July 31, 2014, 12:59:31 PM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Brock

Pages: [1]
1
Canon can not be equal with theirs old  sensor lay out and and  and signal  path way.
Thera are no indications that Canon has gone from the   old 180nm  tech to Sonys, Panasonic Aptina, Toshiba tech which are down at 65nm


http://www.chipworks.com/blog/technologyblog/2012/10/24/full-frame-dslr-cameras-canon-stays-the-course/

Canon is at 500nm.

Nikon 350nm & 250nm

Sony at 250nm & 180nm (though technically the 180 is in the Nikon D800)

Where are you getting 65nm from?


then read again

I said Sony and others are down at 65nm, the Sony  APS etc are made at 90nm, canon are still at 180nm


90nm is still not 65nm.

Also you can't always equate fabrication process to image quality.  It's not like a CPU where it gets incrementally better.  Sensors have to deal w/ the physical properties of light being 400-700nm, CPUs don't.  i.e. Moore's law doesn't apply to image sensors.
__________________________________________________________________
Canon can not be equal with theirs old  sensor lay out and and  and signal  path way.
Thera are no indications that Canon has gone from the   old 180nm  tech to Sonys, Panasonic Aptina, Toshiba tech which are down at 65nm


http://www.chipworks.com/blog/technologyblog/2012/10/24/full-frame-dslr-cameras-canon-stays-the-course/

Canon is at 500nm.

Nikon 350nm & 250nm

Sony at 250nm & 180nm (though technically the 180 is in the Nikon D800)

Where are you getting 65nm from?


then read again

I said Sony and others are down at 65nm, the Sony  APS etc are made at 90nm, canon are still at 180nm


Read what again?  Do you have a reference for the numbers you gave?
Also, this.

2
Canon can not be equal with theirs old  sensor lay out and and  and signal  path way.
Thera are no indications that Canon has gone from the   old 180nm  tech to Sonys, Panasonic Aptina, Toshiba tech which are down at 65nm


http://www.chipworks.com/blog/technologyblog/2012/10/24/full-frame-dslr-cameras-canon-stays-the-course/

Canon is at 500nm.

Nikon 350nm & 250nm

Sony at 250nm & 180nm (though technically the 180 is in the Nikon D800)

Where are you getting 65nm from?

3
EOS Bodies / Who's Fabricating the sensors?
« on: February 07, 2013, 06:26:21 AM »
Did Canon secretly build a smaller fab?

It seems impossible they'd be able to push 40+MP on a full frame sensor w/ 500nm tech.

I wonder if they're going to use Sony to fab, since Nikon recently switched to Toshiba.

I just hope the sensors don't inherit Sony's color inaccuracies.  That's the main reason I prefer canon, true to life colors.

Perhaps if they did have Sony fab it, they'd be using a Canon sensor design which will give similar results to their current designs, but with higher MP.

In an ideal world.  Fingers crossed.

4
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 30, 2013, 12:40:50 AM »


Quote
Making full frame sensors is expensive, that's why they cost so much.

They can make over quadruple the number or APS-C sensors out of the same wafer size as full frame.  e.g.  60D APS-C = 14.9x22.3mm = 332.27sq mm.  5D III FF =  24.0x36.0mm = 864 sq mm.   A 300mm wafer has about 70,500 sq mm.

With the number of cameras they sell, I think it's very unlikely they would see any cost savings with a single sensor design.  More likely they would lose a lot of money.

Which makes it very unlikely they would ever drop their prices as low as you're suggesting.  Realistically they'll stay the same or see a slight bump.  They'll likely try to keep the Rebel & X0D series close to the D5X00 & D7X00 series (if not slightly lower, which they traditionally are by about $100).

If they eliminated the X0D model, they are also eliminating any (semi)affordable DSLR with a good grip.

A Rebel for $600-950 vs a 7D II for $1700-2200 is a huge price difference.  It leaves a big gap for Nikon to fill w/ a $1200-1500 D7000 successor (which has a good grip & feels more solid than a Rebel).

If they don't have a 70D they have no D7000 successor equivalent & they lose all customers who think the Rebel is too small but don't want to spend 140+% more $$$ (than a X0D or D7X00) to get in a 7D successor.

