Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Nikon's newest ad a true disaster


adrian_w Plus
7 3.5k 4 Scotland
29 Sep 2011 12:03PM

Quote:Readers of this Forum know that if they're using equipment that isn't the latest model and real high-end, they need to upgrade and as soon as possible. Nikon is only saying something that we already know!

Upgrading discussion accounts for half of the threads on this Forum.



And to a system where the manufacturer doesn't insult their intelligence. Wink

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

29 Sep 2011 12:21PM
thanks all, I have enjoyed reading your thoughts, and comments about this, and Nikon gear in general.
I don't know what it is about Nikon I liked, I could have brought the other team's gear. I just really like Nikon style I guess. I agree with pretty much every point here. Storm in a teacup, or people feeling like their work is undermined by the comment. I have gotten great remarks and complements on Photographs I have taken with my Fuji HS10, and sold a few prints from them, relating to those commenting on its not the gear but the Photographer. A couple of weeks back I got a chance to get a Nikon Kit ( not the two lens kit) I made my own Kit so to speak. It enables me to take a broader range of images and expand my capabilities referring to the better camera, better lens, make better pictures. Sure at first I took this as a bit of an insult until I thought ha why did I get a better camera and lens. I know one day I'll upgrade the Body, keep the lens maybe upgrade them to if I can. I think it comes down to we all want to create the best photographic art we can. A camera is like a paint brush. cheap course hair gives you course brush strokes, just as sable hair gives you fine brush stokes, but it is the artist that makes the painting not the brush. Like wise My pictures are only as good as I am able to wield my brush ( camera). As its so new to me, my pictures are still a bit off, but that's me not the camera. The composition is fine and all that sort of thing, its just getting use to using a whole new level of machine.

Again I thank you all for taking time to write your own thoughts about this whole thing.
monstersnowman 10 1.7k 1 England
29 Sep 2011 1:32PM
Would any serious photographer base their buying decision on this really? I wouldn't. Maybe the marketting department made a gaff, maybe it was just a marketting ploy or any other reason but at the end of the day if I have looked at my needs and found that Nikon met them best I would still buy Nikon and the thought that anyone would jump ship after already committing to a brand is not realistic IMO.
thewilliam 6 5.3k
29 Sep 2011 3:22PM
Many snappers do switch back and forth between marques as they search for the Holy Grail!

Just think of all that nearly-new secondhand kit that serious photographers can pick up at an affordable price.
monstersnowman 10 1.7k 1 England
29 Sep 2011 4:25PM

Quote:Many snappers do switch back and forth between marques as they search for the Holy Grail!

Just think of all that nearly-new secondhand kit that serious photographers can pick up at an affordable price.



Oh yes, I know people change between Nikon and Canon etc. but I think that very very few, despite making grumblings about the scentiment of the ad, would ditch their kit and a loss of a fair amount of cash just because of a bad advertisement. It doesn't change the photographer or how the kit works or the photographs, just some suited fool in a PR company making a blunder, or some may say an attention grabbing risk.
User_Removed 5 4.6k 1 Scotland
29 Sep 2011 7:12PM

Quote:Would any serious photographer base their buying decision on this really?



No. No-one in their right mind would.

But it is a neat way of telling Nikon that, in this instance, their SN copywriter got it very wrong.
SophieHart 4 136 United Kingdom
29 Sep 2011 10:04PM
Surely equipment makes for a better final image quality but equipment can't make you a better photographer which the Nikon advert implies.
StrayCat Plus
11 16.4k 2 Canada
30 Sep 2011 2:02AM
Imo, the higher up the quality line the equipment is, the more skilled the photographer needs to be, because top level equipment is far less forgiving than lower level kit.Smile
mikehit Plus
5 7.9k 13 United Kingdom
30 Sep 2011 3:11AM
Apart from focussing, what other user deficiencies would a better camera show up?
SophieHart 4 136 United Kingdom
30 Sep 2011 7:07AM
The photographers eye can not be improved by the camera in front of it. While many very good photographers have very good equipment and I agree with your comment StayCat. I also think that there are many very bad photographers who have have good equipment and many very good photographers who have not very good equipment. Equipment can improve the final image quality, a professional lens will take a cleaner photograph but a better lens can not make the photographer see a better photograph.
lobsterboy Plus
11 14.4k 13 United Kingdom
30 Sep 2011 7:58AM

Quote:The photographers eye can not be improved by the camera in front of it.


Ahh but it can by the lens in front of it. I can see further than I can with my eyes using a 400mm lens.
User_Removed 11 3.3k 4 United Kingdom
30 Sep 2011 11:20AM
Sophie I do get the spirit of what you're saying and you're right but Lobsterboy has hit on a real point actually.

I've looked through a 70mm lens wide open and things have popped out against the (blurred) background which I've used to compose pleasing images. I guess you still need a photographer's eye to see them but if your equipment isn't capable of showing you them in the first place you lose out.

I always say it's a combination of the right person with the right gear.
digicammad 12 22.0k 37 United Kingdom
30 Sep 2011 11:29AM
What about the blind cameraman who made a camera to fit into his eye socket? You can't say his eye wasn't improved. Smile

This is an old argument and one on which people will never agree. My own opinion is that the photographer and the equipment need to be treated as a whole, not two parts. Either one is capable of limiting the other, but when working in perfect harmony a good photographer and good equipment can and do produce sublime results.

If any of you have ever done risk analysis, the way you calculate severity by multiplying impact by likelihood is how I think you should look at photographic potential - multiply photographer ability by equipment quality.

Ian
digicammad 12 22.0k 37 United Kingdom
30 Sep 2011 11:29AM
Ah, I see Chris got there while I was typing.

My answer's better though. Wink
thewilliam 6 5.3k
30 Sep 2011 12:19PM
When we look at a pic taken by a great photographer, it does indeed look "clean". I'd suggest that it's clean in terms of its composition because the photographer knew exactly what he/she wanted and had the skill to capture it. In these cases, the image quality doesn't matter so much.

When I first used Hasselblad, many decades ago, I found that a fine camers is merciless at showing up sloppy technique. I had to raise my game just to equal what I'd been getting from 35mm. Friends have said the same about top-end musical instruments.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.