 |
 | 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 / October 2006Canon Rebel XTi's debut in Japan is huge
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1000&thread=20325537 > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1000&thread=20325537 You can see clearly that by projecting that graph, then the 400d will have more than 100% of sales by Christmas, and every other maker will be in negative figures. > > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1000&thread=20325537 > > > You can see clearly that by projecting that graph, then the 400d will > have more than 100% of sales by Christmas, and every other maker will be > in negative figures. Well, they all get a "bump" on debut, but the Rebel's was by far the largest. >> > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1000&thread=20325537 >> > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Well, they all get a "bump" on debut, but the Rebel's was by far the > largest. and almost all of it previous victims replacing their 300d and 350d models... Sales figures don't indicate market share in this market, just how eager the users are to have the latest and greatest. >>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1000&thread=20325537 >>>> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Sales figures don't indicate market share in this market, just how eager the > users are to have the latest and greatest. ...and cheapest. > >>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1000&thread=20325537 > >>>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > > ...and cheapest. Actually the D50 is cheaper. Canon has just made a conscious decision to make a poorly constructed camera to increase their revenues. Why they aren't smart enough to built it so it's the same construction quality as the entry level Nikon's, I'll never know. They are losing customers because of the poor construction. Not that Canon is alone here. The new Sony has pathetic construction. > > >>>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1000&thread=20325537 > > >>>> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Not that Canon is alone here. The new Sony has pathetic construction. It's cheezy, like most entry-level cameras. Saying outright that Nikon's are constructed better may or may not be true. They "appear to be better" but I haven't seen any real proof. Sony has had a really bad run in some areas (batteries, sensors) and because they make so many, it has effected dozens of other companies. > It's cheezy, like most entry-level cameras. Saying outright that > Nikon's are constructed better may or may not be true. They "appear to > be better" but I haven't seen any real proof. Sony has had a really > bad run in some areas (batteries, sensors) and because they make so > many, it has effected dozens of other companies. It's "affected." > It's "affected." Typos, spelling and grammar errors are not ordinarily pointed on NG's unless context or meaning is changed beyond the posters meaning. >> It's "affected." > > Typos, spelling and grammar errors are not ordinarily pointed on NG's > unless context or meaning is changed beyond the posters meaning. Then there is no hope for improvement? >>> It's "affected." >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Then there is no hope for improvement? Little. IAC the point of the NG is not passing a spelling or grammar test. Were it that, it would grind to a halt. >>>> It's "affected." >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Little. IAC the point of the NG is not passing a spelling or grammar > test. Were it that, it would grind to a halt. We should also keep in mind that we have people from many different countries and from many different schooling levels in here. We need to chill just a little I think. >>>>> It's "affected." >>>> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > countries and from many different schooling levels in here. We need > to chill just a little I think. In which case, posting corrections to their English should provide a valuable opportunity for them to improve their command of the language. I speak a little German, and I know that I welcome any corrections. Many Dutch people I communicate with appreciate corrections to their English. David >>>>>> It's "affected." >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > David Thats fine but you also run the risk of insulting some that are just grammar and spelling challenged, they probably will just think the correcting person is a an arrogant, ignorant w.nker, lets face it there is plenty of them around Usenet so they would probably be correct. >>>>>>> It's "affected." >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > there is plenty of them around Usenet so they would probably be > correct. Agreed. That's why I would try (but not always succeed!) to make any correction only after I had also responded to the post, and perhaps with a BTW (by the way) in front of it so that it added to what I posted, and to show that the correction was not the /only/ purpose of the post. Incorrect usage of English annoys me, but I do accept that there is not just one single correct usage. David >>>>>>>> It's "affected." >>>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > usage of English annoys me, but I do accept that there is not just one > single correct usage. Correcting spelling and grammar are distractions from the main point of the discussion and can be seen by many to be a form of red herring. Further, it suggests that you are paying more attention to form than to content. If the grammar or spelling are so poor that the post is difficult to decipher then it's reasonable to make suggestions for improvement. If the error is repeated and it's one of my hot buttons then I may mention it but usually with the disclaimer that it's one of my hot buttons. If it is such that the meaning becomes unclear then it's reasonable to ask for clarification. If it is humorous, well, screw 'em if they can't take a joke. In the instant case, where the error was made once in the post, for all you know it could have been a typographical error--it did not in any sense make the author's meaning unclear. Commenting on it is just a distraction. [] > In the instant case, where the error was made once in the post, for > all you know it could have been a typographical error--it did not in > any sense make the author's meaning unclear. Commenting on it is > just a distraction. In view of the author's apparent expertise in all fields - I am sure he would have appreciated the correction. There was little else in the post.... David > Correcting spelling and grammar are distractions from the main point of the > discussion and can be seen by many to be a form of red herring. Further, it [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > know it could have been a typographical error--it did not in any sense make > the author's meaning unclear. Commenting on it is just a distraction. hear, hear.  Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. >> In the instant case, where the error was made once in the post, for >> all you know it could have been a typographical error--it did not in >> any sense make the author's meaning unclear. Commenting on it is just >> a distraction. > > hear, hear. So, where does it put those who are commenting on the commenting by those who are commenting on the original comment?? Not that *this* is a comment, mind you! <s> Signaturejohn mcwilliams > In which case, posting corrections to their English should provide a > valuable opportunity for them to improve their command of the language. Exactly. A correction without acrimony should always be acceptable and welcome. >>>>>>It's "affected." >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > In which case, posting corrections to their English should provide a > valuable opportunity for them to improve their command of the language. The NG is not "Conversational written english for digital cameras." > I speak a little German, and I know that I welcome any corrections. Many > Dutch people I communicate with appreciate corrections to their English. My spoken French isn't at all bad, but written French is a iran-clad-female of the PMS'd kind (German is even worse, but then that makes perfect sense!) I disagree, however, with you and Mr. Schuler. The point of discussion here is dig. slr cameras and it may take place in ANY language including the bastard of all languages, English. IMO, it should not be used to correct people's grammar and esp. not typos and spelling errors. (Esp. since I seem to be phonetically driven and hence I occasionally blow there v. their and the occasional "too for to"). So I don't want to be picked on. As long as meaning is not lost the convention in NG's has always been to let it go. Cheers, Alan Signature-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm -- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin -- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch. I have a theory. RichA DELIBERATELY made an egregious error to stir up this hornet's nest. Wouldn't put it past him. To paraphrase GSP: "RichA, you magnificent bastard. I read your post." ;-) >I have a theory. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > "RichA, you magnificent bastard. I read your post." ;-) Boy, talk about thread drift... SignatureSkip Middleton www.shadowcatcherimagery.com www.pbase.com/skipm Yes, #5 on the hit parade ;-) "10 flagrant grammar mistakes that make you look stupid" http://insight.zdnet.co.uk/0,39020415,39273376,00.htm Bob P.S. I did not write the article, so please do not flame me. > It's cheezy, like most entry-level cameras. Saying outright that > Nikon's are constructed better may or may not be true. They "appear to > be better" but I haven't seen any real proof. Sony has had a really > bad run in some areas (batteries, sensors) and because they make so > many, it has effected dozens of other companies. It's "affected." <<< |
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.