Eamon Hickey

Lives in United States NY, United States
Joined on Mar 22, 2001

Comments

Total: 78, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »
In reply to:

Eamon Hickey: For anyone with an historical inclination and 5 minutes to waste (remember, you'll never get it back), I posted, on this very web site, a not-terribly-serious report from the gala New York City launch party for the first 4/3rds camera, the E-1, way back in 2003.

I had forgotten some of the things Olympus was emphasizing back then. It makes for maybe a bit of a poignant picture, in some ways, viewed from the present.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/525177

@ Tan68

Yes, I was clearly the lame dweeb at that event -- no jacket, no pictures of Katya. However, my now-friend Dave Etchells (we didn't know each other then), did capture an image of the elusive Katya. I bet he got a jacket, too.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/NPICS1/OLYE1_PRESSCONF_1_L.JPG

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2017 at 00:21 UTC
In reply to:

Eamon Hickey: For anyone with an historical inclination and 5 minutes to waste (remember, you'll never get it back), I posted, on this very web site, a not-terribly-serious report from the gala New York City launch party for the first 4/3rds camera, the E-1, way back in 2003.

I had forgotten some of the things Olympus was emphasizing back then. It makes for maybe a bit of a poignant picture, in some ways, viewed from the present.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/525177

Hey Theano! Yes, I remember that you, me, AB, and a notorious Colorado maverick who shall remain nameless had a drink afterwards at a dive bar called Jimmy's Corner on W. 44th St. Somehow, I did not come away with an E-1 jacket, however, which disappoints me.

Link | Posted on Mar 11, 2017 at 00:17 UTC

For anyone with an historical inclination and 5 minutes to waste (remember, you'll never get it back), I posted, on this very web site, a not-terribly-serious report from the gala New York City launch party for the first 4/3rds camera, the E-1, way back in 2003.

I had forgotten some of the things Olympus was emphasizing back then. It makes for maybe a bit of a poignant picture, in some ways, viewed from the present.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/525177

Link | Posted on Mar 10, 2017 at 23:03 UTC as 98th comment | 6 replies
In reply to:

Debankur Mukherjee: The top LCD layout looks like Hasselblad.........Hasse will face more competition after these Fuji models as Fuji being their OEM.......hard days ahead for Hasse......

@Revenant

The Hasselblad X-series lenses are made by Nittoh, a venerable Japanese lensmaker with roots going back to the 1950s.

https://www.nittohkogaku.co.jp/en/business/optoelectronics.html

Link | Posted on Feb 24, 2017 at 15:58 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1079 comments in total)
In reply to:

medon78: Regarding strange JPEG color rendition: does the SL offer different color profiles?
It is hard to believe that Leica couldn't do "better" (whatever that means) regarding color rendition, so we would have to assume Leica actually WANTS color rendition to be the way it is.
All I can see from reading the review, and from checking the sample gallery: The color rendition is completely off the maintream.

The camera's raw files include an embedded DNG profile for Lightroom, which produces significantly different (and significantly better, in my view) default color. So if you shoot raw files, you can get nice default (i.e. no work on your part needed) color in Lightroom (but not with other software).

It's a somewhat odd way to handle the issue of providing a default look, but I presume that Leica believes almost anyone who uses an SL will be shooting raw anyway. (The problematic raw buffer works against that idea in any case where you want to shoot bursts, however. This is the one area where I wondered "what were they thinking?" when I used the camera.)

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 14:03 UTC
On article Leica SL Review (1079 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tan68: ..until the section titled ~ "learning curve, read the manual", I hadn't noticed the lack of mode dial.

However, I had noticed there appears to be no AF-on button...
I like AF button

Is there any way to initiate AF separately from a half-press of the shutter button ?

Maybe one of the customizable buttons can be set to do this but none of those buttons look very convenient to use for this purpose.

