How interested are you in a GH6 anymore?

[NorBro]

Isn't that a contradiction? If 20 cameras take the market by storm then none do, because taking the market by storm involves displacing everything else.

I'm talking about cameras that it seemed like EVERYBODY owned. I would say canon 5dmk2, 7d, 5dmk3. Sony a7sii, a7iii. Panasonic gh4 and maybe gh5. And that's it. Maybe not even all of those

That's easy to counterexample. Your clients don't need to know anything about technique. If they hire 2 different DPs for 2 different interview shoots and one makes the talent look ugly and the other makes the talent look handsome, using the exact same camera and lights, they're gonna hire the DP who made him look handsome the next time.

Same thing if one OMB gets clean sound and the other gets scratchy sound. I don't know if you were following the discussion of techniques for hiding lavs in the other thread.

Wedding photographers are super focused on posing and staging the couple. And finding good natural light. All of which is gear-agnostic.

For me, knowing which gear I'm going to need when during a wedding shoot and packing accordingly is crucial to actually using it.. buying the gear and bringing it is only the first step..

Then there's gimbal techniques.. balancing the rig,, footsteps, arm positions and movements, joystick and pivot control.

Even if you buy a good AF camera, you should know which settings work best when.

The list goes on and on and on. And the client observes the differences in the results even if they don't understand how or why

lol, you think too much (and it's not the good kind of thinking).

20 cameras in the last 8 or so years. A few per year.

No, it's not a contradiction because multiple cameras can take the market by storm like the R5 and a7SIII, months apart.

And if technique means being competent then OKAY, you need technique.

[ahalpert]

I haven't met a single other person in The Real World who owns an A7SIII. I've met a number with the R5, all stills shooters. Neither camera has taken the market by storm. Being a best seller at B&H is not the same thing.

yes, technique means being competent, not just owning good gear. And ideally, it means being exceptional. In every sector and at every budget tier, you will be able to make more money and be in more demand by having exceptional technique rather than just competent technique

[NorBro]

See, that's why conversations can be so difficult with you, man...the way you think is just, ughh

Thousands of videos about the cameras from everyone under the sun, numerous articles on blogs/info sites, out of stock for months everywhere, so much hype around them, both companies said they exceeded expectations...yet they didn't take the market by storm in your opinion because you haven't met anyone with them.

You need new friends, bro

[ahalpert]

I work alongside new shooters all the frigging time

The volume of marketing videos doesn't mean diddly squat. Neither does being out of stock, especially considering supply constraints.

There was a time when it felt like everyone and his dog owned a 5dmk2. Then a 7d. Then a 5dmk3. Not so with the 5dmk4. Similarly, the gh4 and maybe gh5 as well as the a7sii felt ubiquitous. If someone didn't own one, they owned the other, at least as a b/gimbal camera

I really don't feel like there's any single new camera out there that is ubiquitous. The market is more evenly divided. And possibly the upgrade cycle has slowed due to the pandemic.

If anything, the FX9 has seen the highest uptake among shooters i know rather than the fx6 or any other sony or canon camera. But far and away, most of the folks i know have stuck with their fs7 or c300mk2

[NorBro]

Not everyone can afford a ~$4K camera (announced during a pandemic).

Part of taking the market by storm is the hype and discussion surrounding the product; not just owning it.

We are talking about the R5 and a7SIII...yo, what are you even saying.

P.S. My tone is light...no hard feelings, per usual. It wouldn't be a normal day for me without arguing with ahalpert about something.

[ahalpert]

Companies pay for youtube videos. Influencing is a multi billion dollar industry. That's part of the reason i don't take it seriously, aside from the fact that these reviewers aren't actual working cameramen and have major gaps in basic usage comprehension. It would be like watching TV and assuming that something is popular because it airs a ton of commercials showing people enjoying it

Even on dvxuser, which I would argue is a forum of gearheads and early adopters, there has not been one camera that has taken the forum by storm. Probably the fx6 has the highest adoption, with some fx9. I can only think of one other a7siii owner on here. Then a mix of c500mk2, c300mk3, and c70 owners. The r5 is probably 2nd most common adoption after the fx6, with a healthy mix of R6. But none of them is ubiquitous and not everybody has acquired a body from the latest generation

[NorBro]

You're engaging in semantics to defend your position, but I can't agree.

Their information, no matter what they say or what they do with it, is helping the product take the market by storm.

Your example of commercials is exactly why the mail order industry became so successful.

If you only consider a product taking the market by storm by how many people you can personally confirm own it and use it in a way you approve (in the field or on a forum) then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[ahalpert]

Arguably no sony or canon camera will ever sell as many units as before...

sales.jpg

Anyway, can you point to sales figures rather than youtube analytics? That's the only data that could sway my opinion

And the thing is- my appraisal of the 5dmk2 and mk3 taking the market by storm is based on them being so popular AMONG PEOPLE I KNEW that folks would say to each other, "just bring your 5D" under the assumption that the other person had one. I'm sure that there were fewer YT videos and views at that time. Because YT has grown. I don't care about YT influencer campaigns.

by "taking the market by storm" I mean becoming a camera that everyone in the industry purchases and uses. I know a lot of cameramen in various sectors and I meet new ones constantly. I simply don't observe the R5 or the a7siii matching the popularity of the 5dmk3 or the a7sii. At least not yet

[NorBro]

You said this...

