« PhaseOne's B&W Digital Back | Main | More New Stuff Like the Old Stuff »

Thursday, 09 September 2010

Comments

I like how the word redundancy appears twice in the last sentence. Made me smile.

P.S. I do know there are some actual distinctions between these two cameras, including the longer reach of the Nikon's lens and the articulated LCD on the Canon. But pointing that out wouldn't fit the point I'm making.

Mike

So the two 800lb gorillas have run out of ideas and are now copying each other? Amazing.

First thing I thought of when I saw your picture of the new Nikon - 'that looks just like my old G9'!


I agree - the whole Canon/Nikon debate is ridiculous.

It's the "fringe" companies that are starting to do some truly innovative things (Sony, the micro 4/3rds folks, etc).

Mark

Never mind the similarities, the real question is (with all it's similarities to the G series) will the P7000 be the first Coolpix that isn't a sucktastic pile of doggy droppings when compared to it's competition?

You are right, but the G11 has a LCD that swiwels! I think it's a great feature in such a camera, although some people may think it's not so "pro"...

"If just for the sake of redundancy reduction of redundancy."

Department of Redundancy Dept.

I had this nightmare a couple of months ago where I discovered how Luminous Landscape and a couple of blogs were a conspiracy setup by Nikon and Canon. The worst part in this fantasy was unearthing the fact that Michael Reichmann was a hoax, never existed just an actor hired following Nikon/Canons monthly directions. Of course all this was to keep our minds on the latest cameras and never satisfied with our present cameras!!
Paul

I'd love to see a Canon/Nikon imitation of Ricohs excellent little GRD/GX-line. It got everything just right(well almost anyway) but lacked acceptable image quality. I loved my little GX100 and the fact that you could save a preset focal length and focus distance to a "my mode". Kick-ass for casual street shooting. There is nothing wrong with imitation when it is combined with innovation.

Is because that sore lack of innovation and boundaries pushing from the two boring giants that I´m always wishing that smaller companies as Olympus and Pentax can win market share and continue to grow, but Olympus has disappointed me with the latest developments/ announcements (specially the ultra slow and expensive 70-300 MFT zoom). Still hoping Photokina brings some fresh stuff. Miss the good ol' days when we had five or six brands with a defined and diverse character. Regards, and thanks for this great haven that TOP is.

Please keep in mind I wrote nightmare, I´m not accusing anybody, just a dream OK.
Just sayin´
Paul

The point you have implied but not stated is that this is just one example. There are many others. One really begins to wonder whether they are more concerned with countering each other's moves than listening to actual consumers. On the other hand, given how noisy actual consumers can be, it's certainly a lot easier to concentrate on the competitor rather than the crowd.

Yes, it's very stupid. Especially since real innovation would sell like hot cakes. Canon has been making excellent p&s cameras for years, why not make a better camera, rather than copy it outright? Look at Olympus and Panasonic! They're reinventing the digital camera! Why would I want this when I could get a Pen for less money?

Mike;
It's a form factor thing.. Bessas look like Leicas, which look like most
other range finders. SLR cameras look alike. Almost all the little p+s shirt
pocket cameras look the same. It's ergonomics. Look at fighter aircraft from
various manufactures. Laptop computers. hamburgers.. Tires, light bulbs ..
Look at all the cars that began to look alike after wind-tunnel testing was
introduced into the design process. In the case of these two cameras, the engineers from both companies arrived at a similar solution.

pete


Mike,

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.....!!

As one who is most unlikely to buy either, I am struck by how ugly the Nikon looks in comparison to the Canon.

Somebody needs to explain to me why Nikon would go tit-for-tat with Canon on a esoteric point and shoot camera, and not do the same by releasing a counter-product to the very popular Canon 5DII, a camera which has been shooting full frame images and 1080p video for two unrivaled years.

