One of the best comments I have a read in a LONG time
Is Sony taking over/has it taken over the world?
- Thread starter Stephen Berger
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
Well said! I couldn't agree more. It blows my mind when these camera reviews come out and it is a rush to who can get a video out first to capture clicks. They don't spend any real time learning the camera. I would also imagine jumping from one camera to review to the next and not knowing how to set them up, use them and actually test out features is part of the issue. That is why until someone like Steve reviews a camera I don't really listen. Good ol Tony said the bird eye af didn't work on the a1 which is completely wrong. But hey it got him clicks. Like most things in life take it with a grain of salt until you try it for yourself. It is one reason I find it rather annoying that when you spend your own money to try something different especially when it is from a different brand to see how it works for you and then someone shits on it because they are brand loyal. It gets you to the point of why even share your actual experience when close minded people won't try it for themselves or just listen to some youtube person looking for clicks.
For Sony there's also Mark Galer. He's a Sony Ambassador (and has shot Nikon and Canon in the past) but he is VERY thorough (his YouTube review of the A1 is almost an hour long) and spends a long time with the gear, does ebooks and releases settings guides, explores all the dirfeeernt uses thoroughly, etc. He seems honest about the strengths and weaknesses (and about why or why not one may want to try or buy the gear he's reviewing) and while not a wildlife photographer per se will shoot wildlife very well to demonstrate those capabilities. It was Steve, Thom Hogan, Mark Galer and to some extent PhotographyLife that convinced me to try Sony.
Yeah I think Mark Galer provides some pretty good info but damn he can put you to sleep lol. If I am to be honest seeing Steve give them a try helped give me confidence I wasn't crazy for trying something other than Nikon after all these years.
yes. no style points with MG. And ditto on Steve.
I'm always amazed to see threads like this one last as long as they do...
The youtube playback speed option is your friend!
They still pick what they want. Yes…Nikon might give them equivalent…but Sony or Canon would likely do the same. Once you’re famous and well known/followed such that Nikon will give you free…whatever brand you want to use will likely give you free.
RikWriter
Well-known member
And for them, that would be the equivalent of changing jobs. They've dealt with the same company for DECADES. Not to mention the fact that all of them have a huge portfolio of work, all done with that brand. The fact they stick with it has little to do with which brand is better, technologically, and more to do with what they're used to.
I don’t agree…even if they have dealt with the same people at Nikon for a long time…if they truly believed that Sony or Canon would improve their photography and they got the same deal from the new brand some of them would switch. Their images are a result of their talents and not the gear they use…and if equipment is free or reduced cost and they doubled their tack sharp image rate…heck yeh they would switch. People making money from their shots are like that. Those of us tha5 aren’t have other considerations that are different for each person…for some that means sell the Nikon gear you paid $20K for and get something way less back and invest more in Sony or Canon…for others the weight or menus or end point for images or skill set make the choice to stay with what ya got. Nothing wrong with either… it for people who make their living equipment is just a cost of doing business and ambassadors or whatever a maker calls them are only loyal because of free stuff…and if different free stuff makes more keepers they’ll switch.
RikWriter
Well-known member
I don't know. I've met several of them and had the opportunity to have extended conversations about photography with a couple of them. The ones I talked to were of the opinion that the brand didn't matter, that the technology didn't matter that much and that it was all about hard work and natural talent. So I doubt they'd switch.
I am not sure I agree. When you are a brand ambassador you have a financial consideration. It is part of your total income as an artists. Sure they can downplay how much income comes from it but take that with a grain of salt. If they said yeah brand X pays me $50K a year and free gear or they say yeah it has a few perks but doesn't pay much which one makes them seem more trust worthy when they say this new camera is the best ever? I think some of you would be shocked at how much a photographer who has income beyond just taking pictures makes. The AP changed brands because they as an organization believed a change improved their overall needs of video and stills. If we look at sports photographers decades ago migrated to Canon because of improved performance as AF was the new thing.
If you follow sponsored sports you will see that some change either by choice or not their choice. Take a pro bass fisherman, he has a boat sponsor, rod and real sponsor, lure sponsors, electronics, motor sponsors and on and on. Do they just up and change if they believe some other brand improves their ability? Not likely, those sponsors pay the entry fees, travel cost etc. and if they "change" often they will run out of those willing to sponsor/pay them.