Being a best seller at B&H is not the same thing.

...so why would sales figures interest you, especially since you know that they cannot compete with sales figures from 2010.

Nevertheless, I'd Google them just like you if they were available to the general public. (There are some Canon press releases speaking about the R5's success, if interested.)

As far as the 5D Mark II, you keep using that example, and it's the strongest by far because it's a GOAT, but that was a different world, friend.

Less choices, for one. [Seriously, how many cameras could you name back then that weren't fixed zoom lens systems?]

But also because people never saw shallow depth of field like that in any camera they could physically touch. Its popularity was undeniable in a world where people were using the first iPhone.

[NorBro]

Regardless, you said "...becoming a camera that everyone in the industry purchases and uses.", so I think this is pretty much done based on your description and understanding.

[DLD]

Arguably no sony or canon camera will ever sell as many units as before...

That's not arguable. The trend is what one calls a "prima facie" evidence.

That said, as we were discussing in the iPhone thread, at some point a camera with the A7SII performance will be sold for $500 and a 16K camera will be sold for $3,500. And pro shooters everywhere will say, "Who the heck needs 16K?" and a lot of non-shooters will say, "Eh, $500? I might as well get myself one". It's possible. But most non-shooters will remain the iPhoneusers.

As to the popularity of a given camera, the DVXUser camp has a plethora of choices. The pro sales were never as big as the consumer models. 5D MKII was pretty expensive at the time. And, as we had discussed in the GH-5 thread, GH-4 was big in 2015-2016 because it had the 4K Value market all onto itself. Now, there are dozen 4K models. They split the "value" niche into the many smaller niches. Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus/OMD are all congregating there and, until some brand names drop out, not a single model will dominate.

[ahalpert]

You said this...



...so why would sales figures interest you, especially since you know that they cannot compete with sales figures from 2010.

Nevertheless, I'd Google them just like you if they were available to the general public. (There are some Canon press releases speaking about the R5's success, if interested.)

As far as the 5D Mark II, you keep using that example, and it's the strongest by far because it's a GOAT, but that was a different world, friend.

Less choices, for one. [Seriously, how many cameras could you name back then that weren't fixed zoom lens systems?]

But also because people never saw shallow depth of field like that in any camera they could physically touch. Its popularity was undeniable in a world where people were using the first iPhone.

I'm glad you agree with me - nothing has taken the market by storm like the 5dmk2 did. Nor, I would argue, the 7D and 5dmk3 and a7sii in its wake, albeit to a lesser extent.

I'd be interested in the total number of units sold rather than b&h best sellers. B&h is only one retailer and we're making only a relative comparison to their other current offerings without knowing how many more units are actually being sold, let alone relative to past models.

I don't mean that literally everyone needs to purchase. But that was how it felt with the 5dmk2/7d/5dmk3 and the a7sii. It felt like I knew way more people who owned one than didn't. And that's just not (yet) true with the r5 or the a7siii.

The 5dmk2 was a category 5. The r5 is a tropical storm. (This is less true among stills users who seem to be switching to mirrorless around the pivot point of the R5. But I'm talking about video shooters, same as with the 5dmk2.)

[NorBro]

I do agree, for sure, but that's also like saying the CD player took the market by storm after cassettes.

It was never seen before, in 2008. That's like when dinosaurs were still around.

That camera changed the world.

[ahalpert]

. Now, there are dozen 4K models. They split the "value" niche into the many smaller niches. Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus/OMD are all congregating there and, until some brand names drop out, not a single model will dominate.

I agree with this and, more broadly, that no model has a single knockout feature all to itself. If either canon or Sony had a monopoly on good AF, it would be a different story. I don't think internal 8K RAW is a knockout. Especially if it doesn't really work. But more to the point - it's not in demand

[DLD]

In terms of features, there are minimums and maximums. As a minimum, 4K is a must. A good AF is a must. Then it begins to split - some like ISO, some want IBIS, others want Raw, others want the lowest price, et cetera, et cetera. But there's a reason that Canon and Sony dominate the mirrorless with over 30% each. Each has an exemplary auto focus.

Side note - Blackmagic Design can serve as an example of the consumer response to the technology. In 2012, BMD announced the original 2.5K Cinema Camera and, production delays notwithstanding, it became a huge hit at $3,000. Eight years later, it announced a far superior 12K model and people yawned. Not because the camera was a bad value for its price but because 12K was not in demand. And because Canon announced an 8K camera for a much lower price. With auto focus to boot. And that shows how marginal the benefits really are.

PS. The same goes for cars too. 2022 VW Golf Sport was tested at 4.0 0-60. So, while it may not be 911, it's also $100,000 less. And then 911 becomes that wonderful extra large medium format 16K camera. It's a phenomenal achievement in engineering - turbo can do at 2.2 - but it's pretty much a track vehicle for the super wealthy while. Golf R is an every day vehicle for the masses.