Having just read some comments about the “reliability of VoIP” I am reminded of a problem that I see on a daily basis when users confuse the difference between technology and an implementation of a particular service. These are obviously interrelated but many people do not grasp the true difference leading otherwise good technology to be given a bad name because of a poor service.

Voice-over-IP (VoIP) has been marketed in many ways but the most common association I would expect an average Internet user to link it with is “cheap phone calls” as it cuts out the traditional telecommunications operator from part or all of the phone call, thus reducing the cost primarily to that of the Internet connection itself. VoIP technology is used by many companies that use calling cards, etc. and sometimes (I would not go as far as saying often as I am not sure how well it can be quantified) quality of the phone call can be quite poor as VoIP providers reduce the bandwidth available (or compress using an inferior codec) to the user in order to fit more calls within a pipe. This, bundled with other service problems often results in users blaming VoIP as a technology for not being ready or mature, rather than considering the implementation of the particular service.

The same label currently applies to “Virtual Private Servers” (VPSs) in many cases as they are considered ‘cheap alternatives to dedicated servers’ whereas a VPS based service can in fact be superior by allowing easier failover/migration options in the event of problems or scalability issues and better redundancy in many cases.
Fundementally it comes back to the same problem that affects today’s society–It’s all about price. This factor drives decision making so much that technologies are often associated to prices alone. There is a gross misunderstanding that the level of service provided by two companies with varying prices must be the same, and therefore the cheaper option must be better by definition. It is often not considered that differences in price are quite possibly related to service quality, redundancy, expansion capacity, etc.

Consumers – Wake up!

Consumers are often treated with kid gloves and there is a perception they need strong protection in terms of industry regulation to ensure no ‘cowboys’ can enter a market. This is a frequent suggestion by individuals who find themselves at the mercy of a company that has gone out of business, etc. These types of regulation are a huge burden on smaller businesses and may well prohibit new innovative entrants from engaging in the market as the cost of entry is higher.

It is important to accept consumers require extra protection than that afforded to businesses for the simple reason contract values are smaller and let’s face it, we can’t “negotiate” a contract with the bus company on common terms when we board one during rush hour. However, this needs common sense to be applied and consumers should share the responsibility by not choosing suppliers, no matter which industry it is in, by price alone and not labelling an entire technology based on experiences from one provider, usually a low cost one.

For some time I have been considering the idea of buying a Digital SLR camera. I enjoyed SLR photography with my non-digital Pentax many years ago and it’s something I’d like to catch up on. I have been using a Sony DSC-F828 which is essentially a point-and-shoot camera but with many of the controls (aperture, exposure, ISO sensitivity, bracketing, etc.) that many of the DSLRs have, but with the added benefit of many of the features that Sony cameras are known for like recording movies, etc. Part of what was putting me off was the costs of a full frame DSLR (i.e. one with a 35mm rather than an APS-C sensor), but something like the Canon EOS-5D would cost over £2,000 plus lenses. I was reluctant to go for Canon EF-S lenses since sooner or later I expect I will be buying a full frame camera so these would become redundant. Also, the Sony F828 is already 8 megapixels so I would have wanted a 10, 12 or even 16 megapixel camera ideally, but I wouldn’t be prepared to spend £2-6k for a camera for a hobby.
On Monday I finally decided that I should stop thinking about it and actually make a decision, so I purchased a Canon EOS-350D with an 18-55mm EF-S and 55-200mm EF lenses as a bundle with a battery grip (which didn’t add much to the cost as a bundle, but which proved to be a very nice addition as I shall go into later).

I was tempted by the new Sony DSLR-A100 or first in the “alpha” series since Sony acquired Minolta’s camera business. The interface is from Minolta it seems and the support for Sony Memory Stick Duo is a converter with the Compact Flash card. One of the reasons I am a Sony fan is the Memory Stick and the fact it works on my laptop (although admittedly so does SD now). Sony is also very good at explaining the compatibility of all of their products whilst Canon is a bit more “professional” about it in that you need to find the information for yourself. A really nice feature I would have wanted, and present on the DSLR-A100 is anti-shake compensation (SuperSteadyShot in Sony branding) since it’s on the mounting of the CCD sensor rather than the lens which means every lens becomes an image stabilising one. In cost terms, this would make the Sony solution far cheaper than Canon IS lenses, something that may yet make me consider Sony in the future. Certainly if they begin supporting Memory Stick Pro directly in cameras with full size sensors, I would be very tempted.

In the end, my reason for going Canon was two-fold. Firstly, my investment in EF lenses would still pay back if I upgraded to a better camera. In the meantime I’ll have to take advantage of the 1.6x magnificantion factor EF lenses give me against a smaller megapixel rating. Secondly, I’ve heard a lot of good things about Canon cameras from friends who use them.

A few disappointements with then Canon 350D:

The menu interface on the Canon is a bit counter-intuitive such as switching between black & white and colour for example. I am getting used to it and I can work with it but it could be better I feel.

The hand-grip on the 350D is totally appauling as it’s just hard plastic. I can’t believe Canon released an SLR like that. The only consolation is that the battery grip attachment (BG-E3) has a far better grip.

My Sony flash gun won’t work with the Canon–This didn’t surprise me hugely, and certainly not something I would blame on Canon, but it’s an irritation, particularly as it was a fairly nice flash gun. I would have hoped that the basic features would still work.

The 18-55mm EF-S and 55-200mm EF USM lenses both have a rotating front which makes it impossible to have a ‘perfect’ lens hood
It would be useful to have a mirror lock-up facility that allowed the LCD screen to show the photo without needing to look through the viewfinder. Similarly, having this ability in the software which is installed on a computer attached to the camera would be most useful.

After some time…

I’ve found that having started using my new camera more of my images have been blurred. I suspect it’s a combination of re-learning the settings, and perhaps getting used to less automated compensation that the Sony point-and-shoots may offer (and I ought to add I still intend to buy a tiny Sony pocket camera in the not too distant future). This is improving though and I’m told it’s not infrequent an experience for new cameras.

I was also very pleasantly surprised to find the EOS 350D has an orientation sensor that logs an EXIF setting. It’s a shame Windows Explorer’s own built-in lossless (I haven’t checked that it is yet) rotation function from Microsoft Picture Viewer doesn’t keep all EXIF settings as it’s quite efficient otherwise.

If there’s one site that I need to plug is www.dpreview.com as that proved very useful in my decision.