Take old Moose for an example. Would Canon pay him a lot to change from Nikon? Sure they would with likely a 10 year agreement. Now say Moose changed each time a camera brand came out with what would improve his photography. How likely is any brand willing to pay when you aren't loyal? They have contracts for years. The company I work for is a major sponsor in NASCAR, we have decade long contracts with the largest team in the sport. No one wants someone who just changes because the other guy is better this year.
At the end of the day if you are receiving money you are a business. That income matters. Could some of the top dogs switch brands and get paid? Sure they could and it does happen but it is less likely because they believe that brand helps them vs what the financial gain is for signing on with a new brand.
Lets face it all the camera brands can deliver good results. It is the Indian over the arrow for the most part. However some arrows fly better than others helping the Indian succeed. When you have someone that is paid by any brand it isn't as simple as they could use anything and they choose brand X. They likely choose brand X because they pay them money.
Joe Edelman is a great example. He is a good photographer going on decades. He shot Nikon since he was a photojournalist at a local paper in PA. He changed his photography to fashion, model style photography. He was not a brand ambassador for Nikon. Olympus approached him to be a Olympus Visionary and get paid. He travels around the country for Olympus and teaches classes (he was in TX and I went, I learned a lot but not what I photograph). Did Joe really leave Nikon because Olympus did things to improve his photography? Nope. He left because he is a business that has many income streams other than just taking pictures. He has a youtube channel, teaches classes on his own, paid photo jobs, paid by Olympus to teach and to promote the brand. He is one of the most savvy business people I have ever met in the photography business. The point I am trying to make is for those at the top of the game they have motivation to stay. For those trying to get to the top of the game they have motivation to want to be paid by a camera brand. Just like any pro that has sponsors, it is an additional income stream. It doesn't mean that any one brand is better, it is that is the one paying them and it gets the job done.
Doug Herr
Well-known member
Melissa Groo's initial Sony experience
www.facebook.com
Melissa Groo
Melissa Groo is on Facebook. Join Facebook to connect with Melissa Groo and others you may know. Facebook gives people the power to share and makes the world more open and connected.
www.facebook.com
D
Deleted member 115
Guest
It will be interesting to hear what the naysayers have to say about bird eye af when Nikon finally reverse engineers it.Melissa Groo's initial Sony experience
Melissa Groo
Melissa Groo is on Facebook. Join Facebook to connect with Melissa Groo and others you may know. Facebook gives people the power to share and makes the world more open and connected.
Palouse
Well-known member
Wow, that is the most seriously decentered lens I have ever seen
oh wait is it centered
You impressed?
That's not a shot I would use for anything but I am extremely impressed with the camera and it's capabilities.
D
Deleted member 115
Guest
Is this in reference to Fro? I think he does a pretty good job, his style is "different" but he is knowledgeable. At least I learned a few things about printers from him.
Besides all that, Steve Perry is a YouTuber and I owe him big time for helping me so so much on there.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 115
Guest
Are you a better or more established photographer than Fro?
Lol I understood why you used it as an example. I’d agree with you. I’ve had the a1 since launch day and every time I use it I’m blown away.
Ok…but I did say “if it would improve their photography”…my point being that if they thought 30 FPS and eye focus would improve then go for it…if not then why switch. Steve’s right on the money with his 80/4 rule…and as I’ve said many times few to practically none of us are actually being held back by the equipment…I’m certainly not.
RikWriter
Well-known member
Maybe you're not. I found myself wishing a few times that I had more resolution to play with with respect to cropping. I also appreciate the high-ISO performance of the Sony mirrorless cameras as well as the AF. I could have had that with the Canon R5, of course, but it would have cost me considerably more money to get similar results with Canon gear.
I wasn’t suggesting they would change on a whim…but if Moose for instance was convinced it was in his long term best interests both financially and artistically to switch…he would do it in a heartbeat. I’m not talking about switching every time a new model comes out because once you burn the bridge with Nikon or Sony or Canon un-burning that bridge is a hard sell…guys like that make long term interest decisions and don’t make them lightly. But they won’t stick with Nikon…or the other guys…just for old times sake.
Last edited:
You forgot the Sony Smartphones. They lost 90% of their market share in about 6 years.
- Status