Mike, Mike, Mike ... sometimes, there's an ugly, cynical side to you. Can you not just accept that two companies, eager to do nothing more than provide the consumer with the best possible product, just happen to stumble upon identical concepts? Think of other, seemingly suspicious coincidences that turned out to be just that - the F15 and Mig 29, Saks and Walmart, the Dodge Durango and 1957 Porsche Karmann Ghia. See? Eerie but true.

Seems to me like the nikon can zoom more.

"If just for the sake of redundancy reduction of redundancy."

Sounds like you yourself are prone with the inclination to use repetitively redundant tautologies :-)

Erm...welcome to 2009, Nikon?

And both have an optical viewfinder, which is kind of rare these days so perhaps worth mentioning.

The G11 has an articulated screen and the Nikon does not, I believe. That seems to be the biggest difference between them (and seems a really dumb thing for Nikon to have omitted).

You're overlooking some very important differences:

- the Canon vs Nikon lettering on the front
- the flash metering system e-ttl vs ittl
- image stabilization differences of IS vs VR

... kind of like the differences between the Big Mac and the Big Mic

:)

More to the point, why don't they both just outsource their design efforts to Panasonic, whose DMC-LX3 was clearly the inspiration for both cameras following the success of Panasonic's quixotic decision to increase image quality by going with a faster lens and fewer, larger pixels?

Merge? I don't think so. Just imagine if all PC makers decide so..it's one upmanship not economics..well at least until they reach the point of futility.

I like how the word redundancy appears twice in the last sentence. Made me smile.

"Michael Reichmann was a hoax, never existed just an actor hired following Nikon/Canons monthly directions"

Paul,
I can attest that he exists, is real, and is a nice guy to boot.

Mike

You know, there are some actual distinctions between these two cameras, including the longer reach of the Nikon's lens and the articulated LCD on the Canon.

(from the Department of Redundancy Department)

Seriously though, this an example of natural camera evolution. These cameras make sense, to certain people anyway, including myself.

And since a big reason for them is as a second camera for DSLR users, it makes sense for each brand to offer their own version, with their menu system, software compatibility, rendering style and support channel. In fact, the two companies benefit more from each other's marketing. I once heard a story about two stores on opposite sides of the street. The posters on their windows always said loud, bad things about the other guy, but in fact the owners were two brothers in cahoots. Every consumer wants more than one choice. When Nikon and Canon provide the requisite two, no need for people to get seduced by straightforward K-x + 35mm/2.4 kits, trendy EP-1 + 14-45mm kits or freakish low light conqueroring LX5s.

The G12 is expected before Photkina, I doubt it will differ in looks from the current G11 or the Nikon P7000. But then again don't all the family cars from the different manufactures tend to look the same these days?

'I had this nightmare a couple of months ago where I discovered how Luminous Landscape and a couple of blogs were a conspiracy setup by Nikon and Canon. The worst part in this fantasy was unearthing the fact that Michael Reichmann was a hoax, never existed just an actor hired following Nikon/Canons monthly directions. Of course all this was to keep our minds on the latest cameras and never satisfied with our present cameras!!
Paul'


I have come to believe that this is the case and really it's a photographic matrix.

I actually tried a few cameras today and none felt as natural as my old, left on a train, ricoh and equally importantly none were even close to my ikon in terms of being comfortable to use. Saves money though.

Mike
I

Not sure I agree. For a long time in film days, most SLR's were amazingly similar. They just offered small but to most people crucial differances in handling: Canon shutter speed priority, Nikon Aperture priority, Olympus smaller, and so on. Looking at thes etwo very similar camera's, I see the same small differance in handling. If this is a glimpse of the future in camera design (and I think it is, the mirrorless camera's show a similar, uhm, similarity) it might enable us to get the camera we want again. It's good to have a choice...

But if Canon and Nikon merged, wouldn't the Internet implode from a critical lack of content?

Well, there's always Olympus...the underdog. (Someone called it the "Saab" of camera makers.)

They have entirely different strap connecting systems. That ought to be enough difference for anybody.
I think the fixed screen on the Nikon vs Canon's articulated version is a significant error on Nikon's part, worth $100 to me. The view through the optical viewfinder tunnels may also be another decision point.
bd

Mike, there are huge differences...the Canon goes up to 11, you see.

I'm content with the logic of coinciding evolution, but we've got a serious time lapse here. Nikon appears to have coincided with the Canon G9, a camera now twice superceded.

Part of my work involves deciding on the allocation of R&D funding for my company. Once I've made my mind up, I go to the Board for approval. Typically, it's a presentation involving things like technology trends, emerging markets and critically, what our competitors can do / we think they're going to do.

I shudder to think of the reception I'd have from some fairly flinty businessmen if I said something like "our major rivals have developed a product over several generations, been fairly successful in the market and appear to own this particular niche. I propose that we develop an offering indistinguishable from theirs. I do not propose that we try to go better than them, and I'm certainly ignoring the upstart rivals who have got a better (m4/3) product which is rapidly eating into our and our main rival's market share".

I'm fond of Nikon, and I very much hope they too join the m4/3 group. I sense that unless they do this year (perhaps at Photokina) then they are ceding ground needlessly to others. Whether they do or not is entirely up to them: while fond of the company, I'm not slavishly devoted to them.

In the days of fixed-lens 35mm rangefinder cameras, there were at least a dozen with nearly the same features and specs. I don't see it as redundancy -- I'd like to see at least a couple more choices similar to these. Maybe someone can get the viewfinder right.

I think Nikon's designers took too literally the order to design a camera like the G11.

Or maybe Nikon just hired Canon's pocket camera design team.

In any event, if I need something compact to replace my G7, I'll probably buy a Panasonic m4/3 and eschew the oversized non-pocket cameras.

Nikon's got three dials, Canon has 2. Nikon wins this round.

I really hope the Canon G12 has 4 dials, and then maybe Nikon will raise its game. Let the dial competition begin! Who knows, maybe it'll go from the MP race to the "how many dials can we squeeze into this body" competition.

"Department of Redundancy Dept."

...and the Natural Guard.

Nikon shooters have been bemoaning the fact that Nikon doesn't have a "G11 type" camera. Maybe Nikon took them literally!

Wait and see...

"Nikon's got three dials, Canon has 2. Nikon wins this round."

Are you referring to the dials on top? The mode and ISO dials are concentric on the Canon with a separate exposure compensation dial. It still adds to three. The Nikon does have two rear dials to Canon's one, not counting the diopter dial on both.

I'm still happy with my G10.

It's weird to see how much the market is settling on specific niches. Entry level DSLR, Midlevel (prosumer) DSLR, Pro DSLR, basic point'n'shoot, and these high-end non SLR digicams.

I only see two exceptions to these categories: Micro 4/3 which might fit into entry- or mid-level DSLR except it seems to command its own market share and then Canon's 5D models.

I wonder if there's room for other kinds of innovations, and if so what other sort of innovations the large companies might contrive if they weren't solidifying their offerings in the existing niches.


"I can attest that he exists, is real, and is a nice guy to boot."
Yes, and his website his full of great gems beneath the gear news! Besides I would have never bumped into your Sunday column without his help.
Paul

Misha,

"Department of Redundancy Dept."

That killed me. But simple simplicities simply do that to me. Kill me that is. Simple stuff I mean.

The Nikon is 7000 and the Canon is only 11! That's a difference of over 6000! Over 6000 better!

They probably use the same Sony sensor and whatever features that are on that chip. Nikon wanted to add a longer lens so Nikon's camera got a bit bigger. Since most consumers will shop zoom range and mega pixels. Seems like a definite advantage for Nikon.

Gorgeous! I just can't wait the looong discussions about WHICH one to buy?

I actually proofread the P7000 manual about a month before the camera was released. My first thought was: "Well, it does look a bit similar to the Canon, doesn't it?" Not that I could have shared my thoughts with anyone at the time, unfortunately.

