Don't be a tourist...the camera for Russell and me

[John Ranalletta]

Olympus' Kevin Spacey campaign is fun.

 

I don't want to be that guy...

 

 

[russell_bynum]

That's what I call content-free advertising.

 

Cameras don't take good pictures, photographers do. Just because you've got a modern camera with retro styling doesn't make you a good photographer.

 

 

[90%angel]

This from the guy who claims we don't need to take Steven to a pro to get his 18 months pix cause "we have a good camera; we can do it ourselves"

 

[skinny_tom (aka boney)]

This from the guy who claims we don't need to take Steven to a pro to get his 18 months pix cause "we have a good camera; we can do it ourselves"

 

 

Oh, Snap!

[russell_bynum]

This from the guy who claims we don't need to take Steven to a pro to get his 18 months pix cause "we have a good camera; we can do it ourselves"

 

 

The point was that a good camera doesn't take good pictures. The ads were (I think) trying to say that if I only had this retro-looking camera and put the lenses in my jacket pocket instead of in camera bag, I'd be taking killer shots and wouldn't look like a tourist (like I give a crap about that in the first place.)

 

It was you who said we need to pay a "pro" more than I paid for the car that we commute in because the pros have better equipment than we do. That is not a valid argument because we have a good camera and a couple of good lenses. Since there's no equipment advantage, that means what we get from a pro is post-processing skills (well within the scope of your abilities as a professional marketing guru), the technical skill to operate the camera (well within my skills as a professional nerd), and the eye to know what pictures to take.

 

Given the fact that we've already invested in the hardware, learning to use it better (the technical stuff) and how to post-process the pics (the artsy stuff) just means that we'll get better day-to-day pictures.

 

So the only reason to pay a pro is for their artistic eye.

 

...which so far has not impressed me in the least with any of the pics we've paid for. Not that the pro pics are bad, but they aren't _enough_ better to be worth the price difference.

[1MPH]

Just because you've got a modern camera with retro styling doesn't make you a good photographer.

 

 

I'm living proof of that.

[Tasker]

This from the guy who claims we don't need to take Steven to a pro to get his 18 months pix cause "we have a good camera; we can do it ourselves"

 

 

The point was that a good camera doesn't take good pictures. The ads were (I think) trying to say that if I only had this retro-looking camera and put the lenses in my jacket pocket instead of in camera bag, I'd be taking killer shots and wouldn't look like a tourist (like I give a crap about that in the first place.)

 

It was you who said we need to pay a "pro" more than I paid for the car that we commute in because the pros have better equipment than we do. That is not a valid argument because we have a good camera and a couple of good lenses. Since there's no equipment advantage, that means what we get from a pro is post-processing skills (well within the scope of your abilities as a professional marketing guru), the technical skill to operate the camera (well within my skills as a professional nerd), and the eye to know what pictures to take.

 

Given the fact that we've already invested in the hardware, learning to use it better (the technical stuff) and how to post-process the pics (the artsy stuff) just means that we'll get better day-to-day pictures.

 

So the only reason to pay a pro is for their artistic eye.

 

...which so far has not impressed me in the least with any of the pics we've paid for. Not that the pro pics are bad, but they aren't _enough_ better to be worth the price difference.

 

A little testy, don'tcha think? Jeez, dude, change your maxi-pad! ;-)

[Selden]

I have a real 1960-vintage black Olympus Pen FT with three lenses and a leather box case if anybody is interested. In its day, the Pen was a wonderful travel camera; with the lens off, and a body cap, the body wasn't much bigger than a 21st century large digital point and shoot camera. There is such a nice heft to a camera that's made mostly from metal instead of plastic. The FT still has the nicest "feel" of any camera I have ever owned -- one of those tactile things that can't really be described.

[Mike O]

Interesting marketing promotion.....Refreshingly different from the classic:

 

"It's got 15MegaTruxels with 1280 FarclesPerDupleSecond High Definition Video recordable on a 847JiggaByte MicroMiniMaxiSD Card."

 

However, I honestly thought from the product's name that this was a 'Pen' camera. First vision (pun intended) that popped in my head was some sort of James Bond toy.

 

IMHO, very bad name for a camera.

 

Mike O

[steve.foote]

"Oh, Snap!"

 

"A little testy, don'tcha think? Jeez, dude, change your maxi-pad! ;-)"

 

The question, Russell, is can you feel the love.

[russell_bynum]

Interesting marketing promotion.....Refreshingly different from the classic:

 

"It's got 15MegaTruxels with 1280 FarclesPerDupleSecond High Definition Video recordable on a 847JiggaByte MicroMiniMaxiSD Card."

 

How is it refreshing that the advertisement provided absolutely no useful information whatsoever?

 

[russell_bynum]

"Oh, Snap!"

 

"A little testy, don'tcha think? Jeez, dude, change your maxi-pad! ;-)"

 

The question, Russell, is can you feel the love.

 

Not really.

[motoguy128]

The guy that took our wedding photos had a great camera. he unfortunately was an idiot, didn't know how to manage a live shoot, compose ot stage shots or manage lighting. To top it off, the oritner he used had poor quality ink and he couldn't tell the difference betwwen a dark violet and true black. the retouches and color correct were aweful The guy must have been color blind.

