Yes, they clearly are experts in photography, aren't they? I didn't realize that the "amount" of light that reaches the sensor "creates" accurate colour. I have always found, however, that glass lenses work best, so I have to agree with them there.
All of that aside, I guess that's what happens when people who don't know anything (or at least much) about photography answer questions about cameras. Which actually brings us (or at least me) to something that the "digital revolution" has done to photography. It's turned it on it's head (as most revolutions do). All of a sudden, there are players in the still-camera game that weren't there before. Sony, Panasonic, Hewlett Packard, Samsung, and all these other electronics firms that have never made a still camera, are suddenly competing with Nikon, Canon, Pentax and all the rest. And, since the public knows and trusts many of these electronics firms, they've got instant credibility.
Panasonic gets Leica to design lenses for them (never mind that they're not German made, important thing is that Panasonic can put the red dot on their cameras); same thing with Sony and Zeiss lenses. So now these savvy companies get maybe a bit of credibility with "real" photographers, and more importantly, more credibility with "sort of" photographers who've heard of these German manufacturers, and know "they make good stuff".
What's the point of all this? As I pondered the fellow who called up the computer show for camera advice, it hit me. Why would someone who wants photography advice call up a computer show? Why wouldn't he seek advice from a camera group? For one, I suppose, there aren't any camera advice shows on TV (that I know of). But, for another thing, it shows that this intermingling of photography and electronics has lots of folks confused. Is one buying a piece of photographic equipment or electronic equipment? Do I go to a camera store or a electronics store?
It seems to me that we on this list (or at least many of us) have been saying for a long time that digital is just another way to capture images, that it's another form of photography, just as "valid" as film. And, it is. But, does the public see it that way? And, what does it mean to traditional manufacturers? Nikon seems to be in trouble these days, as it's "conversion" to digital hasn't gone as smoothly as it might have. As Shel has pointed out, there is much wailing and gnashing of teeth over on LUG about Leica's failure to get on board, being beaten to the punch with a digi-rangefinder by this new Bessa thing - all the while Leica saying "we can't make a digital M camera".
Now, all of this is nothing new, of course. The advent of SLR's in the late 50's and 60's propelled Japanese manufacturers to the forefront, leaving some traditional German manufacturers in it's wake. I guess it's happening all over again with digital. Maybe Pentax made a good decision by waiting until the *istD was ready to go right out of the box, rather than coming out with something earlier that would have been less than successful (hello, Contax, are you listening?). Or, maybe not. Maybe the fact that those computer guys on TV didn't even know there's a Pentax DSLR out there says something.
All of this is thought-provoking, though. As a film guy, I'm sitting back and watching (and trying to figure it out) with some amusement, and much interest. I just wonder how much more things are going to be shaken up in the next couple of years.
cheers, frank
"The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer
From: "Kevin Thornsberry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "PDML" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: *istD scores a near miss Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 22:39:50 -0600
Tonight I was listening to "The Screen Savers" a tech support on show on the
cable channel TechTV. One of the callers identified himself as a Pentax gear
owner and was asking if it is more important to have good glass or more
megapixels on a digital camera. The hosts of the show suggested that if he is
an avid photographer, the glass is more important. They indicated that they
didn't know of a Pentax DSLR (Doh!) and directed him to search Google for the
Canon Digital Rebel and also mentioned offerings from Nikon and the new
offerings from Kodak presented at PMA.
Their summary of the call can be found at http://www.techtv.com/screensavers/shownotes/story/0,24330,3608888,00.html.
I dropped them a shore e-mail correcting them on the issue. If you'd like to do
the same they can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/bcomm&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca
