Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?

[distant.star]

.
I don't know about Canon, but my brother has a nasty cold.

I sure hope he hasn't entered the graveyard spiral!!

[Kernuak]

.
I don't know about Canon, but my brother has a nasty cold.

I sure hope he hasn't entered the graveyard spiral!!

Depends whether its Asian flu or not .

[Plato the Wise]

Sounds like a personal problem.

Doesn't the 1d M4's native ISO range from 100-12800? Why would you be "limited" to 1600 ISO?

And if you are "limited" by auto flash ISO stuck on 400 ISO - switch it manually.

Sounds like a lot of whining and not enough thinking.

And as others have said - I don't think Canon will be going out of business any time soon.

[Zlatko]

..., the most frustrating feature is that the fitting of a flash to the 1D Mk4 forces Auto ISO to fix at 400. Damn nuisance if you are doing night work, want to work Manual at ISO 1600 with a fill flash and the clever Canon firmware decides that it is time to override your settings.  The 1DX has the same problem  feature. This could explain why 7 out of the 10 photographers that joined the leopard safari shot Nikon.

The original post has far too much erroneous doom & gloom for me to address, so I'll write about just one topic.  The fitting of a flash to the 1D4 or any Canon EOS camera only forces the ISO to 400 if one is using Auto ISO or the green program mode.  Why someone would feel this is a problem or limitation of the cameras is dumbfounding.  The obvious answer is:  don't use Auto ISO with flash.  Remember that ISO can be set manually.  Remember what we did before cameras had Auto ISO.  Indeed, from the dawn of the film era through most of the digital era, the photographer set the ISO, either manually or via choice of film.  Once set manually, the ISO stays set, flash or no flash.  Auto ISO works great without flash.  And flash works great with manual ISO.  There is simply no problem with any of this.  If this is putting a damper on someone's leopard safari, or making photographers switch to Nikon, well, they must be Auto-ISO-only shooters, which is rather oddly self-limiting.

[Patrick]

A good photographer with a cheap camera and a kit lens will produce better and more interesting images than an unskilled/creatively challenged photographer using a 1Dx or a D4 with a wide selection of quality glass. This is because a good photographer, while aware of the limitations of the equipment, will work in such a way as to maximise the quality of his images while his/her unskilled counterpart is still trying to work out what I just said and wondering if they should feel insulted or praised! 

[Patrick]

he now shoots Canon 

His gear list is all Nikon, save for the G12.

@Daniel...just had a look at Andy Rouse's site - his latest blog post (29th October 2012) include the following:

Anyway for now this will be all as I want to get it loaded up, all taken with 1DX, macro, 300 2.8 and various flash.....

So it looks like he had indeed gotten back into at least some Canon gear as well as/instead of Nikon.

[tnargs]

@iso79

Absolutely correct observation.

Never even been near a shutter release: http://lorettasteyn.blogspot.com/

dear oh me, I can see your problem. The sooner you change to Nikon the better.

[dtaylor]

On a recent leopard safari the Nikon D4 crowd simply ran away with shots compared to the best our 1D Mk4s could deliver. We are not only talking sensor performance, although we lived like lepers with only ISO 1600 max, the most frustrating feature is that the fitting of a flash to the 1D Mk4 forces Auto ISO to fix at 400.

While I do not question the flash issue, I couldn't help but laugh at the rest of your post.

* It's nonsense (or troll bait) to suggest that the 1D4 cannot shoot higher than ISO 1600.

* No way a D4 user should "run away" from a 1D4 user purely because of the camera. The D4 is newer/better, but simply not by any great amount.

* If Auto ISO wasn't working for me on a trip like that, I wouldn't use it, and no D4 user would "run away" from me.

All recently released bodies had significant problems and required post release upgrades and firmware replacement.

No, they did not.

A lot of noise being made about the 1DX, probably the best copy of a Nikon 3D that Canon ever produced, and is probably marginally better than the D3, I seems a capable camera but only if compared to the previous Nikon model.

