| Author |
Message |
    
Dragunov
Tinkerer
Username: Dragunov
Post Number: 9
Registered: 10-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, November 10, 2007 - 11:22 pm: | 
|
prosumer must be something between 'pro' and 'consumer', but what's a prosumer camera like?
cheers,
Dragunov |
Wernerjb
Tinkerer
Username: Wernerjb
Post Number: 213
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, November 11, 2007 - 06:56 am: |
|
This may be off-topic, but ...
... all you need is this: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=prosumer |
York_praktica_fan
Tinkerer
Username: York_praktica_fan
Post Number: 21
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, November 11, 2007 - 10:47 am: |
|
Dragunov
I regularly use a Pentax DSLR, which is not classed as a "prosumer", last summer i had to use a Fuji "prosumer", and frankly I found the experience disappointing.
having used both fully manual SLRs and the DSLR i felt lost at not having full control, and above all the delay between pressing the button and the shutter firing was far to long, causing me to loss some action shots.
The prosumer is marketed at someone who feels beyond the point and shoot models but does want the DSLR - quite what they don't want I don't knoe, particularly as a DSLR can be put into "idiot mode" and still produce better pictures than a cheap "prosumer".
The only advantage is that they are cheaper and look less intimidating when carried in the street.
I certainly wouldn't want to have to rely on one.
Stephen |
Glenn
Tinkerer
Username: Glenn
Post Number: 212
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, November 11, 2007 - 07:55 pm: |
|
In the digital camera world, a 'prosumer' camera is basically a slightly down market/cheaper camera containing many 'professional' features. The word seems to be used only when describing DSLR cameras. For example the Nikon D3 is the professional DSLR, the D300 the 'prosumer' DSLR. To put it another way, 'prosumer' is idiot speak for a top end amateur DSLR. |
Dragunov
Tinkerer
Username: Dragunov
Post Number: 10
Registered: 10-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, November 11, 2007 - 10:00 pm: |
|
well, i meant prosumer film camera. something about service life? and the body has nothing to do with optical quality, right? |
York_praktica_fan
Tinkerer
Username: York_praktica_fan
Post Number: 23
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, November 12, 2007 - 05:47 am: |
|
Glenn
I would beg to differ - i believe "prosumer" to be used to describe cameras that look vaguely like DSLRs, often having a digital viefinder where the optical viewfinder would be on an SLR, often coupled with a wideranging zoom, which of course cannot be removed. There are examples produced by Olympus and Fuji.
The down market DSLRs with reduced capabilites aren't they described as "entry level"?
Dragunov - I've never heard of "prosumer" film cameras - perhaps the new word has only come into being in the past few years. |
M_currie
Tinkerer
Username: M_currie
Post Number: 90
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, November 12, 2007 - 06:51 pm: |
|
I've seen the term used both ways, making it a virtually useless term without considerable qualification.
But virtually no cameras of the sort York Prakica Fan exist any more in the film world. A few did, just before the digital era, though I don't know now how they were designated. None are considered much of a find now, as far as I know, and they turn up for small bucks at rummage sales and the like. If I were looking for a "prosumer" film camera in the sense Glenn means, I'd guess the Nikon N (or F outside US) 90, would fit the description pretty well, along with its predecessor, the N8008. The F100 is probably into the pro range, though these days a good used one is well down into the consumer level in price. |
Dragunov
Tinkerer
Username: Dragunov
Post Number: 11
Registered: 10-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, November 12, 2007 - 09:06 pm: |
|
that's wierd.
... that is wierd. |
Glenn
Tinkerer
Username: Glenn
Post Number: 213
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, November 13, 2007 - 03:30 pm: |
|
Sorry York Praktica Fan, but you are completely off the mark. If you live in the UK, get a copy of the free 'dslr Round-Up' - given with the 17th November copy of Amateur Photographer. There in, you will find 'prosumer' used/described exactly as I have previously stated. The Editor has even used my Nikon D3/D300 example!
You have to remember that the bench-mark is the 'professional model', the down market refers to this bench-mark. The Canon EOS 5D can be looked upon as a cheaper/slightly down market camera, when compared to the EOS-1Ds Mark 111. However there is no way that you can describe the 5D as entry level.
As Wernerjb's link indicates, in the photographic context the word means of a 'type and build to be useful to both amateurs and professionals alike'. The word was never used in the days before digital, people could easily work-out that the Canon F1 was professional kit and the A1 was aimed at the advanced amateur. The A1 could stand the rigors of professional use - I used a couple of A1 bodies alongside my F1s - but changing focus screens on the A1 was not an 'in the field' job. This definitely reduced the capability of the A1 for covering a number my forensic commissions.
However; no matter what the build qualities and thus the ruggedness of the cameras were, the functions were still pretty similar and cost gave a very good indication as to where in the market, the models were pitched. In the DSLR market today it seems there is a need to have a specific word to describe the 'semi-professional' camera. This has arisen because there are vast differences, in the operating functions and menus, on the various classes of digital SLR. Price is no longer a good indication of intended use, you soon find that these semi-professional cameras have their prices nearer to the entry level groups, than the £6,000 professional group. So it then becomes unclear if the camera is based on an up-rated amateur body or a down-rated professional one.
Far simpler to use the word 'prosumer', than list all the cameras specific attributes or intended usage. Mind you I still hate seeing the word in print, just more 21st century jargon! |
York_praktica_fan
Tinkerer
Username: York_praktica_fan
Post Number: 26
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 14, 2007 - 12:56 am: |
|
Glenn
fair-do!
