I'd be more worried about your market size.
don't worry. All the cameras in my dreams are really great. None of them is marketing-crippled. They'll sell like hot-cakes.
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.
I'd be more worried about your market size.
+1, bingo! The A7R should have satisfied most of the requirements of his earlier lists,
and yet he is still using his 7D in place of the A7R. There is a large IQ gap between the 7D and the current FF offerings, and yet he still won't switch...
The 6D further improved on the 5D2, yet you don't give it any respect. You're biased, that's all.
Sure, it further improved the IQ a bit, which was already excellent on the 5DII. It improved the metering, too. It didn't significantly improve the AF or frame rate, which were the 5DII's biggest deficits. The 6D has a less robust shutter with a 1-stop lower max speed, slower Xsync, and a shorter rated lifespan. The 6D has a substantially longer shutter lag. So considering IQ only, the 6D improved on the 5DII, but overall it's a mixed bag. The 5DIII improved on the 5DII in pretty much every way. At least on Amazon (not that it means much) the 5DIII is outselling the 6D.
The 6D's biggest 'feature' is its lower cost.
Of course, AvTvM might say the 6D is not 'dated' because it has WiFi. Nice if you want to upload your JPGs to Facebook on the fly, I suppose. I thought it would be great for remote triggering, but someone pointed out that after a short time the connection drops, and you have to physically access the 6D to reactivate the link - that severely limits the utility, IMO (the WFT options for other bodies aren't limited in that way, but you pay a big premium for them).
+ the a7 with 24-70 f/4 lens (arriving on Sunday)
why is it that the sony a7 and a7r have the same sync speeds as most common SLR's? I ask you directly because you seem to beleive these new systems are the template for all that is good in the world, why is it that with no mirror the zync speeds are still low? And I am talking flash on camera, not even off camera. shouldn't that be one of those benefits to ditching the mirror?
The mirror is gone, but the mechanical shutter is still there…and it's the shutter that imposes the Xsync limitation (shortest duration where the sensor is completely exposed - above Xsync both curtains are traveling across the sensor in a 'rolling' slit).
The logical fallacy at the centre of a lot of this argument from the mirrorless size tends to be....
Mirrorless performance may one day equal DSLR performance = Everyone wants a small camera
The idea that mirrorless tech could be used for anything but size saving seems to have passed many people by.
What I think you need to consider as well is which format sizes are actually going to benefit more from a smaller flange distance. In this reguard ASPC seems much more obvious than FF to me, the overall smaller size of the lenses is the most obvious point but your also dealing with a format where DSLR's use a legacy flange distance that's longer than needed for ASPC mirrors and a smaller sensor that causes fewer problems with light angles.
I look at the FE lens lineup and to me its notable how long they look relative to similar DSLR designs, I'm guessing the product of having to correct light angles. In seems to me that you could effectively just be trading shorter flange distance for longer lenses.
I would much rather buy a Canon/Nikon full frame mirror less that is equal or better than the Sony ... but until that day arrives, I'll play with the Sony a7 instead of waiting for CanNikon to come up with one.
It's also worth noting that Canon really hit a homerun with the RT system, even as it stands today.
I wish Canon made a A7R equivalent. I wish they made an affordable 36+mp camera... But look at the numbers and the current economic climate and one will perhaps have a better understanding why they do what they do. Just look at Amazons top seller list and one will see what sells.
That is farcically ridiculous and failed logic.
If I had been given the option of getting a $50 Canon made RT compatible trigger to work with my 550EX's instead of getting $450 600-EX-RT's I'd have done that, I wouldn't have got as integrated a system as I have, and Canon would have made $200 off me rather than $2,000. This way we are both happy. I am no Canon whore either, I have been running the 550's via Yongnuo RF 602's for years.
I paid $220 for most of my 550EX's new, I am getting around $150 for them now nearly ten years later secondhand, I wrote them down to nothing by 2008, they own me nothing yet they have given me ten years faultless service for $70. I expect similar figures from the 600's.
well, if I'd be coming from 10 years old written-off 550EXes, I'd also see much more sense to upgrade them to 600EXes. But in my case I got a pre-2012 camera model and Canon speedlites that are either still current (430EX II) or were current (580EX II) when I purchased them only about 2 years ago. Plus a 430EX which is maybe 5 years old. All of them used rather sparingly. Would you jump to an all 600EX-RT setup? btw. where I live, the ST-E3 retails from 270 € (=USD 365) and 600EX-RT runs from € 485 (=USD 650) a piece. The Yongnuo trigger is € 100 and I expect their YN-600EX to come in at maybe € 200 ... just to give you an idea, what I am looking at.
Anyway to me its a very minor problem: a few more weeks of occasional optical triggering until the Yongnuos become available.
Canon however has a bigger problem ... they spent R&D money and managed to create a highly beneficial technical advantage for many (potentially all) users of their ecosystem ... and then they don't distribute the goodness (against reasonable charge of course) to as many of their users as possible, but only to some ... 2012-Camera-model owners and 600EX-purchasers - rather than fully leveraging that USP against all their competitors. And driving nice synergies of scale. That's all I am saying.
So basically, your bitching about the fact that Canon created this really kick-ass new technology that you really really want, but you can't afford it, so you go off on a name-calling binge and try to paint Canon as some greedy company run by a bunch of idiot-buffoons who apparently wouldn't know a gold mine if it collapsed around them...because they aren't selling the 600-RT at a price point you can afford to refurnish your entire collection of flash right now.
Can you really get more childish than that? Seriously.
What would you choose as your 2nd Camera Body after the 6D?
Canon are giving us all a choice, buy into the RT system as it is, or not; buy it for what it currently does, or not. The 600-EX-RT does not render the 580 EXII or any other EX going back to my 550's, obsolete, it integrates with them flawlessly with the complete compatibility of the older optical wireless system. You would only have a point if Canon came out with a 650 EX-WT next year that didn't work with either the optical or current wireless system.