March 03, 2015, 03:36:06 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 - UrbanVoyeur

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6
EOS Bodies / Re: EOS M Update Information [CR1]
« on: September 19, 2013, 10:50:50 AM »
Any word on:
- Flip up screen
- WiFi
- Built in flash

Yep, everything from the 5D MK II to the C500 has been a flop. Clearly there are only 4 manufacturers and everyone else should just pack up their bags and go home....
The DSLR (5D and others) *is* a success at the low end in film making and in some specialized other situations - which is precisely why the overpriced, under performing C series from Canon has been a flop. Yes, a flop. People can (and do)  buy two superior prosumer, interchangeable lens Sony's, or one entry level RED or an entry level Pro Sony for the same price as the C series.  All of which are with packed with features and outstanding glass. At the high end, no one is giving Canon a glance.

Of course there are more than 4 video camera manufacturers. But for film makers and serious video work, you've got to make a compelling product that is *better* than what's available. Heck, even "as good as for the same price" would be a start. Canon has not done that.

You're on this forum why exactly?

Because I've been shooting Canon EOS since the early 90's their video products for over a decade and and I'm deeply disappointed in their latest batch of products.

People on this forum may not like the fact that canon mix video with their stills cameras, branch out into higher end video cameras for the movie industry and now are moving into security devices. But such moves are intended to keep the company growing, or at least reduce the losses from other lines of business so they can still make lenses and cameras we are interested in.

Security devices is a low margin, ridiculously competitive market. There's no money for Canon there.

Movie making? Really?
High end is dominated by Panavision, Sony and RED.
ENG/Documentary is Sony, Panasonic
Low End/Event/Budget is Sony, any DSLR and Panasonic.

The Canon cinema cameras so far have been over priced under performers with "me too" features and firmware crippled bodies.  Too expensive for the causal/student/prosumer/low budget shooter and too low end in resolution, features and cross compatibility to compete at the high end.

Canon thinks too much like a DSLR camera maker to compete well in new markets. There systems are closed, filled with proprietary technology and standards, and the bodies and lenses are crippled by stripped down firmware.

Contrast that with Sony, RED or Panavision's high end gear. They give you access to all the features the hardware is capable of, make sure the gear is compatible with everybody's add-ons and go out of their way to make sure the post production path works with everyone's software almost from day one.  And Canon's have no clear upgrade paths to better sensors without replacing the entire body - unlike Red, Panavision,  and others.

In the mean time, Canon's flagship camera business, the DSLR is floundering. Way to tank your entire business.

Canon, you are now 3 years behind Sony, and by proxy, Nikon, in introducing reasonably priced full frame, high MP sensors. You don't have anything on the market that even comes close - you just keep rehashing the same old 18-22 MP stuff.

Stop messing around and fix your sensor production issues.

Canon is behind in the two things distinguish digital camera systems: lenses and sensors. All the other bells and whistles are just firmware and marketing - including the much talked about "dual focus system". Every manufacturer will have it or some variant in short order.

Nikon's lenses were always top notch, and now thanks to widely available low dispersion glass formulas and inexpensive computer measuring and computer controlled grinding, Sony, Sigma and everyone else has caught up. And at lower price points.

Canon's super high priced L glass would be justifiable IF they had super sensors. They don't. So Canon just looks like they are abusing their customers when equal or better performing glass from their competitors sells for many hundreds or even a thousand less.

If standard chip manufacturing progress is any indication, within a year Sony will be ready introduce the next generation of its large, high MP sensors as well as reduce the price of the sensors on the market now.

So quit farting around Canon - release your high end sensor, even if it means taking a loss on the body to keep it affordable OR license Sony's tech.

Time is not you your side.

EOS-M / Re: The Next EOS M [CR2]
« on: September 03, 2013, 10:48:23 AM »
The next M needs:
- WiFi
- flip/swivel rear screen
- built in flash

EOS Bodies / Re: More Medium Format Talk
« on: August 19, 2013, 09:59:35 AM »
Oh gee, just what the world needs, another medium format system. Large, slow, hideously expensive, with a sensor that is completely surpassed by small cameras every 3 years. Except this one will be firmware crippled just like Canon's cinema line.