Absolute nonsense. It is clearly competitive with the D4.

My concern is the rate at which the local photo community is switching to Nikon. With profitability already down Canon is yielding significant market share to innovative and high quality Nikon products and that means less money, also for R&D, resulting in less capable kit, resulting in less sales, resulting in less money…..

Last time I saw stats Canon still held #1 market share position. Do you have newer info? Source?

Should they rather focus on the point and shoot consumer market and leave the high end stuff to professionals?

TROLL ALERT 

[bycostello]

wkth fuji, olympus and sony all nipping at their heels they better get to grips with stuff soon....  the canon m may of sold well... but if falls massivly short of what you'd expect.....

[Zv]

No speedliter in their right mind uses auto ISO. How is that an issue? And I would hardly call the 1DX and 5D mk III  "half baked". Canon are taking their time with lens releases to get them right. I'm sure when the 200-400 comes out it will rock.

I don't understand this Nikon were running away with it comment either. Either you get the shot based on your skill and experience or you don't because of user error or luck. Only a bad photog blames equipment.

When was the last time you needed 35 megapixels? Am fine with 18 and even 21 seems like too much, I'm always sizing down files, which is fine I like the flexibility.

I do wish Canon had better high ISO performance but it's not a big deal, just use noise red software and get on with it.

Nikon make great gear, Canon makes great gear. we should be greatful there is choice instead of complaining about it!
 

[pwp]

Graveyard spiral? 
That emotive stuff...
Wait...there's a distinct smell of troll in the air.

-PW

[Harv]

I wish I was in a graveyard spiral just like Canon.   

[Nishi Drew]

Ahh yes, OP is complaining that Canon has been pathetically behind since the D300, a now 5 year old camera. Why haven't you switched five years ago then? Obviously smart enough to see that Canon was behind and would remain behind and useless because you can't figure out how to set your bloody ISO!!... oh wait... troll bait....?
If only I could lavish in those L glass and 1D bodies... well then the tech will be better than what I am capable of I'll admit that, I'm happy with the more-than-capable 5DII and my Siggy lenses, the direction of manufacturers based on their top-speced gear matters to the few that will actually be able to make such an investment, so by the time (if ever, of course) Canon can meet or exceed Sonikon then I might be able to actually purchase good tech, and in the mean time it's time take more pictures.

[rpt]

That said I need a little more time until I can complain that my cameras are holding me back
So I'm heading back to shoot/edit my RAW files because I'm convinced that none can convince me to convince him about something that I'm totally convinced I'm right without being convinced first that I have to convince him... 

LOL! You convinced me too. Off to shoot some pics with my 100L

[tron]

..., the most frustrating feature is that the fitting of a flash to the 1D Mk4 forces Auto ISO to fix at 400. Damn nuisance if you are doing night work, want to work Manual at ISO 1600 with a fill flash and the clever Canon firmware decides that it is time to override your settings.  The 1DX has the same problem  feature. This could explain why 7 out of the 10 photographers that joined the leopard safari shot Nikon.

The original post has far too much erroneous doom & gloom for me to address, so I'll write about just one topic.  The fitting of a flash to the 1D4 or any Canon EOS camera only forces the ISO to 400 if one is using Auto ISO or the green program mode.  Why someone would feel this is a problem or limitation of the cameras is dumbfounding.  The obvious answer is:  don't use Auto ISO with flash.  Remember that ISO can be set manually.  Remember what we did before cameras had Auto ISO.  Indeed, from the dawn of the film era through most of the digital era, the photographer set the ISO, either manually or via choice of film.  Once set manually, the ISO stays set, flash or no flash.  Auto ISO works great without flash.  And flash works great with manual ISO.  There is simply no problem with any of this.  If this is putting a damper on someone's leopard safari, or making photographers switch to Nikon, well, they must be Auto-ISO-only shooters, which is rather oddly self-limiting.

You couldn't have said it better. I was about to mention that maybe, just maybe an average or above average DSLR shooter can set the ISO to manual     (especially a 1D series user ...    )