Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 30 Oct 2014 (Thursday) 12:57
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

JAR - Just Another Rant!!

 
alphamalex
Senior Member
Avatar
885 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 219
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Lexington, KY, U.S.A
     
Oct 30, 2014 12:57 |  #1

So I got my copy of the latest American Photo. I like that magazine; it's different than the others.

There was a Sony insert along with it - chock full of information about the FF Alpha trio. So you know that's a paid insert, and they're gonna sing praises ... which they did.

My beef(?) is with the magazine itself. They had some top ten this, and top fifteen that kind of lists and some other gear articles, and as far as I can remember, the only Canon that got mentioned anywhere was the T5. Now that I think about it, I don't see a whole lotta Canons mentioned in any of the magazines I get; is there a bias towards Canon in the industry as a whole?

Are other products so much better than Canon, that we can't even get a word in sideways? Should my beef be with Canon, and not the magazine(s)?


Freddy the Freeloader (external link) aka Freddy the Freeloader (external link)
5DIII, 5D II, 5Dc, 7D with 24-70 2.8L II, 24-70 2.8L, 24-105 F4L IS, 70-200 F2.8L IS, 100 2.8L IS Macro, 400 5.6L, 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 28-135, 55-250
Kenko EF/EFS Tubes, Canon 12mm Tube, EF 2x II Converter, 380EX, 580EX II, Manfrotto MT294A3, Manfrotto 804RC2 Head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
gjl711
They have pills for that now you know.
Avatar
53,885 posts
Likes: 1494
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Oct 30, 2014 13:06 |  #2

alphamalex wrote in post #17241981 (external link)
...

My beef(?) is with the magazine itself. They had some top ten this, and top fifteen that kind of lists and some other gear articles, and as far as I can remember, the only Canon that got mentioned anywhere was the T5. Now that I think about it, I don't see a whole lotta Canons mentioned in any of the magazines I get; is there a bias towards Canon in the industry as a whole?

Are other products so much better than Canon, that we can't even get a word in sideways? Should my beef be with Canon, and not the magazine(s)?

I suspect that it's because depending on the weight of the various categories, Canon as a whole tends to trend low and the one area Canon has consistently been the leader, high ISO noise, the others have caught up. If you look at the Canon lineup, that are all really nice cameras, but not the market leader in any.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bsmotril
Goldmember
Avatar
2,504 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 197
Joined Feb 2006
Location: Austin TX
     
Oct 30, 2014 13:24 |  #3

Canon has far more market share than any of them and they don't commit the advertising spend like Sony and Nikon do. The magazines are going to praise those that spend the most on ad space.


Gear List
Galleries: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/smopho/ (external link) --- http://billsmotrilla.z​enfolio.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Qlayer2
OOOHHH! Pretty Moth!
Avatar
939 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 119
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Oct 30, 2014 13:42 |  #4

Depending on what you are shopping for, Canon isn't doing that great right now. The newer entry level crop cameras and high level full frame cameras are being dominated by Nikon and Sony right now.

I just picked up a Nikon D3300 refurbished for $350 about 2 months ago- 24mp, no AA filter, better low ISO and high ISO capabilites, dynamic range, and color depth than any crop sensor from Canon. Has a higher DXOmark score than the 1Dx, if you care about things like that. On the other side of the coin, the D750, D810, and A7r are all very capable cameras, with better sensors, priced lower than the 5d3.

With the 7dII Canon has a chance to get some media attention as the best crop sensor high speed machine, and the 6D is still aggressively priced for a full frame camera with good high ISO capabilites, as well. Doesn't mean Canon products are no good, just means don't expect them to be sitting on anyone's top lists until they upgrade their sensors to compete with the nikon/sony offerings.


Support the forums - donate here

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,411 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4656
Joined Sep 2007
     
Oct 30, 2014 13:48 |  #5

bsmotril wrote in post #17242048 (external link)
Canon has far more market share than any of them and they don't commit the advertising spend like Sony and Nikon do. The magazines are going to praise those that spend the most on ad space.

yep. Canon advertises in national geographic magazines, and that's far more reaching than typical "photography" magazines. NAT GEO is what I consider my primary photography magazine. I do have other subscriptions of photography magazines, but nothing provides the imagery and quality of nat geo.


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
adamo99
Goldmember
1,172 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 33
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Mississauga, ON
     
Oct 30, 2014 13:48 |  #6

alphamalex wrote in post #17241981 (external link)
we can't even get a word in sideways? Should my beef be with Canon, and not the magazine(s)?

Who's we? I couldn't care less which products are rated highly in any magazine.

Why should you have a beef with anyone? Does your camera does what you expect it to? Great! Go out and take some pictures. If not, buy something that addresses a feature(s) that you feel is/are lacking in your current gear.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom_D
Goldmember
Avatar
1,425 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 15
Joined Aug 2005
Location: Napa ~ on the edge of retirement.
     
Oct 30, 2014 14:01 |  #7

PLENTY about Canon here. (external link) LOTS of news and technical articles.


Gallery (external link)
7DMkII, 40D, 17-55, 70-200 f/2.8 IS and more...
More Wag, Less Bark

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hogloff
Cream of the Crop
7,378 posts
Likes: 328
Joined Apr 2003
Location: British Columbia
     
Oct 30, 2014 14:27 |  #8

alphamalex wrote in post #17241981 (external link)
So I got my copy of the latest American Photo. I like that magazine; it's different than the others.

There was a Sony insert along with it - chock full of information about the FF Alpha trio. So you know that's a paid insert, and they're gonna sing praises ... which they did.

