Baseless complaint I saw once....

[sld72382]

I think this counts as a sighting.... ?

Anyway, this was on a complaint site that is now defunct (as a matter of fact, the whole site was dedicated to bashing this store).

This was a few years ago, apparently the man bought a DSLR camera (when they first started to appear on retail shelves and not just boutique camera shops).

The complaint was this (as best I can remember):

"I bought a Canon EOS 20D camera but upon doing research I found that in order to get great image quality I have to buy lenses that cost as much or more than the camera itself. So, I packed it up and tried to return it. This is where my complaint lies.

The CSR looked at me funny when i told her the reason for return (I told her the truth, no need to lie). A guy from the camera dept came over to me from behind the counter when he heard this. He told me, 'needing to buy good lenses to obtain high image quality is the nature of the beast with SLR cameras, always has since the film days and even more so now.' I countered, 'Yeah well I'm not interested in having to buy a thousand dollar plus lens so my camera takes quality shots.' He then told me, 'You don't have to spend that much but if you find spending money on good lenses unacceptable you might be better off with a high-end point and shoot.'

I was shocked! This guy needs to be reprimanded! He basically talked to me like a moron. What he was saying is equal to buying a car that is called 'sporty' but in order to get good performance out of it you have to buy new tires, suspension and exhaust. Totally unacceptable for him to treat me like this!"

Now for something I want to say....

For anyone not knowing about photography, there is a reason why that 70-300mm F/4.-5.6 Quantary lens at Ritz sells for less than $200 while the Canon EF 70-200mm F/4L IS sells for $1200 (or the F/2.8 version sells for around $2300).

Oh, and this guy obviously doesn't realize that the automotive aftermarket parts industry is huge for a reason.

[zombiequeen]

Wow, jerk much?

What kind of complaint is that? A "I was too stupid to actually research what I wanted to buy before I got it, and now it's going to be a bitch for me to do this cheaply so I'm going to be a jerkface to everyone around me, especially those who know what they are talking about." kind of complaint?

[Zellie Crescent]

That guy was a moron.

[sld72382]

Wow, jerk much?

What kind of complaint is that? A "I was too stupid to actually research what I wanted to buy before I got it, and now it's going to be a bitch for me to do this cheaply so I'm going to be a jerkface to everyone around me, especially those who know what they are talking about." kind of complaint?

Yeah, pretty much.

[Irving Patrick Freleigh]

He basically talked to me like a moron.

Well, if the dunce cap fits...

[chainedbarista]

i'm thinking all the research in the world wouldn't have done this idiot any good; if he doesn't know the basics about the camera type, he's in over his head from the get go.

*passes ip freeliegh's cap to the idiot in question*

[BeeMused]

Not to mention that even the best lens doesn't help, if you don't know how to photograph things. Focal length? Aperture? Depth of field? Shutter speed? I'm sure the guy has never heard those words before.

And of course... buying a Canon DSLR... Nikon is the way to go! *walks away to pet her D90*

[mikoyan29]

I bought a Canon 50D myself and I am happy with it and the lens I have with it. I do realize that if I want better pictures then I would have to spend more money for the glass but that will come some day. for now I will be content with not having the larger aperatures. The 50D came about because I bought a 40D and then did some research after seeing nice spots on some of my pictures and I found out that it was a dust magnet. The 50D improved that (almost considerably) but I did like the 40D and my mom loves it.

I don't know this guy but he strikes me as the type that will go up to Mackinac Bridge whip out his camera and then use the flash thinking he'll get a good picture. then he will meander to me and see the nice picture on my screen and then ask how come mine looks nice and his looks like shit.

[Midorikawa]

...uhh....

Am I the only one who noticed that he compared a rather off brand lens to a rather nice mid end name brand lens with image stabilization, and a constant f/stop? It's about like complaining about why <name brand> food that tastes better and is better for you than <store brand> costs more, for those unfamiliar with cameras.

...I suppose I'm glad he didn't get a quote for the cost of a nice Sigma lens. :-P

I'm a Nikon guy myself, and love my D80 to death, but wife has a Canon, so I'm familiar with their lenses, too.

[csquared]

Guy needs to learn the difference between good and great.

Good thing he did not buy the expensive lenses. He would have been back complaining about the quality of the pictures. And we already know that the problem is on the other side of the camera from the lens.

[Midorikawa]

And we already know that the problem is on the other side of the camera from the lens.

Exactly. I have some Nikon glass dating back to the first days of their SLR-ism, and while it's "low grade" glass by today's standards, and tends towards hazing and other "undesirable" effects, when used right, the lens takes some amazing shots. Just takes knowing how to use what you have. A good photographer has a good body, and good glass. A great photographer doesn't matter what he's using (although higher end gear helps tons).

[Seshat]

Heck, I have a little Olympus point-and-shoot (with options for me to customise somewhat), and I'm learning to take nice snapshots with that.

I'm well aware that for truly awesome photographs, I would need to learn a lot more about light and focal length and aperture and shutter speed and all of that. But for now, I'm learning about image selection, framing, figuring out which part of the scene to photograph... all of the artistic basics. The technical basics will come. The point-and-shoot does fine for now.

[Stressball]

And of course... buying a Canon DSLR... Nikon is the way to go! *walks away to pet her D90*

I disagree emphatically Although, the high ISO performance of the D3s is unbelievable Set that thing on iso 24000 and it shoots about the same as my Canon 7D at around 3200.

I prefer Canon's UI though, and their range of lenses tends to be a little wider than the Nikon range.

Incidentally, I own the Canon 70-200 f2.8L that was mentioned in the OP (but without image stabiliser) and I thank god I convinced myself to lay down the $1500AUD on it 18 months ago. I own that, a Canon 17-40 f4L, and the cheap Canon 50 f1.8. I have used Sigma and Tamron lenses, and I can safely say I have not found a single one that can match good quality Canon glass.

<shameless plug> I've got some shots up here www.rossponting.com.au </shameless plug>

[mikoyan29]

I disagree emphatically Although, the high ISO performance of the D3s is unbelievable Set that thing on iso 24000 and it shoots about the same as my Canon 7D at around 3200.

I prefer Canon's UI though, and their range of lenses tends to be a little wider than the Nikon range.

Incidentally, I own the Canon 70-200 f2.8L that was mentioned in the OP (but without image stabiliser) and I thank god I convinced myself to lay down the $1500AUD on it 18 months ago. I own that, a Canon 17-40 f4L, and the cheap Canon 50 f1.8. I have used Sigma and Tamron lenses, and I can safely say I have not found a single one that can match good quality Canon glass.

<shameless plug> I've got some shots up here www.rossponting.com.au </shameless plug>

Nice pictures.

And my shameless plug:
http://michiganexposures.blogspot.com/

[Shalom]

I'll back good old manual focus Minolta glass against anything anywhere near its price range.

I just wish someone would come out with a DSLR in SR mount, since it's obvious Sony won't.

(Yes, someone kludged together an adapter letting you put Minolta MF lenses on an Olympus 4/3 body. That adapter was selling for $175 last I checked. No thanks. There was also a rumor claiming that Seagull, a Chinese company that made Minolta-mount SLRs under license, was going to come out with a DSLR body. Much disappointment resulted from the disclosure that this was an elaborate April Fools hoax. I've got some great lenses and only three film SLR bodies to use them on. Come on, guys, get on the ball...)