. its tech specs are great but there is nothing to make you think it will cost more than 1800-2300 range. And dont say the d4 sensor. the s4 sensor is not what makes the d4 expensive

more pro features than the D610. AF-ON button, round viewfinder, normally reserved for the pro cameras like the F100, F series, D series, D700, D800. I think it's more than the D610 but prob at least the same as a D800 (body). i doubt its gonna be the D700 replacement that some think .. it's a retro, not a fast dynamic AF machine, fast FPS ... it's not a semi sports / wedding camera.

Link | Posted on Nov 2, 2013 at 08:57 UTC
Total: 29, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »