>> Personally I think this is tosh. 'The most demanding professionals' will >> not be buying this camera, and few SLR novices will. Only those with >> loadsamoney. It's still a nice looker though, and I'm sure it will >> perform well. > > Having read all the posts here on the *ist, and the views of professional > photographers and experienced amateurs here, I assumed the same thing. > Interesting that it is marketed that way.
Worst current marketing slogan in the USA: "We Are Professional Grade." --GMC trucks. For those who don't know, the marketing copy is often written by people who are not quite in the know as regards photo equipment--PR firms or advertising agencies. My favorite example of this is that my advertising manager at the magazine once called Ilford's advertising agency to alert them that we were doing a photo paper guide in an upcoming issue. The account manager said to him, very dryly, "Now why would my client be interested in that?" He came to me, and I explained to him that Ilford makes a lot of photo paper, and he called the advertising account manager and, in turn, explained to her everything I'd told him (wonder how much got lost in the translation <g>). She'd been put on the account to sell Ilford film, and had no idea they also made photo paper. In fact, she didn't know what photo paper was. Consumers always put way too much stock in these marketing descriptions, as if they came from the uppermost reaches of the parent company and each word were weighed carefully. Actually the opposite is more often the case--it's generic sales-speak cobbled together by some junior drudge at a publicity firm somewhere. I'm not saying that's always the case, but sometimes it can be. Personally, I usually just ignore all the marketing-speak. It's just white noise. --Mike
