Camera industry in the dumpster - article

[amolitor]

hjulenissen: Precisely.

[amolitor]

This is actually a great example. Let's imagine how it plays out in real life:

You spend $50K or something building this feature. Software and QA are not, it turns out, free. That's $50K you could have spent any number of ways, but you spend it on this.

You shift a few hundred cameras to some enthusiasts, cool, maybe a few hundred grand in gross revenues. That's better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

Then you get some reviews. Some dweeb says the feature is great except that he can't map the Zeta Parameter to the LEFT hand rear control wheel, only the RIGHT one, and so it's unusable. Someone else says that the it does something imaginary to the image quality. 12 people complain that the menu system is now completely out of hand. Another 4 reviews are from people who couldn't even figure out what the feature does, misunderstand it completely, and then claim that it's completely broken. The number of people who say it's great and perfect as-is is Zero.

The net PR fallout is 'neat feature, but the implementation was just so bad it was unworkable'. Sales dip slightly on the perception that your camera company is a bunch of wonkish dolts who build cameras with incomprehensible features, completely obliterating the 18 cameras you sold to:

- serious gearheads
- ... who are wonkish enough to use ETTR
- ... and who are willing to use anything other than M mode

[hjulenissen]

This is actually a great example. Let's imagine how it plays out in real life:

You spend $50K or something building this feature. Software and QA are not, it turns out, free. That's $50K you could have spent any number of ways, but you spend it on this.

You shift a few hundred cameras to some enthusiasts, cool, maybe a few hundred grand in gross revenues. That's better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick.

Then you get some reviews. Some dweeb says the feature is great except that he can't map the Zeta Parameter to the LEFT hand rear control wheel, only the RIGHT one, and so it's unusable. Someone else says that the it does something imaginary to the image quality. 12 people complain that the menu system is now completely out of hand. Another 4 reviews are from people who couldn't even figure out what the feature does, misunderstand it completely, and then claim that it's completely broken. The number of people who say it's great and perfect as-is is Zero.

Michael and others on this site have been quite vocal and consistent in trying to educate the public on this matter.

The net PR fallout is 'neat feature, but the implementation was just so bad it was unworkable'. Sales dip slightly on the perception that your camera company is a bunch of wonkish dolts who build cameras with incomprehensible features, completely obliterating the 18 cameras you sold to:

In all fairness, the camera manufacturers have been willing to put in features before that have earned them ridicule and head-shaking. "PictBridge" dedicated buttons, anyone?

The PDAF tracking settings buried deeply in my Canon 7D seems to have been designed by engineers, for engineers. Or, rather, by engineers trying to conceal how their algorithm actually worked, while still offering sufficient options to cater for all kinds of uses. I see little problem with that, it is a complex subject made for people with particular needs.

- ... and who are willing to use anything other than M mode

Better exposure feedback would be welcome in M mode as well.

-h

[amolitor]

But they don't put in *every* feature.

Every customer thinks that they're the only one with a really good feature idea. In reality, every enthusiastic customer has a couple of ideas. Some of them are terrible, some of them are pretty good. Most of them are pretty specific to that customer. If you've got 10,000 customers with that level of enthusiasm, that's a WHOLE LOT of features you could stick in there. Just imagine the menu system then, eh?

As the product manager, I have to weigh these ideas and pick the ones likely to generate the most revenue for the least cost, interpreting cost quite broadly here. Customers are always offended and put off when their pet feature never shows up in the product, and they think I am not paying attention. I am. Their feature just didn't make the cut, largely for reasons which are opaque to the customer. I don't have the resources available to build their feature, and I also don't have the resources available to teach them product management, so, unfortunately, these customers remain in the dark and upset.

I've spent a lot of time building very complex products for very serious people, and I *still* spend oodles of time fending off features like this. The "enthusiast" equivalent in my field *is* my customer base, and the calculation still produces "No" almost all the time. In the consumer products area, where the "enthusiasts" are still the loudest voice, but the market is almost completely not them, I can't even imagine the nightmare to PMs.

[Isaac]

Every customer thinks that they're the only one with a really good feature idea.

And every customer thinks that they are the typical customer.

"Perspective is worth 80 IQ points."

[Telecaster]

The solution here is crowdsourcing. Efing listen to your customers—actively solicit their feedback—and build a database of their likes, dislikes, wants, needs, comments & concerns. That way the data isn't skewed towards any particular person or interest group's idiosyncracies. Then study the data and see what your customers are telling you. Then have enough humility to take the data seriously.

That said, the fact that electronic cameras in 2014 are still capable of overexposure in full Auto mode is a disgrace.

-Dave-

[Hans Kruse]

I can only speak from personal experience. Within my family, I have had the grand total of 3 iPods in the last 6-7 years: one Classic, and two Nanos. All of them have broken down in less than one year of not heavy use. I still have one Sony mp3 music player from 2005 that works flawlessly. The sound quality of Sony mp3 music players is superior to the iPods. Apple's products are "cooler", but they are overpriced, and not even the best at what they do.

When recently researching to get a new "smartphone" I opted for a Windows Phone device, it does what is supposed to do very well, better than iPhones. And it has some cool factor too:)

So indeed Apple have managed to get a hold on a large percentage of the market, introducing some revolutionary products, but they are far from producing the best quality/price ratio.

Statistics says that you cannot say anything meaningful with a few data points 

As for my own experience the grand total of our family has 10 MacBook Pros, 6 iPads, 10 iPhones and during the last 4 years one iPhone has broken down. Again not statistically significant conclusion of product quality. Another "quality" factor is that the older devices is supported with new software updates where a lot of things a sold and never updated with new software. E.g. I have a perfectly well running HP multifunction printer 6-7 years old which effectively can only print since the scanning function requires software updates that was never supplied. Apple is pretty good at supporting older devices which for me ways into the quality/price ratio.

[Hans Kruse]

The net PR fallout is 'neat feature, but the implementation was just so bad it was unworkable'. Sales dip slightly on the perception that your camera company is a bunch of wonkish dolts who build cameras with incomprehensible features, completely obliterating the 18 cameras you sold to:

- serious gearheads
- ... who are wonkish enough to use ETTR
- ... and who are willing to use anything other than M mode

I'm not sure where you are coming from, so to speak, but I know a lot of enthusiast photographers who shoot ETTR (including my humble self) and who don't spend time using M mode unless needed. Also I almost never look at histograms on the camera!!

Now given your analysis: Who are Canon and Nikon building all these f/2.8 zoom lenses for and these 300, 400, 500, 600 and 800mm lenses? Is this just a few nerds which does not justify to build them? I think it is absolutely the people (pros and enthusiasts) that buy these lenses for quality that also would appreciate to get their shots easier without chimping, bracketing, etc.

Exactly the thinking you are demonstrating here is what the corporate product managers will be thinking in most cases unfortunately, so in this sense I agree (by experience) with you. Also there are always lots of engineers who are experts on explaining why a suggested feature cannot be done and work reliably in all cases. And most likely the users are too dumb to understand it anyway. Unless: In some rare cases you have a team where a few thought leaders can think out of the box and see what is needed to distinguish them from the competition. That's what we need from Canon and Nikon where seriously I think the real next level of products will be coming from for the highest quality below MF.

[Hans Kruse]

Consider this.

Cameras are accessing sensor data many times a second  so that the rear LCD or EVF can display an image. Therefore the camera can know the value of the level of each pixel at any and every moment. That's how he have live histograms, blinkers and zebras.

So in an new automatic mode, the camera could set the exposure properly (ETTR) for raw, and then "normalize it for display and in-camera JPGS. There is already a field in the raw files and Lightroom and Camera raw for the normalization value.

I've been proposing this to camera makers for several years. Enthusiasm is shown, but nothing is ever done.

I should have patented it. One of these days, soon, I'd guess, someone will offer this.

Michael

I can't help smile at this post since you you more or less gave the reason some posts back in this thread  These people you have talked to might have gone back to the their teams and discussed it and I'm pretty sure the engineers could give good reasons not to implement this or the product managers could not show a positive revenue flow from adding this feature. I do agree with you about the value of such feature. But as usual the devil is in the details....

[amolitor]

Telecaster, that is exactly what any competent product management team does. They do not share the database, however, so in general you don't know about it.

[jjj]

No way! How else would I be able to take selfie gems like this one (see attachment) if not for a camera I can place on a flat rock without it tipping over?    

Have a pocketful of small stones to prop camera upright. Job done. 

[jjj]

Apple is pretty good at supporting older devices which for me ways into the quality/price ratio.

You are kidding right? Legacy support is where MS craps all over Apple.
Apple like to move on and drop things they no longer deem necessary like Firewire or what ever display connector they are using this month on a regular basis. Apple's business model is predicated on people buying hardware regularly and willingly upgrade the OS without maintaining compatibility for older kit. My neighbour had a perfectly good MBP he didn't need as he uses Windows and I reset it all and got it running as best I could but couldn't install the last two OSs. I've known people to keep old Macs running was past their best as the essential software for their work didn't work on new machines.
Last year I found that I couldn't run FCPX on my MacPro and to make situation even more absurd I couldn't upgrade to a new MP [which was barely any different to mine anyway] as they weren't available and hadn't been here for some time. And even now if I want to buy the new MP here in UK, I can't. I can place an order, but it'll be couple of months until availability.

Oh and regarding the Apple reliability issue. The only Apple product in our household that hasn't been back to store to be fixed/replaced due to being duff is the Nano. iPad lasted two weeks, before being replaced due to flakey lightning port. Charles Arthur a UK tech journalist for one of the main newspapers and big Apple fan wrote a column one day after he realised that every Apple product his family had owned has had reliability issues. Most of the photographers I know locally have talked about visiting Apple store with problems, then there's the various recalls and Apple cables despite being absurdly expensive are also the crappiest and most fragile you can get. The feedback on the Apple store about them is anything but positive.
I'm about to buy some Sugru to stop mine falling apart. Unsurprisingly Apple connectors are used to illustrate where it can be used/is needed.  And as for the Magic mouse's scroll wheel.....

The other thing to bear in mind is a [particularly stupid] facet of human nature where the more expensive a product, the less likely people are to admit it is in any way flawed. Now seeing as Apple only make expensive equipment, there will be serious underreporting compared to other products like phones/computers which are usually cheaper and a more defensive attitude to criticism. Which explains Macolyte behaviour.
Personally the more expensive something is, the louder I will complain if it doesn't work properly. Because it should be better.

Oh and as someone who has spent a lot of time in my local Apple store buying bits and getting stuff fixed there's a huge number of people coming in with dead/dying kit or having to pay a lot of money for expensive batteries that have died in newish phones/iPads. Obviously a skewed source, but still it shows that Apple stuff needs fixing, just like all other products.

[dturina]

I think it's reasonable to expect that all hardware products conform to the following cycles:
1. The product category is new and super hot. It's also super expensive and hardly any good. Example: digital cameras with floppy drives, computers that can't do much besides text and simple games, cars that barely shifted from horse power to gas. People who can afford it buy that stuff, but upgrade as soon as a new model comes out.
2. The product is decent, but has huge flaws. It is usable for specific tasks, but requires so many workarounds that people can't wait for a new model with a fix. Example: first generations of dSLR cameras, PC computers that are slow but functional, cars that are generally fine but can be safer, more reliable and use less fuel.
3. Mature phase; the product does everything well and users have no reason to upgrade; products are replaced when broken or worn out. The new models always have this or that advantage, which is nice but not enough to warrant an unprovoked change. Example: washing machine, fridge, dishwasher, modern cars, modern PC computers, modern dSLR cameras, a view camera, a pocket calculator etc.

In my opinion, we entered the mature phase of the camera market with Canon 5d. At least that's how it is for me. Since I got it, I never had any wish to upgrade because it does everything I need well enough. I also have a two year old iPhone 4s which works just fine and I'll replace it when it dies of old age, and several core2duo generation computers that work just fine and have no flaws that would require an upgrade.