If they really wanted to stand out from the pack, what they could do is increase the size of their APS-C.  All APS-C sensor are not the same size despite sharing the same name.  Canon could make a APS-C sensor that, while still smaller than full frame, is larger than Nikons 1.52X Crop factor.  That's the only way I can see them drawing out 500nm sensors.   That would create a problem w/ the current crop sensor lenses causing vignetting however, so that's unlikely to ever happen.

Unless, they could just have the camera shoot a lower megapixel crop of the larger APS-C if it detects a older crop lens is attached, and if a full frame or newer crop lens is attached then it shoots the full sensor at a higher MegaPixel.   That would be interesting.   Dollars to donuts it won't happen though.

I know where you're getting at, but like I said the price section isn't what I was trying to get at. It's the way of thinking that I am trying to show you. Most of us are use to seeing a Rebel , then a X0D, then XD, all having incremental upgrades. But instead of that, why not have a Rebel line that isn't crippled. See you're scared that Nikon will have an advantage of that middle price ground with something "similar". But think about it, no one will have anything similar to this idea I'm trying to get. This is why it's bad for us consumers when we can't tell the difference between Nikon and Canon products, no one is revolutionizing the market.

The cost of FF is expensive, but that doesn't necessarily make a product expensive. The cost of R&D and these random sidetracked "improvements" to the cameras they're doing is what's really making a camera expensive. Instead of wasting time and money with "middle ground" products they will focus on just 4 line product, which in itself will lower costs. Also think about it, if Canon stopped crippling their lines, how would you think of Canon now? A lot more people would get Canon, which in turns means Canon makes more of the Rebels which will keep cost per item lower.

Rebel would be the best entry camera, not being crippled in sensor and AF designs, but being limited by the 3 main areas I suggested. All the way up 1D which would have the MP needed for product shooters but not sacrifice the speed and noise quality everyone else would need. Think about it, people shouldn't have to choose anymore, the only reason we do is because no one is bringing or creating anything new to the plate.

You get me?

There's a limit to volume savings.  Canon is only able to fab X amount of sensors.  If they can sell them all for $200-800 but they sell them for $50-200 instead there's no benefit, just loss.

There's also the issue of pixel size.  If they put FF sensors into APS-C cameras & just cripple it with firmware, it's not just the cost of the FF sensor they're losing, it's the megapixel race.  FF sensors have much larger pixel sizes, bigger microlenses for better high ISO performance.  But that also means if you used the same design on an APS-C camera you'd end up w/ a 6ish MP camera which consumers would look at as if Canon is nuts, trying to rip them off, is 1/4 the resolution of Nikon's APS-C.

Hackers would love it I'm sure. They'd likely find a way to activate the whole sensor.

Canon's current R&D method is working for the most part, they're just dragging their feet switching to a smaller fab; because they already own their own 500nm.  The rest of their tech is evolving fine though.  Autofocus (sensitivity, accuracy, recognition, & prediction), video, touch screen, & color accuracy are all areas they've stayed ahead of Nikon.

I understand you'd like to see generational leaps closer to what you see in the computer industry, but with Cameras they can't use the same model.  Their material costs are higher & their volume is lower.


I know where you're getting at, but like I said the price section isn't what I was trying to get at.

You've actually put the cart before the horse. Apple has clearly shown that price strategy comes first when figuring out model differentiation.

Take a look at any of their product lines, and you'll see they almost always have four different models with fairly uniform spacing of the price between each. They then have a similar type of overlap between product lines -- MacBook Air => MacBook Pro => iMac => Mac Pro.

The net result is that it's easy for a customer to mentally slot into a broad category of desired product, easy to figure out which model fits the budget, and then -- and this is key -- the price points are closely spaced enough for the customer to reasonably imagine stretching a bit and buying the next model up.

That is, if you want to have a laptop and your budget is $1,000, the MacBook Air is right there for you. But just $100 more gets you twice the flash ("disk") storage, an easy upsell. Or $1,200 gets you the entry-level MacBook Pro, with much more impressive specs and not all that much more heft.

Viewed from that perspective, Canon's got it pretty close to right. The Rebel line needs some cleanup; they should ditch the T3 and drop the price of the T2i and do a bit of rounding; I'd put it at T2i @ $600 => T3i @ $700 => T4i @ $1000.  When the T5i comes out, price it at $1,100 and drop the prices of the others by $100, retire the T2i, and continue that pattern. I'd drop the 60D, call the rumored 70D an 8D instead and price it at $1200. The 7DII keeps the 7D price at $1600 (and the 7D goes away), then the 6D @ $2100, drop the 5DII when stock runs out, and the pro-level stuff they can price however they want. You're then left with three Rebels and three xD models for the masses, with gradual price jumps along the way. Funky branding and pricing is probably a bit of a plus for the top end, which is why the huge leaps and lack of naming consistency isn't a problem for the 5DIII and 1Dx and anything else (like the super megapickle studio camera) that might come along.

In tabular form:

T2i : $600
T3i : $700
T4i : $1000
----------------
8D : $1200
7D : $1600
6D : $2100
----------------
(pro stuff however it falls out)

Cheers,

b&

While I agree with the reasoning behind your argument for the most part, I think raising the price of a rebel to $1,100 is a bit much, considering the D5X00 launches at less than $900. 


One of the reasons Canon continue to outsell Nikons is price.  They usually launch very close in price, but then Canon drops their price in 3 months & then again in 6; making them the cheaper alternative.  The fact they can do this while still making their cameras in Japan (as opposed to China like Nikon) is impressive in itself, imo.

5
PowerShot / Re: New PowerShots for CP+, no DSLRs.
« on: January 29, 2013, 07:51:24 AM »
I think Canon should release 70D with the new fab sensor, WITHOUT telling anyone that it is new. Just to test the waters. :) (probably not possible, as people will dissect the camera anyway). But if they released it as 18 mp, swivel touch screen, AFMA, WiFi/GPS etc, they could try to pass it as the 650D sensor...claiming new algorithms or whatnot that explains the better DR/ISO.

Then the 7D mk2 comes along with the new sensor, more MP and trumpets! (well, one can imagine) :)

Well, in my opinion, 70D should go back to 30/40/50D format (no swivel screen, and reintroduce magnesium build and AFMA. WiFi/GPS would be nice too). Basically be a 7D classic, but new. (like the 6D is for 5D mk2)

The 70D will definitely be torn apart considering how long it took to come to market.  iFixit, Chipworks, Roger Clark, DXOMark, etc..

I think that the future X0D line will all be tilt/swivel screens.  They're not fully weather sealed, so there's no need to have it flat to the back like the pro cameras.  The demographic it's for are enthusiasts, but will want consumer features like tilt/swivel for video & touchscreen for ease of use.

6
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 29, 2013, 05:10:45 AM »
They need to consolidate 60d and 7d. 70d 20mp 10 fps dual digic dual sd or qd/sd. 38 focus pt 19 cross center dual cross 51k Iso. only 5.6 af to keep selling superteles to those big spenders. Then bring on the 7dii with apsh and near 1 series spec priced above 6d. Everyone happy!

I don't think that would be a good idea.  There's a big price gap between them.

Many people buy the X0D model because the grip on the Rebels are too small & don't want/care about long photo bursts or full weather sealing.

If Canon doesn't have the X0D, then people will migrate to the Nikon D7x00, because it will fulfill their needs for less $$$.


I think Canon might increase the 7D II's price (like they did the 5D Mark III) because It is a pro camera.

But I don't think their Rebel & X0D will change much in price, because they compete in a very price sensitive market against Nikon (who could be considered to have the better cameras in that segment currently, especially if the D7000 successor comes out soon).
 
    I think opposite. Think of it like this (there's also a recent thread with this view) - If Canon stopped milking, and started Under Promise - Over Deliver they would DOMINATE the market. It is NOT a good thing when people can't tell the difference between Nikon or Canon...It means no one is revolutionizing. No one is going out of there way to make and BREAK expectations.

   If they kept the Rebel line (which is always increasing in price for some reason....) took out the X0D line. That would be all they need to start taking over when it comes to first buyers.

   They also need to start standardizing their sensors, AF, etc. Start BRANDING the company's name. Stop making spin offs of "that" sensor/AF/etc. and start making it throughout the lineup. It wastes people's time, and R&D money when they come out with a different versions to sidetrack the product.

  Basically what I'm trying to get at is this.

  4 camera Line Up:
          Rebel
          5D/6D Equiv
          7D Equiv
          1D Equiv


That might be hard to grasp because then you get into pricing confusion. That mainly will come because of how APS-C and FF are at the moment. The rebel will have APS-C to keep price down for sure. Then Everything else should have FF, because by now they should already have been able to figure out how to only use the center to give the reach of crop by now (I mean seriously).

People are probably wondering than how will they be different if they all have the same sensor and AF.

 3 main areas:
   1 - CPU power & efficiency + buffer
   2 - Shutter Speed
   3 - MP

So as you go up the line Rebel - 7D equiv - 5/6D equiv - 1D equiv then all three areas will get better. At this point people will ask well I don't want 50000000000+ MP because noise will increase and buffer speed will decrease....well honestly this isn't how you should be looking at it. Instead ask why hasn't there been any push to technology so that as MP increases noise and buffer doesn't get worse. Seriously the price for these equipments as much and even MORE than the best computer you can build out there.

  Pricing - This is difficult, but if either Canon or Nikon started this revolutionary way of business than they can ultimately (well somewhat as consumers are the ones that determine the price) price it to whatever they want. But let's just give reasonable prices.

  The Rebel needs to be able to have an easy point of entrance. Right now the current T4i sells for about $800 (way overpriced for what you get, that's why people still buy the T3i over it) so I say for something that will actually be VERY good and revolutionary than at most $800 for it would be better for that camera.  7D equiv $1400; 5/6D equiv $2600; 1D equiv $6000

   The pricing section isn't what I'm trying to get at, just giving numbers because I know people will ask.

Now when it comes to system updates (ie Mark ii) then things will make A LOT more sense since most of the technology is shared in the lineup. So as they improve on sensors and AF (and not incremental, but actual improvements) then all they have to do is refresh the lineup.


This will make Canon the best ever, period. Customers will know that this company won't chimp off and let them down, Canon will stop wasting money of random incremental and sidetracked R&D and FOCUS on actual "Evolution & Revlotion" products. There will be a clear difference of what you would get with Canon vs another brand.

Thanks,
Jonathan Liz-Fonts
 

Making full frame sensors is expensive, that's why they cost so much.

They can make over quadruple the number or APS-C sensors out of the same wafer size as full frame.  e.g.  60D APS-C = 14.9x22.3mm = 332.27sq mm.  5D III FF =  24.0x36.0mm = 864 sq mm.   A 300mm wafer has about 70,500 sq mm.

With the number of cameras they sell, I think it's very unlikely they would see any cost savings with a single sensor design.  More likely they would lose a lot of money.

Which makes it very unlikely they would ever drop their prices as low as you're suggesting.  Realistically they'll stay the same or see a slight bump.  They'll likely try to keep the Rebel & X0D series close to the D5X00 & D7X00 series (if not slightly lower, which they traditionally are by about $100).

If they eliminated the X0D model, they are also eliminating any (semi)affordable DSLR with a good grip.

A Rebel for $600-950 vs a 7D II for $1700-2200 is a huge price difference.  It leaves a big gap for Nikon to fill w/ a $1200-1500 D7000 successor (which has a good grip & feels more solid than a Rebel).

If they don't have a 70D they have no D7000 successor equivalent & they lose all customers who think the Rebel is too small but don't want to spend 140+% more $$$ (than a X0D or D7X00) to get in a 7D successor.

If they really wanted to stand out from the pack, what they could do is increase the size of their APS-C.  All APS-C sensor are not the same size despite sharing the same name.  Canon could make a APS-C sensor that, while still smaller than full frame, is larger than Nikons 1.52X Crop factor.  That's the only way I can see them drawing out 500nm sensors.   That would create a problem w/ the current crop sensor lenses causing vignetting however, so that's unlikely to ever happen.

Unless, they could just have the camera shoot a lower megapixel crop of the larger APS-C if it detects a older crop lens is attached, and if a full frame or newer crop lens is attached then it shoots the full sensor at a higher MegaPixel.   That would be interesting.   Dollars to donuts it won't happen though.

7
Lenses / Re: Which 50mm (with AF) is best from f/1.4 - f/2.0?
« on: January 29, 2013, 04:47:00 AM »
Thanks everyone for your replies. What I've gathered so far is:
— The Sigma 50/1.4 is probably the sharpest at f/1.4 of the bunch, and nearly a match for the 50L's bokeh
— The 50L has better build quality, weather sealing, bokeh and possibly microcontrast and color
— The Sigma is prone to AF issues

I have the Sigma 35 and it's an excellent lens. It did take two copies to get a good one, though; the first front-focused badly.

I'm trying to decide whether the additional cost of the 50L is worth it. Sounds like I might be better off trying for a good copy of the Sigma 50 first.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44FqqE6ukjY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uaOC-q6nP8

IMO the L seems to have better contrast & more pleasing colors (how a lens can effect the colors is beyond me, but that's how it looks to me).

the Canon 50 1.4 looks like a good lens too, but I've read that the particular USM motor used in it is ancient & prone to breaking down.   The 1.2L has the full time manual adjust high end USM motor, but because it's such a heavy lens focuses slightly slower than the 1.4.  The sigma also seems to have more vignetting & chromatic aberration compared to the L from the reviews I have read.

8
Canon General / Re: Why did you choose Canon?
« on: January 29, 2013, 04:32:29 AM »
I started researching DSLRs when I was going to buy one as a gift for my aging parents.

It had to have excellent autofocus because their eyes were getting bad & they had to be able to depend on the camera choosing subjects wisely & focusing accurately.

The Canons had the autofocus motors built into the lenses & had more accurate autofocus, whereas half if not more of the Nikons didn't.

I also looked at examples of the pictures out of the Canons & Nikons; & found the more neutral & natural colors of the Canon more realistic than the more saturated & exaggerated colors of the Nikon (even though the Nikons appeared to have higher dynamic range).

Because of the same reasons I bought one for myself.

If I were in the same position now as I was then, now; it would be a harder decision.  Nikons seem to have more AF points in my price range (though Canons are more evenly spread out & I still think the Canons have slightly more stringent tolerances for AF accuracy). 

Nikons have also been advancing sensor technology faster than Canon, but I still prefer Canon's more realistic / natural colors to Nikons over-saturated colors.

I'm in the market for a couple new DSLRs atm, my 50D could use an upgrade.  I've been eying the D5200 & am curious about the D7000 successor, but I'm holding out hope that Canon can wow me with the 70D.

9
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« on: January 28, 2013, 10:53:04 PM »
They need to consolidate 60d and 7d. 70d 20mp 10 fps dual digic dual sd or qd/sd. 38 focus pt 19 cross center dual cross 51k Iso. only 5.6 af to keep selling superteles to those big spenders. Then bring on the 7dii with apsh and near 1 series spec priced above 6d. Everyone happy!

I don't think that would be a good idea.  There's a big price gap between them.

Many people buy the X0D model because the grip on the Rebels are too small & don't want/care about long photo bursts or full weather sealing.

If Canon doesn't have the X0D, then people will migrate to the Nikon D7x00, because it will fulfill their needs for less $$$.


I think Canon might increase the 7D II's price (like they did the 5D Mark III) because It is a pro camera.

But I don't think their Rebel & X0D will change much in price, because they compete in a very price sensitive market against Nikon (who could be considered to have the better cameras in that segment currently, especially if the D7000 successor comes out soon).

10
PowerShot / Re: New PowerShots for CP+, no DSLRs.
« on: January 28, 2013, 10:44:34 PM »
I hope they launch a new DSLR before the end of March.  The 60D is going to be out 3 years before being updated otherwise.

10D, 20D, 30D = 18 months

40D = 12 months

50D = 18 months

60D = 36 months????

