December 18, 2017, 05:44:20 PM

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 10
1
EOS Bodies / Re: What if Canon were no longer #1?
« Last post by Otara on Today at 05:40:57 PM »
It doesnt matter much to me in that overall I think we're in a fairly mature market, and I dont feel particularly brand loyal if any company came out with a compelling alternative.

If wildlife photography died as an interest area and equipment focussed on doing well at that went out of vogue or drastically increased in price, that would worry me more. 

2
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIV v 5DV v 5D-M
« Last post by ahsanford on Today at 05:23:52 PM »
Then it will have a new mount and a frustratingly limited selection of slow zooms with their native mirrorless mount lens offerings, but a houseload of awesome professional lenses will work from day one.

Fixed that for you.   ;)

Unlike with EOS M, which lacks high quality EF-S glass to adapt, any Canon mirrorless FF offering will have world class glass from day one.

Unless you want world class and native mount from day one, which (a) isn't happening and (b) won't be that small -- only a handful of lenses will lead to smaller aggregate footprint (think pancakes, 35 f/2, 50 1.8, etc.) will you actually save much aggregate space for that sexy thin mount -- if we even get that thin mount.

- A
3
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIV v 5DV v 5D-M
« Last post by Dreamer on Today at 05:22:13 PM »
Thanks Ahsanford and others.  Given i've always said this is based on the balance of probabilities, and given Canon have already taken a slow and steady approach to the development of their FF range - i would think the ability to learn from Sony and ensure it remains on top of the heap, knowing Nikon is also feverishly developing their own first FF camera, would surely mean this would be for the EF mount.

I would also agree it's whether it would be of 5D quality that is the unknown factor here - but why wouldnt it be? Surely Sony has now reached 1D quality with its A9 in terms of speed et cetera.

I'm not sure what being late to the party would achieve for Canon at the FF mirrorless level if it's not at the level people are all now expecting.  I get they fear it could mean a cannibilisation of their 5D market - but surely that wouldnt be the case, as they are market leaders. Surely all it means is that those thinking of switching to another system now remain and it gives Canon opportunity to merely further develop the mirrorless technology over a period of time?
4
EOS Bodies / Re: What if Canon were no longer #1?
« Last post by ahsanford on Today at 05:17:38 PM »
If this is...

1) ...coming from a selected slice of data in a selected quarter for selected products by a third party salesman I spoke to once- Zzzzzz.  End the thread.  Canon will plug away until a demonstrable loss of share (or threat to loss of share) surfaces.

2) ...showing a clear trend of units leaving Canon and headed to a competitor (i.e. not an overall market depression, but an actual movement of unit share), Canon would undoubtedly respond with whatever missing piece was driving the loss of share.  But such moves wouldn't be overnight.  See how long Canon took to respond to on-chip ADC on sensors (a few years)*, how long until EOS M arrived*, how long we are still waiting for FF mirrorless, etc. 

* Let the record show we got such things even though Canon didn't lose share. 

But if you're looking for some 'if sales turn sour, Canon has to have a come to [deity of your choice] moment and realize the deep-seeded ills of not pleasing its forum-dwelling enthusiast userbase with things they want really baaaaaadly', please drive on.  Canon doesn't scratch itches.  Canon keeps you from getting itchy in the first place with a broad range of products that simply work.

- A
5
EOS Bodies / Re: What if Canon were no longer #1?
« Last post by unfocused on Today at 05:12:25 PM »
Anyway -- here is why it would matter. If Canon lost the top slot in sales it would mean they seriously misread the market. It would mean that mirrorless sales are far stronger than anyone predicted.

Does that holds true, given that this bit of information (if correct) applies specifically to full frame ILCs?

What do you think? Since we are dealing with purely speculative and no doubt false information, it's a little crazy to even speculate. In this theoretical example, which I don't believe for a minute is correct, I do think it would be an indication that Canon at a minimum underestimated the rate of adoption of mirrorless technology for full frame cameras.

