46
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS-1D X f/8 to be Added? [CR1]
« on: February 05, 2012, 09:49:11 AM »
That would be excellent news, and worth waiting an extra few weeks.
May 23, 2013, 09:15:38 AM
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.
47
EOS Bodies / 1DX killer?
« on: February 02, 2012, 10:03:08 AM »
I would LOVE to be wrong, but how could this camera be real? What differentiates it from the 1DX? (ie. is there $4100 in difference?)
61pt AF? Smells like a 1DX
6.9FPS? Pretty powerful to pump 22MP through on just a Digic 5
$2700? Why would I ever pay $6800 for a 1DX aside from [arguably] a little ISO help on the top end?
61pt AF? Smells like a 1DX
6.9FPS? Pretty powerful to pump 22MP through on just a Digic 5
$2700? Why would I ever pay $6800 for a 1DX aside from [arguably] a little ISO help on the top end?
48
Third Party Manufacturers / Re: Nikon 1 compact cameras capable of 2k and 4k video...
« on: February 01, 2012, 04:19:18 PM »
Ah, good point Eyeone -- the line that "we hope to incorporate this functionality in the future" made me think that it could be enabled via firmware.
49
Third Party Manufacturers / Nikon 1 compact cameras capable of 2k and 4k video...
« on: February 01, 2012, 03:54:51 PM »
Wow, Nikon is going on an all out assault. http://www.dpreview.com/articles/6531373190/interview-tetsuya-yamamoto-of-nikon
It's not a segment that Canon pursues very heavily right now, but its success will definitely be worth watching.
It's not a segment that Canon pursues very heavily right now, but its success will definitely be worth watching.
50
Canon General / Re: Is it just me, or....
« on: February 01, 2012, 08:05:41 AM »
Yep, been here for years, but just now got the urge to post. 
51
Lenses / release cycles
« on: January 31, 2012, 05:26:33 PM »
Back to the thread topic itself...
it suffices to say that Canon would like to get new technology to us as soon as economically possible. I was in Tokyo when the earthquake hit last year -- lots of damage to many manufacturers, to say the very least (not to mention the human toll.)
Lenses and camera are all on loose cycles. Those cycles are getting shorter with the fast rise of Nikon, who blitzed their lineup in 2007. Canon is beginning to react, it just takes time so let's be patient
Lens releases per year:
Nikon | Canon (with specific models)
(6) 2011 (4): 500mm II; 600mm II; 18-55mm EF-S; 55-250mm EF-S
(9) 2010 (7): 300mm II; 400mm II; 8-15mm; 70-300m L; 1.4TC; 2.0TC; 70-200 II
(7) 2009 (5): 100mm Macro; 15-85mm EF-S; 18-135mm EF-S; 17mm TS; 24mm TS;
(7) 2008 (4): 24mm f/1.4 II; 18-200mm EF-S; 200mm f/2; 800mm
(7) 2007 (4): 16-35mm f/2.8; 14mm f/2.8 II; 55-250mm EF-S; 18-55mm EF-S
(4) 2006 (3): 70-200mm f/4 IS; 50mm f/1.2; 85mm f/1.2; 17-55mm EF-S;
(2) 2005 (4): 60mm EF-S; 24-105mm; 70-300mm IS; 18-55mm EF-S
(4) 2004 (4): 70-300mm DO IS; 28-300mm; 10-22mm EF-S; 17-85mm; 28-90mm
it suffices to say that Canon would like to get new technology to us as soon as economically possible. I was in Tokyo when the earthquake hit last year -- lots of damage to many manufacturers, to say the very least (not to mention the human toll.)
Lenses and camera are all on loose cycles. Those cycles are getting shorter with the fast rise of Nikon, who blitzed their lineup in 2007. Canon is beginning to react, it just takes time so let's be patient
Lens releases per year:
Nikon | Canon (with specific models)
(6) 2011 (4): 500mm II; 600mm II; 18-55mm EF-S; 55-250mm EF-S
(9) 2010 (7): 300mm II; 400mm II; 8-15mm; 70-300m L; 1.4TC; 2.0TC; 70-200 II
(7) 2009 (5): 100mm Macro; 15-85mm EF-S; 18-135mm EF-S; 17mm TS; 24mm TS;
(7) 2008 (4): 24mm f/1.4 II; 18-200mm EF-S; 200mm f/2; 800mm
(7) 2007 (4): 16-35mm f/2.8; 14mm f/2.8 II; 55-250mm EF-S; 18-55mm EF-S
(4) 2006 (3): 70-200mm f/4 IS; 50mm f/1.2; 85mm f/1.2; 17-55mm EF-S;
(2) 2005 (4): 60mm EF-S; 24-105mm; 70-300mm IS; 18-55mm EF-S
(4) 2004 (4): 70-300mm DO IS; 28-300mm; 10-22mm EF-S; 17-85mm; 28-90mm
52
Forgive my hyperbole -- they weren't all Canon white, but at least at US sporting events (probably a little further back than 5 years) -- the vast majority were Canon. Go and find a photo where there are mixed lenses, I'll applaud you, but the fact is that Canon has owned professional sports for years and that has been changing in the last few years.
If you can do a better job, go make your own camera company. It's pretty easy to whine about how XYZ isn't up to your standards when you're on the sideline.
Going back into my hole now. Sorry for trying to impart a little business acumen to counter our natural exuberance.
If you can do a better job, go make your own camera company. It's pretty easy to whine about how XYZ isn't up to your standards when you're on the sideline.
Going back into my hole now. Sorry for trying to impart a little business acumen to counter our natural exuberance.
53
Lenses / Re: Long-time lurker, first-time poster
« on: January 31, 2012, 03:51:49 PM »Quote
so you say lenses are different to:
cars
cpus
printers
handys
monitors
blu-ray player
etc.
why do we have 10-20 year old optics but not printers, cars, cpus or handys?
of course you can not improve optics as fast as other technology ... but all these things cost R&D too. your argumentation has a hole i think.
imho canon is not producing new lenses because they don´t have the competition.
You've proven my point masterfully
The difference in lens technology/quality has not forced any of the dominant manufacturers to update all of their lenses on a regular basis because the technology advances (and competition) don't require it. Cars, CPUs, cell phones -- all of these evolve on a monthly basis. Miss innovation and you're out of business quickly (Blackberry, Nokia...)Canon absolutely has competition, and has actually been reacting less quickly than some might have thought. No one thought the Sony Alpha series would take off, but Sony does have (or used to have) a reputable name as the leader in consumer electronics. Nikon has made HUGE inroads in the last 3-4 years. Canon has innovated its long glass as best it can, but Nikon has done a better job with camera bodies (my personal view.)
To say that Canon isn't producing new lenses because it doesn't have the competition misses quite a bit. Canon is very worried about Nikon -- just look at all the dark lenses on the sidelines of major sporting events now, when 5 years ago they were all Canon white.
The R&D process is arduous -- look how long it takes for patents to make it into actual lenses (and often times they never materialize because they can't be produced in sufficient yield with proper quality. This is the case with all camera/lens manufacturers -- I'm just highlighting that it takes time and it's hard to react quickly to competitors when tooling a new lens takes years.
In full disclosure, I have good knowledge of Canon Japan's corporate team. Nothing I've said here should be shocking to anyone; just a reminder that Canon is fully aware of customer desires and will deliver as soon as they are able. Believe me, they want to sell you a newer, more expensive lens as soon as possible!
54
Lenses / Long-time lurker, first-time poster
« on: January 31, 2012, 09:22:59 AM »well some lenses are old and need a replacement. you know how old some of the canon lenses are? with todays technology there could be a huge jump in IQ. just look at the 70-200mm f2.8 IS II or the new 300mm f2.8 IS II lenses.
the current model was released in november 2006.
the EF 17-40mm is nearly 10 years old.
the EF 50mm f1.4 is 20 years old i think.
the EF 35mm f1.4 is from 1998.
the EF 300mm f4 IS is from 1997
the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L is from 2002.
the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS is from 1998
and these are lenses i sell a lot more often then 500mm or 600mm lenses. so to be honest... i think we all have waited long enough.... don´t you think?
This argument makes absolutely no business sense. Canon's quarterly (and yearly) revenue was down significantly because of many factors. It's goal is to make money so that it can keep offering great products that allow it to make money. The execs are sitting in a room saying, "Let's piss everyone off by slowing things down!" They are constrained by how running a multi-billion dollar, multi-national company works.
The business of making lenses:
• The jump in IQ is because Canon uses super premium optics on those lenses you mentioned. $2500 and $7500 lenses aren't in the same category as a 24-70mm lens. When an update is released, it will be far more expensive to help cover new R&D and production costs
• Likewise, your costs decline substantially the longer you have a lens in production. Canon has every financial incentive to drag out production as long as possible
• If you produce far too many copies of a lens, you don't update it with new optics and scrap millions of dollars of inventory
• Agreed that those black lenses sell far more copies, yes, but what do you think the margin on a $750 lens compared to a $12,000 lens?
Same goes for camera bodies with price differentiation:
• Did we really think that there was going to be a 5D III with a 61pt AF or the same sensor as the 1DX? Why would people by the 1DX? For a non-removable grip? You have to segment your market so that people don't move down without giving up enough features.
• This is why you don't see a compact, Full Frame, Fast AF, 4K video, unicorn camera that costs $3000 -- because you couldn't charge more for a premium model. Some features have to stay (by Canon's choice) on the $7000 model.
• The AF on the 5D is unlikely to have a drastic improvement in the mkIII. You either have to go up to the 1DX or down to the 7D. That's on purpose, and it's okay to curse at Canon for that decision.
So, while we would LOVE for new lenses and bodies to be released all the time, it would drive Canon's camera division into the ground. R&D is not cheap, neither is tooling a new production line, and making a camera that serves up enough ultra pro features at the low and mid level wouldn't make any economic sense. I don't want to make Canon sound evil, but this kind of production practice and market segmentation is the only way you can stay profitable enough to continue staying in business. Luckily, there are other more profitable divisions within Canon worldwide (office equipment division, etc.) that help keep everything afloat.
Sorry for the rant! I'm dying to get my hands on a 1DX, 5DIII, 200-400mm f/4, and a new 24-70mm, but we should keep in mind that Canon wants us to have those products too and will get them to us as fast as economically possible.