October 31, 2014, 11:09:56 AM

Author Topic: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?  (Read 33460 times)

jukka

  • Guest
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #75 on: November 14, 2012, 10:21:12 AM »
of course canon entered the graveyard long time ago..

The most revolutionary Canon product ever was 5D mark 2 back in 2007-2008. Canon died after that.

If that's true, Canon is market-dominating zombie.

not at all, no, but their sensor division has fallen asleep since years back

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #75 on: November 14, 2012, 10:21:12 AM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14800
    • View Profile
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #76 on: November 14, 2012, 10:24:01 AM »
not at all, no, but their sensor division has fallen asleep since years back

Sorry, I wasn't aware that Canon sold sensors.  I thought they sold cameras
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

jukka

  • Guest
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #77 on: November 14, 2012, 10:41:06 AM »
not at all, no, but their sensor division has fallen asleep since years back

Sorry, I wasn't aware that Canon sold sensors.  I thought they sold cameras.

there is a small detail inside the cameras called sensor, earlier it was something called film

Hän ei ole tyhmä, hän on aivan onneton kuin hän ajattelee.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14800
    • View Profile
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #78 on: November 14, 2012, 11:29:45 AM »
not at all, no, but their sensor division has fallen asleep since years back

Sorry, I wasn't aware that Canon sold sensors.  I thought they sold cameras.

there is a small detail inside the cameras called sensor, earlier it was something called film

Did Canon make film?  Obviously, dSLRs contain sensors.   ::) 

My point is that a naked sensor does a very bad job of capturing and storing an image.  Things like a viewfinder, autofocus system, mirror/shutter assembly, processor(s), etc., are important parts of the product. The sensor is not the product, and to focus exclusively on the sensor and by extension, imply that the rest of the camera is of no more importance than the cardboard box used to package the camera, is ridiculous.  You take pictures, right?  Disassemble your camera and remove the sensor, then take that sensor out into the Finnish countryside and shoot some pictures.  Let us know how that works out for you.

R&D yen are finite, not infinite.  A company must decide how best (for them) to allocate those yen.  Look at car manufacturers - comparing models over time, despite a new model coming out each year, not everything about that new model is updated each cycle. Last year saw the model updated with a continuously variable transmission, but the engine was the same.  This year, the body style may be updated. Next year, maybe a new suspension and quad-zone climate control.  The engine won't be updated until the 2015 model comes out.

Your suggestion that their sensor division has 'fallen asleep' needs to be put into the context of an overall product development strategy, or you fall into the trap of assuming that the thing that's most important to you is important to all consumers.  We're all aware that there is a vocal group of individuals who are dissatisfied with Canon sensors, particularly with their DR when compared to Nikon.  Fine.  In the past couple of years, there has been a shift away from megapixels in marketing and popular view - I've frequently read that, "ISO is the new megapixles," and statements to that effect.  Maybe someday, DR will be the new ISO.  BUt we're not there yet.  The market shows that the vocal group complaining about comparatively poor DR of Canon sensors is a small minority (as evinced by the fact that Canon sensors have trailed
Nikon sensors on DR for a few years, years in which Nikon lost market share to Canon).

Looking at sales performance over time, Canon was the market leader a few years ago, and remains the market leader.  For most of quarters in the last few years, they have gained market share, not lost it - despite being 'asleep' in terms of sensor progress.  That says to me, and quite likely to Canon as well, that their strategy has been successful.  Most of their recent models, at the higher end at least, have offered minor improvements in sensor IQ, coupled with major improvements in performance (AF, frame rate, etc.). 
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

MarkII

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #79 on: November 14, 2012, 12:29:37 PM »
R&D yen are finite, not infinite.  A company must decide how best (for them) to allocate those yen.
An interesting question is why Canon made new silicon for the 5DIII, given that it performs almost identically to the 5DII. They could have just cleaned up the signal routing to the A/Ds and maybe added a new micro-lens array to improve the sensitivity a little.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14800
    • View Profile
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #80 on: November 14, 2012, 12:37:47 PM »
An interesting question is why Canon made new silicon for the 5DIII, given that it performs almost identically to the 5DII. They could have just cleaned up the signal routing to the A/Ds and maybe added a new micro-lens array to improve the sensitivity a little.

