Killing Us Softly with Their Gear

Hm - if I read all these posts, I could get the idea that you guys are oblivious that we are living in the age of the internet.

The salepeople in those stores are not being paid to give you objective information. All they're being asked to do is to produce as much turnover as possible - I'm not even sure if they're really interested in having satisified customers.

Choice is good because it gives you - the consumer - alternatives. Choice, however makes deciding what to choose quite a lot more difficult - at least if you want to make an informed choice.

That's not necessarily what the camera manufacturers' marketing wants you to do - they'd much rather have you buy in a gut-feeling impulse, because such impulses are much more easily controlled than a sale based on an eveluation of specifications.

Just look at the ads our camera manufacturers are bombarding us with: Do they talk specs? No, they try to give you a warm and fuzzy feeling for having chosen the 'right' product.

So, don't talk to salespeople if you want to make an informed choice. Read forums like RFF. Talk technology, and make up your own mind. If you do, and if you've analyzed what you really are looking for, then the choices that are interesting for you are becoming fewer and fewer.

And choice is getting a lot easier. And no more whining is needed.
 
n' est ce pas "Trop de choix, tue le choix"?

Great post, but not restricted to cameras. I can choose between more than 40 brands of coffee in our town supermarket.

Wim
 
I don't understand the problem with variety. Or what the concern is if there are people in the world who don't know what they want out of a camera. Even with all the available digital options, there's only 1 DSLR, 1 DRF, and a couple p&s's I prefer. Not that complicated. Camera technology amazes me and I'm thankful for all the options.
 
All I want is. Nikon FM/FM2/FM3A sized digital equivalent of the M9 as I can't afford the latter. Anyway if we had no choice that'd be communism - bad. :)

Steve.
 
On one hand I think they have done a good job; there are a lot of people who keep getting the updated model. This is good for the makers and good for those like me who buy the out of date kit, I bought a Panasonic G1 for £100. What gets me is the almost endless new improved model, it is the looking for one grain less noise at iso 64 trillion as the reason why last years model is no longer any use. I miss the long product cycles of the past and the low cost upgrades of a new type of film. I bought in to the Canon FD mount in the early eighties and would not have replaced it if it was not for some scum bucket steeling it.
I agree with those who want good simple small camera, some are close but still miss the mark.
 
Arjay said:
Hm - if I read all these posts, I could get the idea that you guys are oblivious that we are living in the age of the internet.

The salepeople in those stores are not being paid to give you objective information. All they're being asked to do is to produce as much turnover as possible - I'm not even sure if they're really interested in having satisified customers.

Choice is good because it gives you - the consumer - alternatives. Choice, however makes deciding what to choose quite a lot more difficult - at least if you want to make an informed choice.

That's not necessarily what the camera manufacturers' marketing wants you to do - they'd much rather have you buy in a gut-feeling impulse, because such impulses are much more easily controlled than a sale based on an eveluation of specifications.

Just look at the ads our camera manufacturers are bombarding us with: Do they talk specs? No, they try to give you a warm and fuzzy feeling for having chosen the 'right' product.

So, don't talk to salespeople if you want to make an informed choice. Read forums like RFF. Talk technology, and make up your own mind. If you do, and if you've analyzed what you really are looking for, then the choices that are interesting for you are becoming fewer and fewer.

And choice is getting a lot easier. And no more whining is needed.
Click to expand...

Yup. Pretty much agree with everything you've said. There is no one out there forcing us to buy and there "are" lots of ways to make informed decisions...
 
Nikon did make easy to use point and shoots 20 years ago - Lite Touch models. I still have one.
B&H currently lists 13 Nikon point and shoot models not "over 50".
I can not find any reference to Renata Saled except for your post and your reference to a university study in England is very vague, at best.
Cheese or cameras - it seems choices overwhelm you and you tried to point the article that way without any real back up. Very disappointed with the post.

Steve
 
Interesting idea in the article. But I wonder if it's really so different now than in the mid-70s? Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Yashica, Pentax, Ricoh, Chinon, Mamiya, Practika, Olympus, Fujica, Petri, and I don't recall how many others, but there were others. They all had SLR with interchangeable lenses. There were bayonet mounts, breech-lock bayonet mounts, and screw mounts. And there were a lot of models to choose from in those brands.

And they all had P&S models, some more expensive than others. I can remember spending a lot of time perusing the photography magazines and the PX catalogue trying to ferret out what I thought would be my best choice, for whatever reasons I could find. Of course, there were also many TLRs and RF to choose from in different brands.

Should I mention half-frames in SLR and P&S?

Don't mean to rain on your parade of plenty in digital, but ...
 
My first was a D200 digi. When I left the store, I said I wanted to use it tomorrow. The salesman said put it on program and be happy.

In a few days, I found I was happier on manual just like the old days. Still use it 90% with D700 and D3.

I have since learned about noise reduction and layer masking with Define 2. I get really nice files compared to 3 years ago. And the D3, well outstanding is the only word for it.

I use mostly all Nikon primes and two adapted PC Leica R lenses.

People want instant results today with no effort. Well you can not buy it, but they think they can and bypass the learning curve.
 
Seems like nobody reads Herbert Marcuse's 1964 classic, The One-Dimensional Man.
An analysis of the way in which the fabrication of 'choice' according to market logic produces a consensus of choicelessness in democracies based on high-consumption, it is no less relevant today than it was yesterday.
 
Thank you all for your thoughts (and for noting my English flubs--soon to be corrected). The issue hit a chord with a lot of people.
I've also suggested cameras to friends only to have a salesperson redirect them to a camera of lesser quality.
In putting the post together what struck me most was the research that's been done which indicates that more products are sold when there are fewer choices. That seems to fly in the face of the way most of the camera companies do business.
I'm putting together another post about camera use. In reading your comments and from my own experience, we appear to share the notion that the best way to be a photographer is to have one camera and lens (one or two) that you are really comfortable with and not a bag full of gear. The only time I'm gear heavy is on assignment and then a lot of what I am carrying is redundant back-up gear.
I've noticed that non-photographers with Point and Shoots and dSLRs NEVER seem to make camera adjustments. They just Point and Shoot.
So they've bought the camera on the basis of the features hawked by a salesperson or touted in a magazine and then simply never use them.
More on this as I work it out.
Thanks again
Steve
 
By the way I went back to the B&H catalog and there are indeed 50 Nikon models (not dSLRs) and 38 Canon models. Some vary by nothing more than color but that is still a lot of choices.
And my point in the post was not that the choices are bad--hell I love it that there are hundreds of cheese here in France--but that too many choices make the process of choosing problematic.
Does it sell more cameras to have hundreds of choices? Does it make photography any better?
 
hawkeye said:
Does it sell more cameras to have hundreds of choices? Does it make photography any better?
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't - but marketing logic says that in this way, you just might reach more potential customers.

And as to does it make photography better - it certainly doesn't, but that has never been a goal that marketing specialists ought to be suspected to pursue.
 
noimmunity said:
Seems like nobody reads Herbert Marcuse's 1964 classic, The One-Dimensional Man.
An analysis of the way in which the fabrication of 'choice' according to market logic produces a consensus of choicelessness in democracies based on high-consumption, it is no less relevant today than it was yesterday.
Click to expand...

Thanks for an interesting pointer, i am going to purchase it when I get paid.
 
hawkeye said:
By the way I went back to the B&H catalog and there are indeed 50 Nikon models (not dSLRs) and 38 Canon models. Some vary by nothing more than color but that is still a lot of choices.
And my point in the post was not that the choices are bad--hell I love it that there are hundreds of cheese here in France--but that too many choices make the process of choosing problematic.
Does it sell more cameras to have hundreds of choices? Does it make photography any better?
Click to expand...
There are 42 choices of 13 models - colors should not confuse you. 13 are out of stock so that brings your total choices to a current 29.

Fred, thank you for finding the book. I did Google it but given the wrong name for the only cited source shows another flaw in the story. Also reading the economist article shows me where he got the cheese reference for the beginning of the article.
I thiink the choices probably do not sell more cameras but have more satisfied customers who get products that they want, even if the only difference is color. Are there better photoraphers because of all of these choices? Probably not, most people put the camera on auto and shoot away.

Steve
 
Steve, you are spot on in my book.

However, in the Soviet Union the voter turnout between 1950 and 1984 averaged 99.97 percent. So if we force all camera producers except Holga to shut down, and ask Holga to produce only 1 camera type (and only 1 colour) they would sell about 6 billion cameras.

When we are at it let us shut down all film producers except Shanghai and we will save film too.
 
Okie-dokey. Once again the point of the article was that behavioral scientists seem to be saying too many choices reduces sales. Who knows what the boys in marketing think. Is the proliferation of models with tiny upgrades and color differences making it harder for the average consumer? That's all. Ain't talking about much else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom