Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 17, 2005, 7:20 AM   #61
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 145
Default

KSV wrote:
Quote:
To lemondster: you are wrong. Sensor (and particularly developing brand new sensor) is most expensive part of DSLR - otherwise all of as was shooting on full frame sensors ages ago
you are probably right but i thought that since canons 8MP sensor has been out for quite a while in the 20D the development costs wouldnt be there for the same chip in the 350D

i understand that if they put in a brand new 9MP or larger chip, then the cost of the CMOS sensor would be considerably more (to cover R&D and the new algorithms)
lemondster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2005, 3:18 PM   #62
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 935
Default

I think that's right. If a 8 mp chip demonstrates a lot of success, then maybe it can be used in future low-priced affordable DSLR cameras. But the camera companies are probably still pushing the technology to get closer to film performance. In that case, they probably want to pop in the latest chips. In any case, the 20D performance will probably be considered ancient as time goes by, so that KSV will be able to have a 20D in due time for a cheap price.
Kenny_Leong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2005, 5:50 PM   #63
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 86
Default

KSV wrote:
Quote:
Sorry everybody - this would be my last replay in this tread - I just have not got enough time. There is absolutely nothing wrong with 350D - it is great camera indeed capable of taking great pix. What IMHO is wrong is tendency to start stupid and IMHO unnecessarily race now between DSLR manufactures for megapixel count. Instead of investing money into basic models with basic features, but build to last they (manufactures) going to invest money into megapixels, fps, AF point cont, buffer size etc. I know that this is exactly what crowd wants - just because they can not understand anything else except that 8 is greater then 6. I do not believe that this makes benefit for photo enthusiast on budget - they have to upgrade more frequently. I do know that Pentax has tried this approach (basic, but build like tank) with film SLR and lost. What I did not know what is your attitude to this. Now I do. Once again - thanks to everyone.

Edit: Sorry, but I can not see even on horizon basic, affordable well executed DSLR. So there is no choices here - and I am afraid never will be
Races and competition make innovation and progression happen faster. How long would it have taken to get into space without a competitive space race? If you want this "basic affordable well executed DSLR of yours", let there be competition, and great products will precipitate out of it.
kiwi133 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2005, 10:17 PM   #64
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 145
Default

hey KSV look at it this way:

the more 350Ds that Canon sells to us retards the more monye they make, thus creating more funds for R&D, and that will eventually make your high-end wants cheaper. competition between the different companies is the best outcome because it leads to better cheaper cameras. i think it is brilliant marketing [by producing the 350D] because it will give them more money, giving them an edge in the battle for the best camera.

i think you are pissed at canon for some unknown reason (maybe you feel that you should have waited for an arguably better camera)
lemondster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2005, 11:14 PM   #65
KSV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 248
Default

Quote:
the more 350Ds that Canon sells to us retards the more monye they make, thus creating more funds for R&D, and that will eventually make your high-end wants cheaper.
Come on! They make lots of money on us and then start to send us cheques?!? This is what you say? Dream on! High-end cameras NEWER will be cheap - just not enough demand (comparing to mass-production cameras)

Quote:
competition between the different companies is the best outcome because it leads to better cheaper cameras.
It is depends on your definition "better". Mine is different :lol:Better from public point of view - yes. But do not forget that public point of view has been successfully manipulated by manufactures via marketing. It is suit manufactures that public like their way (not mine), because they can make more money in this way producing cheaply executed "advanced" cameras witch they sells with enormous margin.


Quote:
i think it is brilliant marketing [by producing the 350D] because it will give them more money, giving them an edge in the battle for the best camera.
You are dear right here - it is brilliant idea because it will giveTHEM more money
Quote:
i think you are angry at canon for some unknown reason (maybe you feel that you should have waited for an arguably better camera)
Come on! If you like this expression ("angry at"), then I cansay not onlyat Canon, but alsoat Nikon, Pentax etc - basically at whole system. But above all I am really disappointed (can not be really "angry" just because there is no news for me here) with public perception, and in particular I did not expect such a negative reaction frommajority of readers.

