WTF! Canon not #1 in US digicam sales???

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: pyonir
Of course. Those that are loyal to Canon don't need to buy another camera, because the one they have lasts. Anyone that buys Sony or Kodak has to replace the camera when they break and they usually stick with their brand.

Yeah, I'm thinking about switching to Canon for my next one. I absolutely loved my Fuji until the bastard up and died last month. I'm almost tempted to get another Fuji, but dying after less than 2 years left a bad taste in my mouth... <insert random naughty innuendo with possible homoerotic overtones here>

 

[wyvrn]

This does not suprise me at all. Most of the people I know who know next to nothing about cameras buy Sony. The only rating they usually go buy is megapixels, and they want a simple point and shoot. They buy Sony for the NAME, and think it's a safe buy.

Personally, Sony hasn't impressed me. Of the two cameras I have used, both took marginal quality pictures when compared with my Canon A60. The Sony 4 megapixel unit I tried took horrible picture. The colors were off and all of the pictures seemed dark, this on default settings. My A60 blew away most of the Sony's I have tried in regards to picture quality and functionality. I don't really care as much about megapixels as I do quality of the lens, because who wants to print crappy 8x10s?

I took the Sony I bought back and am thinking about buying a Canon A85 instead.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: wyvrn
This does not suprise me at all. Most of the people I know who know next to nothing about cameras buy Sony. The only rating they usually go buy is megapixels, and they want a simple point and shoot. They buy Sony for the NAME, and think it's a safe buy.

Personally, Sony hasn't impressed me. Of the two cameras I have used, both took marginal quality pictures when compared with my Canon A60. The Sony 4 megapixel unit I tried took horrible picture. The colors were off and all of the pictures seemed dark, this on default settings. My A60 blew away most of the Sony's I have tried in regards to picture quality and functionality. I don't really care as much about megapixels as I do quality of the lens, because who wants to print crappy 8x10s?

I took the Sony I bought back and am thinking about buying a Canon A85 instead.

Your comments about Sony don't mean squat unless you tell us what models you were using.

 

[Mr N8]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: wyvrn
This does not suprise me at all. Most of the people I know who know next to nothing about cameras buy Sony. The only rating they usually go buy is megapixels, and they want a simple point and shoot. They buy Sony for the NAME, and think it's a safe buy.

Personally, Sony hasn't impressed me. Of the two cameras I have used, both took marginal quality pictures when compared with my Canon A60. The Sony 4 megapixel unit I tried took horrible picture. The colors were off and all of the pictures seemed dark, this on default settings. My A60 blew away most of the Sony's I have tried in regards to picture quality and functionality. I don't really care as much about megapixels as I do quality of the lens, because who wants to print crappy 8x10s?

I took the Sony I bought back and am thinking about buying a Canon A85 instead.

Your comments about Sony don't mean squat unless you tell us what models you were using.

Exactly. The DSC-P* cameras really aren't all that great. They are meant to be entry level, and the low price grabs the attention of Sony fans/ The F717 / 818 and the V1 are very good cameras, and will blow away an A60.

 

[GTaudiophile]

My first digicam, a Canon S10 bought in 2000, is still going strong. My G2, bought in 2002, is still going strong and took far heavier beatings.

I just bought an EOS-20D and can't wait to see what it can do.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Yeah, and Bose is considered by many to be the best in HT technology...:roll:

All this really points out is how stupid most people are.

 

[rh71]

Time to ask my aunt for some employee discounts...

 

[Antoneo]

Strange, I read an article a while back describing how Kodak was in pains after shooting themselves in the foot for not participating in the digital foray when it started. Or was that Nikon?

 

[pyonir]

Originally posted by: Antoneo
Strange, I read an article a while back describing how Kodak was in pains after shooting themselves in the foot for not participating in the digital foray when it started. Or was that Nikon?

that was definitely Kodak.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: Antoneo
Strange, I read an article a while back describing how Kodak was in pains after shooting themselves in the foot for not participating in the digital foray when it started. Or was that Nikon?

Kodak was late to the game as far as digital goes, but has made a strong comeback in the past year.

 

[NFS4]

Originally posted by: MogulMonster

Exactly. The DSC-P* cameras really aren't all that great. They are meant to be entry level, and the low price grabs the attention of Sony fans/ The F717 / 818 and the V1 are very good cameras, and will blow away an A60.

DROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

 

[Antoneo]

Originally posted by: DT4K

Originally posted by: Antoneo
Strange, I read an article a while back describing how Kodak was in pains after shooting themselves in the foot for not participating in the digital foray when it started. Or was that Nikon?

Kodak was late to the game as far as digital goes, but has made a strong comeback in the past year.

Yeah, it's quite surprising. For the longest time I thought Canon and Sony were the only ones duking it out. Was the 8MP purple fringing on the Sony CCD chip ever resolved? There were lots of complaints with the 828.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: PhoenixOrion
Now if we look at Sony, a lot of people frown upon the proprietary media and battery, has pretty much comparable features at each price point but they are known to use cheap korean glass.

fixed!

 

[Doggiedog]

Sony can suck it.

Its all Canon for me.

AE-1, T-1, S10, S400, S600 and Optura 500.

 

[Koing]

I like the higher end Sony stuff. If you buy stuff for cheap from any company what do expect?!

