Canon vs Nikon: the loser is...

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Kinon O'Cann, Aug 27, 2007.

  1. Kinon O'Cann

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    ....Sony! Give the recent introductions by both companies, and the depth of
    their systems, why would any working pros buy Sony's SLRs? Granted, Sony's
    stuff is nice, but why?
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Aug 27, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Sorry, Nikon has been the loser for the last 30+ years. then things went
    terribly downhill from there in their quality and capability when they tried to
    enter the digital realm. Get some experience under your belt before you can even
    hope to know which camera company is worth supporting. The only reason that
    Nikon is still around is due to the very same phenomenon that keeps PhotoShop
    around. They were good at one time, so some daft pros kept supporting them and
    all the mindless sheep followed like good little idiots. You now have a huge
    snowball of fools and idiots. There should be a name for this phenomenon that
    keeps low-quality products going.

    Oh wait, I remember now, I already have the perfect name for it. I call it "The
    Human Termite Syndrome". Termites, when building spires inside of their nests,
    will all start off randomly making spires. If they detect one nearer to them
    that is larger they will abandon their own to go build the larger one, even
    taking materials from their better smaller spire to go support the larger one.
    The larger spire may be the most useless addition, their own spire being much
    more functional and have more purpose to the success of their nest. But no,
    since they detected one nearby that is being built by more termites and is
    already larger, they abandon their better spire to go help build the large bad
    one. VHS also won out over Betamax due to the Human Termite Syndrome. (On a
    smaller scale you can see this phenomenon happen at every garage-sale or
    yard-sale. Nobody will go to one unless others are already there. Once 2 or more
    people show up the rest of the mindless sheep come flocking to it.)

    Remember this in the future. The only reason that Nikon and PhotoShop are still
    around is due to "The Human Termite Syndrome".

    What a shame that humans have no more ability to think and reason than most
    insects. These two product-lines prove it without question.
     
    Sigh...More Fools, Aug 27, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Kinon O'Cann

    Dave Cohen Guest

    And make sure you all remember that those termites were doing their
    thing long before humans arrived on the scene and will be doing their
    thing long after humans have left. They may be dumb and mindless but
    together with their cockroach friends they do know how to survive.
    Dave Cohen
     
    Dave Cohen, Aug 27, 2007
    #3
  4. Kinon O'Cann

    ASAAR Guest

    There are also no sock puppets among the termites and roaches
    because they deal with them quite intelligently, as a meal. :)
     
    ASAAR, Aug 27, 2007
    #4
  5. And I'm sure that all their photo albums will be quite lovely as they share them
    on all those genus-reunion picnics that they attend. Anemones have been around
    much longer and all they've managed to accomplish is longevity and slithering
    around on reefs, cleaning up the left-overs in the water. Horseshoe crabs too,
    their longevity is dependent on few things caring to eat their copper-based
    blood.

    May your populace of insect and anemone level intellect enjoy the low-quality
    and low-capability of their PhotoShop and Nikon longevity. I, on the other hand,
    prefer to be more than an insect whose actions and choices are not determined by
    the semi-random actions of the all other nearly-mindless collective around them.

    May you one day be lucky enough to strive to be more than an insect collective
    or anemone slithering around on rocks.
     
    Sigh...More Fools, Aug 28, 2007
    #5
  6. Only a fool with the mind of an insect couldn't see the difference. And an even
    bigger fool to ask such a stupid question.
     
    Sigh...More Fools, Aug 28, 2007
    #6
  7. Kinon O'Cann

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    A point your pointless post has reinforced, thank you!

    Sorry, I expect a lot more from my trolls. Try and be a little more creative
    in the future, if you have one.
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Aug 28, 2007
    #7
  8. Kinon O'Cann

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    Rita, will you give "sign" some lessons on trolling? Sigh is obviously a
    rank amateur, even more so than...
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Aug 28, 2007
    #8
  9. Kinon O'Cann

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    Right. That explains their presence in the professional video field.
    Professional video appliances? Sony has made it clear they intend to compete
    with Nikon and Canon. They can't do that without capturing a chunk of the
    pro market.
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Aug 28, 2007
    #9
  10. Kinon O'Cann

    dr Guest

    Why would you think Sony are the losers, they do make nearly all of Nikon's
    sensors after all !!!

    D
     
    dr, Aug 28, 2007
    #10
  11. You forget, Sony only keeps the best sensors for themselves. They sell all the
    ones that don't meet up to their own requirements to all other camera makers.
     
    WhileOutShopping..., Aug 28, 2007
    #11
  12. Kinon O'Cann

    Franklin B. Guest

    No, that's what happens when using ANY dslr. And if you don't change the lenses,
    which *always* introduces even more dust, you might just as well buy a
    high-quality P&S camera with a sealed single-lens design.

    Oh wait, I did, and do, just for that reason.

    I played the stupid dslr game at one time. Never again. I wasn't raised to be
    some blind-sheep and CEO's cash-cow fool. I put the limitations of the SLR
    design behind me in the last century when I intelligently switched to 100%
    digital. You can have your dslr bridge-cameras that ineptly try to marry last
    century's SLR limitations to this century's digital-age. I also won't buy into
    some outdated, noisy, and dust-ridden mechanical design just because I invested
    in some performance-limited lenses long ago and want to keep using them. I leave
    that to the stupid and poor. Those who can't let go of what little they already
    have. There's a huge and lucrative marketplace for that class of people and all
    the camera company market-research departments know it. That's why they keep
    feeding dslrs to those kinds of people. As long as people are stupid enough to
    keep buying them, they keep making them!
     
    Franklin B., Aug 28, 2007
    #12
  13. You know, maybe, just maybe, people here might take you seriously if you
    chose one name to post under and stuck with it.

    Myabe.

    Alternatively, since by your own statements, none of us are worthy of
    hearing your wisdom, you should cease to tantalize us with the merest
    morsels of your glory that our puny minds are capable of assimilating.

    -dms
     
    Daniel Silevitch, Aug 28, 2007
    #13
  14. Kinon O'Cann

    Kinon O'Cann Guest

    Maybe now, but not for long, I'd guess. Sony wanted to "dominate" the SLR
    business, which was, in the lease, ambitious. So my question is this: why
    buy a Sony SLR when there are two companies that produce superior products
    and include a system that's far deeper than Sony?
     
    Kinon O'Cann, Aug 29, 2007
    #14
  15. Kinon O'Cann

    John Turco Guest


    Hello, Gisle:

    You're completely correct! Sony's consumer equipment has always been
    highly overrated, in my opinion.


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>
     
    John Turco, Aug 30, 2007
    #15
    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.