New Nikon?

"Steven M. Scharf" wrote in message
news:Gv5ee.3526

Rarely do they change rapidly. Canon has been using the EOS mount since
1987. Canon has been using the F mount since 1959.

Oops, obviously I meant "Nikon has been using the F mount since 1959."

"Roger" wrote in message
...

These wars are great... if Nikon and Canon hadn't convinced us that we
should now buy a new camera every 18mos rather that every 18 years we
wouldn't have this rush to technology.

They have not convinced me of that, at least in terms of SLRs. If someone is
not moving into the professional realm, with the need for the additional
functionality that the more expensive cameras provide, then there is no
reason to change cameras every 18 months.

There are a lot of users that move to SLRs from compact digital cameras for
two reasons; wider range of focal lengths, and the elimination of shutter
lag. They may be changing cameras after only six months!

Steve
http://digitalslrinfo.com


Throw away cameras, throw away
lenses, throw away money, throw away mentality. We all have our
"blinders" on and Canon and Nikon are having a laugh behind our backs.

What do you think is going to happen when the curve flattens, when
everyone has the ultimate digital, when we are back to the rule of
threes (three suppliers world wide).

Whew.... glad I said that. :-)

Roger

"Steven M. Scharf" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Roy" wrote in message
...
"Tim" wrote in message
...
Does anyone know if Nikon has a camera in the works to compete with the
Digital Rebel XT? If so, any word on when?


I said get the Blinkers Off.

It's blinders, not blinkers, and you definitely have them on.

To say that I should only consider Canon because it has " wider breadth
of
product now" is taking a very "Blinkered" look. Things change, and
rapidly
sometimes.

Rarely do they change rapidly. Canon has been using the EOS mount since
1987. Canon has been using the F mount since 1959. Neither show any signs
of
making a wholesale change to their mount. While some Nikon lenses don't
work
on their more recent cameras, most do.

Buy the Camera you want to use now, and enjoy using it until you outgrow
its
capabilities.

Buy the camera you want to use now, but when making the decision on what
you
want to use, keep in mind where you may want to be in the next 5 years,
and
buy into a system that provides that capability, rather than hoping the
manufacturer of what you buy may come out with an upgrade path later. Both
Canon and Nikon offer an upgrade path to prosumer and professional. If you
have aspirations to move up, these are the only two systems to consider.

There is no kind of guarantee that any system will still be compatible in
2
or 5 years time. If you don't understand that then you really are very
shortsighted, as well as wearing blinkers.

If history is any indicator, you are 100% incorrect. Read, study, learn.

Steve
http://digitalslrinfo.com


Yea.

Go tell that to Contax users. Remember them? Real Professional Cameras at
real Professional prices. Leica??

"Change is the Norm"

I very carefully have not said what camera, or what make I use.

What I object to is people who argue that Brand A is better than Brand B
because A has this or B has that, and that anyone who uses the opposing
brand is somehow not as intelligent.

There also seems to be a certain number who delight in pointing out apparent
weaknesses in the other Brands product Portfolio. They seem to think they
are responsible for the other Brands imminent demise, and rejoice in it.

Who do they think they are? The Marketing Directors for Nikon or Canon?

They are just Customers, and are as likely to end up with incompatible bits
and pieces as anyone else.

Hence, my argument to choose your Camera for what you want it to do, now
and in the immediate future.

In spite of what you state as a fact, the history of this hobby is littered
with obsolete Brands and Outdated Systems. Both Canon and Nikon have their
fair share of unusable, but perfectly sound, equipment gathering dust in
their customers cupboards. I know, I have got some of it.

" There is none so blind as those who will not see ".

Roy G

"Roy" wrote in message
...

Hence, my argument to choose your Camera for what you want it to do, now
and in the immediate future.

This is okay advice when you're looking at point and shoot cameras, or
automobiles, but it's extremely short-sighted when you are looking at
digital SLRs because with an SLR you're also buying complementary equipments
such as lenses and flashes. Therefore it makes sense to look at not only
what your immediate needs are, but where you may want to be in a few years,
as your budget and skills increase.

I didn't realize that not everyone realized this, since it's just common
sense. I added a section to my web site explaining this.

Steve
http://digitalslrinfo.com

"Steven M. Scharf" writes:
They have not convinced me of that, at least in terms of SLRs. If
someone is not moving into the professional realm, with the need for
the additional functionality that the more expensive cameras
provide, then there is no reason to change cameras every 18 months.

I think DSLR's have only very recently gotten to the point where a
nonprofessional can buy one and stay with it without feeling a need to
upgrade. Before that, it's been like the early days of P/S digicams.
I upgraded through several generations of them before buying one of
the first Canon S100's. The S100 was (for me) the first P/S digicam
whose compromises were acceptable enough that I didn't constantly want
to upgrade it, and in fact I still use one (my 2nd).