I fully accept your correction, and like you hate seeing the word in use, and certainly would never use it!
lets keep real camera (words that need no explaining) going.
regards
Stephen |
Wernerjb
Tinkerer
Username: Wernerjb
Post Number: 214
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 14, 2007 - 08:04 am: |
|
Like Glenn and Stephen I despise words like prosumer a lot.
But language is arbitrary, and beyond any individual's command of this human communication tool it is basically limitless.
Even if all the language purists were united they would not be able to ban people using words that stem from their idiosyncratic way of looking at things.
So when Alice wanted to know what impenetrability meant Humpty Dumpty responded "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less." |
Glenn
Tinkerer
Username: Glenn
Post Number: 214
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 14, 2007 - 11:03 am: |
|
JB,
Ah Alice! - I can see we are going to get into serious word play.
I have no problems with new words appearing. The English language has been borrowing and amending words/phrases, from other languages, for centuries. You have only to see the number of 'new' words that are added to each new edition of the 'Oxford English Dictionary' to see the extent of this modern increase. The problem occurs when they are used in such a way, that their true meaning - in the contest of the article - is unknown. Describing a camera as 'prosumer', does not tell me which bit of the camera is professional and what is consumer. ie, I do not need a camera that is built like a tank, but certainly need a professionally based operating system.
Now as far as it concerns me, the above argument is a bit spurious - after forty odd years in the business, I have a pretty good idea what a particular camera is supposed to do and who it is aimed at. The very fact that this thread exists, indicates that we do have problems with certain words and phrases. However, as Wernerjb states, we are never going stop or alter this behaviour. |
Wernerjb
Tinkerer
Username: Wernerjb
Post Number: 215
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, November 14, 2007 - 01:25 pm: |
|
To begin with, like you Glenn, I do not like that gibbery jargon at all, but the sad facts show there are people who do. I wouldn't mind leaving it to the context to decide what meaning a community of users makes a word mean.
I admit that in a world of almost indifferently thoughtfree debate over serious and not so serious issues it is often troublesome to get the intended message.
People next door claim their camera being semi-professional, but they are simply echoing the adpeople's blabla, they don't know what they are saying and what they say does not mean anything at all.
But there is no ultimate true - false theory judging anthropofugal to be similar or different from centrifugal as far as the words' common denominator is concerned. What about the truth of "auto" or "automatic" embossed on all sorts of cameras through the ages? Have the words become a lie in their apperance on the front a vintage Petri, just because that one isn't autofocus?
To cut a long story short: prosumer attributed to a camera says, come and get me, with me dangling from your neck you will feel terrific & fabulous, without me you do not even exist. In modern ears the prefix pro may sound like progressive or protruding, while sumer relates to the gist, the heart, the essence, the sum of all the cameras before this one.
For closer info on this neologism and derivatives, also with some respect to photo equipment, see this:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosumer |
Mndean
Tinkerer
Username: Mndean
Post Number: 36
Registered: 08-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, November 15, 2007 - 02:04 am: |
|
It seems to me that the "prosumer" tag is fairly insulting and must have come from an adman. I remember the term first in the 1980s when dealing with video camera equipment, and thought it rather stupid/uninformative. It was inevitable that the term would infect still cameras eventually, as it both flattered and insulted the customer simultaneously (the adman's dream - tell the customer what a sucker he is while making him believe that he's smart for choosing the product).
My understanding on professional vs. amateur in camera equipment had to do primarily with durability in use, and little else. The various professional-grade cameras were intended to last a larger number of shots as opposed to nonprofessional cameras. They often had other features thought useful to the professional (removable prisms, for example), but it was not a distinguishing feature. The "advanced amateur" line was just another selling term which didn't tell anything useful, but was meant to flatter the amateur into buying more expensive equipment. That these terms are successful is without a doubt. I have seen many snapshooters who had equipment far beyond their abilities. The good thing about it is that it provides us with a lot of lightly-used vintage equipment, so I can't be too critical! |
Glenn
Tinkerer
Username: Glenn
Post Number: 215
Registered: 07-2006
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, November 15, 2007 - 10:09 am: |
|
Quite right, there is a vast amount of very good late vintage kit around, some of it for sale in the most unlikely places. You just have to keep your eyes open.
Another piece of advertising hype aimed at the amateur, has appeared recently. Certain models of DSLR cameras are being advertised - 'fitted with pro shutter - good for 150,000 operations'. It begs the question, what is the life of an 'amateur' shutter?
It is quite clear that the user of a DSLR takes more images per shoot, than they did with the equivalent 35mm camera. That is the good thing about digital, 'negatives' are for free. However print costs - for the number of images taken - are/will be another thing. Hence, the very low print to image taken ratio in the amateur field.
A while back a professional airshow photographer was having a moan about loosing a commission to a amateur part timer. What really riled the pro, was the fact that the new guy was bragging that he had taken over 4000 images, during the day. As my professional acquaintance pointed out, there was no way he could 'process' that number of images per job ( if all the images had been saved) and have viable customer costings. I mention this only to indicate that extreme numbers of shutter operations can be made during a shoot. My personal feeling is that although 4000 images were taken, a large proportion were not saved. The new lad was trying to make sure he had the best possible set of images, and it was a bit of sour grapes on the side of the pro for loosing the job in the first place.
However all this, may indicate that in the future any classic DSLR cameras ( well somebody will be collecting and using them surely?) that are around, will be there because they have robust shutter mechanisms. All the others being scrapped when they died from lack of spare parts. |
Dgillette4
Tinkerer
Username: Dgillette4
Post Number: 119
Registered: 04-2007
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, November 16, 2007 - 10:10 am: |
|
In the states we call it Yuppie..Keep all the plastic wonders I'll keep using my manual Leica,s Don |
|