 

He unfortunately was a friend of my father-in-law and was trying to start-up a photography business. Hopefully he's learning, otherwise I can't see how he'll stay in business.

 

Try to save a few buck and you get what you pay for. My wife get a little sad whenever she see's someone elses wedding photos or wedding photos on TV.

 

 

Long story short... and good photographer can use almost any camera and get good photos. They shots will be limited by the capability of the equipment. Just how any GP rider can hop on any mtorocycle and go "fast".

[Couchrocket]

It was you who said we need to pay a "pro" more than I paid for the car that we commute in because the pros have better equipment than we do. That is not a valid argument because we have a good camera and a couple of good lenses. Since there's no equipment advantage, that means what we get from a pro is post-processing skills (well within the scope of your abilities as a professional marketing guru), the technical skill to operate the camera (well within my skills as a professional nerd), and the eye to know what pictures to take.

 

AND, when you have a friend w/ a nice pro level printer, a decent camera, at least an average "eye," and who lives about 8 miles from you and who has volunteered twice to come shoot the little guy for free!

[russell_bynum]

It was you who said we need to pay a "pro" more than I paid for the car that we commute in because the pros have better equipment than we do. That is not a valid argument because we have a good camera and a couple of good lenses. Since there's no equipment advantage, that means what we get from a pro is post-processing skills (well within the scope of your abilities as a professional marketing guru), the technical skill to operate the camera (well within my skills as a professional nerd), and the eye to know what pictures to take.

 

AND, when you have a friend w/ a nice pro level printer, a decent camera, at least an average "eye," and who lives about 8 miles from you and who has volunteered twice to come shoot the little guy for free!

 

Yeah, that too.

[Mike O]

Interesting marketing promotion.....Refreshingly different from the classic:

 

"It's got 15MegaTruxels with 1280 FarclesPerDupleSecond High Definition Video recordable on a 847JiggaByte MicroMiniMaxiSD Card."

 

How is it refreshing that the advertisement provided absolutely no useful information whatsoever?

Because in general, I'd go to the manufacturer's detailed specifications to learn that information. What's interesting about their advertising approach is getting to the foundation of a camera (it takes pictures), not attempting to convince the viewer in a 30 sec spot that it's product is spec better than the competition. I hear the MegaHertzPixelByte crap all the time... It gets old IMHO. There is so little difference in competing products, if its all the manufacturer can tout I wonder if they really know their differentiating value proposition.

 

Mike O

[Trinity]

Just to "pile on" here...

 

Particularly for indoor or high quality portraits, the lighting set up can often be more critical than the type of camera used by the photographer. Yes, composition and the subject's expression are still #1, but the right lights/reflectors/soft boxes/umbrellas/backgrounds make a HUGE difference in the picture. (And for anyone who is interested and living in a larger city, most if not all of this additional equipment can be rented.)

 

Yes, it's more work to set up and take down, but you also get the "I did it myself" level of satisfaction that is priceless.

[russell_bynum]

Interesting marketing promotion.....Refreshingly different from the classic:

 

"It's got 15MegaTruxels with 1280 FarclesPerDupleSecond High Definition Video recordable on a 847JiggaByte MicroMiniMaxiSD Card."

 

How is it refreshing that the advertisement provided absolutely no useful information whatsoever?

Because in general, I'd go to the manufacturer's detailed specifications to learn that information. What's interesting about their advertising approach is getting to the foundation of a camera (it takes pictures), not attempting to convince the viewer in a 30 sec spot that it's product is spec better than the competition. I hear the MegaHertzPixelByte crap all the time... It gets old IMHO.

 

I guess I just don't respond to content-free ads on an emotional level. If I was looking for a camera, never heard of this one, and the ad came on, there's absolutely nothing in the ad which would lead me to look any deeper.

 

All cameras take pictures...I don't need the ad to tell me that because it's assumed that any camera on the market can take pictures. I need to know specifics like: What media format does it use? (Am I going to have to adopt another standard or can it use what I've already got?) What is the selection of lenses and/or aftermarket accessories like? How many megapixels? How many frames per second can it shoot? If it's a point and shoot, i want to know how big/heavy is it, what's the optical zoom, does it have IS, how long will the battery last, etc?

 

You're not going to give me all of that information in a 30-second ad, but you need to give me enough to make me want to know more.

 

Watching that ad, I really have no idea what they're trying to tell me about their product. Is it smaller/lighter than the typical DSLR? Does it have more internal capabilities so you don't need the camera bag full of lenses? Maybe I don't need a camera bag full of lenses because it only has two lenses? Maybe I don't need a camera bag because I just use my jacket pocket and pants pockets to store my camera gear.

 

"I wanna be camera chow picture wow." What in the wide world of sports does that mean? Is it a requirement that you speak jibberish to own this camera, or does the camera leak radiation which causes you to speak jibberish?

 

 

There is so little difference in competing products, if its all the manufacturer can tout I wonder if they really know their differentiating value proposition.

 

I'd agree with that statement.