 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / July 2005Proof marketers are not catering to enthusiasts
But instead to the average consumer when it comes to cameras of all types. This is a blurb from dpreview about the new Fuji "prosumer." http://www.dpreview.com/news/0507/05072803fuji_s9000z.asp "Fuji has today announced what it sees as competition to entry level DSLRs with the 9 million pixel FinePix S9000 Zoom. It features a 10.7x optical zoom (28-300mm) (with no image stabilization), ISO from 80 to 1600, twist-barrel zoom control, a tiltable 1.8-inch LCD, plus a 640 x 480 movie mode. Fuji sees the S9000 Zoom as the point where compact and DSLRs meet as it offers the resolution and control of an SLR, while at the same time offering functions associated with a compact camera." What is MISSING from this is that the CCD is only a 1/1.6 and not anything like what you get in a DSLR. Instead of providing it, something that would provide a MASSIVE improvement in prosumer performance, they opt instead to do the same thing; MORE pixels (tiny pixels!) and a long zoom. So, it's very likely the noise and tonality issues that plague prosumers are still going to be there. And they were the MAIN differentiators between the DSLRs and prosumers! Why? Because they know what buttons to push to impress Joe Average. Bigger, longer, more, more, more! Meanwhile, a 6 meg DSLR will BLOW AWAY the 9 meg prosumer in nearly every aspect of image quality, STILL! Other reasons why we don't have "high end" prosumers or fixed-lens cameras? Cost. Bigger sensors and the lenses needed to support them cost money. Although a bigger CCD coupled with a Sigma-like 18-200mm zoom (providing maybe 27mm to 300mm with a decent CCD/CMOS) would be a GODSEND for the prosumer market. I've yet to buy a DSLR because I'm waiting to see what Olympus successor to the E-1 will be. But, my current prosumer (C8080) bests most DSLR/kit lens combos when it comes to resolution because of my prosumer's superior lens. This is a rarity in the prosumer field. It's also built better than entry-level DSLRS. However, it does NOT match any DSLR when it comes to: -Focusing -Noise control -Tonality -Speed But it COULD, if they'd wanted it to. I personally believe there is a big potential market for a fixed-lens high-end prosumer that could compete with the DSLRs. A sealed camera body would eliminate the dust issue and a lens of 18-200mm would serve 90+% of users out there. An external "telextender" raising the max f.l. to 300mm (450mm equivalent) could be produced as well since they already exist for prosumers. But Fuji's latest offering is NOTHING to write home about. Pity. > But instead to the average consumer when it comes to cameras > of all types. This is a blurb from dpreview about the new Fuji [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > while at the same time offering functions associated with a compact > camera." I don't agree with your headline, but having the camera without image stabilisation, and with 9MP in such a small sensor may not help it to sell compared to its competition. By the way, this would be more on-topic in rec.photo.digital.zlr or rec.photo.digital. It is off-topic here. David On Thu, 28 Jul 2005 06:17:11 GMT, "David J Taylor" <david-taylor@blueyonder.co.not-this-bit.nor-this-part.uk.invalid> wrote: >> But instead to the average consumer when it comes to cameras >> of all types. This is a blurb from dpreview about the new Fuji [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > >David Well, in a way it isn't off topic. It's clear that Fuji, Samsung and Panasonic are aiming their new models at people trying to decide between DSLR and prosumer so it's "kind of" on topic since the sale of those things will impact DSLR sales. I think. -Rich zoom control, a tiltable 1.8-inch LCD, plus a 640 x >> 480 movie mode. Fuji sees the S9000 Zoom as the point where compact >> and DSLRs meet as it offers the resolution and control of an SLR, [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > David I thought trolls were off topic in any group. > Because they know what buttons to push to impress Joe Average. YES > Bigger, longer, more, more, more! Meanwhile, a 6 meg DSLR will > BLOW AWAY the 9 meg prosumer in nearly every aspect of image quality, Yes again but.......... The market they're targeting don't much care for the little (in their view) differences between the image quality of the DSLR to non SLR. What Joe Average cares about mostly is ease of use. Despite DSLRs being streets ahead of even top-end pro-sumers Joe Average would question the value of that difference Toa >> Because they know what buttons to push to impress Joe Average. > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Toa Because he only ever prints at 6x4 and never crops and is happy with that. > >> Because they know what buttons to push to impress Joe Average. > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Because he only ever prints at 6x4 and never crops and is happy with that. Right. And I don't Joe & Jane Average question the value of the better camera. To them, it has NO value, because they would never come close to using its capabilities. If all you want is a 4x6, or when feeling wild a 5x7, what's the point of paying for the ability to produce sharp 16x20s or larger? And most especially when the cash difference is maybe $500 minimum, and the changeover also adds complexity to what to them is a simple feat. Point. Shoot. Run the card into the machine. You and the others are being a little hard on the quality of pro-sumer cameras. They indeed can produce very good 8x10 and in some cases larger prints. The main reason some will like the s9000 is convenience and less weight. Add that to good quality prints and I bet Fuji has a winner with the s9000 and the e900. Who are y'all to talk about Joe Average? Arrogant know it alls, I think. > You and the others are being a little hard on the quality of pro-sumer > cameras. They indeed can produce very good 8x10 and in some cases > larger prints. The main reason some will like the s9000 is convenience > and less weight. Add that to good quality prints and I bet Fuji has a > winner with the s9000 