jerryc41 wrote:
This is a pet peeve of mine - names used for photo gear. I can understand Canon and Nikon using "D" in their DSLR names, but they should have given more thought to what goes along with that "D." Does it really have to be called a Canon EOS 5D Mark IV? Nikon's naming system is a bit cleaner, but what will happen after several updates to the D750? Will it become the D800?
Look at the names given to lenses. If someone asks what you want for your birthday, isn't "Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens" just a bit of a mouthful? Of course, all of those characters mean something, but are they essential to the name? Not everyone knows what each of those characters represents. Here's a lens from Tamron: Tamron 18-400mm F/3.5-6.3 DI-II VC HLD. Consider how camera manuals are written, and you can see that camera companies have trouble with words.
Imagine if car names included engine size, gearbox, fuel tank capacity, safety features, etc. I might go shopping for a Ford Taurus 3.8 A ABS RE FLR 5P.
What got me thinking about this again was a link someone provided to the Nikon Message service. I downloaded it and found that it was named "S-NMC2_-020101WF-ALLIN-32BIT_"
Later in the day, I received an email telling me there was an update, so I downloaded "S-NMC2_-020300WF-ALLIN-32BIT" I added "Nikon Msg" to the beginning of each name so I would know what it is. Why not call it Nikon Msg_1, Nikon Msg_2, etc?
Thanks. That's my rant for the day.
This is a pet peeve of mine - names used for photo... (
show quote)
It's a good thing you know only about Canikon.
Over recent years, Pentax's flagship APS-C cameras were K-7, K-5, K-3 {several successive variants of each} and then the FF K-1 came. Where do they go from here?