[clackers]

I think we should stop valuing the opinions of youtubers. It seems more like Northrup is declaring DSLRs are dead through Canon stating the 1DX mk III will be the last flagship DSLR they offer. Yet Canon released that body just last year and also says it will be a few more years before they're gone from production. So even if it was true, it won't be overnight. He's just creating drama to get a discussion going. Plus Pentax doesn't seem to be going anywhere. Nikon still fields a few DSLRs at the time as well. Lots of DSLRs.

And this is why I say stop valuing the opinions of youtubers. They get paid on views. They get the most views by creating contention and discussion/argument. So they often say controversial statements for the money they make off of them. People will post their videos in threads just like this, which will net them more views and more money.


It's a racket. These multi-millionaire youtubers don't need any more help on extending their wine collections or paying for that 3rd vacation home in the mountains. And we're funding that by discussing their stupid videos.

Well said, Mee.

Can I add that the YouTubers are obligated by the algorithm to churn out clickbait, on a regular basis, with less than dignified titles and thumbnails? Otherwise their content doesn't appear in our feeds.

Their hope of being paid by gear manufacturers to be Influencers hinges on their views, and I heard one guitar vlogger say that less than 100,000 subscribers is laughable to companies.

So getting attention is everything, not producing sound content.

[NZ_Ross]

Their hope of being paid by gear manufacturers to be Influencers hinges on their views. Getting attention is everything, not content that is sound.

At the end of the day that has to be a very debasing way of making a living.

[BigMackCam]

Can I add that the YouTubers are obligated by the algorithm to churn out clickbait, on a regular basis, with less than dignified titles and thumbnails? Otherwise their content doesn't appear in our feeds.

Their hope of being paid by gear manufacturers to be Influencers hinges on their views, and I heard one guitar vlogger say that less than 100,000 subscribers is laughable to companies.

So getting attention is everything, not producing sound content.

At the end of the day that has to be a very debasing way of making a living.

Take away the payment from gear manufacturers, and the basic principle is no different than modern-day lower-tier "journalism", e.g. Daily Mail Online

[Lord Lucan]

Can I add that the YouTubers are obligated by the algorithm to churn out clickbait, on a regular basis, with less than dignified titles and thumbnails? Otherwise their content doesn't appear in our feeds.

Could you explain that? I do have a couple of YouTube videos myself, and I was not obliged by anything, but then I don't expect (or get) any payment or more than a few views. Are you saying that they cannot be linked into an external website like PF? I don't intend to try linking them here (they are not about photography anyway) and I don't know if anyone else has tried linking them to any other website (I doubt it anyway).

I did my videos as a bit of fun and they are just straight-forward and factual to the best of my knowledge. I don't really care who or how many watch it. I think it is easy to recognise such "amateur" videos, which lack any sponsorship pressure and often go much deeper than surface gloss, and some are even tear-downs to show poor design and poor quality of stuff. I used the word "amateur" not in a derogatory sense, in fact the opposite in not having a money motive, and often knowing a great deal about the subject. For example one of my videos is about an open source video game (a very well known one) in which I had a hand in writing and naturally know in depth

---

Last edited by Lord Lucan; 12-31-2021 at 05:14 PM. Reason: Tpyo

[tranq78]

Could you explain that? I do have a couple of YouTube videos myself, and I was not obliged by anything, but then I don't expect (or get) any payment or more than a few views. Are you saying that they cannot be linked into an external website like PF? I don't intend to try linking them here (they are not about photography anyway) and I don't know if anyone else has tried linking them to any other website (I doubt it anyway).

I did my videos as a bit of fun and they are just straight-forward and factual to the best of my knowledge. I don't really care who or how many watch it. I think it is easy to recognise such "amateur" videos, which lack any sponsorship pressure and often go much deeper than surface gloss, and some are even tear-downs to show poor design and poor quality of stuff. I used the word "amateur" not in a derogatory sense, in fact the opposite in not having a money motive, and often knowing a great deal about the subject. For example one of my videos is about an open source video game (a very well known one) in which I had a hand in writing and naturally know in depth

I think he means that Youtube "influencers" can make 6 to 7 figure incomes. It's not just a cut of advertising revenue. The influencer can also be paid by companies for product placement, promotions and positive reviews. Sometimes a third party will sponsor a Youtube or podcast which means money is being paid to the influencer and that's why there's a 2 minute digression shilling some product or service. Finally the influencer can be paid by viewers on Patreon or crowdfunding methods. Some big influencers pull in 7 figures but they aren't allowed to talk about it as part of Youtube's terms of service.

That's why there's talk about click-bait, algo's, eyeballs, requests for clicking like, subscribe and comment. You may or may not agree with this but some people are making a darn good living off social media.

But this sort of thing has always been going on in plain sight. For example pre-internet there was (and still is) pay-to-play by musicians. Hand $20 to a DJ and he'll spin your tune, this of course got much more sophisticated as the radio and music industry evolved.

I personally don't like having my chain yanked like this so I don't like, subscribe, comment.

[Lord Lucan]

I'd tell you what I think of Northrup, but I'm pretty sure anyone who cares knows.

The trouble is that his style is such that he comes over as very authoritative. He isn't, but people believe him.

As for Tony & Chelsea's YouTube channel, they've managed to gain 1.5 million subscribers

It is odd what makes Youtubers successful (as measured by subscribers and hits). A lot of it is simply charm and easy listening. I saw a video by a young lady on very basic stuff (the exposure triangle) and it had (AFAIR) over 2 million hits despite there being dozens of other videos on the same subject. Nothing wrong there, but she said nothing that most PF members, or any other photog who has passed beginner, could not have said - she was just standing talking and holding a camera (Canon of course). However she would beat me on charm by at least a thousand points

I think we should stop valuing the opinions of youtubers

There is more to Youtube than the Northrups and other influencers (or would-be ones) like Robin Wong, KaiW, and Cameraville (and the cat videos). Some of them even have some interesting things to say, but you must sift the wheat from the chaff. I skip through their embedded adverts for a start. I get a lot of value from Youtube in the area of car and garden machinery repairs - there is no sales hype going on when the Youtuber is under a car, up to his elbows in grease, heaving on a stubborn bolt - more like redacted swear words.

[BigMackCam]

OK... I folded and watched the video

Having sat through it, I'm wondering how anyone that's pro-DSLR could have much of anything bad to say about it In most senses, it's a pro-DSLR presentation!

He starts off being quite open about the click-bait title... actually joking about it

In the middle half of the video, he:

- explains how he & Chelsea thought manufacturers would continue making DSLRs for existing user base
- says he believes the reason they're not is the chip shortage, manufacturing and shipping limitations causing them to focus on the latest, greatest, most expensive gear (mirroless)
- mentions that educated buyers he talks to won't buy DSLRs even when it's clearly the better choice for them (inferring that DSLRs are the still better choice for some)
- mentions how manufacturers have been marketing the benefits of mirrorless ("whether or not they actually show up in your pictures"), and how folks have shifted to mirrorless because the marketing is powerful
- recommends DSLRs for several use cases and lower budgets (e.g. wildlife kit under $5k!!)
- even states that under $1,000, DSLRs have better AF, better useability, better battery life, and says inexpensive MILCs can be frustrating for the average photographer
- makes it clear that when he says "DSLRs are dead", he means it's a technology that's no longer receiving new innovation (he's wrong, IMHO, because Ricoh is innovating... slowly... with its Pentax DSLRs - but his point is reasonable enough in terms of the bigger brands)
- again recommends that certain users buy a used or even new DSLR instead of mirrorless if they fit in one of the categories he previously mentioned
- says "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" - i.e. there's no need to go mirrorless if DSLRs work for you
- points out that the higher end MILCs - when combined with anything other than ultra-wide lenses - don't have the size and weight advantage that was once touted as a MILC benefit, and that image quality is just as good on both platforms
- mentions the legitimate MILC benefits of silent electronic shutter in certain use cases (golf and wedding photography, for example) and use of EVF for videographers

Most of the rest of the video is about why he thinks the technology, software and security in smartphones is better than any ILC, whether DSLR or mirrorless.

...

So... I'm left wondering, unless it's a case that you simply don't like Tony & Chelsea Northrup and their YT channel (and if that's the case, I get it - we all have different tastes), why the hate for this video? I'll say again - it's pro-DSLR I'll bet there's more than a few MILC users feeling pretty indignant about it

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 01-01-2022 at 01:41 PM.

[gatorguy]

OK... I folded and watched the video

Having sat through it, I'm wondering how anyone that's pro-DSLR could have much of anything bad to say about it In most senses, it's a pro-DSLR presentation!....

So... I'm left wondering, unless it's a case that you simply don't like Tony & Chelsea Northrup and their YT channel (and if that's the case, I get it - we all have different tastes), why the hate for this video? I'll say again - it's pro-DSLR I'll bet there's more than a few MILC users feeling pretty indignant about it

I came to the same conclusion as you. I suspect at least some of the dismissive comments in the thread are coming from those who did not watch it before posting. It's definitely pro-DSLR.

[NZ_Ross]

OK... I folded and watched the video

Do you need therapy now?

I agree with your summary, having watched the video at the start of this conversation.

[BigMackCam]

Do you need therapy now?

Many might claim I do, though not as a result of this video

[StiffLegged]

I wonder if there was any truth in the rumour someone just thought up that Canon declared the Northrups dead?? Probably just click-bait, move along …

OK... I folded and watched the video
...
So... I'm left wondering, unless it's a case that you simply don't like Tony & Chelsea Northrup and their YT channel (and if that's the case, I get it - we all have different tastes), why the hate for this video? I'll say again - it's pro-DSLR I'll bet there's more than a few MILC users feeling pretty indignant about it

Guilty as charged, and for the reason stated: don’t like their channel, don’t like constant gear talk. There is one channel that talks a lot of gear and I will occasionally watch it, because the presenter is lucid, interesting and the gear (Leica) is so beyond my reach - and unsuitable for my needs - that it’s amusing to hear his quite biased opinions as an actual user - and a very fine photographer.

There was one Northrup video from years ago where Tony answered someone’s query with an exasperated groan: after finally getting a really good image of a large raptor he had been asked what his camera settings were for the shot. He explained instead how many times he’d been to try for this image, how long he’d stayed on site, how much he’d had to practice for the right moment, how often the light was poor or the bird didn’t show etc etc and this query was what his settings were???? That was a worthwhile short video. The typical output (and the presumed brand war) doesn’t interest me.

[Wheatfield]

And Northrup says it's a big mistake.

What do you all think of that?

Tony is desperately looking for ways to stay relevant. In this instance I agree with him, but as time marches on, he has fewer and fewer things to say that are worth listening to.

The people who have already decided the DSLR is dead, and that is the majority of the market, aren't going to listen as all they want is confirmation.

[tranq78]

The people who have already decided the DSLR is dead, and that is the majority of the market, aren't going to listen, as all they want is confirmation.

Naw DSLR ain't dead. It may be on life support but it's not quite buried. Just wait until the mirrorless camera users turn 40 years old.

Old age is very democratic, it will get everyone in the end. It is the DSLR's best friend.

Old peeps rule!

[The Squirrel Mafia]

I think we should stop valuing the opinions of youtubers. It seems more like Northrup is declaring DSLRs are dead through Canon stating the 1DX mk III will be the last flagship DSLR they offer. Yet Canon released that body just last year and also says it will be a few more years before they're gone from production. So even if it was true, it won't be overnight. He's just creating drama to get a discussion going. Plus Pentax doesn't seem to be going anywhere. Nikon still fields a few DSLRs at the time as well. Lots of DSLRs.

And this is why I say stop valuing the opinions of youtubers. They get paid on views. They get the most views by creating contention and discussion/argument. So they often say controversial statements for the money they make off of them. People will post their videos in threads just like this, which will net them more views and more money.


It's a racket. These multi-millionaire youtubers don't need any more help on extending their wine collections or paying for that 3rd vacation home in the mountains. And we're funding that by discussing their stupid videos.

Indeed! No click from me.

[normhead]

I didn't watch the video, and I explained why. So sue me.