Nikon's response to Canon's Rebel 300D?

<p><i>"There is a place that will digitally scan my B&W and slides to a CD in 18meg tiff, so if you want their address, let me know. -- Rob"</i></p>

 

<p>Actually, Rob - I do want know ;) could you give me the details?</p>

"So Carl since you feel confident in telling me I'm wrong, let me challange you - Put

up or shut up!"

 

What I said was that you don't have the expertise to constantly run off at the mouth

about Nikon's marketing. When Nikon is ready to introduce a new product they will.

The fact is that you don't have a clue as to what drives Nikon's marketing, or what

may effect their decisions. And it's not bloody likely that they will tell you in advance

of any move they may contemplate.

 

This will conclude my response to you over this matter, as it's absolutely pointless to

try to converse with someone that thinks they know what they're talking about, when

they obviously do not. Rob was right, you're a Jackass. Go and get yourself an MBA in

marketing, like my wife did, then MAYBE you'll have some insight.

 

In conclusion, let me point out to you that any photographic expertise, or lack

thereof, on my part has NOTHING whatsoever to do with Nikon's marketing, or your

rantings. That son, is a red herring, and I'm not biting.

We are photographer. Should we care about marketing? Who loose/win the battle? I just want good quality DLSR and as cheap as possible.

Hi Yaron

 

The company is called "fast Photo" I'll give you their web site. They do Slides and B&W to digital. The more you do the less per roll it is. they can do 18meg Tiff files, and 5meg JPEG (much cheaper). I let them do the developing also, it works out to be less expensive since they prefer uncut rolls of negatives to work with.

 

TTYL

Rob

 

http://www.fastfotoanddigital.com/slides.html

Josh, I'm really tired of your posts. Your more of a trouble maker than anything. If you read my entire posts you would see I actually agreed with many of your points. Obviously I don't think this will "kill" Nikon, but it may hurt their sales.

 

Second, I do own a F3, F2SB, M6, and a F100 and D100. What is your problem with people who still, from time to time use and enjoy manual cameras? So get off my back. According to the photos you posted you use a Leica M2, what do you call that??

 

I still say your only doing this cause trouble. You rip Carl for not posting any of his photos, But you've only posted 2 photos or what looks like the same statue, taken with a 1950's M2 (Isn't that older than my F3- "Oh" I guess tht doesn't count).

I can see that the 300V may for a short while get beginners to go with their gear. That's all it does, nobody with a significant investment in Nikon glass is going to buy it, since the glass switch would be more costly than the price difference in the bodies. And I'm sure Canon has added some "features" to the 300V which essentially prevent any serious user to be happy with it. That's how they sell their more advanced models.

The really big story here isn't whether Canon or Nikon win.

They both do. The real story is time compression in the market.

If we are going to see a generation of DSLR technology every

year indefinitely - analogously to the competition we see in

the computer industry - then those of us who don't *make money*

with our cameras are in for a bad couple of decades.

 

The great thing about Nikon over the years has been the ability

to spend VERY LITTLE money over many years and still get first-class

performance, because of system compatibility. If we continue to

have 12- to 18-month turnaround in new digital models, you won't get

this from ANY manufacturer, if only because battery and memory technology will change rapidly. And this means that you'll have to upgrade frequently to stay current. And this means you'll have to spend money much more frequently than you used to have to.

 

For professionals, this won't be a problem, both because they can depreciate equipment as a business expense, and because the equipment is generating income and its cost can be figured into prices as overhead.

 

For amateurs, it will be a problem. Maybe they'll figure it out

and invest in film technology...

I really gotta wonder about this...<p>Canon announces that it will release a camera that for all we know is a piece of crap.<p>Nikon users eat their own as they go into a frenzied denouncement of each other...<p>I don't get it.

"Canon announces that it will release a camera that for all we know is a piece of crap" -jim

 

I'm new to the forum and really to photogrpahy. I'm the proud owner of a older F3 and now 3 lens. I have to say I love my F3 and Nikon lens. I wish I could afford a D100, but it's out of my price range for a few years, especially since the lens I own won't work with the camera. I would never sell my F3. However, I have to admit that If the 300D is very interesting too me. If I didn't already own the F3 and lens, I could be "swayed" to Canon.

