There are/will be no pro cameras, other than Canon or Nikon

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by RichA, Mar 11, 2007.

  1. RichA

    RichA Guest

    All the rest, including the new Sony proposals are "prosumer" or
    "enthusiast" market cameras.
    Sony and Olympus talk about "pro" models, but this is just to make
    those models attractive to a group of shooters who are definitely not
    pros but want something beyond the plastic of the amateur ranks but
    that don't cost as much as the pro models from Canon and Nikon.
    But the pro ranks are dictated as much by marketing and system support
    as the equipment itself so the idea of Olympus, Pentax, Sony, etc,
    joining those ranks is somewhat laughable as they are not likely to
    set-up the kind of support infrastructure Canon and Nikon have for pro
    shooters on the off chance they can grab some of that market. Sony
    could, if they wanted to, but they don't.
     
    RichA, Mar 11, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. They couldn't. Canon and Nikon, in their different ways, were able to
    reach a market by seeding - Nikon got it done for them in the 1950s
    because their cameras were so cheap and so good the users adopted them,
    Canon did it by giving away thousands of cameras and lenses to Fleet
    Street and the pro (mainly press and agency) establishment in other
    countries. They didn't 'give' them as such, they just handed bodies and
    desirable lenses to picture editors and told them to try them - and
    never asked for them back. It only takes one 600mm f4 or whatever
    dropped off with with a big news agency, which only works with Canon
    bodies, to produce more than enough sales of bodies and other lenses in
    time.

    I saw this process happening and the only other company which attempted
    the same in the UK - seeding gear into influential large users - was
    Olympus. Minolta once made a half-hearted attempt and Peter Abbey, who
    was the chief photographer of United Newspapers, was briefly persuaded
    to use and recommend Minolta throughout his group. But these were big
    regional newspapers, not the dailies or weekend press, and many were
    already using Canon, Nikon or Pentax (the system Peter used previously)
    with one brand only being adopted by each newspaper. Peter got some PR
    promotion in return, but it all came to nothing. Minolta would not give
    away the right level of gear.

    Instead they did crazy things. They gave Ashvin Gatha two XMs and loads
    of lenses. Ashvin was a really nice guy and had an amazing eye for
    colour when colour was almost new, 1970s. But he was also a truly crap
    photographer - trashed his gear, had no idea about anything technical,
    didn't care much whether horizons were straight or focus bang on. He
    tried to trade one of his beaten-up XMs for my XE-1 but it was so badly
    treated there was no way! Over the years, half the pros they sponsored
    were so strange I was barely able to use their work. David Fairman -
    pointillism photo-effect from every image, like giant grain - no
    evidence of the camera at work! One guy who painted elephants, famous
    elephant artist. Used the cameras as a notebook. His final work was
    PAINTINGS. Absolutely crazy. They even issued a limited edition painting
    repro. It was like saying look, photography really isn't any good. They
    once championed a guy who lived on the Cape Verde islands and
    specialised in paying impoverished locals to pose nude. And their big
    star was David Hamilton - a success in his time, but reviled as a
    kiddy-porn pioneer. At least they won over his frien Lucien Clergue to
    the system, and by supporting Lucien, helped foster the Arles festival.

    Sony has got off to a bad start picking one Magnum photographer who is
    technically uninterested and artistically goofy, the most obscure
    personal reasons needing to be explained before you can judge if his
    shots are not just snaps; and a chart singer who really, honestly, shows
    nothing to photographers.

    Canon somehow has managed to pick and sponsor photographers'
    photographers - the ones who end up lecturing, exhibiting, writing
    books, getting TV series.

    It would take an entire generation, and a very different eye for
    potential proteges and endorsers, for Sony to oust Canon from their
    'bought in' position. Nikon won their place by other means; they earned
    it, they didn't buy it. I don't think time will ever take that away from
    them, like Leica. Leica earned their place, Contax tried to take it (and
    failed). Nikon won their place and Canon, unlike Contax, succeeded.

    David
     
    David Kilpatrick, Mar 11, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. RichA skrev:
    Pro cameras in the sense you're thinking of require a kind of backing /
    lense pool etc that Minolta never had, and sony sure doesn't have. So no.

    The flagship model will be build to withstand professional use - the
    build, efficiency and image quality that the professionals would be
    sadisfied with. But the target will not be professionals, but rather the
    amatours that want professional grade equipment. And ofcourse, probably
    some professionals will buy it but it's important for the marked to have
    such a top model.

    And as usual, it's the a100 and a10? that will be the ones that take
    home the money.
     
    Geir Eivind Mork, Mar 11, 2007
    #3
  4. RichA

    D-Mac Guest

    : RichA skrev:
    : > Sony and Olympus talk about "pro" models, but this is just to make
    : > those models attractive to a group of shooters who are definitely not
    : > pros but want something beyond the plastic of the amateur ranks but
    : > that don't cost as much as the pro models from Canon and Nikon.
    :
    : Pro cameras in the sense you're thinking of require a kind of backing /
    : lense pool etc that Minolta never had, and sony sure doesn't have. So no.
    :
    : The flagship model will be build to withstand professional use - the
    : build, efficiency and image quality that the professionals would be
    : sadisfied with. But the target will not be professionals, but rather the
    : amatours that want professional grade equipment. And ofcourse, probably
    : some professionals will buy it but it's important for the marked to have
    : such a top model.
    :
    : And as usual, it's the a100 and a10? that will be the ones that take
    : home the money.
    :

    Waiting quietly in the wings is the "REAL" Professional camera maker.
    Their soon to be released MF digital SLR will most certainly be a
    Professional camera in the true sense of the word... Who is it? Starts
    with P and ends with X.
     
    D-Mac, Mar 11, 2007
    #4
  5. RichA

    Bill Funk Guest

    I ask again: what makes you think your pronouncements are significant?
    What credentials do you posess that would add weight to what you say?

    --
    The New York Times reported
    Barack Obama made investments
    in companies owned by his
    campaign donors, then tried
    to help them with legislation.
    He says he didn't know he owned
    their stock. Scooter Libby
    watched his performance and
    gave it a seven.
     
    Bill Funk, Mar 11, 2007
    #5
  6. RichA

    Alan Browne Guest

    One of the reasons I don't reply to you very much is that I'm always
    wanting to write: "That's the stupidest thing you've written yet."

    But I tire of writing that again and again as you seem to have endless
    pits of greater stupidity to draw on.
     
    Alan Browne, Mar 11, 2007
    #6
  7. I won't requote it because of the length, David, just wanted to say it was
    most interesting.

    Neil
     
    Neil Harrington, Mar 11, 2007
    #7
  8. RichA

    RichA Guest

    Awww did his widdle MINOLTA feewings get hurt?
     
    RichA, Mar 12, 2007
    #8
  9. RichA

    frederick Guest

    Perhaps, but a camera that's had to have been revised to meet the market
    before it has ever been beyond being a "clay model" doesn't bode well.
    (And I hope I'm wrong)
    There is also a marketing position which Canon have nailed. Many
    amateurs buy in to an SLR system with expectation that one day, when
    they're good enough, they'll make enough money from photography to be
    able to buy a pro model. Canon has this path open better than any other
    dslr maker. No. 2 position holder (Nikon) doesn't do so well - the
    expensive D2x isn't really capable of significantly better image quality
    then the new entry level D40x - the D2x just comes with a far better
    feature set.
    For Pentax, to have a digital medium format camera isn't going to
    increase their sales of entry dslrs - which is where the volume market is.
     
    frederick, Mar 12, 2007
    #9
  10. RichA

    Emma Knaps Guest

    One of the reasons I don't reply to you very much is that I'm always
    No, he just called you on what you are: a persistent troll that keeps
    buzzing around this newsgroup like a pesky little mosquito.
     
    Emma Knaps, Mar 12, 2007
    #10
  11. RichA

    Bill K Guest

    .. . .Uh, so Hasselblad, Sinar and Leaf are for amateurs? Equipment
    doesn't make a photographer a professional. It doesn't even make him
    or her good.
     
    Bill K, Mar 12, 2007
    #11
  12. RichA

    Grumman-581 Guest

    But it allows you to take more expensive bad photos... <grin>
     
    Grumman-581, Mar 12, 2007
    #12
    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.