Camera gear... This has really got me angry

stu_the_flat

stu_the_flat

Messages
2,443
Name
Stuart
Edit My Images
Yes
I am a subscriber to a magazine I would describe as for enthusiasts and beginners.

Recently I thought of canceling my subscription. in this months publication they had a survey asking what, We the readers though of there magazine.

So I logged on and over half the survey was asking what kit I was going to buy!

Now Of course there is stuff I want, But why the hell should the care? I mean I am very happy with my D60. it has one with the rest of the Nikon range can't offer. Its small enough to carry everywhere!

I'm getting really fed up of the Buy, Buy, Buy culture. Its a rubbish cycle where the enthusiasts and hobbyists spend so much the the feel that they have to start the make money only to offset the loss from buy kit! In turn that takes work from the Pros.

I'm the only one that feels like this?

Stuart
 
this is tricky one, as it is all down to personal preference.

I for one don't agree with always having to be at the "bleeding edge" of technology, however there are some people that do.

Rule of thumb is if it aint broke don't fix it

In other words if you are happy with your kit, keep it :thumbs:
 
The reason it asked what gear you would like to buy is so they can get it and review it or feature it...
Its marketing - once you understand it, you will never fill in a questionnaire ever again =]
 
stu_the_flat said:
I'm getting really fed up of the Buy, Buy, Buy culture.
Click to expand...
Because the cover price doesn't pay for the printing and distribution of the rag, to feed themselves they need advertising revenue, to get advertising revenue they have to encourage you to buy more stuff.
 
If people ask you when you're upgrading, ask them why you need to upgrade.

I was still shooting my D100 bodies til early last year and doing just fine. :)

But like Gary says, they're a magazine, there's no point them reviewing products not many people will be purchasing. It makes sense for them to find out what people want, so that they can get relevant content in the future.
 
stu_the_flat said:
I am a subscriber to a magazine I would describe as for enthusiasts and beginners.

Recently I thought of canceling my subscription. in this months publication they had a survey asking what, We the readers though of there magazine.

So I logged on and over half the survey was asking what kit I was going to buy!

Now Of course there is stuff I want, But why the hell should the care? I mean I am very happy with my D60. it has one with the rest of the Nikon range can't offer. Its small enough to carry everywhere!

I'm getting really fed up of the Buy, Buy, Buy culture. Its a rubbish cycle where the enthusiasts and hobbyists spend so much the the feel that they have to start the make money only to offset the loss from buy kit! In turn that takes work from the Pros.

I'm the only one that feels like this?

Stuart
Click to expand...

Capatalism at its best I am afraid. hate the whole purchasing/throw away culture we have today. And I am only 25
 
The reason they want to know what you're going to buy, is so that they can go to advertisers and say to Mr Canikon that 73% of thier readers intend to buy a new camera in the next year, so you'd better take an ad.

I'm not sure what harm that does, especially if it's true.

We should all be grateful for people that upgrade all the time. That's what drives the market. If nobody did that, or only bought a new camera once every ten years, then either the manufacturers would go out of business, you'd be paying £5k for a basic DSLR.
 
HoppyUK said:
The reason they want to know what you're going to buy, is so that they can go to advertisers and say to Mr Canikon that 73% of thier readers intend to buy a new camera in the next year, so you'd better take an ad.

I'm not sure what harm that does, especially if it's true.

We should all be grateful for people that upgrade all the time. That's what drives the market. If nobody did that, or only bought a new camera once every ten years, then either the manufacturers would go out of business, you'd be paying £5k for a basic DSLR.
Click to expand...
very true, look at the car industry it was very nearly on it's knees.
 
stu_the_flat said:
Recently I thought of canceling my subscription. in this months publication they had a survey asking what, We the readers though of there magazine.

So I logged on and over half the survey was asking what kit I was going to buy!
Click to expand...

I think this is the part the OP is annoyed by - the request for opinions as to thoughts regarding the magazine, but the reality (possibly - I haven't seen the questions so shouldn't leap to conclusions, I guess!) or perception is of a 'different' questionnaire altogether.

I agree that this information is useful for review features etc, it could just be that the OP was a little p'd off that they thought they were undertaking a different exercise.
 
Pretty much every magazine is funded by advertising :shrug: and the yuo scratch my back I'll scratch your's ethos.........

Therefore if photo mag said hey the 2010 Nikon D100 is pretty much the same as the 2009 Nikon D99 other than a few small insignificant bits then people wouldn't have gear lust, wouldn't buy new gear and Nikon wouldn't make so much dosh...... Oh course this goes for other manufacturers as well........ (and yes I know those models don't exist)

There are a couple of well known mags out there one of which will 9/10 times go for the Canon in the Canon v Nikon megatest and yep you guessed it the other one is Nikon flavoured....

Same with golf where Callaway and Taylormade are the big boys....... TM bring out on average 2-3 new drivers a year..... people always have to have the newest shiniest because this one will make the ball go about an inch further.......
 
Advertisers dictate to magazines. I used to write for a magazine and I can give you a personal example.

The magazine was Target Gun and I wrote on the design and manufacture of target ammunition and reviewed guns and ammunition etc.