I can give you anotherprobably more clear example. Everyone have car insurance. If small accident happens (just a small scratch on bumper) *WAST MAJORITY* of insurance holder rushing to fix theirbumpers via insurance. Theynever even think about to have a mutual agreement with another party. Theirbrain workssomewhat like that "Gee - good luck! Now I am gonna fix my bumper for nothing! It already has some scratches and now it became like new FOR NOTHING! So why should I bother myself and try to negotiate with another party?" So do you believe that they are winner? No way! Next year they gonna to pay more for insurance - cheese for nothing could be only in mouse trap! It is totally clear for me that winners here ONLY insurance companies! Exactly the same happens in many areas including digital cameras. I do not votefor any changes - it is absolutely impossible to go against herd. It is just sad to me that even here in this forum people who suppose to be in love with photography can not understand this simple thing. We are loosers here because we like to be. If someone think that (s)he is winner here (s)he just full (her)himself.
KSV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 12:02 AM   #66
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 935
Default

KSV wrote:
Quote:
*snip*
I can give you another probably more clear example. Everyone have car insurance. If small accident happens (just a small scratch on bumper) *WAST MAJORITY* of insurance holder rushing to fix their bumpers via insurance. They never even think about to have a mutual agreement with another party. Their brain works somewhat like that "Gee - good luck! Now I am gonna fix my bumper for nothing! It already has some scratches and now it became like new FOR NOTHING!
*snip*
That's not true at all KSV. People understand that their insurance premiums go up if they make claims on an accident. Thus they know that the smart and economical thing to do is for the innocent 'victim' to get a mutual agreement to fix the damage (for minor things like small bumps etc).

KSV ... you still don't seem to understand that even though, in the future, you may not want to buy the 'latest' high-end camera..... but it would still be possible for you (in the future) to buy a low priced camera that would do everything that a 20D (of today) does. You know that, right? Or are you one of those that want the latest high-end products for free?

Remember when the first point and shoot digital cameras came out? They costed a heap, and yet their performance was lousy. Today, we have cameras that cost way less than what I paid for my Nikon 950...and some of these cheaper cameras can match or exceed the performance of my 950. Actually, I don't even have to mention this...because it's all obvious.
Kenny_Leong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 12:14 AM   #67
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 145
Default

i think it is more sad for people who dont understand what is best for them isnt best for the majority of other camera users(photograpers, ameture photographers, weekend warriors, whoever). im assuming that canon should bend over backwards for me because even after many many emails Canon has not released a Rebel XT in a Royal Blue color for my UK Wildcats.

i dont think that i ever eluded to canon sending me money and i guess i should have been more clear with my words:

"high-end wants" = your non-plastic body, pentaprism viewfinder
these items would become cheaper as the manufacturing techniques are improved. with more technology, you can produce product quicker, with less waste and excess material. the money saved will eventually trickle down to the consumers. lean manufacturing is now starting to play into the camera business making cameras more affordable than ever.

i feel that it is very nieve to think that a persons love of photography can be based on the level of equipment they use, but more of their additude. before i got my dSLR i still loved taking pictures with my P&S digital camera. does it make me a bad person that i like to take photograph s with my VGA camera phone?

i think that all of us in this forum love photography because that is why we are here, and that our love shouldnt be comprimised by what our opinion of a good camera is. if you think that you can design a better camera than canon, GREAT send them your resume, but until then you must realize that large companies arent going to cater to individual needs.
lemondster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 12:21 AM   #68
KSV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 248
Default

Kenny_Leong wrote:
Quote:
That's not true at all KSV.
I do not know YOUR experience in this area, but according to mine it is dead true. I would rate number of people who happy to settle down without insurance company involved around 10%
KSV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 12:39 AM   #69
KSV
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 248
Default

lemondster wrote:
Quote:
i feel that it is very nieve to think that a persons love of photography can be based on the level of equipment they use, but more of their additude.

Absolutely agree! Camera is just an instrument and if instrument is beloved and adored it only brings extra satisfaction in whole process. And if instrument is not really adored it is just bring extra frustration in whole process. So we are talking here about internal satisfaction. May be my needs for stainless steel body is justimaginary - it does not matter, I am still not completely satisfied. Alternatively if someone needs (also may be imaginary) for 8mp is fulfilled (s)he became satisfied even with cheap plastic body. Therefore if you have got what you satisfied with you just more happier in this world than me :lol:

And please understand these points:

1. What majority of public wants is not necessarily the best

2. What is the best for majority of public not necessarily the best for each individuum.

Also please note that I do understand that nothing going to change - hence I never ask for any advise as"what should I do" - Iwas just like to know your opinion.



KSV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2005, 1:33 AM   #70
Senior Member
 
aladyforty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,964
Default

KSV you really need to build a bridge and get over it, if you dont like what these companies do, dont buy from them.
aladyforty is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:35 PM.