Is canon going to come back?

[Simba]

Thanks for those two very helpfull comments, and i totally agree with both of you.

@meuroanatomist
They´re ahead because they sold so many 5d2 and now they give those users everything they wanted in the first place with the 5d3. They are forced to upgrade, even tough the camera doesnt provide anything fantastic or revolutionary and is pretty pricey (when you look at the competition).

Nikon bodies fell behind when the 5D II was released. They didn't make any real progress to be in any kind of lead till the D800. They have played leapfrog with bodies for years. With the rumored 46 mp Canon in the wild, who will be behind in bodies when it is released.

Lets not forget, Nikon has always been behind with glass.

I stand by the first comment I made in the thread.

Unfortunately the statement 5D II leads D700 can only be found in this forum. You will see different opinions if you open your mind and look at different forums or do a google search.  To be fair, they are very different cameras.  5D II leads in mega pixel and video.  D700 leads in AF and ISO.  They are obsolete now, but check out their resale values on eBay or amazon.  You will know the truth.

[PackLight]

It seems that with the d800 Nikonians tout the MP count, but with the D700 it doesn't matter?

It would be sad to buy in to a camera system that has a one hit wonder, but hardly any glass to back it up with.
I would hate to go to the woods with Nikons huge 600mm f/4 around with it's mediocre resolving power, just so I could say I owned a 36mp camera.

This started out as and still is a troll's thread. It wasn't even well disguised.

[leolol]

Yeah obviously i must be trolling if i consider a nikon over a canon. fanboy S___ all over the place, honestly like 4 people in this thread were actually able to give their thoughts and the rest of you has not really opened their eyes nor minds (yet). But you should all do because if you dont Canon is gonna continue to make overpriced products that arent revolutionary.

[PackLight]

46mp body for i say ~8k if i look at their picing right now. Thats ok, but not for me. And even if it would be cheaper, that doesnt mean that it will be on par. And if the 14-24 struggles with the d800 then imagen the 16-35 with a rumored 46MP Body. lol

When given the answer to your original question, is Canon going to make a come back you give this response.
You never wanted to debate the answer to your original question as it is immaterial to your true intent.
If such a camera is released next year it leap frogs Canon back ahead of Nikon. You apparently didn't want this answer.

So yes this thread is a troll's thread.

[neuroanatomist]

... the 5d3. ... doesnt provide anything fantastic or revolutionary and is pretty pricey (when you look at the competition).

Just the 1-series AF system that is better than anything else Canon or Nikon offers - nothing fantastic about that... Maybe those old lenses you prefer are all manual focus only, but for most of us, that's pretty fantastic.

They´re ahead because they sold so many 5d2

Not really. Sales of high-end bodies and L-series lenses are a very small fraction (both in units and revenue) compared to the entry-level Rebel/xxxD bodies and kit lenses.  But one reason they sold so many 7D's and 5DII's is because of that huge customer base at the entry level - upgraders are much more likely to stay with their current brand.  That customer base still exists, and is much larger than Nikon's.

Unfortunately the statement 5D II leads D700 can only be found in this forum. You will see different opinions if you open your mind and look at different forums or do a google search.  ...check out their resale values on eBay or amazon.  You will know the truth.

LOL. Seriously?  What's stated here or on any other internet forum is opinion and is totally irrelevant. The 5DII far outsold the D700 in the marketplace.  That's the "truth" - at least, the only one that matters.  In fact, your last statement just proves the point - basic supply and demand, used 5DIIs are cheaper than used D700s because there were a lot more 5DIIs sold, therefore more are available on the used market. Truth, indeed...

Yeah obviously i must be trolling if i consider a nikon over a canon.

Considering Nikon over Canon isn't trolling. Stating that you're considering Nikon over Canon isn't trolling. Starting a thread to state that you're considering Nikon over Canon isn't trolling.  Giving that thread a title like, "Is canon going to come back?," with an opening post stating, "Right now canon is far behind others. Or lets just say it: Nikon," - that IS trolling, in every way.

[leolol]

Ok AF is fantastic but it isnt a revolution! We had great AF systems before, but we never had 36Mp in a FF Body.

Ok then because of the rebels, but does that matter? They are resting now because they sold so much. Look at the crop Bodys, all have the same 4 year old sensor.

If you would open your eyes you would see that they are behind. d4 outperforms the 1dx in high iso, and autofocous is good in both. d800 is the best studio camera on the market, 1ds3 isnt what i once was, 5d2 and 5d3 cant compete here either. The 5d3 is the best press camera out there for sure. But i dont need somethign like that.

[PackLight]

What makes you think no one here has compared.

My kit consists of a 500mm f/4, 300mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8 and various wide and macro lenses. I am getting ready to upgrade to a 600mm f/4. I look at all the options when I upgrade, especially to a $12,000 lens.

Nikon trails behind almost all the way across my kit for what I do.


 The Nikon 300mm isn't as sharp as Canon's old version.

The Nikon 600mm isn't as sharp as Canon's and weights several pounds more.

The AF system of the 1D's are the best of the best.

For my landscape picture now Nikon would have a slight edge with sensors but only if you go to Zeiss lenses. For low light conditions and high ISO the 1D X is still the animal to have.

Your opinions are the ones that are limited, and if you would open your eyes to how other people shoot you would see that Nikon isn't as far ahead as you think.

[neuroanatomist]

Ok then because of the rebels, but does that matter? They are resting now because they sold so much. Look at the crop Bodys, all have the same 4 year old sensor.

If you would open your eyes you would see that they are behind.

Yep, that same old 4 year old sensor is hurting their sales.  They are behind.  Open your eyes and look at the list below.  Now...who's behind?     Any Nikon bodies in the top 5?  Do your eyes see the D800's on that list?  It's way down at #25, with 16 Canon entries ahead of it.  Maybe when you buy one, that'll be enough to push it all the way up to #24...a spot currently held by the totally outmoded, no-longer-competitive Canon 5D Mark II.

[Simba]

Unfortunately the statement 5D II leads D700 can only be found in this forum. You will see different opinions if you open your mind and look at different forums or do a google search.  ...check out their resale values on eBay or amazon.  You will know the truth.

LOL. Seriously?  What's stated here or on any other internet forum is opinion and is totally irrelevant. The 5DII far outsold the D700 in the marketplace.  That's the "truth" - at least, the only one that matters.  In fact, your last statement just proves the point - basic supply and demand, used 5DIIs are cheaper than used D700s because there were a lot more 5DIIs sold, therefore more are available on the used market. Truth, indeed...

Opinion does matter.  We are talking about qualities of products in forums, and that's why we are here.  Market share is determined by many factors, and that's why Rebel outsold 5D, not because Rebel is better than 5D.

[neuroanatomist]

We are talking about qualities of products in forums, and that's why we are here.  Market share is determined by many factors, and that's why Rebel outsold 5D, not because Rebel is better than 5D.

You were comparing the 5DII to the D700, not to a camera costing 1/5 as much (at least, you weren't to begin with, and I don't see your point in doing so now, except perhaps as a concession to the main point).  I think you're missing the point.  You may post on a forum that the D4 is the best camera in the world, but unless you use your fingers to hand your money to a vendor and buy one, your posted opinion isn't worth the 2 cents worth of electricity you wasted posting it. In any case, the people who post their opinions on forums represent a very small fraction of real buyers.  It's the opinions of those buyers that matter, in aggregate, and the 5DII was the clear winner over the D700 in that arena.

[Simba]

We are talking about qualities of products in forums, and that's why we are here.  Market share is determined by many factors, and that's why Rebel outsold 5D, not because Rebel is better than 5D.

You were comparing the 5DII to the D700, not to a camera costing 1/5 as much (at least, you weren't to begin with, and I don't see your point in doing so now, except perhaps as a concession to the main point).  I think you're missing the point.  You may post on a forum that the D4 is the best camera in the world, but unless you use your fingers to hand your money to a vendor and buy one, your posted opinion isn't worth the 2 cents worth of electricity you wasted posting it. In any case, the people who post their opinions on forums represent a very small fraction of real buyers.  It's the opinions of those buyers that matter, in aggregate, and the 5DII was the clear winner over the D700 in that arena.

Subjective and bias.

[neuroanatomist]

Subjective and bias.

Yes, now you're getting the point.  Opinions on Internet forums - this forum and others, your opinions and mine - are just that: subjective and biased.  That's why I brought up sales figures, which are objective.  One person may fervently believe that Nikon is better than Canon, while another rabidly believes the opposite.  But in aggregate, the data on dSLR market share indicate that more people have bought Canon dSLRs than Nikon dSLRs, consistently for the past several years.  Is Canon better? That's subjective. But the fact that Canon has outsold Nikon is an objective fact. I know what conclusion I draw from that fact...

[witeken]

Ok then because of the rebels, but does that matter? They are resting now because they sold so much. Look at the crop Bodys, all have the same 4 year old sensor.

If you would open your eyes you would see that they are behind.

Yep, that same old 4 year old sensor is hurting their sales.  They are behind.  Open your eyes and look at the list below.  Now...who's behind?     Any Nikon bodies in the top 5?  Do your eyes see the D800's on that list?  It's way down at #25, with 16 Canon entries ahead of it.  Maybe when you buy one, that'll be enough to push it all the way up to #24...a spot currently held by the totally outmoded, no-longer-competitive Canon 5D Mark II.

I think he means Canon is behind with their (crop sensor) technology, not the amount of sales. Canon's crop bodies are far behind of Nikon's . They cost a lot more and have an old sensor .         

[leolol]

I never meant that they are behind sales whise. But technology whise.

[neuroanatomist]

I think he means Canon is behind with their (crop sensor) technology,

Ahhhh. Next time I'm in the market for a naked piece of silicon imaged as a CMOS image sensor, I'll keep that in mind.  Usually, though, I prefer to buy cameras, not sensors.  All that other technology wrapped around the sensor is sort of important to me.

I never meant that they are behind sales whise. But technology whise.

For anyone who believes technology trumps sales, how many Betamax video tapes did you buy?  That was a demonstrably better technology than VHS.  Who won? 

And with that blanket 'Canon is behind' statement, you've brought us right back to where the thread started. Troll-ville.