 

You may say it's "Crap", but to those who can't afford over $2,000.00 to start a digital SLR set up, it will work quite nicely. My room mate at college had a Rebel, and I'm sorry it wan't that bad of a camera, and from what I've read, neither is this. I would expect it to be less of a camera than the Nikon D100, but to many new people that won't matter. The point that someone made about being able to buy it and a pro grade lens for less the D100, is a valid point. Especially to a lot of non Nikon users.

 

My Dad always used Nikon Cameras, and he gave me his old F3Hp for college and a lens. I've been "picking up" a few lens and even a few screens when I can. Some filters also. As I previously stated, I love it, and won't be selling it off to buy the new Canon. But from the point of view of a "new person", I do believe it will give Canon a slight edge in that market. I do admit I don't have a degree in marketing or anything other than Business.

 

However, that tell me that when times are hard people will seek the bargains. People like Shun and many of the rest of you can laught at this little camera, because it is beneath your ability and affordability. BUT for those of us looking up, especially those who don't have any "major" investment in equipment, it looks really good.

 

Maybe it is crap, but maybe it's a staring place too.

 

Just my own opinion, not meant to insult anyone else

 

Abbie

Since there is no real answer to this post, only opinion, this is my final views on it.

 

First, I can't debate anymore with Carl, after all he dedicated a thread to me, so I' guess he really cares..... Thanks "Buddy"..;)

 

Second, Rob gets too upset. You must settle down Rob. A guy of your "advanced" age can't afford to get all worked up like this. Yes I do own a rather Beat up M2. But Leica, as you damm well know, is what Nikon could have been. Lens for the M2 will work on the M7. Even lens from the IIIF will, with an simple adapter. That's Customer Satisfaction. Wasn't that you who complained about the new "G" lens not working on older models?

 

Quote from Abbie - "I'm the proud owner of a older F3 and now 3 lens. I have to say I love my F3 and Nikon lens. I wish I could afford a D100, but it's out of my price range for a few years, especially since the lens I own won't work with the camera. I would never sell my F3. However, I have to admit that If the 300D is very interesting too me. If I didn't already own the F3 and lens, I could be "swayed" to Canon." ...... Another member of the "F3 FM3A Club", but this one without blinders. I need say no more. Call the new Canon crap, shit or what ever. It will sell to the very people Abbie speaks of. Sit there with your high priced equipment and Nikon Snobbery. Canon won't mind, this camera, and the 10D, will bring a whole lot of new new people into their camp. Some will never upgrade, but many will. The proof is the 1Ds has already done that in the Pro market. They will buy new lens and then better bodies. So pretend the Nikon is still the innovative leader, and in the 2 or so years it takes Nikon to catch up, Canon will once again surge ahead and laugh their way to the bank.

 

You think I'm wrong, well when did Canon develop the USM and IS options for their lens? When did Nikon, and how much more is a lens with the AF-S and Vr option compared to Canon. Almost every Canon lens, at least 80%, is USM (AF-S to Nikon).

 

So let's not say foolish remarks like "it's crap and it doesn't matter". People like Abbie should let Nikon know their views so they can see what's at stake and once again become the inovative leader they were. Look ahead and get the jump on Canon. Develop the lens technology that photographers can only dream of. I'm not against Nikon, I want us to help them see where they made mistakes and find the options that will keep them number 1 for years to come

it's all about useless market rulers stuffs nowadays...I don't really care about them anymore, tough I really thinked about it recently..

 

I don't see a decent reason to spend all that hard worked money on such a best-seller toy..it became normality spend the equivalent of an F5 on a digital F80 (D100).

 

Want digital to become the new era? ok, to me is the same, make them 1\3 of the price.

 

If I want to use my b\w film too, I'll always have the chance, no doubts.

 

ciao!

Joshua, what's your problem? You seem to admire Leica M compatibility yet there is no digital future for those lenses as far as we can see. Leica themselves said that with present technology, a digital M (with the current lenses) is not possible. That you call customer satisfaction and great compatibility?

 

Few people today buy into Nikon with the belief that it's the market leader in SLR cameras or something. What does this matter? You buy the camera system which best fulfills your present needs at a cost that you can manage. If you want to buy a 300V, that's your choice.

 

Why would Nikon need to be "the market leader"? What does it matter unless you have their stock? Times change, and people adapt. I don't give a damn what brand name is written on the camera, and frankly if you were interested in photography, neither would you.

Sorry, meant the 300D.

