> From: Chip Louie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: EOS New Nikon/Canon Gear..
Hi Chip > IMO Canon currently appears to be playing a conservative game in digital > bodies, possibly to avoid the new model syndrome that consumer products are > so tied to. I agree that Canon is playing a conservative game in digital but I'm not so sure it is to avoid the new model syndrome. >These are very expensive items with a very limited base of > buyers, a group that Nikon has cultivated for a long time and Canon has > traditionally always avoided if they could. I think you will agree that there has never been a lens with a more limited base of buyers than the EF 1200/5.6! So why did Canon build it? IMO, just to make a statement: we have the technology and know-how to do it. Which leads me to also disagree with your next point of view: > Canon seems to have less ego and may be more motivated by sales numbers and > broad application of the new technology than Nikon usually is. I think that as far as big brands are concerned, egos are more or less the same. >Nikon will > always boast of a great new feature or technology no matter how limited the > availability or practicality in use a feature is. One can question the practicality of the eye-focus on the EOS 5. Yet, Canon did boast about this new technology in 92. > Typically Canon will only > make a jump if they can sell a lot of the new technology. Look at their > timing for the release of new technology products and you will see that they > always try to bring a usable new technology to the market with products that > are mature or at the end of their life cycles. Doesn't really apply to the new 400/4 DO, but maybe it is an exception. I'm not an expert in Canon's history. > The lead in features and technology is perceived by most consumers as > important. IMO who has the lead at any given point is completely > irrelevant, just that progress is being made and that the company is > profitable so they can continue to support my camera system. I couldn't agree more! That maybe valid for you and me, but a lot of the prestige of a company is built upon leading technologies, even if normal consumers will never use it. I think that a lot of the consumers that give Canon a real profit (the ones that buy the camcorders, compact cameras and low end SLRs), do care about technological innovations, even if they can't afford them. Since these are the ones that give Canon (and Nikon) the major part of their profit, their opinion matters. You are right when you say that technology is perceived by most consumers as important. >Like I've said > before, gee-whiz features sell cameras and lenses, they don't make the > camera and lenses any more reliable (often times just the opposite), or > improved a photographer's skill level (again, often times just the > opposite). Once again I agree. > Anyway what difference does it make who is in the lead at the moment? To me none. Nor does it matter if it's Ferrari or Mclaren who wins F1 races. 99.999% of the people who watch F1 will never own a Ferrari in their lives, but somehow they seem to be very happy when Ferrari wins. Go figure people... Take Care Hugo * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