@Tan68

You can do AF-On (a.k.a. back-button AF) with the joystick -- it presses in. My thumb reaches it easily without contorting my grip on the camera (I'm 6'2", with proportional hands), but I had occasional problems with inadvertently activating the lateral commands of the joystick (i.e. moving the focus patch when I was trying to initiate AF). All in all, not as good an implementation as Canon or Nikon (who still do back-button AF the best, much to the discredit of the rest of the camera making world), but perfectly acceptable to me.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2017 at 13:54 UTC
In reply to:

CortoPA: It seems only the Companies with a strong Video presence will keep on moving forward.

Pentax, Fuji and Olympus are Hobby divisions funded by the Mothership so they will stay around as well. And some High End brands of course.

Does Nikon have enough income from other sources to keep their consumer grade stuff going?

@mosswings

Agree with you on the software comments, although I think computational imaging will be a huge part of that recipe, in addition to connectivity.

Tiny thing for the record: it's going back 20 years, but as late as the mid-1990s, the precision equipment division of Nikon accounted for almost 2/3rds of Nikon's revenue (cameras were down to 25% at that time). But precision equipment has been a mostly struggling business for Nikon since the late 1990s, no doubt.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2017 at 17:45 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: There is a lesson to take home for Nikon:

Even a market leader can be too late to adopt a new technology and become extinct in that niche.

Sony turned the 1" premiums into a cash cow, still Nikon failed to materialize any profit from that market.

The next, more important exercise will be enthusiast full frame mirrorless cameras. Aka 4k video, 50 MP stills hybrids.

@Raist3d

Oy. Really? I use my real name. Try this newfangled thing called Google.

I did not say the RX100 was unprofitable; I said we don't know. You and Falconeyes are guessing and defending your guesses without any sources or documentation. It's intellectually laughable.

Link | Posted on Feb 14, 2017 at 14:24 UTC
In reply to:

StephanBG: This press release is not about the DL line and development costs.

The pr is about Nikon having massive losses in 3 consecutive quarters.

Nikon has axed 1000 employees in 2016 bt that didn't make the outlook for 2017 any better.

The DL line has been cut to keep the Nikon boat afloat, yes it's that urgent.

I did see the announcement of "extraordinary loss". That's a specific accounting term which you should research -- it does not refer to Nikon's overall profit or loss. It's more accurately described as an 'out-of-the-ordinary expense'.

Now, it will certainly have an effect on Nikon's 4th quarter financial statement, and it could even cause them to restate earnings for earlier quarters in 2016. And it's true that they are forecasting a small overall loss for FY2017 (just over 1% -- very far from "massive or "huge"). But we won't know for sure until May. Most of the restructuring costs were already factored into Nikon's financial planning; what may not have been already factored in was the write-down/write-off of inventory in the semiconductor equipment division (28b yen worth). But that loss has nothing to do with the camera division, so all the comments on this thread are completely irrelevant to that issue.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 23:42 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: There is a lesson to take home for Nikon:

Even a market leader can be too late to adopt a new technology and become extinct in that niche.

Sony turned the 1" premiums into a cash cow, still Nikon failed to materialize any profit from that market.

The next, more important exercise will be enthusiast full frame mirrorless cameras. Aka 4k video, 50 MP stills hybrids.

Who is joking here? Your answer contains not even a hint of a source. An open secret in the industry? I'm a journalist in this industry; I talk to executives at camera companies, including Sony, all the time, but somehow this "open secret" escaped me. The actual truth is that profit margins on specific products are almost never credibly talked about (i.e. by people who are in a position to actually know). Margins on product categories are sometimes discussed - ILCs vs. point-and-shoots, or high-end SLRs vs. entry-level -- but not specific products. So, cite a credible source -- otherwise, nobody has any reason to believe a syllable of what you said.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 23:31 UTC
In reply to:

falconeyes: There is a lesson to take home for Nikon:

Even a market leader can be too late to adopt a new technology and become extinct in that niche.

Sony turned the 1" premiums into a cash cow, still Nikon failed to materialize any profit from that market.

The next, more important exercise will be enthusiast full frame mirrorless cameras. Aka 4k video, 50 MP stills hybrids.

How do you know if Sony makes any money on its 1" premium business? As far as I know, they have never divulged whether that business is profitable.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 22:00 UTC
In reply to:

StephanBG: This press release is not about the DL line and development costs.

