August 21, 2014, 02:45:43 AM

Author Topic: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]  (Read 38744 times)

dlleno

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 599
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #195 on: January 29, 2013, 10:55:49 AM »
because no competition have anything like APS-H, the image quality drop vs full frame is minimal unlike the wonderfull APS-C.

Well, I understand your point and I'd probably even buy an enthusiast aps-h camera - but as discussed all over expanding the dslr market share doesn't seem to be Canon thinking, for them it's most important to grab as much money as they can get away with while while keeping a strong position in the pro/cps-segment - and the latter is mostly ff :-\

+1 on these points.   The money grab occured by moving the pro sports/wildlife segment away from H and into FF plus longer gla$$.  to the extent that this remains Canon strategy, there is room to address the enthusiast/sports/wildlife segment with a full featured APS-C camera priced between the 6D and 5D3 (lets remind ourselves that the CR2 rumor mentioned a 'mid level' camera).  The attractivness of such a high priced APS-C camera is worth debating, to be sure, i.e will Canon produce a worthy sensor. 

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #195 on: January 29, 2013, 10:55:49 AM »

ahsanford

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 836
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #196 on: January 29, 2013, 02:37:01 PM »

+1 on these points.   The money grab occured by moving the pro sports/wildlife segment away from H and into FF plus longer gla$$.  to the extent that this remains Canon strategy, there is room to address the enthusiast/sports/wildlife segment with a full featured APS-C camera priced between the 6D and 5D3 (lets remind ourselves that the CR2 rumor mentioned a 'mid level' camera).  The attractivness of such a high priced APS-C camera is worth debating, to be sure, i.e will Canon produce a worthy sensor.

You are spot on.

Of course, Canon can move us to larger sensors only so much because of that glass reason you mention. 

For instance, let's say Canon offered an 'affordable medium format rig' and tried to do to veteran FF shooters what the 6D was meant to do to veteran APS-C shooters.  Even if the camera's quality / value proposition was solid, verteran FF shooters might not be so excited to buy something longer -- say a 70-200 -- just to have the length we need to cover a family birthday.  And hell, we'd need the Sigma 200-500 monster just to shoot a school play.  :D

I know they wouldn't be physically compatible with the mount if they actually did this, but I think you gather what I mean.  Bigger sensors = bigger/pricier glass to do the same focal length job as before.

So bigger sensors are great, but if they force us to buy fundamentally pricier glass to do what we could before with less expensive glass, some folks might not be so enthused.

Hence, APS-C will be here for a very long time.

- A

ahsanford

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 836
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #197 on: January 29, 2013, 03:21:50 PM »
I know where you're getting at, but like I said the price section isn't what I was trying to get at.


You've actually put the cart before the horse. Apple has clearly shown that price strategy comes first when figuring out model differentiation.

[TRUNCATED FOR LENGTH]

In tabular form:

T2i : $600
T3i : $700
T4i : $1000
----------------
8D : $1200
7D : $1600
6D : $2100
----------------
(pro stuff however it falls out)

Cheers,

b&


+10 if I could.  Very insightful.

I think we all, as users, wrestle with the premise that Canon has so many product lines -- see chart graphic from http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/rumours.html (also attached at bottom)

It's fun for us to make sweeping simplifications to portfolios -- and what you propose is indeed the Apple go-to gameplan.

But with camera owners, I'm sure there is a Canon marketing guy who could bury us with market segmentation data to imply that each and every SLR bucket they offer is vital, financially viable, and useful.

Think of each of these segments and what differentiates them:

  • XXXXD:      Cost cost cost.  "I cannot buy a film camera any longer", "my high school student son wants to pick up photography", etc.

  • XXXD:        A few key consumer level niceties: touch screen, swivel screen, so-so AF for video. "I just want it to take nice pictures, and occasionally a video", "Do I need a longer lens?  Maybe...", etc.

  • XXD:          A thicker grip (I hear this often), top LCD for quick adjustments, less reliance on auto modes. "I've been shooting a while now", "I felt limited by my older camera", etc.

  • 7D:            Serious shooters and some pros who see APS-C as a strength and not a liability.  Better build.  Fast burst.  "This is the best tool for birding", "I need high burst rate to cover sports for the local paper",  "I really like tweaking my lens AF", etc.

  • 6D:            Serious shooters who do see APS-C as a liability but don't want to pay for all the bells and whistles.  "I have always wanted a FF camera", "It's not the highest end, but you should see the pictures I get with this."

  • 5D3:          Pros, videographers, well-funded enthusiasts, etc. who will pay for IQ and build quality but do not require the apocalypse proof build, cost or size of 1D bodies.  "It's solid and doesn't let me down", "Shoosh, we're filming right now", "[Quiet shutter noise at wedding]", etc.

  • 1DX:          Those people.  "Welcome to my studio",  "We're invading Asia.  Thought I'd tag along", "It was this or the obsidian steering wheel for my yacht" ::)


Personally, I see the XXD group as the one that makes the least sense -- not in terms of value but in terms of overlap with other offerings.  I personally jumped from a T1i to a 5D3 this past year (file me under enthusiast) and found the jump to be an easy one.  I already had a bunch of lenses and only the 10-22 was a casualty of the move.

But I'm sure we all have our thoughts on segmentation.

- A

dlleno

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 599
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #198 on: January 29, 2013, 03:31:34 PM »
yea I can only imagine the cost of a medium format equivalent of the 600mm F/4.  not just the focal length changes to something close to 800, but the image circle is now proportionally larger as well (so the glass elements themselves are larger and most costly to produce), not to mention the optical requirements to deal with the higher resolution.  the beast would be $100k for petes sake. 

Not many medium formatters shoot wildlife, lol :D , but that does illustrate the cost benefits of a C lens --

Athlon

  • Guest
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #199 on: January 29, 2013, 04:47:14 PM »
Nobody's cheering for the upcoming EOS M?
I wasn't really turned off by the slow AF that was pointed out by reviewers, but if that's addressed in the next iteration (and that'll prolly be the biggest improvement), I'll surely buy it.

Quasimodo

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 864
  • Easily intrigued :)
    • View Profile
    • 500px.com
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #200 on: January 29, 2013, 04:53:49 PM »
Nobody's cheering for the upcoming EOS M?
I wasn't really turned off by the slow AF that was pointed out by reviewers, but if that's addressed in the next iteration (and that'll prolly be the biggest improvement), I'll surely buy it.

Give me an optical vf and I will buy it!
1Dx, 5DII w/grip, 3x600 EX RT, ST-E3
Canon: 8-15L, 16-35L II,  24-105L , 70-200L IS II, 17L TS, 135L, 100L, 2x III TC, 40 F2.8 STM, 50 F1.4. Sigma 35 F1.4 Art, Sigma 85 F1.4, Sigma 150-500.
www.500px.com/gerhard1972

wickidwombat

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 4454
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #201 on: January 29, 2013, 05:50:07 PM »
Nobody's cheering for the upcoming EOS M?
I wasn't really turned off by the slow AF that was pointed out by reviewers, but if that's addressed in the next iteration (and that'll prolly be the biggest improvement), I'll surely buy it.

Give me an optical vf and I will buy it!

what I have discovered that is bugging me most about the M right now is no way of attaching an intervalometer!
i dont really care about optical VF on this camera or even the af speed doesnt bug me but I want to use it mainly for timelapse :( roll on a stable ML release hopefully that will unleash the power
« Last Edit: January 29, 2013, 06:13:43 PM by wickidwombat »
APS-H Fanboy

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #201 on: January 29, 2013, 05:50:07 PM »

fonts

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #202 on: January 29, 2013, 07:06:07 PM »
I know where you're getting at, but like I said the price section isn't what I was trying to get at.


You've actually put the cart before the horse. Apple has clearly shown that price strategy comes first when figuring out model differentiation.

[TRUNCATED FOR LENGTH]

In tabular form:

T2i : $600
T3i : $700
T4i : $1000
----------------
8D : $1200
7D : $1600
6D : $2100
----------------
(pro stuff however it falls out)

Cheers,

b&


+10 if I could.  Very insightful.

I think we all, as users, wrestle with the premise that Canon has so many product lines -- see chart graphic from http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/rumours.html (also attached at bottom)

It's fun for us to make sweeping simplifications to portfolios -- and what you propose is indeed the Apple go-to gameplan.

But with camera owners, I'm sure there is a Canon marketing guy who could bury us with market segmentation data to imply that each and every SLR bucket they offer is vital, financially viable, and useful.

Think of each of these segments and what differentiates them:

  • XXXXD:      Cost cost cost.  "I cannot buy a film camera any longer", "my high school student son wants to pick up photography", etc.

  • XXXD:        A few key consumer level niceties: touch screen, swivel screen, so-so AF for video. "I just want it to take nice pictures, and occasionally a video", "Do I need a longer lens?  Maybe...", etc.

  • XXD:          A thicker grip (I hear this often), top LCD for quick adjustments, less reliance on auto modes. "I've been shooting a while now", "I felt limited by my older camera", etc.

  • 7D:            Serious shooters and some pros who see APS-C as a strength and not a liability.  Better build.  Fast burst.  "This is the best tool for birding", "I need high burst rate to cover sports for the local paper",  "I really like tweaking my lens AF", etc.

  • 6D:            Serious shooters who do see APS-C as a liability but don't want to pay for all the bells and whistles.  "I have always wanted a FF camera", "It's not the highest end, but you should see the pictures I get with this."

  • 5D3:          Pros, videographers, well-funded enthusiasts, etc. who will pay for IQ and build quality but do not require the apocalypse proof build, cost or size of 1D bodies.  "It's solid and doesn't let me down", "Shoosh, we're filming right now", "[Quiet shutter noise at wedding]", etc.

  • 1DX:          Those people.  "Welcome to my studio",  "We're invading Asia.  Thought I'd tag along", "It was this or the obsidian steering wheel for my yacht" ::)


Personally, I see the XXD group as the one that makes the least sense -- not in terms of value but in terms of overlap with other offerings.  I personally jumped from a T1i to a 5D3 this past year (file me under enthusiast) and found the jump to be an easy one.  I already had a bunch of lenses and only the 10-22 was a casualty of the move.

But I'm sure we all have our thoughts on segmentation.

- A


Yes someone probably would show that how things are setup it will show that they make profit...but that's a given. They are milking the products which in turn give us either the same or a very very small step towards new technology. But what I'm proposing is another way of thinking, and in a sense it's how Apple is but I don't want to associate it with Apple because of the negative psychology that it can impose with certain consumers.

ahsanford

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 836
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #203 on: January 29, 2013, 09:16:54 PM »

Yes someone probably would show that how things are setup it will show that they make profit...but that's a given. They are milking the products which in turn give us either the same or a very very small step towards new technology. But what I'm proposing is another way of thinking, and in a sense it's how Apple is but I don't want to associate it with Apple because of the negative psychology that it can impose with certain consumers.


Agree again, but Apple wasn't the market leader when their great innovation model kicked in.  They said they would chase blue water innovations through 'user needs' rather than 'market expectations'.  That distinction is important.

Canon will never do that in an most areas b/c that's not what people expect of a leading camera company.  There are expectations of use across a number of segments, so the needs of segment A drive the needs of segment B.  Canon's rather vanilla (but capable) entry into mirrorless shows this -- they went for a straightforward smaller camera based on technology they know tons about (APS-C), with menus, interface etc. borrowed from other Canon offerings.  None of us should have been surprised by that.

But now look at the Apple-like blue water innovation entry Canon dropped earlier this month, the Powershot N:

http://photorumors.com/2013/01/07/canon-announced-powershot-n-elph-130is-a2600-a1400-compact-cameras/

It's not going to rock the world of an SLR shooter, but I challenge anyone to tell me:

  • What photography market segment does it go in?
  • Who is the target demographic?
  • What do you compare this to?

And there you have Canon, in one smaller camera, being a little brave.  It's not going to change our world, but where there are no expectations, interesting products can arise.  Sadly, this is Canon's very limited sliver of opportunity on the 'where the hell did that come from?' innovation front.

- A

fonts

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #204 on: January 29, 2013, 09:47:20 PM »

Yes someone probably would show that how things are setup it will show that they make profit...but that's a given. They are milking the products which in turn give us either the same or a very very small step towards new technology. But what I'm proposing is another way of thinking, and in a sense it's how Apple is but I don't want to associate it with Apple because of the negative psychology that it can impose with certain consumers.


Agree again, but Apple wasn't the market leader when their great innovation model kicked in.  They said they would chase blue water innovations through 'user needs' rather than 'market expectations'.  That distinction is important.

Canon will never do that in an most areas b/c that's not what people expect of a leading camera company.  There are expectations of use across a number of segments, so the needs of segment A drive the needs of segment B.  Canon's rather vanilla (but capable) entry into mirrorless shows this -- they went for a straightforward smaller camera based on technology they know tons about (APS-C), with menus, interface etc. borrowed from other Canon offerings.  None of us should have been surprised by that.

But now look at the Apple-like blue water innovation entry Canon dropped earlier this month, the Powershot N:

http://photorumors.com/2013/01/07/canon-announced-powershot-n-elph-130is-a2600-a1400-compact-cameras/

It's not going to rock the world of an SLR shooter, but I challenge anyone to tell me:

  • What photography market segment does it go in?
  • Who is the target demographic?
  • What do you compare this to?

And there you have Canon, in one smaller camera, being a little brave.  It's not going to change our world, but where there are no expectations, interesting products can arise.  Sadly, this is Canon's very limited sliver of opportunity on the 'where the hell did that come from?' innovation front.

- A


True, but that is why they need to do something different. You're also right on this being their opportunity, and honestly I think their in the BIGGEST point in their timeline to decide whether they will lead by a large margin or be muddied down with the rest. Canon is huge, and they sell (from what I can remember reading) the most but we're no longer in an age where we can say well "Buying Nikon/Canon will be better" even Sony (I should say definitely) is starting to creep up into that conversation, and given the way things are, they MIGHT pass it. I might not saying Canon is dieing or whatever, that isn't what I'm getting at. I just wish that a leading company will start loving what they make, and actually lead by revolution and not by how big their margins are. Yes they are a company...but not all companies operate on only making the biggest profit. (not pointing to you, just expressing my thoughts)

dave

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #205 on: January 29, 2013, 10:17:11 PM »

Yes someone probably would show that how things are setup it will show that they make profit...but that's a given. They are milking the products which in turn give us either the same or a very very small step towards new technology. But what I'm proposing is another way of thinking, and in a sense it's how Apple is but I don't want to associate it with Apple because of the negative psychology that it can impose with certain consumers.


Agree again, but Apple wasn't the market leader when their great innovation model kicked in.  They said they would chase blue water innovations through 'user needs' rather than 'market expectations'.  That distinction is important.

Canon will never do that in an most areas b/c that's not what people expect of a leading camera company.  There are expectations of use across a number of segments, so the needs of segment A drive the needs of segment B.  Canon's rather vanilla (but capable) entry into mirrorless shows this -- they went for a straightforward smaller camera based on technology they know tons about (APS-C), with menus, interface etc. borrowed from other Canon offerings.  None of us should have been surprised by that.

But now look at the Apple-like blue water innovation entry Canon dropped earlier this month, the Powershot N:

http://photorumors.com/2013/01/07/canon-announced-powershot-n-elph-130is-a2600-a1400-compact-cameras/

It's not going to rock the world of an SLR shooter, but I challenge anyone to tell me:

  • What photography market segment does it go in?
  • Who is the target demographic?
  • What do you compare this to?

And there you have Canon, in one smaller camera, being a little brave.  It's not going to change our world, but where there are no expectations, interesting products can arise.  Sadly, this is Canon's very limited sliver of opportunity on the 'where the hell did that come from?' innovation front.

