Apple

[kris142]

Has anyone else though of what might happen when apple gets intophotography if they do. I wonder what their cameras would be like...

[ladyphotog]

I think they would be great. I wouldn't use anything else but a Mac so I can't even imagine if they were to venture into the camera end of things.

[cyclohexane]

Apple QuickTake - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[tomrock]

Originally Posted by cyclohexane

Apple QuickTake - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I'm an Apple fan and I had no idea they made a camera (or three).

[Nikonfreak]

Apple won't do a photography product again. There simply isn't any room for any more "me too" products in the business. What would or could they introduce that isn't already out there or that could be new and groundbreaking? Consumer or Professional market...

Julio

[Jacco]

I was a very content Minolta SLR camera user for 20 years. Had several. But the simple fact that it now says 'Sony' on their cameras made me, sofar, not purchase one. Minolta had a solid photography tradition, heritage and perspective. Sony doesn't. Neither does Apple.

I became an Apple fan with Lisa, in '83, a Macintosh Plus user in '85, had maybe a dozen Macs since, and currently use 4 (17", 20", 24" iMacs, 17" MacBook Pro). But I can't see myself seriously buying an Apple photo or dSLR camera.

[00silvergt]

Sony is a big player in the video industry, not just Handicams but mid-range pro's and top end pros. I think the whole Star Wars Prequel was shot with Sony HDV pro cameras. Sony was essentially building everything in the Minolta series anyway, why not? Minolta was going to get out of the DSLR game all together and Sony bought the line to create their entries to compete with Canon and Nikon. They also made the Noink CCD sensors. To me, it just make sense, I really don't see why you would not buy a Sony simply because of the name.

For me, it would be because Sony has decided to add NR to their RAW files, which sort of defeats the RAW usage IMO. Also the fact that I am somewhat captive by Canon to pretty much stay with their line.

[Jacco]

Originally Posted by 00silvergt

Sony bought the line to create their entries to compete with Canon and Nikon.

Which imo heralds an attack on the no. 2 slot. And I think they will succeed too in the coming 2, maybe 3 years. Word on the street has it that their next dSLR is gonna be a bombshell! The prior alpha cameras were mere exercises compared to what's coming.

[Ed Shapiro]

I was sorry to see the Minolta line of cameras go. Price and quality wise, I think they had a good place in the market. Some decisions made at high corporate levels are not always sound. If anyone here remembers when some big shot at Kodak decided to infringe on Polaroid's patents for instant cameras and films- that only cost them a billion bucks in court costs lawyers fees, fines, compensation to Polaroid and punitive damages at the end of the day and nearly drove them out out of business.

Minolta should be remembered well for so many good things. In the 1950 the Model A range finder camera enabled a lot of young photography enthusiasts to but a decent camera with a sharp lens at a fairly low cost. Their Autocord TLR cameras made it easy to step up to medium format without having to purchase a Rolleiflex and the image sharpness was pretty decent for the price. Their SRT 101 series cameras were built like brick outhouses and those good old Rokor lenses were a lot of bang for the buck. Then the invented auto-focus in the later X series and again a wide range and affordable line of lenses were made available.

Let not forget about that magic little chip in the little X-700 35mm SLR. It had circuitry to enable perfect blending of existing and flash lighting when used with their dedicated flash units. Even when working in very low light or difficult situations like stage lighting, there was always a perfect blend and the images never look like flat flash photography and everything, exposure wise, was automatic. I user the X-900 with a 300mm AF tele to cover a contract with the National Figure Skating Association of Canada and never missed a shot under crazy lighting and high speed action. Oh- The little Hi-Matic 9 was my favorite recommendation to snap-shooters who wanted a good point and shoot. I still have my favorite beat-up Minolta flash meter- it looks like it was run over by a bus but it is still tack on!

So goodbye old friend Minolta but I never say never! Did you ever think you would see a Cadillac Pick up truck or SUV? A giant steroid Volkswagen Bug, a digitally controlled bowl. Even a Hasselblad DSLR seemed far fetched at one time. NIKON eyeglasses? Lica lenses for digital point and shoots, Licas made in CHINA- Who knows, some executive VP at Apple may wake up one fine morning and decide what is missing in his corporate life is a super high tech DSLR, after all the MAC name can sell a lot of cameras. One never knows who will come up with ground braking technology and decides to kill Nikon and Canon.

Ed

[SureFire]

Originally Posted by Nikonfreak

Apple won't do a photography product again. There simply isn't any room for any more "me too" products in the business. What would or could they introduce that isn't already out there or that could be new and groundbreaking? Consumer or Professional market...

Julio

Agreed. Jobs can't pretend he big dog over Canon or Nikon. He wouldn't bother.

[Ed Shapiro]

Have you ever heard of Graflex, Cooper-Hewitt, Univac, Kodak Opal Paper?

Graflex- The maker of the Speed-Graphic, one the badge of the professional photographer- all gone

Cooper-Hewitt- The ultimate in studio lighting (circa 1939)- high output neon tubes- worked on thousands of volts and made more buzzing noises than the electric chair.

Univac- At one time the ONLY maker of computers- the ere the size of telephone booths and took up entire large rooms and held only a fraction of storage that we now have in a lap-top. Last time I heard of them, I think the were making electric pencil sharpeners.

