But Neuro currently is much more than DR. Mirror less, MP, 7d2 sensor improvement and such are in the scanner.
What about lenses? Yesterday I went on a 5 mile hike with my 840mm f/5.6 combo (600/4 II + 1.4xIII), shooting flying raptors entirely handheld. After lunch, I shot a lighthouse, and on the narrow spit of land, only an ultrawide lens with shift could capture the full height with correct verticals, so I used my new TS-E 17/4. How's the competition doing on meeting those needs? Should I go to forums dedicated to other brands and complain about their lack of innovation in areas which matter to me?
I don't know if it is simply ignorance here, or whether it is just conveniently forgetting, but the whole TS-E 17/4 or 840/5.6 argument is largely moot with mirrorless options these days. Why?
The TS-E lenses are manual lenses anyway. You lose absolutely NOTHING by adapting a TS-E to any mirrorless option out there. The argument that such a lens is "Canon Only" is, therefor, no longer valid.
I totally agree, Canon lenses are phenomenal. Which is why I consider the adaptability of any other system as paramount to it's success, in general but specifically for me. The Metabones adapters for the A7 series are good, but still a little lacking. They got better with the 4th incarnation, I've used the 3rd incarnation and there are some issues. Perhaps a 5th incarnation will solve the remaining few problems (primarily AF related...which means the ability to adapt the TS-E lenses is complete and fully compatible with an A7 camera). The adapter quality for the Samsung NX1 will also be a key selling point for me...if it lets me AF with good AF performance using my big lenses, HELL YEAH! Sign me up!
Canon's problems do not lie in their lens lineup. Actually, their lens lineup is probably one of their key strengths in a world where people are increasingly adding third party cameras to their kits. Canon's problems like in their electronics technology, primarily their sensors...and in a lack of certain features that people have been asking for for years, even decades (Auto ISO, anyone? ) Everyone who cares knows that. So bringing up unique lenses that can easily be adapted to other systems as a primary reason why Canon is better is entirely missing the point.