and the e900. Who are y'all to talk about Joe > Average? Arrogant know it alls, I think. Got your shorts in a bunch, huh? Speaking of different qualities for the average buyer of a particular item is not exactly denigrating that person. Joe & Jane may not give a rat's a.s about photography as a hobby or sport or whatever the hell it is, but may well be superb at woodworking or carving or quilting. That's a choice of recreation, and has nothing to do with arrogance. Most people I know who are not involved in photography as a business or a "calling" tend to think 4x6 photos are big enough. I had a 5x7 made of a portait I made of my stepson, and my wife thought it was a waste of money, when a 4x6 would be almost as big. I don't explain it. I down downrate it. But it does exist, and there is a lot of it. It's a little like my bass fishing friends: I wouldn't give you two bucks for every bass boat in Virginia (or elsewhere), but these guys pay many multiple thousands for theirs, based on the boats of the stars, and seem to feel I'm a little weird because dropping 25K to kill a few fish is not my thing. It's their choice. It's not my choice. > Who are y'all to talk about Joe > Average? Arrogant know it alls, I think. Ain't no-one getting their shorts in a bunch (well, I'm not sure about you). We're just telling it as it is. Most digital photographers don't give a rats about multiple lenses, huge sensors etc. They just want a quick, easy and reliable way to take photos. Some of them make prints, lots don't. Toa > Because he only ever prints at 6x4 and never crops and is happy with that. Yup. In fact lots don't even print, just using it for email etc. Yes I know it's over-kill but Joe Average has been sold on the idea that zillions of pixels are the sole factor for consideration with digital photography Toa > but Joe Average has been sold on the idea that > zillions of pixels are the sole factor for consideration with digital > photography It's like trying to convince them that Ghz isn't all there is to computer performance... When they are shopping, all they ask is "How many Ghz is this one..."  SignatureStacey > > but Joe Average has been sold on the idea that > > zillions of pixels are the sole factor for consideration with digital [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Stacey It's GHz. Hz is for Hertz, after Heinrich Hertz, a German physicist 1857 - 1894. The H is always upper case. Colin D. >> > but Joe Average has been sold on the idea that >> > zillions of pixels are the sole factor for consideration with digital [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Colin D. And he is wrong because it does matter but not as much as some would have you believe. >>> > but Joe Average has been sold on the idea that >>> > zillions of pixels are the sole factor for consideration with digital [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >And he is wrong because it does matter but not as much as some would have >you believe. Used by Intel to keep the con going. Good think they're now being prosecuted for bribing computer makers, dealers, etc. If Intel can do one thing very well, it's read the minds of sheep. -Rich > And he is wrong because it does matter but not as much as some would have > you believe. And, who is wrong? Toa >> > but Joe Average has been sold on the idea that >> > zillions of pixels are the sole factor for consideration with digital [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >It's GHz. Hz is for Hertz, after Heinrich Hertz, a German physicist >1857 - 1894. The H is always upper case. The truth Hertz. ;-) >> but Joe Average has been sold on the idea that >> zillions of pixels are the sole factor for consideration with digital >> photography >It's like trying to convince them that Ghz isn't all there is to computer >performance... When they are shopping, all they ask is "How many Ghz is >this one..." Well, some ask about RAM. What most people fail to ask, is "why does this computer only have one hard disk?" Three 120 GB drives are much faster, when properly utilized, than a single 300 GB drive. "Simultaneous" access of two files on two separate hard disks is anywhere from 5x to 15x than on a single drive. Photoshop is excrutiatingly painful to use on a one-hard-disk computer, especially on laptops, with their pathetic drive performance. Signature<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm> ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< > I personally believe there is a big potential market for a fixed-lens > high-end prosumer that could compete with the DSLRs. A sealed camera > body would eliminate the dust issue and a lens of 18-200mm would serve > 90+% of users out there. An external "telextender" raising the max > f.l. to 300mm (450mm equivalent) could be produced as well since they > already exist for prosumers. Amen to that. If Sony took the 828, reworked the sensor to make the high-ISO noise on part with a Canon 20D, made the shot-to-shot speed as fast as a DSLR (I hate the between-shots lag) and supported something like the Canon or Nikon multiple wireless flashes, I'd buy one in a minute. The thing that's kept me from pulling the trigger on a DSLR is the lack of ability to use the LCD for framing a shot, the lack of a movie mode, and the lack of something like the NightFraming/Nightshot feature that Sony has. Believe it or not, I use all of these. I'd also like Canon to offer a 24-200 (equivalent) f2.0-2.8 kit lens, but I'm not going to hold my breath. ;-) > But Fuji's latest offering is NOTHING to write home about. > Pity. As usual. SignatureAlbert Nurick | Nurick + Associates - Web Design albert@nurick.com | eCommerce - Content Management www.nurick.com | Web Applications - Hosting >> I personally believe there is a big potential market for a fixed-lens >> high-end prosumer that could compete with the DSLRs. A sealed camera [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > and the lack of something like the NightFraming/Nightshot feature that > Sony has. Believe it or not, I use all of these. So do I but my Sony V1 is used sometimes and my Pentax Ds is used others. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.