I assume so it's "new"...
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

PackLight

  • Guest
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #81 on: November 14, 2012, 12:46:32 PM »
not at all, no, but their sensor division has fallen asleep since years back

Sorry, I wasn't aware that Canon sold sensors.  I thought they sold cameras.

there is a small detail inside the cameras called sensor, earlier it was something called film

Did Canon make film?  Obviously, dSLRs contain sensors.   ::) 

My point is that a naked sensor does a very bad job of capturing and storing an image.  Things like a viewfinder, autofocus system, mirror/shutter assembly, processor(s), etc., are important parts of the product. The sensor is not the product, and to focus exclusively on the sensor and by extension, imply that the rest of the camera is of no more importance than the cardboard box used to package the camera, is ridiculous.  You take pictures, right?  Disassemble your camera and remove the sensor, then take that sensor out into the Finnish countryside and shoot some pictures.  Let us know how that works out for you.

R&D yen are finite, not infinite.  A company must decide how best (for them) to allocate those yen.  Look at car manufacturers - comparing models over time, despite a new model coming out each year, not everything about that new model is updated each cycle. Last year saw the model updated with a continuously variable transmission, but the engine was the same.  This year, the body style may be updated. Next year, maybe a new suspension and quad-zone climate control.  The engine won't be updated until the 2015 model comes out.

Your suggestion that their sensor division has 'fallen asleep' needs to be put into the context of an overall product development strategy, or you fall into the trap of assuming that the thing that's most important to you is important to all consumers.  We're all aware that there is a vocal group of individuals who are dissatisfied with Canon sensors, particularly with their DR when compared to Nikon.  Fine.  In the past couple of years, there has been a shift away from megapixels in marketing and popular view - I've frequently read that, "ISO is the new megapixles," and statements to that effect.  Maybe someday, DR will be the new ISO.  BUt we're not there yet.  The market shows that the vocal group complaining about comparatively poor DR of Canon sensors is a small minority (as evinced by the fact that Canon sensors have trailed
Nikon sensors on DR for a few years, years in which Nikon lost market share to Canon).

Looking at sales performance over time, Canon was the market leader a few years ago, and remains the market leader.  For most of quarters in the last few years, they have gained market share, not lost it - despite being 'asleep' in terms of sensor progress.  That says to me, and quite likely to Canon as well, that their strategy has been successful.  Most of their recent models, at the higher end at least, have offered minor improvements in sensor IQ, coupled with major improvements in performance (AF, frame rate, etc.).

Despite Canon building a great camera, having great lenses and even if Canon did fall behind on sensors Canon did have a obvious major failure that has caused Canon owners to swarm to Nikon;

As the OP has pointed out to us Canon failed to make it simple and educate 1D IV owners who are obviously to busy to read the manual on how to push the ISO button to change ISO when using a flash. They also failed in explaining how to adust your Auto ISO settings.

Also CAJ has a PE ratio of 12. this morning. If we can beat it up to 10 I am going to buy a few more shares.
« Last Edit: November 14, 2012, 12:48:59 PM by PackLight »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #81 on: November 14, 2012, 12:46:32 PM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14800
    • View Profile
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #82 on: November 14, 2012, 12:51:54 PM »
...obvious major failure that has caused Canon owners to swarm to Nikon;

As the OP has pointed out to us Canon failed to make it simple and educate 1D IV owners who are obviously to busy to read the manual on how to push the ISO button to change ISO when using a flash. They also failed in explaining how to adust your Auto ISO settings.

Even worse, when they released the 1D X, they made the ISO button physically smaller, meaning even someone who actually read the manual and knew about the ISO button may not be able to find it to press it.  Canon FAIL.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

7enderbender

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 635
    • View Profile
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #83 on: November 14, 2012, 01:34:57 PM »
Between the wife and myself we have 5 Canon bodies and 18 lenses of which only the 15mm fish eye and an old 100 macro are not L glass, with 7 series 2 lenses, so there is a sizable investment in Canon kit.

But the dissatisfaction with Canon’s tardiness is steadily mounting.

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. 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.

Then there is the long wait for the release of partially sorted equipment.

I waited almost 2 years for the 24-70 Mk II lens. The 200-400 lens, as staple for wildlife shooting in the Nikon stable, is yet nowhere in sight. Would also love a 14-24 for landscape work….

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

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. It is the probably the very best Canon camera but that is a bit like being the most beautiful girl at an all-male party.

IMHO it seems that the constant release of superior Nikon products is forcing Canon’s hand. Canon has since the release of the D300 been in catch up mode and are being forced to announce products that are still on the drawing board, and then have to rush half-baked stuff to market, at prices that exceed the Nikon range.
Has Canon fallen terminally behind?

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…..

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


See, in my opinion all this doesn't matter much from a business perspective. Not to say that you don't have valid points or to diminish you being annoyed since your needs are not met. On the other hand, I doubt that Nikon is really that different. Maybe some of their difference coincide with your specific needs for whatever reason, but generally it's pretty much all the same.

And pro and and prosumer cameras is not where their money is. Yes, they got lucky and sold a lot of 5DII bodies. Maybe that even increased the number of people going for L glass - though I'm not even convinced that their profit margin on those is that much higher. Yes, they want happy pros and semi pros, that's why they are jumping through all the expensive hoops. But they make money by selling you printers, medical equipment and point and shoot cameras. Sure, this may all change. And it may change for worse, if this model gets threatened. There may not be many /relative/ affordable camera gear left that meet your standards half-way. don't believe me? Go out and try to buy a computer today that is pro-grade yet affordable. Doesn't really exist. Apple or Lenovo buyers these days are all consumer oriented and that's what you get. If you want or need more you shell out big chunks of money. So there may well be a time when pro-grade camera means little specialty manufacturers like the Leicas or Hasselblads of our world.

We might want to enjoy what's available to us while it lasts. I'm actually pretty happy overall and can't really understand why people complain about high ISO performance and such. For the most part I would argue that nobody really need this. Decades of excellent wildlife (and other) pictures shot on 400 ISO film are proof to me. But then again, I'm not really the safari/Africa tourist to begin with so what do I know. I'd pay to be nowhere near such a thing.
5DII - 50L - 135L - 200 2.8L - 24-105 - 580EXII - 430EXII - FD 500/8 - AE1-p - bag full of FD lenses

natureshots

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #84 on: November 14, 2012, 01:36:46 PM »
I don't want to get all emotional here, but just to emphasize my other post, there are people who have other concerns than something about Canon (that I can't really remember) the OP mentioned. I took this pictures last Sunday on a morning walk.


I hope you did more than just taking the pictures
Well that is sort of the reason we live in a country like this. My wife works with international development within human rights and rule of law. These children are not starving, they are homeless. If they are not picked up by a children's protection organisation they are doomed to a life of crime and drugs though. My helping them with money of food wouldn't make a difference. One difference I can make is to publish a picture like that to make more people aware of what's going on in the world. That is in my view one of the tasks for photographers. I am not professional, but get some stuff published on occasion. This picture happens to be taken with my 5D3 but to deliver the message any tool could have been used. Auto ISO or not.

Really? helping with money or food wouldn't make a difference?  Even if for just that day?  your lack of compassion is staggering...keep on shooting that $3500 camera

Your stupidity is staggering. You have obviously not spent much time in an urban area. The number of homeless people are enormous. I have bought homeless people food and it makes a small difference in one of the thousands of homeless people's lives just in that city. Mostly it just made me feel better about my life and did very little to stem the tide of homelessness in Boston. Publicly displayed pictures or working for a human rights organization does so much more. A picture can inspire others to do something for the homeless people they pass every day.

So how much time have you spent working at your local soup kitchen? What do you volunteer your time for besides ignorant attacks on the internet. I volunteer a good deal of my time for local conservation efforts. I feel it is better way to make an impact on the future of the human race than helping with the homeless. You can argue that but you will not convince me otherwise. What do you do with your time and money robbymack Theresa that puts you in a position to judge others? (I just supplied my credentials to judge you)

tron

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1876
    • View Profile
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #85 on: November 14, 2012, 01:51:57 PM »
An interesting question is why Canon made new silicon for the 5DIII, given that it performs almost identically to the 5DII. They could have just cleaned up the signal routing to the A/Ds and maybe added a new micro-lens array to improve the sensitivity a little.
They made one dimension 3 times 1920 (5760) pixels so as to make 3X3 pixel binning in video

Chuck Alaimo

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 986
    • View Profile
    • Chuck Alaimo Photography
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #86 on: November 14, 2012, 03:12:43 PM »
not at all, no, but their sensor division has fallen asleep since years back

Sorry, I wasn't aware that Canon sold sensors.  I thought they sold cameras.

there is a small detail inside the cameras called sensor, earlier it was something called film

Did Canon make film?  Obviously, dSLRs contain sensors.   ::) 

My point is that a naked sensor does a very bad job of capturing and storing an image.  Things like a viewfinder, autofocus system, mirror/shutter assembly, processor(s), etc., are important parts of the product. The sensor is not the product, and to focus exclusively on the sensor and by extension, imply that the rest of the camera is of no more importance than the cardboard box used to package the camera, is ridiculous.  You take pictures, right?  Disassemble your camera and remove the sensor, then take that sensor out into the Finnish countryside and shoot some pictures.  Let us know how that works out for you.

