Is there Something In The Water?

If Nikon buys their sensors from Sony, maybe Sony has some say in how they use their sensors? Because Sony has some high end (expensive) 2/3'' cameras to protect. Although RED is going to kick some Sony 'a' anyways. :Drogar-Evil(DBG):
 
I see your point Morgan, and agree to a certain extent.
Most consumers just buy because of good marketing campaigns,

And the best marketing campaign is for Nikon to have their kit seen in the hands of the pros at the olympics etc

They then buy in those images for use in nikon mag/website/printads etc

So if no pros are using nikon

nikon has no marketing campaign

and no marketing campaign

means no consumer sales

which is why IMO nikon need to, and will I hope, bring out a great solution for the professionals

again looking at the timeline nikon have been behind canon (1ds V D1 etc) for some time, really only catching up with the D3x so them lagging now is of no suprise

S
 
Every camera used to have manual control. That's all there was. Then automatic control came about to make it easier to "get the shot". For people who don't know what manual is, they started making camera with fully automatic/no manual. But pro cameras always have manual and auto, they also get a high price for them. The companies don't want to give out pro features or pro quality imaging for cheap.
 
Think about it. Can you imagine if the 5D Mark II had all the manual controls, no rolling shutter problem, etc. etc. You could say goodbye to XL H1S, XL H1A, XHG1S etc. etc. sales...same with all others.

I wonder when people talk about "destroying" the prosumer camera line-up if they ever think about the videography/ENG market. Who the hell wants razor thin DOF when your subject is constantly moving about in unpredictable motions? SUre you can go full-size broadcast cameras but who's gonna be able to afford a $20k body with lens? There's always gonna be a need for small chip form factor camera like the A1, HVX, EX1 etc. Ergonomically these are gonna be a lot easier to handle than DSLR and the long DOF makes them much more usable in a live-event coverage situation for the budget conscious.
 
I wonder when people talk about "destroying" the prosumer camera line-up if they ever think about the videography/ENG market. Who the hell wants razor thin DOF when your subject is constantly moving about in unpredictable motions?.

Oh..I have already brought that up before...yes I agree that there could be a need for certain types of cameras for certain types of applications...especially all LIVE events...news, sports, etc.
 
I wonder when people talk about "destroying" the prosumer camera line-up if they ever think about the videography/ENG market. Who the hell wants razor thin DOF when your subject is constantly moving about in unpredictable motions? SUre you can go full-size broadcast cameras but who's gonna be able to afford a $20k body with lens? There's always gonna be a need for small chip form factor camera like the A1, HVX, EX1 etc. Ergonomically these are gonna be a lot easier to handle than DSLR and the long DOF makes them much more usable in a live-event coverage situation for the budget conscious.

You can always close down your aperture/use a slow lens then you get deep depth of field and lousy low light performance just like a video camera. CCD camera's are definitely important for action. but yeah maybe canon and panasonic have nothing to fear.
 
The other thing is that some clients want to see a big ass camera at work. If I walked into a gig with a D90 or 5DII, some clients would think I was joking.

The wow factor of walking in with a fully kitted out HVX200/Redrock (for example) can be a factor for some clients.
 
If Nikon buys their sensors from Sony, maybe Sony has some say in how they use their sensors? Because Sony has some high end (expensive) 2/3'' cameras to protect.

Interesting point. Might be real. Perhaps Sony has the intention to launch a VDSLR as well. Therefore they sell the sensor under severe restrictions? Who knows...
 
Back
Top