Maybe Canon has hit the wall & are designing / have designed a smaller fabbed sensor; but need someone to make it.  (sort of like how Nikon designed the D5200 sensor, but had toshiba make it).

I assume Canon can't make it because I've read nothing about them building new fabs.  (though I suppose the old one could be retrofit, but I'd think that would make the news).

They better hurry up though, because otherwise Nikon's going to pull ahead in the consumer market w/ the D5200.  No matter how true the "Megapixel Myth" may be, the majority of casual consumers who want to just step into a Rebel or x0D+, model is going to think the Nikon is 33.33333333333333333% better for the same $$$ w/ 24MP.

11
Site Information / Re: "Access Denied - Security Block"
« on: January 25, 2013, 11:58:17 PM »
I'm getting the same message when I tried to reply to a EOS Bodies 70D rumor thread

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=12537.60

So I tried just posting

TEST

and it worked.

I'd post my post here, but I get the same error when I add it.

Never mind, I figured out what was tripping it up.  The word casino

12
EOS Bodies / Re: Where are you EOS 70D?
« on: January 25, 2013, 11:48:07 PM »

It isn't quite that simple. Realize that Sony owns a gagillion patents for sensor technology. Canon isn't just trying to milk their technology for all its worth...although in doing so they are certainly in a better financial position than Sony (who is barely better than junk bond status for their latest debt purchase). Canon has to find ways to do things similar to what Sony's done with Exmor...without violating Sony patents. Canon knows full well their technology is old, aged, and smelling pretty stinky by now.


you realize that canon is in the top 5 for filing patents for years?

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_canon/newsroom?pageKeyCode=pressreldetail&docId=0901e02480508dde

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/01/20/most-innovative-companies-24-7/1823001/

and if if canon would desperately need a patent.. they could license it or exchange patents with sony.

my company does it all the time, sony does it, canon does it.

patents are not the real problem i think.
but to have more circuits, more logic, on a sensor you need a smaller litho process.
and that is canons problem right now.

i predict that in a few years we will see a jump in canons image quality and todays cameras will have the stigma of "that last 500nm generation".

unfortunately that does not help me right now.
i don´t need better high iso performance, i need better DR and better detail rendering.
i do most stuff on a tripod at ISO 100 or with strobes.

for my sports photography (motorbikes) i could need the better AF of the 5D MK3 but it´s not really worth the money for me. i would not use it often enough so i could justify spending the money.
so i keep my 5D MK2 until canon produces a camera that offers a noticeable better image quality.


I did not say patents overall...just image sensor patents. I know Canon is a top patent producer in general, however Canon has a very broad and diverse imaging presence, which involves patents for optics, fabrication, manufacture, and other things in addition to sensor patents. Sony's IC division, particularly their imaging sensor division, has been pounding out R&D and patents in that one area for the last few years. They have spent tens of billions of dollars JUST on image sensor and related IC patents, which is why they are so deeply in debt right now.

To my knowledge, Canon has not patented as much image sensor technology as Sony has in the last several years.
Where did you get that figure that Sony has spent " tens of billions of dollars JUST on image sensor and related IC patents"?

You say that Canon's ranking in patents doesn't matter because they make lenses, scanners & printers as well?

Sony makes TVs, computers, mp3 players, headphones, amplifiers, speakers, projectors, movies, TV shows, video game consoles, video games, financial services companies, a record label, & I think they even have a piece of MGM Resorts/Gaming.  All that combined is was $78.9 billion last year.

Canon just makes cameras, scanners, printers & medical equipment (which is all based on imaging tech).  It's revenue was $45 billion last year.  10% of which went to R&D.ar.  10% of which went to R&D.


Poked around patentfish for a while. As far as I could tell, counting patents for CMOS image sensors, solid-state imagers, color filter arrays, etc. I counted about 27 patents for Canon, and over 60 for Sony before finally stopping.  I'd say Sony has about three times the image sensor related patents as Canon does since 2009.


Canon has about 2,500 patents a year.  If you found 27 relating to their primary part for their main division, I'm inclined to believe that's not an accurate assessment.   27 out of some 10,000 doesn't seem very realistic.

