Showing posts with label Nikon. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nikon. Show all posts

2009-10-11

Canon vs. Nikon Marketing Strategies

I meant to post this last year but somehow didn't get a chance to finish writing it, thus please back-date this blog to 2008.

Canon and Nikon have been fighting in the SLR and DSLR market for several decades. From the 60s to mid 80s, Nikon dominated the professional film SLR market share. When Canon came out with better technologies such as auto focus and other electronics automation after the mid 80s, many pros (especially those who shoot sports) switched to the Canon EF-mount system. For the next few decades, Canon SLR (and lately DSLR) dominated both the pro and consumer SLR market. Today the competition is just starting to heat up. Every few months, both companies come out with something better and/or lower priced than the other brand. Both companies get a bulk of their revenue *not* from their professional grade camera equipment, but with a flood of plastic, cheaply made consumer grade equipments (sub $500, sub $750, and sub $1000 SLR cameras and cheap kit lenses).

The consumer grade segment of the market is most vital to both companies because they account for a bulk of their revenue and thus is their bread and butter. One way to gauge the competition is to go to a store. I go to Costco frequently and chuckle whenever I see both Canon and Nikon DSLR boxes side by side. As of late 2008, the two consumer grade cameras that Costco sells are the Canon XSi and D60. While both try to compete for similar price range, looking at the boxes, one may feel that they're actually aiming for different types of consumers!

Below is a 2008 Canon XSi picture I took using a Canon SD740 point-and-shoot camera at Costco. The box shows a frozen action of a boy catching a football. Guys love sports. Guys love frozen action, and zoom. There's something about BIG ZOOM, having a big zoom is like having a nice sportscar with XXX horsepower and YYY torque. Guys want the biggest plasma/LCD TV. Fastest cars. Most megahertz computers. Things of that sort. This Canon Rebel is a guy's camera. Just look at the specs, it's sexy!





Below is the exact same item as above but has a different packaging, in 2009. Look at the fancy jargons like "Optical Image Stabilizer Double Zoom Lens Kit", and below, a bunch of fancy stuff like "12.2 MEGAPIXELS", "Digic III", "3 inch LCD", "3.5 Frames per second", "EOS", "Picture Style". Wow! If I were a guy who loves to look at specifications all day, I'd get a Canon Rebel because it's obviously better on a spec-by-spec comparisons.


Let's now look at the Nikon D60. You see a woman with a bunch of smaller images on the side (baby smiling, flower, kids, etc). There's no sports. There's no emphasis on frozen action. There is no fancy jargons to woe you. There IS however lots of emphasis on people... portraits... softness... prettiness... connection to people. No jargon, just "FAST, FUN, & EASY." Nikon's strategy is about connecting to people in the simplest possible way.





Let's look at another Nikon, the D5000 (2009). Unlike Canon that screams technical jargons and specifications, Nikon box simply says "Smart, Sharp, Simply Brilliant." Again the emphasis is on people. Happy people, with happy emotions.


Let's look at yet another Nikon, the D3000. Similarly, it's got happy people. Kids. The camera captured the moment. "Incredible pictures, incredibly easy."


So what's going on? Canon's strategy is to use what they're traditionally good at: sports and specs. Do you remember the late 1980s when Canon EOS Rebel flooded TV with their ads blitz? "It's so easy to use, amateurs can capture Andre Agassi like a pro!" Canon loves to show pictures of sports, frozen in time. In addition, Canon uses higher specifications (higher megapixel, more frames per second, higher processor name, etc) to lure certain types of buyers-- the Specification Peepers. Boys. Men. Guys. People who generally want the highest megapixels, biggest LCDs, most horsepower, most torque, biggest lens, biggest of everything. Canon is the ultimate boy's toy, because boys can brag to each other that they have a biggest spec'ed camera, the Canon. You know,"my cannon/piano/whatever is at least 3 inches longer and thicker than yours so I'm a more dominant male", that sort of thing. Spec for spec, Canon will have more features, for the same price or lower. Canon [on paper] is the most incredible machine on earth. Not surprisingly, Canon is an engineering company where engineers design and optimize the camera by spec, and they will out-spec any competitor, period.

What does that leave Nikon with? Nikon's strategy isn't to use specification to sell.
Nikon doesn't need to compete on specs, because not all specs are relevant to the discerned buyer. For example, higher megapixels doesn't mean better image quality (in fact, more megapixel means more noise at night). There are other things to consider, like contrast and color rendition that Nikon excels at. For example (on similar settings), Nikon tends have warmer and more accurate auto white balancing hence psychologically more eye pleasing portraitures (this is all according to DXO Mark). In addition, Nikon tends to have lower megapixels but better night time capability (higher ISO with lower noise), whereas Canon tends to have higher megapixels (great during day time) but less night time capability (higher ISO with higher noise). Of course, color/contrast/night pictures are difficult to sell so instead of trying to describe it as specs, Nikon marketing decides to simply put portraiture of people on their boxes hoping people could just see how great their cameras are. There are other intangible items that Nikon hopes discerned users can feel such as better built quality (vs. the cheaper plastic housing of Rebels); Nikon is traditionally known to be more rugged and this has been true since the 60s when more journalist used Nikons to take pictures of Korean and Vietnam war than any other brands, and that more Nikons went to space & NASA than any other brand. They are also known to have excellent usability, and usability consistency in their product lines (a consumer D40's UI isn't too different than that of the professional D700).

None of the differences should be a surprise. The two camera brands have had very different philosophies since the 50s and 60s. Canon embraces the latest and greatest technologies while mass producing them (at the cost of durability) whereas Nikon is conservative and will only embrace new technology when absolutely necessary. Also, they have had very different philosophies in what types of images their cameras should capture. In the old days for example, Canon traditionally values more resolution (at mid-aperture), whereas Nikon values more contrast at wide-open. Below is an illustration of a 1950's pictures (directly from
Dante Stella's article on resolution vs. contrast trade-offs in lens design, http://www.dantestella.com/technical/nikoleic.html):


On the left is Canon, which gives great resolution at mid-aperture. On the other hand, to the right is Nikon which gives great contrast wide-open. There is no "wrong" choice in trade-offs, just preferences. Photographers shooting sports or landscape is likely to opt for the company that values great resolution (higher MTF 30 lp/mm and higher megapixels on the Canon), and photographers shooting portraits and/or at night is likely to opt for the company that values contrast (higher MTF 10 lp/mm and better ISO on the Nikon).

Today, the differences in contrast and resolution between the two companies is no longer a big factors in choosing the "right brands". Both companies employ engineering techniques to yield some of the best products that we have seen to date, and both companies make lenses that yield very similar resolution and contrasts. Today, what makes them different is that Canon is consistently making higher megapixel cameras (21MP) that looks amazing during day time and decent at night, whereas Nikon is consistently making lower megapixel cameras (12.1MPP) that looks decent during day but superb at night. Like the old days, Canon still uses more plastic parts today to save costs and pass the savings to consumers (e.g. 5Dmk2, T1i) whereas Nikon has slightly better built quality to endure harsher conditions better (e.g. D700, D90) but cost more.

In short both companies embrace very different philosophies and employ different engineering techniques and both create great products. Sometimes there is no right camera to use for every single possible situation. For certain situations, Canon can be marginally better than Nikon, and vice versa. I for one prefer Canon and its superior pro-telephoto lens selections for events such as sports/bird shooting, but at other times I prefer Nikon for their Creative Lighting System for shooting portraitures, product shots, and night time.


-----------------------------------------
Links to other sites:
Trade-offs in lens engineering:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/understanding-series/understanding-mtf.shtml

Contrast vs. resolution philosophies of Leica, Contax, Canon, and Nikon:
http://www.photoethnography.com/ClassicCameras/index-frameset.html?focusing.html~mainFrame


2008-11-20

Post processing -- DPP, NX2, Lightroom

This is an ultra lightweight review of editing software from Nikon, Canon, and Adobe on a recent Intel based laptop running Windows XP with 2G RAM (Lenovo X61). Before we get to the review, let me clarify what post processing is. Post processing is an essential part of being a good photographer. Many people will argue that people in the old days simply turned their films to photolabs to develop naturally without any post processing, and that processing makes photos look unnatural.

The fact of the matter is during the early days of photography people had to develop each and every picture from negatives manually. They have to compensate for exposure (test strips), and create details by changing contrast filters, and burn and dodge to get the greatest details. People can try to redevelop Ansel Adams negatives but the prints will look lousy-- all of his magic happened in the darkroom and development process, and none can be reproduced faithfully.

As to pictures being unnatural-- first of all, there is no such a thing as natural pictures. The moment natural light passes through human made lenses, then gets recorded on film or sensors, then reproduced back to paper or LCD screen, it's anything but natural. Dynamic ranges will be completely off, colors will be changed, details will be lost.

The difference between processing yesterday and today is that yesterday, we processed in stinky darkrooms (or color photolabs), and today we process in the comforts of our homes with our computers.

----------------------------------

Canon DPP:
As with most Canon packages, Canon Digital Photo Professional is free with all of their DSLR cameras along with many other software utilities. DPP is lightweight in terms of disk and memory footprint and it is blazingly fast. The GUI is very intuitive. Unfortunately, it's for Canon exclusively so if you need to edit other RAW files, you're out of luck. Installation is a breeze though many fancy features are missing. One of the biggest features that is missing is cropping.


Nikon NX2:
As with most Nikon packages, Nikon NX2 is *not* free. It is 60 days trials and $200 to buy. It is free only if you buy the prosumer and pro camera bodies (e.g. D3, D300, etc). While the GUI is awful, it's actually pretty powerful. I like how you can select certain color/ranges, and selectively accentuate or diminish tones/color/contrast very easily. It's better than the magic lasso that Photoshop has (the last Photoshop I used was v. 7.0). I think it has pretty much all the features of Lightroom for 1/2 the cost, but has a very retro looking UI that's clunky (requires lots of clicks in weird places). It is SLOW SLOW SLOW. I've heard that it works best if you have Windows Vista with at least 8G of RAM. They say that Nikon's software is inversely as good as their hardware, and the NX2 GUI and the huge hardware requirement really shows.


Adobe Lightroom 2:
Adobe LR2 is becoming the industry standard tool for organizing thousands of photos and light editing. Many pros are skipping Photoshop completely because they only need to color balance and crop, and LR2 does these tasks blazingly fast. It is built for fast and efficient workflows-- from tagging pictures, ranking pictures, mass 1 step color correction, mass file generation, etc. It also allows very light editing such as spot editing, graduated ND filter, dual toning, curves, etc. LR2 trial is 30 days. I got my copy for only $130 during the "Oh no we can't sell anything we gotta lower the price" Amazon special, but normally it is $279 on Amazon and $190 on eBay.


In the end, I didn't want to use Apple Aperture because it's Apple specific. I liked DPP but it's not powerful enough. NX2 was powerful but it's a beast and it crashed on me all too often. Lightroom has its problems but it's the best out there today.