Yet another thread along the lines of "Oh no, Nikon are so behind Canon, what are we going to do." This time its digital SLRs, next time it'll be IS/VR. You never get this sort of thing in the Canon forum.

Few people today buy into Nikon with the belief that it's the market leader in SLR cameras or something. What does this matter? - Ilkka

 

First we're really talking about the Narket leader in innovation.

Ilkka are you really asking such a question, say it isn't so.

 

But, maybe you prefer to pay twice as much for features like IS (VR in Nikon) or USM (AF-S in Nikon). Or do you like waiting for 3 years longer to have it available? But then maybe you would rather pay 50% for a lens which is not optically any better, and doesn't have features like AF-S? And before anyone says something stupid like "canon lens aren't optically as good as Nikon - get real, once that ws true, but not anymore.

 

As talented as you are, I can't believe you would ask such a question.

Two examples of faulty thinking are being exhibited. #1 is the idea that because Canon introduces one Rebel DSLR at a sub $1000 price Nikon is doomed. #2 is the idea that digital is so wonderful people who don't switch to it are foolish, stupid, or whatever.

 

Abbie, you make so much sense that I must ask you to consider a writing an equipment column for photo.net. People who get hung up on having the latest equipment, people who are tormented because they still shoot film, people who feel insecure when anybody has anything better than they have, can write you for advice. You can call the column "Dear Abbie".

Abbie wrote.

 

"You may say it's "Crap", but to those who can't afford over $2,000.00 to start a

digital SLR set up, it will work quite nicely."

 

Abbie, you missed the point entirely! What jim was saying is that some people are

having a coronary over a new Canon release that hasn't been tested enough to KNOW

whether or not it's piece of crap. They just get off on doomsday attitudes. I seriously

doubt that anyone with a lick of sense is going to say that Canon cameras are crap.

 

Moreover, you've alluded to Shun and others laughing at the camera, please show me

where they did that. I really think owe them an apology, as you have completely

misunderstoood what was said. Maybe you would do well to read what is said, instead

of what you think is said. Jim clearly said "Canon announces that it will release a

camera that for all we know is a piece of crap." That is NOT calling the camera a piece

of crap.

 

Instead of making stupid, childish threats saying that " Oh my God, I'm gonna switch

to Canon", they should just do it and shut up! They'll say the same thing about Canon

when Nikon brings out a new model. Who in the hell needs 'em?

"Oh my God, I'm gonna switch to Canon", they should just do it and shut up! They'll say the same thing about Canon when Nikon brings out a new model. Who in the hell needs 'em?" - Carl

 

Hi Carl

 

first of all the point Abbie made was clear and concise. She never said she would sell her F3 - or recommended others to. She only said that in her opinion there would be many people, not all, who will choose to get the new little Rebel Digital. Like you and I, she is entitled to her opinion. she never attacked anyone,or their views. Only said that the Rebel her room mate had wasn't a piece of "crap", and that many would enjoy it. She gave her views that's it.

 

As far as it being crap and a joke, ie. laughed at. Yes many people on the list insinuated that the Rebel series was inferior, crap or not worth the money. I've never owned a Rebel or even used one, But that's what I took it too mean when she said "laughed" at.

 

So weither we like her opinion or not, I do think we should not attack her. She's new by her own words, but seems to be a loyal loving Nikon owner. Besides, anyone who likes a F3 can't be all bad- Can they? That was a joke, no insult intended.

 

I to think many newbies will look at this camera and like it. As far as anyone who owns Nikon glass selling it to buy the Rebel, well to each his own. I wouldn't

 

I do know a couple of pros who did sell their nikon stuff and Kodak DSLRs for the New Canon Eos 1ds. Personally I wouldn't as I assume Nikon will eventually bring forth their version.

 

But I don't think Abbies remark deserved to be attacked. She is entitled to her opinion.

 

As for missing the point this "discussion" has wonder in every direction, so it would be hard to miss the point I think.

 

Your Buddy

 

"Antique Camera Rob"

 

PS.