[daws]

...The other thing to bear in mind is a [particularly stupid] facet of human nature where the more expensive a product, the less likely people are to admit it is in any way flawed. Now seeing as Apple only make expensive equipment, there will be serious underreporting compared to other products like phones/computers which are usually cheaper and a more defensive attitude to criticism....

There's that.

And there's this: Apple causes 'religious' reaction in brains of fans, say neuroscientists

[dturina]

There's that.

And there's this: Apple causes 'religious' reaction in brains of fans, say neuroscientists

Yeah, and then there's the fact that I have five Apple products at home (wife's stuff included) and they've all been well behaved, the batteries lasted far longer than average for the respective devices' classes, and they've all been cheaper than the competition at that performance level. For instance, a Lenovo in the spec range cost more than my Mac Air, and Samsung and HTC alternatives cost more than my phone and tablet, so basically that entire line of thought you're advertising just made a loud *pop*.
Also, since I need a laptop with a Unix OS (for work), it's either Mac or Linux, and you can't run Lightroom on Linux.

The only complaints I have with my Mac Air is that after 3 years of use the screen hinge became a bit loose and the battery life shortened to around five and a half hours. I'm sure there are lots of pro-Apple wackos around but there are at least as many anti-Apple wackos.

[Hans Kruse]

You are kidding right? Legacy support is where MS craps all over Apple.

No, I'm not kidding and I'm sorry for your experience which does not match mine at all. I'm not a fanboy of anything. If things does not work good I will switch any time. This goes with cars, phones, laptops, cameras, etc.

If your MBP cannot be upgraded to the last OS it is very old. Certainly 2009 models with core2 duo processors can run Mavericks. iPhone 4 can run IOS 7. Look at Android phones that cannot be upgraded. I meet a lot of photographers on my workshops and I have not heard a single complaint about Apple products. On the contrary all like their MacBooks which generally runs so much better than the Windows laptops. Not that there cannot be a well running Windows laptops, of course.

[Hans Kruse]

Telecaster, that is exactly what any competent product management team does. They do not share the database, however, so in general you don't know about it.

Yes, any competent product management team will gather information about how their products are sold, used, satisfaction levels, number of repairs, etc.etc. However I have never seen any innovation come from such groups. I think Steve Jobs was right when he said that the customers don't know what they want. Also requests from customers even from high-end IT customers in large businesses will mostly be formulated as requests for specific functions and often formulated as an implementation suggestion (like a competitor products has this so your product should have it too) rather than formulation a problem that needs a solution which might not even include a specific suggested function.

I think innovation in the camera industry will come from forward thinking engineers who work with university researchers and see new possibilities and eventually radical ones.

[Hans Kruse]

Apple like to move on and drop things they no longer deem necessary like Firewire or what ever display connector they are using this month on a regular basis.

Firewire is certainly supported. The display port on MBP's is the same since a very long time and compatible with Thunderbolt. The power charger connector was the same for a very long time and was changed with the new MBP's and a converter was available. So I find the exact opposite the case where on Windows laptops there is a new charger connector for every new model from even the same company that is not compatible.

[bjanes]

I'm not sure where you are coming from, so to speak, but I know a lot of enthusiast photographers who shoot ETTR (including my humble self) and who don't spend time using M mode unless needed. Also I almost never look at histograms on the camera!!

Hans,

If you practice ETTR and don't use the histogram, then how do you judge exposure at the time of the shoot (rather than later via Rawdigger or similar)? Blinking highlights are another option, and these tell where in the image that the actual overexposure is occurring. IMHO the two methods are complementary and I use both.

Regards,

Bill

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

I also use both. The blinkies show where and the histogram shows how much. It works for me reasonably well on both the Sonys and the P45+ I have


Best regards
Erik

Hans,

If you practice ETTR and don't use the histogram, then how do you judge exposure at the time of the shoot (rather than later via Rawdigger or similar)? Blinking highlights are another option, and these tell where in the image that the actual overexposure is occurring. IMHO the two methods are complementary and I use both.

Regards,

Bill