Ok, the article is mostly about Nikon and, as everybody knows, they are the most boring cameras on earth. Canon is where it is all at.
Joking aside, in the section on cameras there is a useful section about approaches to sensor cleaning and a rehash of Hogan's views about what is going to happen to the camera industry as sales continue to decline.
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/ano ... om-qa.html
Thom Hogan Q & A
-
- Posts: 7316
- Joined: Tue 11 Sep 2012, 16:38
- Contact:
Re: Thom Hogan Q & A
It's odd, on his other site he's unabashed with his praise for mirrorless and thoughts about how it's trouncing SLRs. Yet in that article, he's basically saying the exact opposite. Peculiar.
Many of the points are prefixed with variants of "in my opinion" too, with few outright assertions backed up with hard fact. So it's just a big opinion piece. I'm not sure why he's written it.
It was quite disjointed and hard to read, though admittedly some of that comes because I'm not 100% au fait with Nikon jargon
Many of the points are prefixed with variants of "in my opinion" too, with few outright assertions backed up with hard fact. So it's just a big opinion piece. I'm not sure why he's written it.
It was quite disjointed and hard to read, though admittedly some of that comes because I'm not 100% au fait with Nikon jargon
-
- Posts: 7316
- Joined: Tue 11 Sep 2012, 16:38
- Contact:
Re: Thom Hogan Q & A
davidc wrote:It's odd, on his other site he's unabashed with his praise for mirrorless and thoughts about how it's trouncing SLRs. Yet in that article, he's basically saying the exact opposite. Peculiar.
I am not sure that there is any contradiction, he merely has a foot in both camps and highlights the benefits of each. On the mirrorless site, do you really expect him to say something along the lines of "they're OK, but you really ought to be using a DSLR"?
In regards to all round versatility, DSLRs still trump mirrorless ones, the main advantage being AF speed, with optical viewfinders being a benefit for some. The issue for the DSLR camp is that mirrorless already does most things well enough, AF performance is catching up, EVFs have also improved considerably and the equipment tends to be smaller and lighter.
Towards the end of the piece, he ruminates about the reasons which will force Nikon (and presumably Canon also) to switch most of its production away from DSLRs. Mirrorless manufacturing costs are lower and eventually falling sales will mandate the change.
davidc wrote:Many of the points are prefixed with variants of "in my opinion" too, with few outright assertions backed up with hard fact. So it's just a big opinion piece. I'm not sure why he's written it.
He's trying to predict what Nikon will do in the future, so I am not surprised that he is qualifying his statements. His basic problem is that he does not have much that is new to write about and has to rehash what he has already said. He said in the introduction that this is a roundup piece to address the questions he regularly receives.
davidc wrote:It was quite disjointed and hard to read, though admittedly some of that comes because I'm not 100% au fait with Nikon jargon
As a certain TV programme used to say, here's a bombshell. I agree with you. As a non Nikon user myself, I had no real interest in what new lenses are likely to be in the pipeline, although there was some insight into how the power supply issues caused by the 2011 earthquake created problems for lens production. I was not going to link to it, but I thought it worthwhile mainly for the comments about sensor cleaning.
Oh, and it also gave me the opportunity to have a completely unwarranted and unnecesary dig at Nikon users. You have to do these things, right?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests