Posted by Henry Butz on October 16, 2006 at 11:36:14:
Quick Survey:
You have a choice between buying one of two Nikon cameras. One is the Model "UY100" and the second model is the "UY120." They both sell for $500, which one do you buy?
You buy the UY100 for $500.
You buy the UY120 for $500.
Second question: You have a choice between buying two Nikon cameras again. The models available are the "YY100" and the "T3." The T3 costs $25 more. Which one do you buy?
You buy the "YY100" for $500.
You buy the "T3" for $525.
Last question: Adobe releases Photoshop version 37. You have Photoshop version 36 and you can upgrade to version 37 for $170. Do you automatically put Photoshop version 37 on your "Wish List?"
You buy Photoshop version 37 "upgrade" $170 when you get the chance.
You stick with version 36 for free.
Most people, confronted with two similar model numbers will automatically buy the bigger number. Consumers are conditioned to think that the latest model will have feature enhancements and that the manufacturer has corrected any problems found in earlier models. This might be, but is not guaranteed to be true.
Here's another reason why a manufacturer will come out with a new model. The company is not making enough money on the UY100 - it's too expensive to build. Rather than raise the price, the company replaces most of metal parts with plastic parts and markets it as a new, lighter weight model which is also more quiet.
Another reason why both models are the same price may be just a matter of the market trends. The UY120 might retail for $40 more, but distributors can't get them off the shelves since everyone buys the UY100 for less. Distributors drop the price on the UY120 to get them out of the inventory - they call it an Inventory Clearance.
How about different models which sell for different prices? If you are just looking at prices and you see two similar cameras, are you automatically drawn to the more expensive model? Do you assume that the more expensive model is "better" than the cheaper model?
Often, a model might be more expensive because they've added a new feature which you don't need. For an extra $25, the T3 might be a package deal which includes a CD ROM of software which you will never use. Or, again, it may just be the market which has driven up the T3 because it's black instead of silver. Black cameras might be cheaper to build, but they fetch more money on the market because they look cool.
What about software upgrades? Why does a software company keep coming out with new versions of their product? Because they need to keep their programmers employed. What if Photoshop version 6 was the best version they ever wrote? Does Adobe sell a million copies then close their offices and lay off all their workers? No! They find some new feature to install and call it "an upgrade."
Do you need to upgrade? No! How many people use all the features in Photoshop? Not me. I use some layers, the clone stamp, eraser, fill bucket, lasso, and three of the zillions of filters. So, I ask myself, What does Photoshop 7 have which Photoshop 6 doesn't have?
If you can't say to yourself, "I am spending $170 to upgrade Photoshop because I am getting [this and this and this]" then you're being scammed. Do a comparison between the old software and the new software. Are you getting good value for your dollar?
Often, the "New and Improved" software will introduce as many problems as it resolves. Sure, Photoshop version 7 may add improved layer navigation, but you'll have to learn how to use it. When Adobe released version 7, they "broke" the jpeg format so that suddenly most of the world could not see jpeg photographs on websites. It wasn't their fault, and they quickly released a patch, but the new software introduced a lot of problems.
My own personal experience was that, after an upgrade to Photoshop, my computer began to lock up or reboot. It took months to figure out that the software ran too fast for my computer. Due to a problem with my motherboard, which was not Adobe's fault, anything which used direct manipulation of the video memory would corrupt the processor's memory. The solution? downgrade the software to make it run slower.
What have we learned?
Just because your friend at the local camera club tells you that Model 101 is better than Model 100, do some research first. What are you getting for your money? If Model 101 has 30 frames per second, while Model 100 has 25 frames per second, ask yourself how much money are you willing to pay for it?
FILM IS NOT DEAD!
Well, not dead yet. I was recently in a room full of amateur photographers who all owned digital point-n-shoot cameras. They were able to figure out what all the buttons did. They just had a few questions about adjustable ISO, white balance, and histograms. Fine - no problems with their cameras other than that.
But, now instead of photographs, they were all left with a little memory chip. Most asked, What do I do with this thing? Well, you can connect your camera to your computer with a USB cable or a card reader and import the images to Photoshop, crop them, adjust for color, upload them to an on-line service for printing, or email them. Most people did not know how to "upload" or did not own a copy of Photoshop. A few did not have an Internet connection. Those who were on-line did not know how to get the photographs out of the camera and onto the web.
And, why should they? Why should you? Why are you all using digital cameras?
One person told me, Digital cameras is what they make us use. Someone else asked, Do they still make film cameras? Oh, yes! Of course they still make film cameras.
Let me tell you something. If you don't know how to "upload" a photograph and if you don't use your computer to edit your photographs, go back to film! The film processors miss you. They're all asking themselves if they should give up offering film development for you people - you, the consumer. You drive the market. You are buying these things. If you do not want to "go digital" then stick with film.
You've got the 60-minute photo lab. You can drop off your film at supermarket or 60-minute lab, then pick up a stack of photographs. If you want enlargements, just give the negative back to the lab and tell them which one to print.
You're telling me that digital cameras are "more convenient?" Oh? Does a digital camera give you photographs? No. It gives you a memory chip which needs to be uploaded, edited, emailed, or printed. Can you print photographs on your printer at home? Kind-of. Sure, you can print it, then the photograph fades in a couple of months and it's gone. Prints made by your local lab should last for a lifetime. What about quality? What is better? A roll of film which costs you four bucks? Or, a digital camera which costs you $700? The answer is a roll of film will always give you better photographs than a $700 digital camera. In fact, a roll of film will give you better photographs than a $3,000 digital camera. Digital cameras are, and always have been inferior to film.
The only reason you should use a digital camera is if you know how to it and enjoy editing your own photographs, if you know how to use a computer to manipulate those photographs, and if you can take advantage of the technology.
And, do you really want to trust your precious memories to a computer which can crash, die, or fail? Or, do you want to preserve your memories on film - a wonderful medium which has proven itself for the past One Hundred Sixty-Five years? (That's 165, not 65 years!) Don't give in to sales pressure. When you're shopping around for a camera for yourself or a friend, consider film. It's better. It's cheaper. It lasts longer. It takes better pictures. It's more convenient. It's easier to use. And, you don't need to be a rocket scientist to make an enlargement!