R&D yen are finite, not infinite.  A company must decide how best (for them) to allocate those yen.  Look at car manufacturers - comparing models over time, despite a new model coming out each year, not everything about that new model is updated each cycle. Last year saw the model updated with a continuously variable transmission, but the engine was the same.  This year, the body style may be updated. Next year, maybe a new suspension and quad-zone climate control.  The engine won't be updated until the 2015 model comes out.

Your suggestion that their sensor division has 'fallen asleep' needs to be put into the context of an overall product development strategy, or you fall into the trap of assuming that the thing that's most important to you is important to all consumers.  We're all aware that there is a vocal group of individuals who are dissatisfied with Canon sensors, particularly with their DR when compared to Nikon.  Fine.  In the past couple of years, there has been a shift away from megapixels in marketing and popular view - I've frequently read that, "ISO is the new megapixles," and statements to that effect.  Maybe someday, DR will be the new ISO.  BUt we're not there yet.  The market shows that the vocal group complaining about comparatively poor DR of Canon sensors is a small minority (as evinced by the fact that Canon sensors have trailed
Nikon sensors on DR for a few years, years in which Nikon lost market share to Canon).

Looking at sales performance over time, Canon was the market leader a few years ago, and remains the market leader.  For most of quarters in the last few years, they have gained market share, not lost it - despite being 'asleep' in terms of sensor progress.  That says to me, and quite likely to Canon as well, that their strategy has been successful.  Most of their recent models, at the higher end at least, have offered minor improvements in sensor IQ, coupled with major improvements in performance (AF, frame rate, etc.).

Despite Canon building a great camera, having great lenses and even if Canon did fall behind on sensors Canon did have a obvious major failure that has caused Canon owners to swarm to Nikon;

As the OP has pointed out to us Canon failed to make it simple and educate 1D IV owners who are obviously to busy to read the manual on how to push the ISO button to change ISO when using a flash. They also failed in explaining how to adust your Auto ISO settings.

Also CAJ has a PE ratio of 12. this morning. If we can beat it up to 10 I am going to buy a few more shares.

+1
Owns 5Dmkiii, 6D, 16-35mm, 24mm 1.4, 70-200mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 85 mm 1.8, 100mm 2.8 macro, 1-600RT, 2 430 EX's, 1 video light

jrh

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 21
    • View Profile
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #87 on: November 14, 2012, 04:59:32 PM »


Also CAJ has a PE ratio of 12. this morning. If we can beat it up to 10 I am going to buy a few more shares.
[/quote]

If any company is on the brink of a "graveyard spiral" it is Sony. P/E performance is negative and setting 52 week low on share prices. Does not bode well for investment in developing future technology and retaining top talent.  Canon is still making a profit.  Btw - if Nikon is doing soo well it is definitely NOT reflected in their share prices.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #87 on: November 14, 2012, 04:59:32 PM »

wickidwombat

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4526
    • View Profile
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #88 on: November 14, 2012, 05:04:32 PM »
Between the wife and myself we have 5 Canon bodies and 18 lenses of which only the 15mm fish eye and an old 100 macro are not L glass, with 7 series 2 lenses, so there is a sizable investment in Canon kit.
...

Lets see the Nikon crap capture this image at ISO 25K from a helicopter.



Sounds to me most of the better shooter just happened to be using Nikon

I'm pretty sure a D4 would have no trouble with taking a shot like that
in fact I'm pretty certain Joe Mcnally has published similar aerial shots taken from helicopters using D3s
APS-H Fanboy

Ben Taylor

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 29
    • View Profile
Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #89 on: November 14, 2012, 05:09:24 PM »
If Sony hits the graveyard will Nikon follow then? If everyone's so adamant that Nikon's better because of their sensor performance and they use Sony sensors they might be forced to put Canon sensors in  ;D 

I'm sure Canon would be supportive though and let them use the original 1D sensor for a reasonable price.  ;)
5D Mark III  | 5D Mark II  |  Samyang 14mm f/2.8  | Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L  |  Sigma 85mm f/1.4L  |  Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II  | Canon 2X Extender III  |  Canon 580 EX II  | RRS TVC 34L + RRS BH55 LR                            http://www.flickr.com/photos/ben_taylor_au/

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Has Canon entered the Graveyard Spiral?
« Reply #89 on: November 14, 2012, 05:09:24 PM »