March 02, 2015, 10:20:42 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] 4 5 6
I have been watching with growing dismay how Canon is diverting more and more of their attention and resources to all the video crap in DSLRs which I do not need and want, rather than on creating the world's best still photo cameras, competing full blast with Nikon. I am sick and tired of the excessive market differentiation and purposful crippling of cameras even in terms of ultracheapbut useful firmware features [e.g., Auto-ISO on my 7D compared to any Nikon camera!].  I am sick and tired of constant massive price increases with little if any additional value to me as paying customer.  I am sick and tired having to pay extra for every lens hood on evry non-L lens.  I am sick and tired watching, that I could be using better cameras for less money had I only chosen Nikon over Canon. And it amkes me angry that I may end up having to sell my gear at a big loss, just because Canon is not able to effectively compete with Nikon any longer.

And whether you like it or not: I will not ask for your permission before I complain and I will do so as long as I please and certainly as long as Canon does not finally get their act together and sells me cameras and gear  that is clearly better than any competitive product or at least on par AND not more expensive.
I agree.  I wonder if Canon is trying to position itself as a premium brand - like Apple is now, or Sony used to be in TV's and electronics. Not the super high end like Leica, but the most expensive of the general consumer gear.

It could be a more profitable strategy. I don't know.

OK, so no stats, just pure speculation. I got it :)
Unfortunately, the stats I could find are all locked away in high priced reports from PMA and other research groups. If anybody can find these numbers free, please share.

We would happily buy a 5D3 at Euro 3200, if the bloody thing had the D800 sensor and electronics in it and an amazing 2012 version of Canon's Eye Control Focus on top.
I really miss Eye Control Focus. Selective spot meter AND focus, just by looking at a part of the frame. I would pay a premium to have that again (even though I know the technology costs Canon next to nothing to implement).

is it an sony Alpha 900 on budget?...maybe they are repackaging the unsold a900as nikon d600

You might not be far from the truth. The A900 could well have been using an earlier version / manufacturing run of the same sensor now in the D600. 4 years ago it could have been much more expensive to produce. Nikon is using Sony sensors.

How do you know that the "non-pro, photo-enthusiasts segment of the market" are "the guys who buy by far the largest share of higher-end, high-margin lenses and speedlites." I'm curious is you have any statistics that backs up your claim, or if it's pure speculation. If I interpret your statement correctly, then it sounds like you think that it's hobbyists that purchase expensive L-series lenses and accessories in the greatest quantities?
Because photo-enthusiast hobbyists vastly out number working pros by a zillion to one?

Even a tiny fraction of hobbyists buying L lenses would exceed the total number of working pros. The exceptions *might* be the extremely long L primes (400, 600, etc), but even there, there exists a huge number of non-pro nature photographers that use these regularly.

The big problem here is too many Canon fans or employees trying to tell Canon is always right.
So true.

This is a bit off topic, but I don't think that the EyeFi cards have GPS on them. I believe they just log the IDs of nearby WiFi networks, and use a Google service to convert the WiFi network to a location. This works very well in cities, but not so well in rural areas, and it is also a lot less accurate than GPS.
Thanks for pointing that out. Oh well. I guess they will have to use a standard GPS chipset. I've seen the chips available for hobbyists at $29-$50 with a serial interface and logging, so I would imagine it must be dirt cheap for a manufacturer like Canon.

Duh... I just realized they must have developed the new radio flash tech, Wi-Fi & GPS in conjunction with each other
I wonder why they don't use the same chip or similar chipset as the EyeFi. If it can fit in a SD card, it can fit in the camera somewhere. You can even get wifi, GPS and bluetooth on the same chip these day for a few pennies more.

If everything was as logical as you pointed out they wouldn't be able to charge you $269
LOL. I think Canon failed to recognize the popularity and ubiquity of GPS in today's digital cameras. The GP-E2 is them playing catch-up, marking time until they build it into the next generation.

There is a very simple explanation for this. Mark III, 1DX etc are constructed in/around magnesium alloy. A GPS tracker that could fit into an DSLR body would NOT be powerful enough to penetrate the body accurately and consistently.

The point-and-shoot cameras often feature GPS because they usually contain a higher percentage of plastic than metal.
I don't buy that. You can put a GPS antenna anywhere, even on the surface of a magnesium body, underneath the plastic skin. You can even use the alloy body as an one antenna. What about the other DSLR's that include GPS but have alloy bodies - like the Sony A77
Or they could stick in the hand grip which is hollow plastic. The receiver chips with built-in logging and serial output are very small.

Why can't Canon learn from Apple and just make something that "Just Works".  If my iPhone can have a GPS receiver built in, and there are pocket cameras with GPS built in, why isn't it built in to all of their DSLRs?  If the photographer is worried about battery life, they could switch it off.

It is ridiculous what you have to do in order to get real time GPS values into the metadata on the 5Dm2...
I agree. High quality GPS takes up very little space and costs just a few dollars - almost nothing. 

If a rinkey-dink Canon point and shoot can include GPS  and still be under $250 for the whole camera,, there is no reason Canon couldn't include on it $3500 near top-of-the-line model.  To have to buy a cumbersome accessory that takes up the shoe is silly at this point.  Stick it in the battery grip if you must. But $269? Insane.

Regardless, this really should be part of the standard body kit (as long as we can turn it off - as it's easy to forget to strip excess metadata when needed).  I'll stick w geoTagr for now.
Or at the very least, Canon should build it into accessory battery grips. GPS technology is dirt cheap. $269 is obscene.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon BG-E11 Making its Way to Retailers
« on: May 18, 2012, 04:10:45 PM »
Why does Canon insist on making a new battery adapter for every slight body variation?  They size every body revision just a little larger or smaller, which necessarily requires a new adapter. What a waste.

I think they could standardize to 3 body sizes and maintain them year to year with very little effort. It would simplify their supply network and show some long term planing.

(yes, i know the obviously trite answer is "they do this to make money")

Canon. We're not the best, but we're good enough for you.

Available everywhere better cameras are sold.

They may not adopt the same Sony technology, but Canon will be forced to respond with higher MP, lower noise, higher DR sensors, or face losing upper end DSLR market share to its competitors.

Canon may not feel the sales effect immediately, but they will if they continue the price/performance lag behind the D800 and D600 (if the rumors are true).

I'm interested to see what kind of camera Sony releases next, using its own top end sensors. Will they go lower in price than D800 and D600 with same sensors? Will they try to compete against the D4 and 1D? or will they just tread water and track Nikon ins prices and features.

Whichever way it falls, Canon needs to hurry up.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6