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
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
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

JAR - Just Another Rant!!

 
alphamalex
Senior Member
alphamalex's Avatar
Joined Mar 2011
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 Freeloaderexternal link aka Freddy the Freeloaderexternal 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 registered member)
gjl711
They have pills for that now you know.
gjl711's Avatar
53,513 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Deep in the heart of Texas
Oct 30, 2014 13:06 |  #2

alphamalex wrote in post #17241981external 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
bsmotril's Avatar
Joined Feb 2006
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!
Qlayer2's Avatar
Joined Dec 2013
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!
13,992 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Sep 2007
Oct 30, 2014 13:48 |  #5

bsmotril wrote in post #17242048external 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 - CV 35/1.7 - 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
Joined Mar 2007
Mississauga, ON
Oct 30, 2014 13:48 |  #6

alphamalex wrote in post #17241981external 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
Tom_D's Avatar
Joined Aug 2005
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
7,326 posts
Joined Apr 2003
British Columbia
Oct 30, 2014 14:27 |  #8

alphamalex wrote in post #17241981external 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
fiebru1119's Avatar
Joined May 2009
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!
13,992 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Joined Sep 2007
Oct 30, 2014 15:19 |  #10

fiebru1119 wrote in post #17242181external 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 - CV 35/1.7 - 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
28,936 posts
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
GeoKras1989's Avatar
Joined Jun 2014
Oct 30, 2014 17:23 |  #12
banned

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
Joined Dec 2013
Columbus, OH
Oct 30, 2014 18:42 |  #13

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17242454external 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"
JeffreyG's Avatar
15,218 posts
Gallery: 34 photos
Joined Jan 2007
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

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

Hogloff wrote in post #17242175external 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 registered member)

2,392 views & 0 likes for this thread
JAR - Just Another Rant!!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

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

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00233 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.05s
Latest registered member is cjp1997
894 guests, 479 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017