Now that nikon just announced a lower priced camera. What is Canon going to do to compete? Anything new coming soon or would they lower the price on the xti or what??
Canon does not have to respond to a Nikon initiative, the tail in this case cannot wag the dog, the dog is just too big.
Great reply! Just was curious as I am searching for a canon dslr, at a low price for now. So many and so much to choose from! Wish they all made at a low price a 35mm at a lower price than 3,000 to 4,000. hopefully in the future
Canon cannot afford to not react to the Nikon D40, but it may take them a while to catch up. There must be a huge market for this kind of dSLR as people get frustrated with the limitations of P&S and want to move up.
I am wondering if you are at all aware of the relative size of Nikon's world-wide market share compared to Canon, much less the relative size of the two companies which is many times a greater discrepancy?
Every company in the business is aware and has to be as to what the competition is doing. But in reality who is leading and who is following? But before you answer I'd suggest you check the facts in terms of sales and company size.
Those kind of ideas are known in the business world as the "fat cat attitude" and have caused the downfall a many a great company. Just because a company is big in terms of sales, doesn't mean they offer better products at a better price. The Canon vs. Nikon situation is a point is case. Yes, Canon is many times bigger than Nikon is terms of revenue, but their dSLR offerings for instance are very comparable, with Nikon introducing extremely competitive products like the D40, D50, D70, D80 and D200.
Not too many years ago I might have agreed with your perspective, but today with digital dominating the photo market place it is a different "ball game". And we are just beginning to see the direction the photo market is moving in with what happened to Minolta and Hassleblad.
A long time back Nikon was ahead of Canon. The two companies took different paths. Nikon stayed pretty much within its traditional product range while Canon diversified and obviously made some wise moves because its current size and diversity includes not just consumer photo products but many products for both business and industry. This has gone hand in hand with a large re-investment in their R&D capacity and of all the traditional camera brand names is the only company designing and manufacturing their own image sensor chips. Nikon, Pentax, Olympus are all dependent on other companies like Kodak and Sony for their image sensor design and manufacture.
Now the big diverse electronic/digital manufacturers that supply companies like Nikon, Olympus and Pentax are watching Sony and Imacon to see what moves they make. Panasonic from the looks of things is likely to swallow up Leica. Samsung has apparently decided to develop on its own probably partnering with companies in Taiwan and Singapore to get their SLR camera hardware, companies that have been doing camera manufacture for brands like Rollei in the recent past.
In other words, to have the capability to succeed with dLR's in the current market requires two things, the technology size and depth to produce image sensor chips which are a significant part of the cost of a dSLR and in the marketplace today a brand name that is recognizably related to traditional photography. That will only last for awhile until the old f.... like you and me with strong brand-name product loyalties fall by the wayside.
Of the old line camera companies Canon is the only one with the digital design and production capability to remain independent. All of the other big brand names are likely to be swallowed up and become divisions of big electronics/digital companies like Sony taking over Minolta, and Imacon, a Danish scanner and technology company, that took over Hasselblad.
Your response doesn't address at all the issue at hand: will Canon respond to Nikon's introduction of the D40?
Canon will likely follow its own path and plans for future camera releases on its own schedule, pretty much as it has in the last few years. Read whatever you want into that you like. Neither you or I or anybody on the outside will likely know for sure whether Canon's next model release is something they've had on the drawing boards and in the works, or for how long. Might as well bet on horse races, and I won't say what I think of people who do .......
"But in reality who is leading and who is following?"
With Nikon having introduced the D40, D50, D70, D70s, D80 and D200 in the last couple of years versus Canon the Rebel XT, Rebel Xti and 5D in the same time period, I would venture to say that Nikon is leading in the area of introducing new dSLR's.
You can call it leading if you like, but a shot-gun strategy may also be seen as Nikon being desperate, confused, trying anything and everything to catch up, but just confusing everyone in the process.
If all else fails, just revert to your usual Nikon-bashing.
Just calling the shots as I see them. I can't be responsible for what any of the manufacturers do, and I have no connection to or obligation to any of them other than to take what they do at face value. Canon sure doesn't need my help, and I have owned at one time or another almost every brand of camera most of which had some very good attributes I enjoyed.
If you enjoy being a contrarian defender of Nikon or any brand, be my guest. I hope its fun.
You repeatedly express a negative attitude towards Nikon and a positive one towards Canon, as any unbiased reader of your posts will clearly see. And your denials when you are called on it don't change that one bit.
Now that nikon just announced a lower priced camera. What is Canon going to do to compete? Anything new coming soon or would they lower the price on the xti or what??
The lead time it takes to prepare a new camera for market means that one company can not respond to another. Each has their production plans laid out for several years in advance. Cameras that will be announced at Photokina 2008 are probably well along in their design cycle now. Cameras that will be announced at the PMA show in March are probably currently in production, even though they may not ship for several months following the announcement.
A new camera hits the retail shelves world-wide at the same time, so there must be enough units made to have a few in every store, so lead time is required not only to make the cameras, but to get enough into and through the channels. With the short shelf-life of digital cameras as opposed to decades with some film cameras, timing is everything.
This is not just Canon and Nikon, but Pentax, Olympus, Sony, Samsung, Leica/Panasonic and any one else that may be competing. While there is no way to react by immediately designing a rival camera, a camera can be withdrawn from the schedule prior to production if the rival is clearly superior and cheaper. Outside of the company, no one would ever know.
Scheduling time on the production lines is also likely to be done years in advance, in order to accommodate the flow, and to make any modifications to the manufacturing equipment needed for the new model and to schedule delivery of parts from potentially many vendors.
If Canon were to try to respond, by the time they got a camera designed and into production, the D40 would be long off the shelves. Canon will follow their schedule and release the next camera when ready. It may be an entry level camera such as the D40, or it may be the successor to the 1Ds - only Canon knows. In any case, the design team started work on it years ago, the specifications were probably locked solid for the past year, and it probably is on the production line right now.
So I agree with the majority of photographers, should that be unexpected? And maybe as a magazine writer for almost 35 years I have been treated better by Canon than Nikon over those years. In years past I wrote a lot more about Canon, but that was because the editors I was working for were Nikon people and assigned the Nikon reports to themselves. I can't help that. So yes I do favor Canon somewhat, but so do many if not most of the pro shooters you see covering news, politics and sports.
You are quite correct. Canon's "response" to the Nikon D40 is probably already sitting on a shelf somewhere in Japan. And I suspect Canon will release it when they are good and ready to do so.
However, I will say this from the feedback I get from the industry, and that is with computer design and digital products the lead time between start and finish of an actual product has been shortened considerably. It takes less time by far to swap out one sensor chip for another and upgrade the firmware. The huge proliferation of all kinds of digital cameras from the cheapest point and shoot to the most sophisticated dSLR's would not have been possible 20 years ago.
I started this whole thing. Anyway I read various sites than canon has already come down in price on the XT and the XTi. Who knows. whatever is I still may wait till I like something
It's never a good idea to put both feet in the water, and push off until you are sure you want to swim.
"So yes I do favor Canon somewhat"
"...a shot-gun strategy may also be seen as Nikon being desperate, confused, trying anything and everything to catch up, but just confusing everyone in the process."
You call that favoring Canon somewhat? Give me a break. Everything you have said about Nikon in the past couple of years has been extremely hostile, biased, negative, misleading and inaccurate.
When not buying a specific brand for religious reasons, if you already have a substantial arsenal of recent glass from a film camera, it makes great sense to buy a dSLR of the same brand.
If not, set a maximum budget for body and at least one excellent lens. While the body will be obsolescent before you get it home, great glass is a good, long term investment.
Realize that every company makes cameras aimed at specific market strata. An entry-level camera is not just a top-line camera with a lower price. Canon and Nikon both build cheap cameras, mid-range and high-end instruments. Cameras are very different at each level and no one has the edge.
The same is true of lenses. In choosing the first lens, consider the classic photojournalist's kit - a wide-angle in the 28->35mm range, a normal lens and a short telephoto - generally a 90mm lens. The first lens should cover this range well, since it is where most photography is done. People covered wars with such a kit, and everything else when shooting for newspapers and magazines.
A huge 300mm zoom may look sexy, but unless you actually have a need and the willingness to gain the skills to handle it, 2/3 of its focal length may well go to waste. If you are buying it as jewelery to flaunt, or a phallic substitute to wave about, then disregard this post entirely. Just make sure it is very big and painted white - or black if you would rather.
On the other hand, if you specialize in field sports or small critter shooting, it might be ideal. Clearly define your photographic goals, and realistically match the lens to them. If you know your goals, but don't really know how to relate them to equipment, ask questions in forums such as these.
An entry-level body will produce results that will greatly please most entry-level users. It may have things like "Scene Modes" to help one get started. It will not shoot 500,000 shots before going into the shop, no matter what brand it is. These are not junk cameras, but they are not meant for high production shooting either. By the time they are worn out, there will likely be a much more advanced camera on the shopping list.
There is a reason why the flagship costs $6,000 and the entry-level costs $600. From the viewpoint of quality, you get what you pay for - again regardless of popular brand trademark that may be on it. If your goal is to become a working photographer, then Canon and Nikon make sense. If not consider Samsung, Pentax, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic and any other consumer level cameras. You might not have the vast array of lenses and accessories from which to choose, but for an enthusiast photographer, this may not be relevant.
Once you have your short-list, get yourself to an actual camera store. Far more important than brand-image is how the camera fits you. Handle all the cameras on your short-list. Adjust the controls as if you were in an actual shooting situation. Page through the menus, point the camera around the store
- does it quickly focus to your satisfaction?
- is the zoom easy to adjust quickly?
- is it easy to frame and compose?
- does it start quickly?
- is the shutter lag long enough to be a bother?
- is the interval of black-out in the viewer during exposure acceptable?
- is the camera too light or too heavy?
- is changing lenses comfortable to you?
- is it easy to access the sensor for dust removal?
- does the camera feel balanced when using the lens you have selected, or do you feel like you are fighting it?
- does the view through the finder present problems for your vision?
- is access to the battery possible if the camera is on a tripod?
- are spare batteries affordable?
- is swapping memory cards easy and comfortable?
- what sort of write times do you get?
- is the buffer adequate for continuous shooting that you might do?
If the camera lacks the comfort and ease of use you are looking for, it will be a bother every time you pick it up. Each brand will find people who love it - a very personal choice that has nothing to do with brand. Working with a camera that works with you means that you can spend less attention fighting with it and more capturing images with great content. Buying a Canon or Nikon because one or the other is the "leading" brand may simply mean buying a camera you really don't enjoy using. If it feels best, buy it.
Obviously you have an attachment and loyalty to Nikon. I have no attachment to anyone or any particular brand. And, I respond to these issues on the basis of a long history of experience, some of which from Nikon being as hostile and unfriendly as yours. What goes around comes around.
I have no dog in this fight as I use both Canon and Nikon cameras and have no loyalty to one over the other. I have an attachment to the photographic industry and the wonderful products they supply, not to any particular company. Your bias against Nikon is not in line with objective reporting that I expect from a Shutterbug contributor.
That's your individual opinion. I don't see it as bias being critical of a company and its products if in fact it is deserved by what they do and produce. I have friends who are dedicated Nikon pro users and are even more critical than I.
If I obtained the same feedback as you have expressed from the thousands of Shutterbug readers about what I write in the magazine as you have expressed, I would be concerned that my perspective is unreasonable, but although I occasionally have a detractor on some issue or another, your view I am excessively critical and not objective in my view of Nikon, has not been supported by any other readers.
The reason for that is that I don't write about products I would not use myself, in other words I don't cover Nikon in the magazine, in the past because I usually did not get the assignments to do so, and in recent years as a matter of choice on my part. I choose to write about products and companies that don't have attributes I find don't work for me - I prefer not to write negatively, although if some particular feature in a product falls short I'll say so.
Here in this forum I am just another individual photographer expressing a personal perspective. I am not writing here in this context for the magazine as a contributor, but as an individual photographer, one to another on a basis of equality, and free to express my individual perspective and opinion as everyone else.
You do have a dog in this dispute, but I agree it is not Nikon. It is a problem you have with me that is a personal motivation on your part. That's your problem, so I would suggest you not make it a problem for me.
You lost me on that one. It's just that I have a canon film and a nikon point and shoot camera already. I feel prices on DSLR will possibly come down and have "better" quality and features than they do now. Its like the LCD TVs, quality is getting better and prices coming down. It would be nice to have a 35mm digital not a 1.6X for a price besides 3,000 or 4,000. I personally do not see a camera out there that is worth the price. xti seems so so and if that came down I'd maybe consider it to experiment with. But rather save my money for the real thing to use with good lenses. I think I'll look into new nature/wildlife lenses for now.
I was responding to Mr brooks "both feet in the water".
Define "real thing."
Actually I'd consider the 1.5/1.6 magnification factor in determining what new nature and wildlife lenses you're thinking about for film cameras. Once you get past 10 to 12 megapixels, it's not the magnification factor that determines the quality of the camera but the photographer. I know that Nikon has a professional wide angle zoom in it's 12-24mm and I'm sure that Canon does something similar also.
As for prices coming down and quality going up, it's happening all the time and at some point you will bite the bullet and jump in.
It's just that I have a canon film and a nikon point and shoot camera already. I feel prices on DSLR will possibly come down and have "better" quality and features than they do now. Its like the LCD TVs, quality is getting better and prices coming down. It would be nice to have a 35mm digital not a 1.6X for a price besides 3,000 or 4,000. I personally do not see a camera out there that is worth the price. xti seems so so and if that came down I'd maybe consider it to experiment with. But rather save my money for the real thing to use with good lenses. I think I'll look into new nature/wildlife lenses for now.
I'm looking into the 100-400 zoom lens though not into the push pull or the 400 lens. Would really like the 500 but maybe down the rd. I know they are costly as well. I know the 1.6x sensor camera probably suits a nature/wildlife photographer. Just got the macro 100 for closeups. I have not actually purchased a new lens in 8 years, when I first really got into it. Have the 28-105 and the 100-300 188.8.131.52 which is not all that good. The macro is so smooth and now I realize the "better" that is out there.I have just got back into it all so as always doing a lot of research. Appreciate your comments