My beef(?) is with the magazine itself. They had some top ten this, and top fifteen that kind of lists and some other gear articles, and as far as I can remember, the only Canon that got mentioned anywhere was the T5. Now that I think about it, I don't see a whole lotta Canons mentioned in any of the magazines I get; is there a bias towards Canon in the industry as a whole?

Are other products so much better than Canon, that we can't even get a word in sideways? Should my beef be with Canon, and not the magazine(s)?

Why do you even care. What beef are you talking about? Will you all of a sudden be able to take better photos if a magazine praises your camera?

Just go out and shoot.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
fiebru1119
Senior Member
Avatar
681 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 59
Joined May 2009
Location: Orlando, FL
     
Oct 30, 2014 14:33 |  #9

While we're on a rant… I strongly believe that camera technology has reached a point where they out-perform whatever skill the operator may have to contribute.. I get that for the working photogs needing the increasingly high ISO performance (wedding guys come to mind), or great improvements in AF (wildlife/sports) etc, most of the cameras available today are just overkill for most of us on here (myself included). For the gun folks out there, I can better explain it as, just because my rifle built to 0.5MOA at 200yd spec doesn't mean I'd be able to put in a group that tight at that distance.

Need proof? Look at the hundreds of pages of INCREDIBLE images captured with the regular old 5D "classic" and 1D2 picture threads. The images in the 5D3/6D/1Dx/XYZgreatest​newestcamera threads, as amazing as they may be, are for the most part could have just as easily been taken on a 5Dc or 1D2 or 40D for that matter - when PP is applied and viewed online (such as is the case with many folks).

And the last $0.01 out of my 2 cents is that I frankly don't give a **** what a magazine/website says about my gear. If anything, it'll just drive some people to dump canon platform allowing me to acquire used gear at cheaper prices :D


1DX | 15/2.8 FE | 16-35/4.0LIS | 24/1.4L II | 50/1.2L | 24-105LIS II | 70-200LII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
14,411 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 4656
Joined Sep 2007
     
Oct 30, 2014 15:19 |  #10

fiebru1119 wrote in post #17242181 (external link)
While we're on a rant… I strongly believe that camera technology has reached a point where they out-perform whatever skill the operator may have to contribute.. I get that for the working photogs needing the increasingly high ISO performance (wedding guys come to mind), or great improvements in AF (wildlife/sports) etc, most of the cameras available today are just overkill for most of us on here (myself included).

Sorry, a camera is not like a gun, AF is borderline as good as it gets with the higher end models, but there can certainly be big improvements everywhere else, including high ISO. What's wrong with a clean super 400K iso? If anything, that allows photographers to take better astro photos, better sports photos with higher shutter speeds, sports photos with smaller aperture glass, less blurred images, ect. If it can be improved, why the heck not?

I would love a tool that has no limits. Every tool has limits, my life would be simpler with less limitation. Why cant I have a base iso of 6.25 with a max iso of 400K? Most of photography could have been done with film, but I'm glad there was a movement to digital. Some day iso 25 might be the norm as well as 400K performance.


Sony A7rii/A7riii - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 35-70, 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8, 24/1.4 - Tamron 28-75 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
28,988 posts
Likes: 964
Joined Dec 2006
     
Oct 30, 2014 15:42 |  #11

Keep in mind that in photography magazines there is not a great deal of editorial integrity. Articles and advertising dollars are often intertwined. American Photo seems better than most but likely still aware of where their bread is buttered.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GeoKras1989
Goldmember
Avatar
4,038 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 259
Joined Jun 2014
     
Oct 30, 2014 17:23 |  #12
bannedPermanent ban

The bottom line for any magazine (or any other commercial venture) is the bottom line. They are in it for absolutely no other reason than to make money. Money drives the advertising, the editorial page and the reviews. What the users on POTN, Photocamel, FM, DPS, PZ and TDP, think means a lot more to me than whatever drivel shows up in a paid advertisement - OOOPS! - I mean magazine.


WARNING: I often dispense advice in fields I know little about!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Boone13
Senior Member
387 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Columbus, OH
     
Oct 30, 2014 18:42 |  #13

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17242454 (external link)
The bottom line for any magazine (or any other commercial venture) is the bottom line. They are in it for absolutely no other reason than to make money. Money drives the advertising, the editorial page and the reviews. What the users on POTN, Photocamel, FM, DPS, PZ and TDP, think means a lot more to me than whatever drivel shows up in a paid advertisement - OOOPS! - I mean magazine.

Amen!


Some moments are too amazing to be ruined with words.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,339 posts
Gallery: 39 photos
Likes: 451
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Oct 30, 2014 18:53 |  #14

I only care about Canon's advertising plans because they (their ad agency) have purchased photographs from me in the past for it. I whole-heartedly support more of this advertising.

Canon ads not featuring my photos? Could not care less.

Overall, I support Canon expanding their advertising budget and then buying more photographs from me.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sega62
Senior Member
Avatar
755 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Aug 2011
     
Oct 31, 2014 14:53 |  #15

Hogloff wrote in post #17242175 (external link)
Why do you even care. What beef are you talking about? Will you all of a sudden be able to take better photos if a magazine praises your camera?

Just go out and shoot.

Yep, don't care bout magazines or reviews for what its worth.
All cameras are good, just get to know your's and be happy.

🐸🐸🐸




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,469 views & 0 likes for this thread
JAR - Just Another Rant!!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.0forum software
version 2.0 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Lausti
634 guests, 396 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.