The pr is about Nikon having massive losses in 3 consecutive quarters.

Nikon has axed 1000 employees in 2016 bt that didn't make the outlook for 2017 any better.

The DL line has been cut to keep the Nikon boat afloat, yes it's that urgent.

Not that facts matter anymore, but Nikon has been profitable the last three quarters. And for many, many quarters preceding those three. It takes about 5 seconds to find this information here: http://www.nikon.com/about/ir/finance/quarter/index.htm

And nearly all of those profitable quarters are attributable to the camera division; Nikon's other divisions have struggled significantly for many years, including last year.

Link | Posted on Feb 13, 2017 at 21:57 UTC
In reply to:

Eamon Hickey: There’s no reason why anyone should really know the mechanics of how currency exchange and international trade work, but I’ve been a little surprised at how many people on this thread have said, “Nobody ever lowers prices due to currency fluctuations”. Both price increases and reductions due to currency effects are actually happening all around you, every day, whether you know it or not.

I live in the U.S., and I like avocados — in salad or gaucamole, even on toast. Two or three years ago, I was paying about $2 an avocado most of the time. A year or so ago, my neighborhood grocery store put up a sign in the avocado bin: "Special! 4 for $5", and they’ve never taken it down. They actually should redo the sign; the writing is beginning to fade. Anyway, I’ve been paying about $1.25 for an avocado ever since. (cont. below)

And a part 3: Obviously, the avocado example is simplfied. Currency exchange is not the only factor that determines prices, even on imports. A good or bad growing season for avocados, in Mexico or California, could affect supply and that could have a big effect on prices. But currency changes are an important factor in import pricing, and the effects of currency go both ways, up and down. Not because companies have generous spirits, but because they compete with each other for market share and profits.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2017 at 20:26 UTC
In reply to:

Eamon Hickey: There’s no reason why anyone should really know the mechanics of how currency exchange and international trade work, but I’ve been a little surprised at how many people on this thread have said, “Nobody ever lowers prices due to currency fluctuations”. Both price increases and reductions due to currency effects are actually happening all around you, every day, whether you know it or not.

I live in the U.S., and I like avocados — in salad or gaucamole, even on toast. Two or three years ago, I was paying about $2 an avocado most of the time. A year or so ago, my neighborhood grocery store put up a sign in the avocado bin: "Special! 4 for $5", and they’ve never taken it down. They actually should redo the sign; the writing is beginning to fade. Anyway, I’ve been paying about $1.25 for an avocado ever since. (cont. below)

So what’s the explanation for this “special” that never ends? These avocados come from Mexico, and a little over two years ago, the peso began to lose value against the dollar — it’s now worth about 35% less than it was towards the end of 2014. U.S. importers are paying less now than they used to pay, in dollars, for Mexican avocados; the importers compete with each other, and with avocados from California, for market share and so they try to undercut their competition by making deals with supermarkets and they end up selling their cheaper avocados for lower prices; the supermarket buys the avocados for less, and it is competing with other supermarkets for customers like me, so it puts the avocados on special. The sign on the bin doesn’t say “Due to the weaker peso, we’re able to sell avocados cheaper than we used to.” It just says “Special! 4 for $5”. But the special is a result of the weaker peso. It’s why I am paying less for avocados now than I did two years ago.

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2017 at 19:57 UTC

There’s no reason why anyone should really know the mechanics of how currency exchange and international trade work, but I’ve been a little surprised at how many people on this thread have said, “Nobody ever lowers prices due to currency fluctuations”. Both price increases and reductions due to currency effects are actually happening all around you, every day, whether you know it or not.