 

Abbey I assume your a women, since all the Abies I've know were, if not - Sorry

<p><i>"how much more is a lens with the AF-S and Vr option compared to Canon"<br>

"maybe you prefer to pay twice as much for features like IS (VR in Nikon) or USM (AF-S in Nikon)."</i></p>

<p>I'm not a PJ, and for my needs, IS/VR/AFS/USM doesn't improve squat (I know, I had a Canon system with IS lenses)-- I'll take a fast lens over any slow VRed lens. Quite frankly, with ISO noise levels declining, I don't find any of these technologies a neccesity, unless you shoot with a super telephoto. If you are a super-telephoto IS/VR shooter, you're probably won't want a 300D anyway. From my point of view, IS/VR/AFS/USM are all very nice gimmicks designed to sell more expensive cameras. I may sound harsh or very similar to Antique-Rob, but I actually use my cameras to shoot photos.</p>

"She never said she would sell her F3"

 

And I didn't say that she did, but there were others who did talk about switching, and

that's who I referred to. She did accuse Jim of calling the camera crap, and Shun of

laughing at it. Neither one did what they were accused of, and that is what I said. I

have no problem with her opinion. We should all read what is actually written instead

of trying to spin it into something it isn't. The point she missed was in what Jim and

Shun really said. She wasn't attacked, and I didn't accuse her of being malicious, just

mistaken.

Hello Carl

 

I didn't miss the point of the thread. I thought it was a discussion of the new Rebel Digital and it's price as it potentially impacts different individuals. As Dan originally said: "Frankly, I'm tempted to ditch my Nikon gear and move to Canon, since the projected cost of the Rebel 300D plus one or two lenses would be less than a D100 body. (Note the use of "tempted." I doubt that I could ever part with my FM2n, AIS 55mm/f2.8 Micro-Nikkor, or my AI 20mm/f4.)"

 

As far as remarks about the camera being a "Joke" or "crap", I never quoted any individual by name, just the general trend of some more advanced photographers. But as you mentioned Shun, didn't Shun state: "Any Rebel isn't a serious camera". Shun wasn't the only one with similar opinions. The point of my statement is: to Shun and many others, this camera might not be a good option, I RESPECT that. My point is to many people who can't affort the closest Nikon - D100, it will be a alternative they will like. There are many who think the F3 is outdated and no comparison to the F100. That's probably true. But for me it was free, my dads, and does everthing I could ask it too. I love it, and it's what I can afford. That is the only point I was making

 

Carl, never once in my previous post did I use a name. My statements were blanket statements of based on some general opinions expressed by more than one person. So do not say that I previously indicated Shun or Jim by name I DID NOT. Your "nit picking" my statements, and missing the general thought.

 

My statement was: "You may say it's "Crap", but to those who can't afford over $2,000.00 to start a digital SLR set up, it will work quite nicely." I didn't say "Jim " or "Shun" you may call it Crap". The statemant was designed to cover the broad feeling of several members.

 

I don't appreciate your "attack" of my opinionn or putting words in my mouth. I didn't attack you. I would expect you to have similar respect for me. If you wish a fight, please go back to talking to josh. He always seems to like a good argument

 

 

I will not discuss this further with you

 

Abbie

 

it's ok "antique Camera" Rob I'm named for my Great Aunt, I just don't like Abigale

This is copied from your post, where you claim that you didn't say this.

 

""Canon announces that it will release a camera that for all we know is a piece of crap"

-jim"

 

"You may say it's "Crap","

 

Wanna read your post Again? Nuf said.

Wow, Carl now your going after members of the "F3 and FM3A" club, and a girl at that.

 

What point did she miss. People did call the Rebel crap, if not by name by innuedo, more than just Jim or Shun. And That's what she just wrote, but of course, since your never wrong, you know what's in her mind also. Since you have to have the last word, you going to pick on a girl for a single word. Nice one. Bet your proud of yourself.

 

Why don't you learn to read an entire post, Missing the point? - ya you did. And they call me a trouble maker- ha

 

"Nuf Said", well no but your such a know it all, so why even try

Yaron said: From my point of view, IS/VR/AFS/USM are all very nice gimmicks designed to sell more expensive cameras.

 

No they are features that can mean the difference between earning a living and not. Given the choice between buying the 35mm SLR system with the latest technology and optics as good as any, and one 2-5 years behind technologically, and bedevilled with compatibility problems, which would most people choose? The obvious answer is to choose Canon and avoid spending ages on this forum justifying the purchase of Nikon. And if you are a pro I am told that Canon treat you well, whereas Nikon treat you badly. As an amateur, I can say that Nikon service stinks: very very very slow, very expensive and arrogant to the point of rudeness.

Carl...thanks, I'm glad someone got it.