Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Cognitive Resonance?  (Read 3245 times)

Bob Stevenson

  • Guest
Cognitive Resonance?
« on: January 18, 2004, 04:43:08 pm »

Fabio,

Firstly, you should perhaps try to equate the cameras shortcomings with Sony's stated specification on its sales leaflets and on the camera manual.  If you decide that its claimed potential cannot be realised then as we would consider here in the Uk, its 'not of merchantable quality' and you might want to return it for a refund or repair.

Secondly, although I am not a digital camera user as yet and can claim no real experience other than borowing a digital camera for a day, your experience highlights why I will not buy one for a while yet.   So few of these models seem to have had any real design input.  On the other hand they ALL seem to have been heavily 'styled' with marketing potential the main consideration.  I get the impression that they don't really need to function well as most users will either be reasonably pleased to get the current gem or will merely move on to buy the next one.  

Additionally, all the digital 'toys' seem so way overpriced,....a £200 item for £1500 !  A case of 'a new broom sweeping clean'.  Most of the people I know who have bought digital models seem to me to be trying to buy something other than a mere picture making tool and, with respect, you seem to me to be in this group also.   Most of these aquaintances have been disappointed to greater or lesser degree, but then, few of these digital cameras have been truly targeted at a particular type of user, they are simply glittering baubles to attract anyone who will buy against a promise of potential,...You said it yourself;  "..an enthusiastic person who likes new stuff and the possibilities it can offer.."
Logged

Bobtrips

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 679
Cognitive Resonance?
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2004, 05:47:49 pm »

Quote
What reaction should I have to this? Send the camera back in disdain? Close my eyes and ignore the problems? Acknowledge the problems and see if I still can make good use of this tool?
I think you should consider what the camera can do, which shots you might have to walk away from, and which shots might need a bit of editing to be their best.  Then if you see yourself using it, keep it.

From what I've read CA is only a problem with 'contrasty', back-lit subjects and PF is only a very minor problem when printing.  Neither should be noticeable when viewed on the screen at 800 pixels wide with the vast majority of images.

So, if you're like lots of us and don't want to carry several pounds of gear when just out walking around then the 828 might be the tool for you.
Logged

Ray

  • Guest
Cognitive Resonance?
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2004, 10:07:57 pm »

One of the factors in our 'culture of things', as someone expressed it in the other thread, is the tendency to identify in some way with the thing we own. It can become an extension of our personality; it can represent who we are; our standards, tastes and interests; position, status and wealth.

It's always been thus. Even in primitive societies, a man's worth is often measured by the number of cattle owned and the number of wives possessed (or whatever).

Personally, I prefer to stand back from my possessions and try to be objective about their performance. But there is a 'conflict' here because we like to feel good about our possessions (and I shan't go into a lengthy definition of conflict, from the Oxford Dictionary, for Bobtrop's benefit).  

It's all about striking a balance and getting on with the job. And, as always, it's 'buyer beware'. The job of the people responsible for marketing a product is to make you fall in love with the product and buy without being too critical. They're very good at that.

I can't think of any product I own that doesn't have its defects and failings, but I still like most of them. I think 'love' would be too strong a word.
Logged

BigRed450

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
Cognitive Resonance?
« Reply #3 on: January 19, 2004, 10:22:03 pm »

Well said Jonathan.

  Both these threads remind me of a little story from a fellow photographer some time ago. It goes as follows: Some time ago, this photographer was asked by a mutual aquaintance to do some  portraits for a family friend. He proceeded to make arrangements for the pre-shoot visit. During the visit they viewed the photographers porfolio and the lady of the house excitedly exclaimed what wonderful work he did and that he "must have a VERY expensive camera". Well, as the visit progressed the clients generously invited the photographer to have dinner with them. What a wonderful dinner it was, the lady of the house was truly a remarkable cook. On leaving the home, in a joking fashion as not to offend the cook, the photographer quipped "Thank you, that was an exellent meal. You must have VERY expensive pots."
Logged

Fabio Riccardi

  • Guest
Cognitive Resonance?
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2004, 03:42:53 pm »

I'm an enthusiastic person, I like new stuff and the new possibilities it can offer.

I fell in love with the F828 at first sight, I started dreaming about what I could do with it as soon as it was announced. I love the picture quality of my 10D but I miss my Canon G3 days, when I was innocent and I could frame pictures so beautifully on the LCD screen.

The F828 offers the best of two worlds, the creative immediacy of a digicam and the quality of an SLR. What could be more appealing in the life of a photo enthusiast?

I would like to call this "Cognitive Resonance". A very akin feeling to "Falling in Love".

After I received it (Dec 23, Sony's Xmas gift) and started using it I really start to feel awkward, I still loved the camera's concept but felt somewhat cheated. The F828 is a great camera, but it falls short of some of the promises it made, like image noise and unexplicable CA/PF problems.

What reaction should I have to this? Send the camera back in disdain? Close my eyes and ignore the problems? Acknowledge the problems and see if I still can make good use of this tool?

It all depends on what the object of my resonance becomes, how much we identify with my  resonance, with my dream. Can we be in love and objective at the same time? Even if the loved one is a cheater?

How do you feel out there?

 - Fabio
Logged

Jonathan Wienke

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5829
    • http://visual-vacations.com/
Cognitive Resonance?
« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2004, 05:28:02 pm »

The "perfect camera" is like the "perfect spouse", a concept with no existence in reality. Every camera has limitations and shortcoming, even the Canon EOS-1Ds. Part of being a proficient photographer is learning the limitations of one's equipment and devising ways to bypass or overcome them.
Logged

Fabio Riccardi

  • Guest
Cognitive Resonance?
« Reply #6 on: January 18, 2004, 09:04:15 pm »

I'm not entering in the merits and demerits of the F828, the point I'm trying to make is what attitude we have wrt our tools, and how some things can stir deep feelings in many people.

Is it a dissonance? A consonance? How do we react?

 - Fabio
Logged

Jonathan Wienke

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5829
    • http://visual-vacations.com/
Cognitive Resonance?
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2004, 01:06:59 am »

Quote
I can't think of any product I own that doesn't have its defects and failings, but I still like most of them. I think 'love' would be too strong a word.
I kind of think of my 1Ds like a wife that occasionally burns dinner, or sometimes forgets to record a check in the checkbook, or gets a trifle moody every 28 days or so. Not perfect, but certainly worth keeping around long-term. Sure, I wish that it cost less than $50, could shoot 8 FPS (heck, why not 30?) and that it had a 500 frame buffer and noise-free ISO 128000 and weighed 3 ounces with a 500mm f/1.0 lens attached and could shoot for 30 days on a single battery and had telepathic focus point selection and could focus in less than 100 milliseconds with any lens in complete darkness and...well you get the idea. The point is, warts and all, the 1Ds can consistently produce excellent images in the hands of a skilled operator in spite of its flaws and limitations. So I'm keeping mine in spite of its imperfections. Am I disappointed? No. I read enough reviews of the 1Ds (including Michael's) and looked at enough images taken by the camera to get a fairly accurate idea of what the flaws and limitations were, and decided that the capabilities and features were worth the cost, even with the flaws and limitations. And I haven't regretted the decision once. Your mileage may vary.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up