I live in the U.S., and I like avocados — in salad or gaucamole, even on toast. Two or three years ago, I was paying about $2 an avocado most of the time. A year or so ago, my neighborhood grocery store put up a sign in the avocado bin: "Special! 4 for $5", and they’ve never taken it down. They actually should redo the sign; the writing is beginning to fade. Anyway, I’ve been paying about $1.25 for an avocado ever since. (cont. below)

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2017 at 19:57 UTC as 16th comment | 3 replies
In reply to:

garyknrd: Has Canon or Nikon given you a 30 cent on the dollar decrease since the Yin started to slide????? No, they increase there prices or stay the same? 2013-2017 the yin has gone from about 75 yin to the dollar to 110 yen to the dollar........
Those are the real thieves in the house IMO. Not Adobe!

garyknrd, you haven't been paying attention. What do you think all those massive U.S. rebate programs that Canon and Nikon (and nearly every other camera maker) have run over the past few years were?

I'm going to leave the question of whether there's still a "Soviet" currency aside, and also note that the broad economic effects of currency imbalances are much, much more complex than the question of individual companies making profits. And the American people -- or any other people -- can see the profits of most major global corporations in their annual reports. Canon and Nikon are profitable, but most other Japanese camera manufacturers do not make money in their camera businesses. And Apple, which accounts for its business using the "greenback", makes much higher profits than any of them. Currency value manipulation is important, but it's not simple and can't be summarized as "foreign companies are price gouging us".

Link | Posted on Feb 4, 2017 at 18:28 UTC
In reply to:

Kona Mike: I'll bet Adobe will NEVER lower a subscription price because of 'fluctuating foreign exchange rates'

Yes, Revenant is right, I did not offer any opinions on the motivation of the companies. (But when they lower prices it is not to reward customers, but to stay competitive, of course.)

Redhed17, I am 100% positive that companies, including camera companies, lower prices because of currency fluctuations all the time. Any time you see a broad rebate program from an importer -- i.e. they are providing rebates on many products simultaneously -- that's a currency-related price reduction. I'm not guessing about this; I worked for the U.S. subsidiary of Nikon for almost a decade. During that time, I helped implement not only rebate programs (the easy way to do it), but also across-the-board wholesale price reductions (the painful way to do it) due specifically to currency fluctuations. I also implemented many price increases due to currency fluctuations. In the mid 1990s, it was like a see-saw.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 18:48 UTC
In reply to:

Brian Wadie: funny how they never add "we want to increase our profit margins so will charge well in excess of the currency fluctuations. Its not just Adobe, Apple are doing it, as indeed so are UK companies charging increased prices for products sourced and produced within the UK

Yes, of course, they will charge as much as they can. But classic capitalist theory says that competition will hold that in check.

I think there are already credible competitors to many Adobe products, and Adobe, in theory, is aware that if they drastically overprice the products that don't have much competition, then they will be opening up an opportunity for a new competitor to emerge. So, again, that's supposed to act as a counter to price gouging.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 17:12 UTC
In reply to:

Kona Mike: I'll bet Adobe will NEVER lower a subscription price because of 'fluctuating foreign exchange rates'

Actually, companies do this all the time. It's usually in the form of a sale or rebate. Obviously, I don't know if Adobe will, but if exchange rates go the other way, look for sales and promotions on Adobe subscriptions.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 17:07 UTC
In reply to:

jdu_sg: I know this is primarily a photo site, but what I find most interesting about this is the economics aspects.

Adobe are creating a sort of borderless market, tied to currency rates in this case. Because there is nothing physical about selling the product (retail package, retail location, physical storey, manufacture, materials) they have no need to comply with local pricing at all, or even account for factors that normally drag on prices. Its starting to feel like exchange arbitrage.

I'm not 100% familiar with Adobe's business structure, but it's certainly not true that they have no regional expenses.

I'd guess they have sales and marketing offices in most regions, which in a normal corporate structure would be paid for by sales within that region, meaning they would be heavily affected by currency fluctuations.

I know Adobe does a ton of regional localization -- i.e. language translation etc. I don't know how they pay for translating the Photoshop interface into, say, German, plus everything else they provide in German (help, instruction manuals, marketing and advertising, customer service etc.) But if they are like most companies, they would seek to pay for those activities from their sales in Germany. And so exchange rates would have a big impact on their costing.

Link | Posted on Feb 3, 2017 at 17:05 UTC
Total: 78, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous1234Next ›Last »