Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 19, 2005, 7:42 AM   #1
Junior Member
simon.giesen's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1

Hi everybody!

When I read the comments about the new Sony R1 camera I noticed that most
people feel quite arrgogant towards Sony. Most people just consider Canon
or Nikon simply better that Sony regardless how astonishing the results are
you can get with the camera mentioned above. They consider the Sony a "toy".

Right at the moment I own the F717 and I am extremely happy with it. I am going to replace it with the R1. So even for me it's often difficult to use my camera on important events such as parties, weddings or shootings because many people wonder how a consumer "toy" camera - the Sony F717 - could be good enough. Afterwards, of course, they are deeply impressed by the image quality but and this is the point: they would never buy a Sony because they are "enthusiats" or "professionals".

Can you explain me what makes the difference and why people act like this?
simon.giesen is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 19, 2005, 8:12 AM   #2
nymano's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 67

simon.giesen wrote:
Can you explain me what makes the difference and why people act like this?
Very simple: because Canon and Nikon really *are* better!

No. Just kidding:blah:. Some guys are nuts about "their" brand and will do anything to put other brands down. Other people are just a bit more open minded.

Actually, I think Sony has quite a good reputation. While I personally don't adhere to this point of view, maybe Sony isn't considered "pro" enough because they don't (yet) have their ownDSLR series? <sarcasm>And we all know that "real" photographers all use DSLRs</sarcasm>.


nymano is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2005, 8:47 AM   #3
Senior Member
amazingthailand's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 851

Sony is a relative newcomer to the still camera market and the die hard purists are having a hard time accepting an electronics company into their little world of canon/nikon/pentax etc.

But as you say, it's the image that counts. Rock on!!

amazingthailand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2005, 9:24 AM   #4
Senior Member
Meryl Arbing's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 436

Any large company, corporation or country is apt to become, what is called, 'The Big Target".A Big Target is easy to hit...even for people without any marksmanship skill. Sony is a huge corporation compared to Nikon, for example. So, it is easy to (and attractive)to take pot shots at Sony to see if it can be brought down a few pegs.

Look at the other 'Big targets' in the world. Micro$oft, Ma Bell, Big Blue,countries like Israel...hey even the United Statesare Big Targets.

The pattern is always the same. The Big Target is portrayed as a huge, unprincipled monster that can do nothing right! Even if it does something that, on the surface, appears positive it has to be opposed and 'cut down to size'. If something negative happens to the big target (say, for example, Sony sales figures are down one quarter) the bad news is trumpeted as a major victory. If something positive happens, the news is either suppressed, downplayed or undermined. So, any new Sony innovation is put under the most rigid scrutiny and anything that can be criticised...IS criticised. Look at the campaign of misinformation that was circulated against the Sony V3. Even when the allegations of defects and flaws were disproven, they continued to be presented as fact in order to spread 'Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt' among new buyers.

I have stopped expecting balanced assessments of Sony products since...as a Big Target' it is too tempting for people to take shots at it and their products.
Meryl Arbing is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2005, 11:50 AM   #5
sdh's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 74

I fully agree w/ the last 2 replies. To put it in my words, Sony makes everything from $10 alarm clock radios, mp3 player watch/pencil/keychain-trinkets, low-end-cheesy-camsto high-end flat screen TV's. Photograhpy, like high-end anything (audio, cars, wine, whatever) has its share of snobs and in their minds, a company like Sony couldn't possibly make a camera that suited the needs of an old-school purist even if it tried.
sdh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2005, 8:12 PM   #6
Senior Member
speaklightly's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 721

I personally believe that Sony is about to flip every one on their ear. They just revealed the Sony R-1, a totally new, and ground breaking digital camera. Not everyone wants to jump on the dSLR bandwagon. Some folks prefer to keep their kit small and light.

There really is a market for the all in one digital camera, and I think that Sony has nicely gained a leadership position in that market. Three cheers for Sony. Yes, I agree that Sony really needs to put more emphasis on their digital camera operations. But the REAL potential is there.

I truly hope that Sony will take advantage of their leadership position and become a leader in the digital camera industry.

Sarah Joyce
speaklightly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 19, 2005, 10:02 PM   #7
Senior Member
srvsd's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 141

I think there could be a few reasons, but none are that important. Like people have mentioned, it is the end result that matters most.

Canon and Nikon have been in photography for a long time (my guess is longer than Sony). Many were converts from film to digital and were brand-loyal. Newer players (including one of my favorites--Panasonic) can take awhile to be accepted.

I'm not a huge fan of memory sticks because they essentially only work in Sony items (which still is a lot).

Prosumers, no matter how good, will still likely be considered a step below a DSLR. No matter what lens you put on there, it is the only one the camera will ever have. This does make sensor dust a non-issue.

P.S. I still can't change my signature and don't have either camera listed below.
srvsd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 20, 2005, 3:53 PM   #8
Senior Member
hgernhardtjr's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 516

Each person has his own beliefs and views and snobbery --- "mine is better than yours"is often a form of self-justification for expensive purchases and, perhaps, the uniquely human foible of one-upmanship -- "join my club, believe my way". In its extreme, it is used as justification for war and jihads since "my way is better than yours".

Personally, I like and continue to use Sony digital cameras ... in fact the one I use most is the DSC-F828, an absolutely fine camera, and simply do not care what others might think! For film cameras I preferred (and still occasionally use) Rolei, Contax, Zeiss Ikon ... and those that are SLRs have provided the adaptability I needed in my diverse assignments.

Nonetheless it is, in fact, the end result that counts and if a particular brand or type of camera meets your needs, go for it! Even a "lesser" tool can build a masterpiece if it is used in the skilled hands of an artist.

As an aside, I have twice found myself having to use "35mm film-frame" PS actions in order to provide a "film proof sheet" to two clients who remain totally against digital images (even though they know no better, cannot tell the difference visually, and ultimately rave at -- unbeknownst to them-- the digital end-results ... and outstanding end-results are all they want).

Yes, I have found the need to use DSLRs for their tailor-ability to certain shooting situations ... try putting a 2000mm lens on a non-SLR, for example.

For me, though, the Sony DSC-F828 is currently the best of both worlds, at least until the release of the R1, and remains an always-with-me-and-ready-to-shootworkhorse in my stable.

However, both Sony models still lag tremendously in the RAW format arena, one that is exceptionably favorable to digital editing ... Sony still likes to keep its "secrets" and sees no need to fully support speedy saves and bursts in RAW mode. For that RAW support, I must look elsewhere. Even so, I like, promote, and continue to use Sony digital cameras, still and video ... IMHO.
hgernhardtjr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2005, 10:53 PM   #9
Junior Member
Rube39's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 14

I teach at a college in Japan. 70% of my students have digital cameras, and of them, about 90% use SONYs! I recently went up to the mountains with 5 other teachers, and 4 of them brought their SONYs.
So SONY is doing quite well in Japan.
BTW, I often use a SONT M1, which gets laughed at all over the internet it seems. It takes great pictures and is a snap to use!


PS My mother uses a SONY W1 and loves it. I guess that must be the problem; if students, teachers, and 77 year olds use SONY, there must be something wrong with it (not!)
Rube39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 23, 2005, 12:05 AM   #10
terryf1960's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 30

I just dumped all my DSLR equipment in anticipation of the R-1. I am tired of carting around a bag full of equipment for a hobby. I'm hiping that the R-1 will deliver the low noise photos that I'm used to in the Canon DSLRs. I had purchased the Panny FZ30 here in Canada when it first came out but the noise issue was something I couldn't get over and returned it.
terryf1960 is offline   Reply With Quote

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:08 AM.