Kodak Opal Paper. The material of choice if thousands of master portraitists for decades. All gone along with all Kodak papers. Who would have believed- no more darkrooms and chemicals as little as 10 yeas ago.

If you told the photographers in the good old days that all of that equipment would become things of the past they would have laughed you out of the industry. If you told a computer operator that one day he could take his computer home in a briefcase he would call the men in the white coats and have you taken away to an asylum.

If you told a press photographer of the 1960s that he could surpass the sharpness of his 4x5 camera with a 35mm film-less camera, crop is images in a computer hardly much thicker than a clip board and send his images over a wireless telephone directly to the picture editor who then sends it to the composing room along with the text and the images can be published before his shift is over.

Let's not forget about space travel. medical miracles and nuclear energy- I never underestimate science and technology. If you think that modern photography is gonna end with Nikon and Canon- you got another thing comming. Oh- and there is always the free enterprise system that drives the scientists and engineers to discover better things and new ways. "The love of money may be the root of all evil" but you gotta admit that it gets a lot of things done. There is always the other old adage- "Money talks and BS walks"!

The photography industry is just a tiny microcosm of progress. It may be hard to believe but some of the electronics used in photography comes from radar, sonar, guided missal and stealth technologies where there are mega-budgets for research and development. All this stuff trickles down into your stereo gear and you photographic equipment. Trunked radio and cell phone technology is now living in you electronic flash slave units and off camera automatic exposure electronic flash systems. As long as the big boys are inventing atomic weapons of mass destruction and ultra high tech communications systems- down here in the photography biz you can expect just about anything.

Watch- you'll see!

Ed

[00silvergt]

Ed, sorry, but I don't see the crack about Minolta leaving the DSLR, when Sony was building them anyway. Quality is not harmed, in fact, it may have improved. Afterall, the DSLR were Minolta by name only. Now they wear the "real" name. What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name, would smell as sweet? Sorry, I couldn't resist! LOL

[brian.austin]

Originally Posted by 00silvergt

Ed, sorry, but I don't see the crack about Minolta leaving the DSLR, when Sony was building them anyway. Quality is not harmed, in fact, it may have improved. Afterall, the DSLR were Minolta by name only. Now they wear the "real" name. What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name, would smell as sweet? Sorry, I couldn't resist! LOL

I will miss Minolta's R&D. I'm not a big fan of Sony since the DRM fiasco but I agree: moving it to Sony was really just a name change.

I loved my Minolta Maxxum film SLRs.

[00silvergt]

Originally Posted by brian.austin

I will miss Minolta's R&D. I'm not a big fan of Sony since the DRM fiasco but I agree: moving it to Sony was really just a name change.

I loved my Minolta Maxxum film SLRs.

Brian, my first camera was a Minolta XD-7...yeah, I'll miss them, but by the time they made the "leap" to DSLR, I already missed them. I think ever since Konica took over it was really down hill from there.

I don't like Sony for many reasons, MD, Beta, etc...and I would never buy Sony Audio equipment, but video, it is hard to beat them. Especially when it comes to low-light, I can shoot an event by candle light with my PD-150 and it will be noise free and clean.

[Ed Shapiro]

One of the reasons, over the years, that the Japanese Photographic Industry has been so successful is that the companies did cooperate with each other and the are the MASTERS of badge marketing. Many folks don't realize that the old Bronica line of MF SLRs were built in the Nikon factory and sported Nikon lenses. There were many other such situations. Hoya makes most of the "brand name" filters. If the companies find that it is not cost effective to make certain parts or componants the simply outsource them to other companies that can do a better or a more efficient job. At one time there were only 4 major factories in Japan making dozens of different brand names. Many of the brands, called themselves "marketing companies".

If you look at the base of some now collectible classic Japanese cameras you might be surprised to see the same "logos" or trade marks on many different brands next to the "Made on Japan" engraving on their base plates. Please excuse my bad phonetic spelling- Nippon-Konamtzu, Kyosara, S/M (Mamya) were 3 of the factories. I think they did not worry too much about competition within Japan. They probably were more interested in blasting the German and American camera manufactures out of the world.

Well- there used to be dozens of German cameras- Balda-Agfa- Lica- Voightlander- dozens of folders and others on the consumer and professional cameras and lenses. Aside from fines lenses, I can only think of Lica and possibly Rollei and Linhoff as camera manufacturers. In the U.S.A. all gone- Kodak- Argus- Bolsey- Geaflex- Realist- Bush- Ansco- Revere- Ciro- Kalmar- Omega and many others- all distant memories- HISTORY!

Sony?- can't be all that bad. Remember those Bata-Cam ENG cameras?- used to be industry standard. They have been in electronic imaging for a long time!

Years ago, I learned allot about the Japanese photo industry from an old fried and my first photographic dealer, Joseph Erinrich of the old Penn Camera in NYC. He brought over the first Nikon range fide cameras from Japan when most Japaneses cameras were considered to be junk and created a revolution. He later founded EPOI the main U.S. importer of better Japaneses equipment for many years. He was one of the idea men behind the Japanese Camera Institute which set up quality control standards and guarantees on all Japanese equipment- remember that little oval sticker?

Ed

[Jacco]

Afaik Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, etc. all outsource over 50% of the production of their high-volume lenses to the likes of Sigma and Tamron. And probably near 100% of all other camera accessories with their brand name on them.