Whether or not that would have a major impact on sales or profits, I don't know. But certainly, Canon's management would be asking how and why they had misread the market.
6
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIV v 5DV v 5D-M
« Last post by brad-man on Today at 05:10:54 PM »
As far as timing of future bodies goes, I'll be super brave ::) and say a FF mirrorless ILC system will be offered before a 5D5, which one does not think we'd see until the 2020-2021 neighborhood.

...but there's zero guarantee the first FF ILC body from Canon will have a 5D-level feature set. If the EOS M platform is any indication, they very well may go from bottom to top.  They could try to scoop up enthusiasts with a 6D-level mirrorless body before they try to court professionals with a 5D-level or 1DX-level mirrorless body.

- A

Then it will have a new mount and a frustratingly limited selection of slow zooms :P
7
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIV v 5DV v 5D-M
« Last post by ahsanford on Today at 04:50:46 PM »
Quite a while ago, there was a rumor (or some Canon official said) that a new sensor was being developed for FF mirrorless.  No guarantees, but a new sensor seems likely to be  highendish.

The 6D2 had a new sensor as well.   ::)

But even if it was a groundbreaking new sensor, what if that nice sensor is stuck in a body with...

  • Only 5 fps
  • Some features locked out unless you get native thin-mount lenses
  • A tiny viewfinder (or no integral VF at all, remember the first three EOS M models didn't have one!)
  • A tiny grip ill-suited for large EF glass or a large battery
  • Fairly inexpensive plastic body
  • No 4K

I'm obviously frankensteining something unattractive above, but Canon might walk before it runs in this space and put out something with relatively limited appeal just to scoop up early adopters and work out the kinks before something slick/polished is ever brought forward.

- A

8
Lenses / Re: Thoughts on 24-70 4.0 IS?
« Last post by ahsanford on Today at 04:39:48 PM »
Canon 85 1.8 (for general purpose non-wide angle)?  Canon 50 1.2?

I'd get a modern fire-and-forget 'take it to the bank' autofocuser with ring USM, that's what.

As every autofocusing Canon 50 is compromised on that front in some way, I'd get the 85 f/1.4L IS, 100L or 135L, perhaps the 85 f/1.8 USM if you are cost-constrained.

- A
9
EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 5DIV v 5DV v 5D-M
« Last post by BillB on Today at 04:37:59 PM »
As far as timing of future bodies goes, I'll be super brave ::) and say a FF mirrorless ILC system will be offered before a 5D5, which one does not think we'd see until the 2020-2021 neighborhood.

...but there's zero guarantee the first FF ILC body from Canon will have a 5D-level feature set.  If the EOS M platform is any indication, they very well may go from bottom to top.  They could try to scoop up enthusiasts with a 6D-level mirrorless body before they try to court professionals with a 5D-level or 1DX-level mirrorless body.

- A

Quite a while ago, there was a rumor (or some Canon official said) that a new sensor was being developed for FF mirrorless.  No guarantees, but a new sensor seems likely to be  highendish.
10
Lenses / Re: Thoughts on 24-70 4.0 IS?
« Last post by BillB on Today at 04:27:58 PM »
I hate to sound gasey, but what might one say about 16-35 4.0 IS, Sigma 50 1.4 Art and Canon 135 as a kit?

Depends on you and your needs.  Any prime-centric kit will push your patience for how frequently you do/don't want to change your lenses out. 

Also: caveat emptor with that Sigma.  It will split atoms sharpness-wise, but the AF has had well-documented problems of inconsistency (not front- or back-focusing, but just randomly whiffing).  So if you shoot events, weddings, reportage, candids, sports, etc. -- i.e. things you can't chimp and reshoot -- I'd strongly recommend another prime to serve that need.

- A
Canon 85 1.8 (for general purpose non-wide angle)?  Canon 50 1.2?

The 85mm might be a better fit with the 16-35 (that is what I use).  On the other hand, the 50 f1.2 might fit better with the 135mm.  Big price difference between the 50 f1.2 and the 85 f1.8.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 ... 10