Question for hoggers (Page 3): :sm24: :sm24:...

gwilliams6

flip1948 wrote:

No, it's just another outrageous anti-anything but Canon claim from Archie.

gwilliams6

Architect1776 wrote:

DXO is a subsidiary of Sony/Nikon.
They base their reports on purely subjective parameters.
PS Canon far outsells Sony and Nikon. So why is it the by far preferred camera system if it is so crappy?
Also lens rentals put out the most lenses and cameras rented and again Canon was far ahead and Nikon was virtually not even represented.

Total falsehood.
DXO is not and has never been owned by or been a subsidiary of Sony or Nikon. They have always been independent and objective in their testing .

Just another unresearched falsehood from you again. Do your homework. Dont just make stuff up and think we wont call you out on it.

The facts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DxOMark

Cheers and best to you all.

Bill_de Loc: US

gwilliams6 wrote:

Total falsehood.
DXO is not and has never been owned by or been a subsidiary of Sony or Nikon. They have always been independent and objective in their testing .

Just another unresearched falsehood from you again. Do your homework. Dont just make stuff up and think we wont call you out on it.

The facts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DxOMark

Cheers and best to you all.

I think the idea of DXO having an affiliation with Nikon started with this ...

On October 25, 2017, DxO announced the acquisition of the Nik Collection assets from Google

Of course everyone knows that Nik is short for Nikon. The real proof was when UHH members started spreading the news. I don't know who is responsible for getting the genie back in the bottle. Not me.

---

flip1948 Loc: Hamden, CT

Bill_de wrote:

I think the idea of DXO having an affiliation with Nikon started with this ...

On October 25, 2017, DxO announced the acquisition of the Nik Collection assets from Google

Of course everyone knows that Nik is short for Nikon. The real proof was when UHH members started spreading the news. I don't know who is responsible for getting the genie back in the bottle. Not me.

---

Nik was founded in 1995 in Hamburg, Germany and had nothing to do with Nikon.

Nikon did acquire a 35% share in 2005, but the company was sold to Google in 2012 and then resold to DxO in 2017.

The 35% share from 2005 until 2012 was the only association to Nikon...and the name Nik had nothing to do with Nikon.

tcthome Loc: NJ

Longshadow wrote:

I don't follow who's selling what....
Or what may be the most popular, or highest sales, or ....

When window shopping for new features I look at new features/function desired & performance- low light, AF. Starting to think about some of the video features also but not main reason for the want.

chikid68 Loc: Tennesse USA

rmorrison1116 wrote:

From what I've been reading over the years I've be... (show quote)

My assertion is based solely on personal observations not by any quantifying reports which was why I added the around here part.
I'm referring to the photo sessions I have personally sat in front of the camera.
It's likely somewhat unique since I appear as Santa Claus.
In fact my profile icon is actually a photo of me taken by my wife through the window which had a wreath hung on the door.

sueyeisert Loc: New Jersey

I agree. Some of my best photos were with a cheap point and shoot.

w00dy4012 Loc: Thalia, East Virginia

chikid68 wrote:

I have noticed (around here at least) the trend of photographers is to favor Nikon cameras over Canon or other brands.
The irony is that they are not even using the top models but rather a basic cropped sensor model.
Is this an indication of better quality or just minimal budget.

Another battle of the fan-boys.

chikid68 Loc: Tennesse USA

w00dy4012 wrote:

Another battle of the fan-boys.

Not the case at all especially since I have Canon and Sony gear.
My question was based on the cameras I have pointed at me not by me.

wireloose

If true I suspect it’s a function of the age profile of UHH. When I bought my first SLR in 1970 thé pro camera was Nikon, period. It was out of my budget as a college student so I bought a Minolta, still a very nice camera. Some years later after marriage and kids and other distractions and giving away my enlarger and darkroom gear, a young woman asked if I could take her picture, and handed me her Canon DSLR. I promptly decided the office needed one, bought it that weekend, and two weeks later bought myself one. I eventually migrated to Sony for various reasons, including the ability to use my Canon glass. I have pro level equipment now but that doesn’t make me a better photographer, a lot of folks take brilliant pictures with entry level cameras- which these days are very good. But a lot of people who started with Nikon stayed loyal, they are still excellent cameras with a far better user interface than Sony.

deanfl Loc: Georgia

chikid68 wrote:

I have noticed (around here at least) the trend of photographers is to favor Nikon cameras over Canon or other brands.
The irony is that they are not even using the top models but rather a basic cropped sensor model.
Is this an indication of better quality or just minimal budget.

I blame Ken Rockwell. He promoted Nikon in the early days of digital. My first digital was the Nikon D40. I suspect I am not the only one here who started with a D40. Once invested in the system it made sense to continue. I don’t regret it at all.

Retina Loc: Near Charleston,SC

chikid68 wrote:

I have noticed (around here at least) the trend of photographers is to favor Nikon cameras over Canon or other brands.
The irony is that they are not even using the top models but rather a basic cropped sensor model.
Is this an indication of better quality or just minimal budget.

I am not sure about your numbers, but in my case I needed a live HDMI camera and had a number of pre-Ai lenses that work well with Nikon's crop sensor D3XXX cameras. The fact they can take decent photos was an unexpected bonus. After years with a Fujifilm X-S1, I decided MILC is next due to silent shooting and their superior viewfinders over DSLRs. Brand won't matter then, since I would be crazy not to take advantage of the better MILC lenses from all the leading camera makers.

agillot

When i started in the 70 s , moving up from a praktina fx [ still work fine ] , went the Pentax way .then 6 yrs ago a friend gave me a D300 with 2 lenses , so now was stuck going the nikon way .Then a couple of yrs ago he gave me his D7100 , he went mirrorless .So i guess i am stuck there .If you notice most sport or report people use canon . maybe using a nikon is a symbol of vast wealth [ not me ]. My hobby work mostly on donation .I enjoy giving a second life to mechanical things .

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

I began to use Nikon cameras and lenses over 55 years ago. I was attracted to the quality of the images and the fact that at the time it was the camera system most professionals were using. I bought my Nikon F in Madrid Spain around 1963, a present from my wife and I still keep both, the camera and the wife.

Over the years Nikon has taken a few poor decisions. The most recent one was to ignore mirrorless cameras which is clearly the future. By the time Nikon introduced mirrorless cameras companies like Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji, later on Sony, were leading the market in sales.
Canon has become a very popular brand. Many professionals prefer it to Nikon and the new trend now is Sony. It is my understanding that Canon sells more cameras than anybody else in the world.

Today I could be as happy with any of those cameras but I have used Nikon for so many years that I am used to them and they have been very reliable.

Horatio

Orphoto wrote:

You do no favours by inciting discussions as to brands. No one asked Picasso what brand of paint he used.

Perhaps that might have been an interesting discussion. I wonder what brand of paint he did use? Hmmmmm.