any Nikon answer to digital rebel?

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by redcat, Oct 22, 2003.

  1. redcat

    PhotoMan Guest

    Seems to me that the Digital Rebel is a pretty good indicator of how well
    Canon stays on its toes!
     
    PhotoMan, Oct 25, 2003
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. The 300D is a brilliant marketing move toward getting new users hooked into
    Canon lenses. The only thing that surprises me is that I haven't seen the
    Digital Rebel blister-packed and hanging on a rack at Wal-Mart. That would
    seem to be a logical move for this camera.

    HMc
     
    Howard McCollister, Oct 25, 2003
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. redcat

    Bob Niland Guest

    May be priced too high. I haven't paid all that
    much attention to cameras at Wal-Mart, but what's
    on the shelf seems to top out at about $400.

    WM does list the EOS-10D on their web site, but
    I've never seen one in a store.

    --
    Regards, PO Box 248
    Bob Niland Enterprise
    mailto: Kansas USA
    which, due to spam, is: 67441-0248
    email4rjn AT yahoo DOT com
    http://www.access-one.com/rjn

    Unless otherwise specifically stated, expressing
    personal opinions and NOT speaking for any
    employer, client or Internet Service Provide
     
    Bob Niland, Oct 25, 2003
    #23
  4. redcat

    Bowser- Guest

    Hmm...

    This camera, announced in July, for a "late summer shipping date,was delayed
    until October, and now November.

    Whatever. It doesn't matter to me since I'm not buying one.
     
    Bowser-, Oct 25, 2003
    #24
  5. redcat

    Bowser- Guest

    I think Nikon's problems with digital go much deeper than simply being late
    to market. Nikon was caught in a classic paradigm shift, and didn't react as
    fast as Canon. In the past, Nikon would take years to develop and introduce
    new products, and then market those products for decades. Well, we're not in
    Kansas anymore. Canon read the market, began their own sensor development
    process, did not rely on third parties to provide parts, and has taken the
    market by storm, not only from Nikon, but from all other SLR manufacturers,
    as well.

    Not only that, but Nikon was facing the prospect that no matter how good
    they built their cameras, the image quality it produced was defined by
    someone else's product; the sensor. And, no matter what they did, image
    improvements were only marginal when software updates were issued. Clearly,
    Nikon is in catch-up mode, and it could be a year or two before their latest
    venture, sensor manufacturing, bears real fruit. Their D2H is delayed again,
    there are rumors of noise problems, they have nothing to compete with the
    300D or 1Ds, and the the P&S market is competitive to the point that there
    are little, if any margins. I'd have to guess that they're scrambling in a
    huge way right now.
     
    Bowser-, Oct 26, 2003
    #25
  6. redcat

    ThomasH Guest

    Nikon was traditionally slower in body releases and they have not
    changed their tactics much. By doing so they avoid the recent
    Canon-Syndrom: Thousands of people having a body and trying to
    replace with a newer one! Just think of all the D30 and D60 owners,
    some of them might now look at the EOS-10D, a worthy Nikon D100
    killer, and regret to have waited a bit. Its easy to saturate
    market, you know... There are only so many people willing to spend
    well over $1000 for a camera and the EOS-300D ("digital rebel",
    a horrible name of it here in the US) is way to nasty plasticky
    and ugly looking piece of equipment for some people.


    But nowadays Nikon's comparatively slower pace might have another
    reason as well:

    One issue with Nikon might be poor performance of their
    Precision Instruments division (see annual reports on their
    web page.) This division was losing so much money, and the
    revenue sank in half, that the entire company is in (low) red
    numbers. Seemingly the profits from the photo division are
    being depleted to cover loses of the Instruments division.

    Another Nikons slow and painful march toward newer technology
    were the VR lenses, which came out with a huge delay... Personally
    I am cool with that: better delay that release a product which
    will be dumped almost instantly. I am cool with the 2nd delay of
    the D2H as well. If they have noise problem, they should take
    time and fix it. Of course, it can happen that Canon will than
    reply to them and bring another version of the EOS-1D with
    the ideas and innovations presented in the D2H prototype, such
    as wireless image download from the camera.

    For me the EOS-300D was a well timed reply to Pentaxes entry
    with their tiny dIst! The new EOS is just as tiny and has
    a wider base of potential users: more Canon lenses are out
    there.

    Thomas
     
    ThomasH, Oct 27, 2003
    #26
  7. redcat

    redcat Guest

    thats an excellent answer. thanks much!

     
    redcat, Oct 27, 2003
    #27
  8. redcat

    JackD Guest

    One has to wonder if this is the best tactic going forward. In the digital
    era the body is both a means for holding the lens AND is in a way, the film
    itself. In the film world, the same camera body can get better images as
    film emulsions improve simply by changing what you load in the back.
    Improvements of the body are fairly slow (and in my opinion fairly
    inconseqential - though some may differ). However, to take advantage of new
    digital imaging technology the body must be thrown out and you need to buy a
    new one.

    With that in mind, it would appear that perhaps a "disposable" plastic body
    (and here I don't really mean disposable, but really something that is
    designed for a 5-10 year life instead of 50-100 years) would be more
    appropriate. Canon has in effect done this with their 300D and it appears to
    be a very successful move. By doing this they remove the hesitation
    encountered when one is buying an expensive item that everyone KNOWS will be
    obsolete within a few years.

    Sure, it was nicer when you could buy a Nikon F body and live with it, but
    now that the camera is the film too, you have to be more flexible.

    Perhaps if the digital guts could be modularized enough so that they could
    be upgraded as a unit it would take the edge off this trend, but until then
    I think we will see that people are buying camera bodies for the internal
    imaging electronics as much as for the body itself.

    -Jack
     
    JackD, Oct 27, 2003
    #28
  9. redcat

    ThomasH Guest

    Why so? Let's look at the sales development: Nikon has a comparable
    growth rate in their photo division with the digital stuff as Canon
    has. Film gear declines, digital gear explodes in numbers.

    Canon moves faster with new models, we know that, but at a price of
    less testing and... obsoleting someone's investments. A few month
    ago I quoted quite disturbing news from Europe that Canon Germany
    admitted to EOS-10D problems with sharpness and AF with certain
    lenses and wide open aperture. Now as I see this is a public knowledge
    here as well, just lookup below the thread with the header "Canon 10D
    Sharpens issues" and see the exemplary images.

    I have heard of no such drastic issues with D100! Nikon released
    it late, later than some people would wish, but they have done
    a nice job in outranking the EOS D60 in many aspects, which
    included superb AF in low light, what especially you as 'the master
    of the Noir' should value so much! EOS-10D followed the D100 with
    smashing new improvements, seemingly always a notch over the D100,
    but now we know, that they have not tested the camera as they should!

    If they will continue to do so, the sudden Canomania could be
    over any time soon, and the traditional "1st Diva in Photography"
    Nikon might resurrect itself as the preferred source of a *serious*
    and reliable photographic equipment.

    Thomas
     
    ThomasH, Oct 27, 2003
    #29
  10. redcat

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    You are a bit behind the curve on the 10D, as it was only some cameras
    of the first production run - Nikon products frequently need "Firmware
    upgrades" pretty quick after they come out too -- but no matter.
    The Canon DRebel is under 1000 dollars. It is going to produce one hell
    of a lot of Canon shooters in the 8 months to a year that it takes Nikon to
    come up with a competitive product - if they even do it that fast. The
    market for the DRebel is the very important P&S moving up to SLR market --
    the one that will be buying a lot of lenses over the next 5 years.
    Nikon squandered a lead in DSLRS and it's going to cost them - right now
    the two lowest priced system DSLRS are both Canon - unless you want to count
    the Sigma - which only takes Sigma lenses.
     
    Tony Spadaro, Oct 28, 2003
    #30
  11. redcat

    Charlie Ih Guest

    I just want to add the following. It is apparent that Canon is ahead
    in sensor technology (particularly CMOS) and probably in image processing
    software (producing more pleasant images in camera which pleases many
    people). On the other hand, Nikon lenses (mount) are more widely
    accepted (Kodak, Fujifilm, Sigma (?)). Nikon seems to give more
    considerations for the needs of users. Nikon already has 12 - 24 mm
    lens for D100 so ultra wideangle is not an issue. With this ultra
    wideangle lens there are really no technical and logical reasons
    to have a "full size" sensor during the "transition" to free us
    from the 35 mm movie film (double-frame and sideway) format. (which
    is of course nothing wrong. we adapted it quite well.) D100 takes
    "standard" batteries and AA batteries through an adapter in addition
    to its proprietary battery. Nikon's CP-4500 (and predecessors)
    can also use "standard" batteries and has wideangle and telephoto
    converters and many other accessaries available when the camera
    was announced.

    I am glad that the two companies taking different approaches.
    I try to take advantages on both sides.
     
    Charlie Ih, Oct 28, 2003
    #31
  12. Hi Charlie
    I must disagree.

    Assume you've got an array of 4500 x 3000 pixels.

    The larger the sensor containing that array, for
    a given sensing technology, the less noise in
    the sensed image. Why ? Because each pixel
    is sampling a larger area.

    stan
     
    Stanley Krute, Oct 28, 2003
    #32
  13. Hi Gavin
    Nope, just sniffin' the tea leaves.

    Assuming that noise is NOT a problem: what
    else explains the shipping delay ? what else
    explains the lack of official samples at high ISO ?

    Hey, I'm sitting here on mucho $$$ worth of
    Nikon lenses. I WANT them to succeed. But
    I don't wear blinders.

    stan
     
    Stanley Krute, Oct 28, 2003
    #33
  14. Hi Bob

    Could be. They're in a tough balancing act as
    they develop their own sensor-manufacturing
    capabilities.

    As you point out so well, though, relying
    on the Sony 8Mp sensor is problematic.

    stan
     
    Stanley Krute, Oct 28, 2003
    #34
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.