13
EOS Bodies / Re: Where are you EOS 70D?
« on: January 25, 2013, 03:06:17 AM »
I believe Canon has similar technology.


well of course canon knows how to do it... it´s not some alien technology.  :)

they just have to do it.

but seeing all the fanboys being happy with mediocre sensors "it´s the photographer not the camera" .. why should canon hurry?
their "old stuff" is selling well.

no, it makes more sense for the management to maximize todays profit.
and if that backfires in a few years, they will work at other companys.
that is how these things usually work.. make the shareholder happy.. then walk to greener pastures before the cardhouse collapses.
 
but i think canon has a huge userbase and can afford it to be mediocre... for some time.

when i say "mediocre" is speak about sensors.. not cameras.
i still like the handling of canon cameras more.

it´s just that nikon user saw a image quality improvement in 2012... canon user not so much.


It isn't quite that simple. Realize that Sony owns a gagillion patents for sensor technology. Canon isn't just trying to milk their technology for all its worth...although in doing so they are certainly in a better financial position than Sony (who is barely better than junk bond status for their latest debt purchase). Canon has to find ways to do things similar to what Sony's done with Exmor...without violating Sony patents. Canon knows full well their technology is old, aged, and smelling pretty stinky by now.

I believe Canon's blunder is not that they are trying to suck their customers dry on crappy technology...Canon's blunder was not remaining innovative throughout the last five years or so, creating patents in lock-step with Sony. To play catch-up, Canon also has to play dodge-ball...they have to dodge Sony patents while concurrently trying to come up with their own, and with Sony owning so many balls to throw, Canon has a really difficult task on their hands.


Canon has the most patents of any camera company, & is #3 in the world when it comes to patents.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/01/11/ibm-maintains-top-spot-in-global-patent-rankings-canon-overtake/


Canon invests 10% of their revenue into R&D.

http://www.photographyblog.com/news/canon_registers_record_number_of_patents/


Sony has more invested in fabrication, but that doesn't mean they're doing more R&D or are ahead in patents.

14
EOS Bodies / Re: Where are you EOS 70D?
« on: January 24, 2013, 10:35:26 AM »
It is ridiculous if they put the same old 18 mpix sensor in the 70D!
I will definitely NOT buy 70D if it uses the same sensor.

Make at least a new sensor with better iso performance and better dynamic range!!!

I dont care about how many pixels it has. Just improve high iso performance and dynamic range and I will buy it :)



I would bet a small amount that the 70D - if it comes out soon- ie well ahead of a 7D2 launch will have the same 18Mp sensor as the 60D.

Canon certainly needs to be more innovative by even just thinking about subletting more sensor designs to Sony or Toshiba.

Canon doesn't have a problem w/ sensor designs, just shrinking fabrication. 

The fact that they are able to get the performance they do within the 0.5 µm design rules shows they are, if not the very best sensor designer, close to it.

When they finally do shrink the process I have lofty expectations.

I still think that it's crazy to keep the same sensor in the 70D & don't believe it.  There's no way they can drag it out another 2.5 years.  So unless there's some secret sauce that will make it magic I don't know how they can justify it.

15
EOS Bodies / Re: Where are you EOS 70D?
« on: January 24, 2013, 02:39:36 AM »
<p>We’ve been told previously that a 70D will appear before a 7D replacement. It’s said to be an incremental upgrade from the 60D. Although, we’ve heard that wifi and gps will be added to the xxD line with the 70D.</p>
<p>The image sensor may remain at 18mp as Canon separates the 7D Mark II with a new, higher performing APS-C sensor. This makes a lot of sense as I think the APS-C segment needs a jolt and not more of the same.</p>
<p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>
[/html]


NOOOOOOO!!

http://nooooooooooooooo.com

The D5200 is now at 24MP.  People will look at the Canon box and see 18MP and then the Nikon and see 24MP.  It's obvious which one most new purchasers (who aren't already invested in lenses) are going to trend towards choosing.  :(

Unless Canon is planning on competing on price, they really need a new, higher MegaPixel sensor in the 70D / 7D Mark II to pass down to the T5i, T6i, T7i.

Pages: [1]