One particular advertiser, who was selling .22" ammunition, said in their advert, 'use our .224" ammunition; it will take account of any wear in your barrel.' It was the most expensive ammunition on the market.

I wrote an article testing and comparing the quality of 16 makes of .22" ammunition and the said ammunition came very close to the bottom of the league. It was beaten into a cocked hat by ammunition half the price.

It turned out that all .22" ammunition was, in fact, .224" and this was pointed out in the article.

The article was never published because the advertiser threatened to pull their advert if it was published.
 
Have you noticed that more than half the magazine is advertising?

I guess you love to read the ads or you wouldn't buy it.

Personally I can find everything I need online.

Graham
 
~Sam~ said:
I think this is the part the OP is annoyed by - the request for opinions as to thoughts regarding the magazine, but the reality (possibly - I haven't seen the questions so shouldn't leap to conclusions, I guess!) or perception is of a 'different' questionnaire altogether.

I agree that this information is useful for review features etc, it could just be that the OP was a little p'd off that they thought they were undertaking a different exercise.
Click to expand...

I don't think they were taking part in a different kind of survey. These things are usually aimed at getting some quality feedback on what readers think about the magazine, which, in truth, publications generally have very little idea about because the feedback they tend to get is very biased either for or against them - they never hear from the silent majority.

These things are quite expensive to do, so they try to make it as absolutely beneficial as possible and tagging on a few questions that might help their advertising sales, well, if that helps them then presumably that should make the magazine more relevant to readers.

It's pretty basic market research, and quite harmless.

Edit: BTW, there's a similar TP survey currently running on here, at the top of this page.
 
Sectionate said:
Capatalism at its best I am afraid. hate the whole purchasing/throw away culture we have today. And I am only 25
Click to expand...

There will always be some people who upgrade for the sake of it, but I would say most upgrade because they need to.

While there is nothing wrong with a D40, you may wish to use non-AFS lenses, or you may need the better ISO the D90 or D700 can do... or you may need more fps or external controls...

Glass is even more important. A good lens, like the 24-70 2.8 will give great IQ compared to the kit lens. People upgrade because it is better, not because they feel they need to. When I upgraded to a D300 I did so because I needed the external controls and preferred the feel of it. I also upgraded to a 70-200 VR because I needed to drop to 2.8 at times and wanted to use f/4 a lot and get the best IQ I could.
 
gazedd said:
The reason it asked what gear you would like to buy is so they can get it and review it or feature it...
Its marketing - once you understand it, you will never fill in a questionnaire ever again =]
Click to expand...

this is the answer you want, they ask for what kit your considering buying in the near future, they review it and then you buy the magazine and that makes them money plus more money from the popularity of the review and money from the advertising.

its very clever marketing.
 
mastertrinity said:
this is the answer you want, they ask for what kit your considering buying in the near future, they review it and then you buy the magazine and that makes them money plus more money from the popularity of the review and money from the advertising.

its very clever marketing.
Click to expand...

Not really. What to review is easy - the latest products from the major manufacturers, with advertising potential attached. There aren't enough pages to do anything more.

The question they really want the answer to is, what can we do to make you buy the magazine more often, and stop reading the damn internet that is killing our business.
 
blue max said:
Have you noticed that more than half the magazine is advertising?

I guess you love to read the ads or you wouldn't buy it.

Personally I can find everything I need online.

Graham
Click to expand...

Was thinking about why I buy it.

I came it the conclusions that I really like large printed photographs. I don't think I can fully appreciate a photo on the computer. Its my personal view.

The adverts are very non intrusive they are all at the back and I seldom look at them... I use the Internet! :D
 
HoppyUK said:
I don't think they were taking part in a different kind of survey. These things are usually aimed at getting some quality feedback on what readers think about the magazine, which, in truth, publications generally have very little idea about because the feedback they tend to get is very biased either for or against them - they never hear from the silent majority.

These things are quite expensive to do, so they try to make it as absolutely beneficial as possible and tagging on a few questions that might help their advertising sales, well, if that helps them then presumably that should make the magazine more relevant to readers.

It's pretty basic market research, and quite harmless.

Edit: BTW, there's a similar TP survey currently running on here, at the top of this page.
Click to expand...

I understand that completely. However, I got the impression that the OPs impression that " over half the survey was asking what kit I was going to buy!" caused some frustration. As I said, I haven't seen the survey and have no issue with marketing Q's attached to a survey but if it is to the extent claimed, it kind of turns one survey into another and I can see why that may irritate - especially if it is a publication the OP was considering canceling a subscription to. :shrug:
 
~Sam~ said:
I understand that completely. However, I got the impression that the OPs impression that " over half the survey was asking what kit I was going to buy!" caused some frustration. As I said, I haven't seen the survey and have no issue with marketing Q's attached to a survey but if it is to the extent claimed, it kind of turns one survey into another and I can see why that may irritate - especially if it is a publication the OP was considering canceling a subscription to. :shrug:
Click to expand...

That may be true Sam, I've not seen the survey either. I'm just going by the dozens of similar surveys I used to commission in a previous life.

If it has been pitched in such as way as to appear intrusive - and some people are very touchy about this kind of information for some reason - then they've slipped up. They usually put in some kind of sweetener, like your name goes in a hat for a free tripod or something.

There is no compulsion to fill it in! But TBH most people like filling these things in, voicing their opinions, hopefully having a useful influence. The surveys I used to do often had 90% return rates (they were in-mag leaflets, fold up and post off, inserted into a few thousand random copies).
 
gazedd said:
The reason it asked what gear you would like to buy is so they can get it and review it or feature it...
Its marketing - once you understand it, you will never fill in a questionnaire ever again =]
Click to expand...

Indeed, demographics = marketing spend = advertising rates ...

It's just like the (poorly constructed) survey running on this forum.

As with all surveys, lie, lie hard and lie often ;)
 
HoppyUK said:
We should all be grateful for people that upgrade all the time. That's what drives the market. If nobody did that, or only bought a new camera once every ten years, then either the manufacturers would go out of business, you'd be paying £5k for a basic DSLR.
Click to expand...

Thank god for digital, they must all be thinking......
 
Coaster said:
Advertisers dictate to magazines. I used to write for a magazine and I can give you a personal example.

The magazine was Target Gun and I wrote on the design and manufacture of target ammunition and reviewed guns and ammunition etc.

One particular advertiser, who was selling .22" ammunition, said in their advert, 'use our .224" ammunition; it will take account of any wear in your barrel.' It was the most expensive ammunition on the market.

I wrote an article testing and comparing the quality of 16 makes of .22" ammunition and the said ammunition came very close to the bottom of the league. It was beaten into a cocked hat by ammunition half the price.

It turned out that all .22" ammunition was, in fact, .224" and this was pointed out in the article.

The article was never published because the advertiser threatened to pull their advert if it was published.
Click to expand...

A poor decision of a single publisher (on a low-selling magazine) is hardly indicative of the entire print industry.
 
stu_the_flat said:
Was thinking about why I buy it.

I came it the conclusions that I really like large printed photographs. I don't think I can fully appreciate a photo on the computer. Its my personal view.

The adverts are very non intrusive they are all at the back and I seldom look at them... I use the Internet! :D
Click to expand...

Good answer. Although they are printed in CMYK (out of just four colour plates), so you lose the vivid colours straight away.

Graham
 
blue max said:
Good answer. Although they are printed in CMYK (out of just four colour plates), so you lose the vivid colours straight away.

Graham
Click to expand...

What colour can't you reproduce in that way? There are only three colours used to create a photographic image in the first place.
 
HoppyUK said:
What colour can't you reproduce in that way? There are only three colours used to create a photographic image in the first place.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm a graphic designer and regularly convert rgb images to cmyk. Bear in mind that cyan is not blue.

Perhaps you can try yourself on some of your brighter images and you will see what I mean.

I produce a plant magazine and the printed image is nowhere near as vibrant as the original as captured by the camera sadly.

Graham
 
HoppyUK said:
What colour can't you reproduce in that way? There are only three colours used to create a photographic image in the first place.
Click to expand...

The vast, vast majority of colours can't be reproduced in CMYK:

gamut.gif


Obviously it reproduces the best section of the colours possible, but it's far from all of them.
 
blue max said:
Well, I'm a graphic designer and regularly convert rgb images to cmyk. Bear in mind that cyan is not blue.

Perhaps you can try yourself on some of your brighter images and you will see what I mean.

I produce a plant magazine and the printed image is nowhere near as vibrant as the original as captured by the camera sadly.

Graham
Click to expand...

Red, green and blue are the primary colours, from which any different colour can be created. That is the basis of all colour photogaphy and reproduction systems and each colour is 2/3rds of the spectrum. The problem with that is white is made up of equal quantities of red/green/blue with the result that images are very dark, eg the original Autochromes of the first colour photos. More recently, instant Polarchrome was the same.

So what is used now are the subtractive primary colours of yellow, magenta and cyan, which are 1/3rd of the spectrum. White is created by the absence of any colour, so images are much brighter.

If you have a problem with your plant magazine, you need to have a word with your repro facility. They can give you any amount of viabrancy you want just by pulling up the levels.
 
Lynton said:
Therefore if photo mag said hey the 2010 Nikon D100 is pretty much the same as the 2009 Nikon D99 other than a few small insignificant bits then people wouldn't have gear lust, wouldn't buy new gear and Nikon wouldn't make so much dosh...... Oh course this goes for other manufacturers as well........ (and yes I know those models don't exist)
Click to expand...

Oh thank you!! I've just rushed off to Amazon looking to upgrade my upgraded upgrade as I only got it at Xmas 2009!! Now you tell me there isn't a 2010 Nikon D100. :lol:
 
Dinsdale said:
Oh thank you!! I've just rushed off to Amazon looking to upgrade my upgraded upgrade as I only got it at Xmas 2009!! Now you tell me there isn't a 2010 Nikon D100. :lol:
Click to expand...

And there was me thinking there was only a 2002 Nikon D100. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top