So it seems there is in fact very little difference between models, once the firmware is "uncrippled" Artificial price points and non-upgrades. Yay.

I'm happy with IQ, GUI, and performance. I've mastered this version pretty well.
Is there a reason I need to "upgrade"?
Here's my experience:
V4 and v5 are crashsy. 5 is the most stable.
v4 and v5 are each successively faster with large collections.
v4 applies changes to raw files faster. v5 is about the same.
v4 and v5 each have successively better lens corrections, especially wide angle distortion
v4 and v5 produce successively better auto correction results.

Canon General / Re: Canon Camera Sales Down in Q2, Imaging Revenue Up
« on: July 28, 2013, 05:24:48 PM »
I think Canon is losing sales to competitors with less expensive, higher res, better performing sensors and better equipped camera in both the mirror less and SLR markets.

After more than a year, Canon still does not have a 30+ MP answer to Sony/Nikon. And while sharp, their L lenses are horrendously expensive and losing the innovation race to Sigma and Niko with their upgradeable firmware.

I'm not saying Canon is doomed or anything, but they are slipping.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Announces
« on: July 27, 2013, 02:08:51 PM »
if you want it other way, you have to pay a third more to get a new lens, ....or, think about other lenses that you could get with the money you save...
Good points.

Pricewatch Deals / Re: Announces
« on: July 27, 2013, 10:03:42 AM »
I'm looking at these prices and they don't seem like a good deal.
Example: Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II, 8.0 condition for $1,880.

 A new one is $2500, just $600 more for a pristine, never used lens with a full warranty.  The other equipment is similarly expensive. Why would anyone buy used gear at these prices?

EOS Bodies / Re: The Next EOS M - features
« on: July 08, 2013, 09:34:00 AM »
I'm less concerned about the sensor than I am about GPS, WiFi, small pop up flash and a tiltable rear screen. THese are the reasons I didn't jump on the $299 offer. Great price, but without these it no more useful than the G1X I already have.

I don't need a viewfinder. Between parallax and small image size, they are just a hassle. But I would love to use it at waist or chest level with a tilting screen. Doesn't have to swivel.

A sensor bump is nice to have and inevitable, but without the other features, I won't.

EOS Bodies - For Video / Re: Inside the Canon EOS-1D C
« on: January 08, 2013, 05:32:34 PM »
Hacking aside, I don't think the 1D C makes sense at it's current price level. It's too close to other entry level pro video camera bodies that (Red, Sony, Panasonic) that offer greater flexibility and control for $15-20k. And a good sale or promotion will wipe out even the slight Canon price advantage.

Canon General / Re: Canon Can't Even Make a Billion Dollars Anymore
« on: October 28, 2012, 04:03:41 PM »
I agree with many posters here. I think 3 things happened: (among other things)
- Canon's camera manufacturing cost structure is out of line with what the retail market can support. This could be due to too many last minute design changes, not enough emphasis simplicity and design reuse or a host of other reasons. The solution is a manufacturing manager who will demand - a get - less expensive, higher quality results from the engineers. It can be done.

- Canon seems to think that no one will notice when they intentionally cripple their bodies. They've been doing since the film camera days, but now that the firmware is easily accessible, they look like scam artists. Solution: make all the features a body is capable of available. Rather than hurt, it will probably help their sales because consumers will feel that they are being dealt with honestly. Further locking down or stripping the firmware will on result in an arms race with the hackers, or people gradually migrating to more hackable cameras.

- Canon has cluttered their product line with marginal tweaks and conflicting price points, while failing to deliver basic features across the board - like built-in GPS and wireless. The solution is to simplify the pricing and reduce the number of models while guaranteeing certain low/no cost options across the entire product line. That way the value proposition of the higher end cameras will be clearer.

Lenses / Re: If you could only have 2 lenses for a wedding...
« on: October 05, 2012, 06:46:14 AM »
16-35, 70-200.

You can go wide for large groups in tight spaces, and close for intimate portraits.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 6