Anyway, Nikon should just outsource their compacts to another company. They're very good at making DSLRs, but I can't for the life of me remember a compact they've released in the past few years that wasn't decidedly meh.

Just wait....Samsung have a lovely treat for you in their APS sized interchangeable lens NX series coming soon.... with their fantastic AMOLED screen....I've seen it. Samsung are the other 1000 lb gorilla in ten years time.

"The Nikon is 7000 and the Canon is only 11! That's a difference of over 6000! Over 6000 better!"
------------

But the Canon goes to 11! They didn't need to make 10 better, it goes to 11!

Am i the only one who suspects that neither Canon nor Nikon build the G11 and P7k? It is possible that a company like Sanyo designs and manufactures the G11 for Canon and the P7k for Nikon. And in this particular case, they may have already had a generic high-end compact camera design with a number of options that Canon and Nikon could customize, but only one chassis and sensor configuration available.

In fact, i wouldn't be surprised if the majority of the P&S on the market are NOT made by company whose name is on the front of the camera.

Oh, for God's sake, just walk away from these camera(s).

James said facetiously: "our major rivals have developed a product over several generations, been fairly successful in the market and appear to own this particular niche. I propose that we develop an offering indistinguishable from theirs."
If you were in the sales or marketing departments, not engineering/R&D, you would see this kind of proposal all the time. These people don't feel comfortable unless they have a direct competitor to sell against.
The press doesn't help. Look at all the photo magazines and websites - when a new product is introduced, a slew of comparison charts and tests pop right up.
Just look at the prior post, Mike says "...Because, of course, Nikon has had a modest success with its economical normal-lens-equivalent for reduced-sized sensors, and then Sony came out with its version, and so now Pentax wants one, too."
If you introduce something really unusual, like the micro 4/3 or Ricoh interchangeable sensor/lens designs, everybody gets confused - and uncomfortable!
Real success belongs to the brave who listen to their customers, not their competitors!
(Right, Peter?)

Actually, Canon seems to get it better, because they have that no-frills S90 camera. Why didn't Nikon copy that instead? Anyways, Panasonic makes the better camera in terms of usability. They always did. Now it also has an optional EVF. Ricoh had that on the GX100 like three years ago.

Repetitively repeating the same thing over and over again is just saying what was said before in a alike manner by uttering identical words periodically from time to time in such a way that is very duplicative. Anyway, the point is it sounds same.

How do you spell redundant again?

What was I trying to say...? Oh, yeah: why would one ever want that brick they named...er...P7000? Like, ever?

Nikon: Inspired DSLRs, abysmal point and shoot cameras.

Canon: The best point and shoot cameras, DSLRs that somehow always just miss the mark.

It's been like this for years.

I think they have an agreement.

So which one came first!

Yawn.... buy an LX5 and go take some pictures.

Where is the GPS in the Nikon P7000 they were far ahead with the P6000

I guess it's another example of CONVERGENCE.... eventually they run out of improvements and everything becomes the same.

The Nikon P7000 has been brought out as competition for the rumoured Canon Powershot G12, as both of these cameras will have 720p HD video (at present the G11 only has 640x480 video).

I hope this will force Canon to release the G12 that they have been holding back on....

I expect cameras will follow other products such as LCD screens, where they are all made in the same factory and just badged differently.

They both use Sony sensors so, I consider them both subcontractors for Sony. Sony is brilliant.

One big difference between the G11 and the P7000 is the absence of a thumb pad on the G11. Trying to hold my G11 without accidentally changing some setting was a nightmare. I finally sold it for my wonderful Olympus EP-2. If the P7000 were available a few months ago, I certainly would have considered it.

"Nikon appears to have coincided with the Canon G9, a camera now twice superceded."

Thrice.
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/digital_cameras/powershot_g12

The comments to this entry are closed.