Just buy the higher quality stuff. Sony cameras get GOOD reviews from their higher end stuff. Amazing battery life. The Carl Zesis lenses in use are also highly rated.

A lot of people I'd imagine just buy Sony because of the branding. For 'most' of them they are HAPPY with what they get. They aren't 'demanding' consumers.

As for the MS it works well. They have the Duo Pro stuff. Isn't that much more imo and what is a little difference in price REALLY going to sway you from getting a camera?!

If you have other Sony stuff it all works well. I have a MS slot on my laptop = no need to carry cables about or a card adapter. Just plugs in and I can view the pics/ edit etc. My phone has a MS Duo Pro slot so it just works for me. The DV camera has a MS slot again. It is just convienent for me.

Koing

 

[kreb]

I don't understand..how is this surprising? Were they ever #1 in sales?

 

[Deeko]

First off, when it comes to quality cameras, Canon isn't even number one.

More importantly, sales come from EASY cameras because most people are stupid. Kodak and Sony > ALL when it comes to ease of use. Olympus has the idea with their Stylus line too.

 

[Doggiedog]

Originally posted by: Deeko
First off, when it comes to quality cameras, Canon isn't even number one.

More importantly, sales come from EASY cameras because most people are stupid. Kodak and Sony > ALL when it comes to ease of use. Olympus has the idea with their Stylus line too.

Care to elaborate?

 

[geno]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: geno

Originally posted by: NFS4
OWNED. I switched from a Canon A95 to a Sony DSC-F717 and haven't looked back.

Who wouldn't? That's like saying " I went from a DCS P72 to a Canon G5 and haven't looked back!" Of course the 717 is much better

What's your point? I could have gone from the A95 to another Canon digicam (I had an A70 previously) as I had been a Canon fanboy for years. But I decided to go with Sony.

My point was that I left Canon behind and went with Sony. It has nothing to do with the DSC-F717 being better than the A95:roll:

Then you can say you switched from Canon to Sony, why bother mentioning models? It's like saying you left your Camry behind for an M3 , no use in comparing those now is there?

 

[Deeko]

On who makes the best camera?

The only, only time I'd say Canon is the best is the absolute high-end of the consumer level, with the Digital Rebel.

On the rest of the consumer level, I'd take an Olympus Camedia or the better Nikon Coolpix' any day. The lens on the xx40 and xx50 line of Olympus Camedia's is incredible.

When it comes to a portable camera, something about the Elph just never sat right. I'd take jus about any of the competitors.

Ease of use? Don't even bother. Kodak, then sony, then everyone else.

 

[luvya]

Originally posted by: NFS4

Originally posted by: wyvrn
This does not suprise me at all. Most of the people I know who know next to nothing about cameras buy Sony. The only rating they usually go buy is megapixels, and they want a simple point and shoot. They buy Sony for the NAME, and think it's a safe buy.

Personally, Sony hasn't impressed me. Of the two cameras I have used, both took marginal quality pictures when compared with my Canon A60. The Sony 4 megapixel unit I tried took horrible picture. The colors were off and all of the pictures seemed dark, this on default settings. My A60 blew away most of the Sony's I have tried in regards to picture quality and functionality. I don't really care as much about megapixels as I do quality of the lens, because who wants to print crappy 8x10s?

I took the Sony I bought back and am thinking about buying a Canon A85 instead.

Your comments about Sony don't mean squat unless you tell us what models you were using.

Ok, so why do you think Sony > Canon? I don't see u provide any argument either.

 

[Doggiedog]

Originally posted by: Deeko
On who makes the best camera?

The only, only time I'd say Canon is the best is the absolute high-end of the consumer level, with the Digital Rebel.

On the rest of the consumer level, I'd take an Olympus Camedia or the better Nikon Coolpix' any day. The lens on the xx40 and xx50 line of Olympus Camedia's is incredible.

When it comes to a portable camera, something about the Elph just never sat right. I'd take jus about any of the competitors.

Ease of use? Don't even bother. Kodak, then sony, then everyone else.

So you are going by your own experience? I see.

I could say the opposite for Canon but it wouldn't matter since I'm sure there are lots of differing opinions.

 

[pyonir]

Originally posted by: Deeko
On the rest of the consumer level, I'd take an Olympus Camedia or the better Nikon Coolpix' any day.

Olympus? No way. Nikon i can agree with, but if you chose Olympus over Canon, Sony or Nikon, i'd say good luck with your inferior cam.

When it comes to a portable camera, something about the Elph just never sat right. I'd take jus about any of the competitors.

So just because you don't like the Elph, means it is a below par camera? That line has the best picture quality i've seen from the "small camera" market.

Sounds to me like you are just a Canon hater. I'll admit Sony and Nikon make great cameras, i just prefer Canon. Any discussion about any other brand as far as overall quality goes, and the person is likely just a hater of the brand, not discussing the quality of the product.

 

[Deeko]

The Camedia cameras are far from inferior. You can make the comment about some of their other cameras...but ones like the 5050 are great Cameras.

I didn't say Elph is a BAD camera, I just personally think the other offerings(nikon coolpix, sony V1 for example) are better.

I am not a Canon hater. They make good cameras. Cameras like the G-series, and A-series, are very good cameras, there are just better options.

 

[oogabooga]

wow kinda surprised me but not.

i guess it makes sense, i still want a canon