- A


True, but that is why they need to do something different. You're also right on this being their opportunity, and honestly I think their in the BIGGEST point in their timeline to decide whether they will lead by a large margin or be muddied down with the rest. Canon is huge, and they sell (from what I can remember reading) the most but we're no longer in an age where we can say well "Buying Nikon/Canon will be better" even Sony (I should say definitely) is starting to creep up into that conversation, and given the way things are, they MIGHT pass it. I might not saying Canon is dieing or whatever, that isn't what I'm getting at. I just wish that a leading company will start loving what they make, and actually lead by revolution and not by how big their margins are. Yes they are a company...but not all companies operate on only making the biggest profit. (not pointing to you, just expressing my thoughts)


I don't think you give them enough credit.

Personally I feel Canon is pretty much better sensors away from being easily ahead.

I prefer:

- Their lenses (IQ)
- Their variety and range
- Their ergonomics (and LCD's on the DSLR's)
- The latest autofocus technology
- Their service and support
- Their reliability

Lets look at some absolute benchmarks they have laid out this last year or so:

- 24-70mmL ii
- the 500mm and 600mm version ii's
- the autofocus in the 1D X and 5D 3

I know people often sook about Canon's lack of a killer ultra wide zoom, but I rate the 14L and 17 TS-E as fantastic lenses.

Yes, their sensor tech could be improved but most other things are pretty rosy!

fonts

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #206 on: January 29, 2013, 10:41:46 PM »
Quote

I don't think you give them enough credit.

Personally I feel Canon is pretty much better sensors away from being easily ahead.

I prefer:

- Their lenses (IQ)
- Their variety and range
- Their ergonomics (and LCD's on the DSLR's)
- The latest autofocus technology
- Their service and support
- Their reliability

Lets look at some absolute benchmarks they have laid out this last year or so:

- 24-70mmL ii
- the 500mm and 600mm version ii's
- the autofocus in the 1D X and 5D 3

I know people often sook about Canon's lack of a killer ultra wide zoom, but I rate the 14L and 17 TS-E as fantastic lenses.

Yes, their sensor tech could be improved but most other things are pretty rosy!

 I do give them credit. Even though I don't own the AF of 1Dx/5D3 I know it's the best on the market. I also do love their lenses. I'm not trying to say they are a bad company or are going to die. I'm just trying to get to a new way of thinking.

 Idk I feel like I'm repeating myself too much :/ Ill back down as it seems that I'm failing at portraying my vision.

dave

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 126
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #207 on: January 29, 2013, 10:58:45 PM »
Quote

I don't think you give them enough credit.

Personally I feel Canon is pretty much better sensors away from being easily ahead.

I prefer:

- Their lenses (IQ)
- Their variety and range
- Their ergonomics (and LCD's on the DSLR's)
- The latest autofocus technology
- Their service and support
- Their reliability

Lets look at some absolute benchmarks they have laid out this last year or so:

- 24-70mmL ii
- the 500mm and 600mm version ii's
- the autofocus in the 1D X and 5D 3

I know people often sook about Canon's lack of a killer ultra wide zoom, but I rate the 14L and 17 TS-E as fantastic lenses.

Yes, their sensor tech could be improved but most other things are pretty rosy!

 I do give them credit. Even though I don't own the AF of 1Dx/5D3 I know it's the best on the market. I also do love their lenses. I'm not trying to say they are a bad company or are going to die. I'm just trying to get to a new way of thinking.

 Idk I feel like I'm repeating myself too much :/ Ill back down as it seems that I'm failing at portraying my vision.

I'm not being critical of you :), it's just I imagine that being a camera company (even a good one) and trying to please everyone is impossible. I think one of the biggest issues for most people (e.g. me) is how much the technology they desire will actually cost them. I'd prefer to pay a bit less...but then I'd just buy more  ::)
« Last Edit: January 29, 2013, 11:00:31 PM by dave »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #207 on: January 29, 2013, 10:58:45 PM »

Brock

  • Power Shot G16
  • **
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #208 on: January 30, 2013, 12:40:50 AM »


Quote
Making full frame sensors is expensive, that's why they cost so much.

They can make over quadruple the number or APS-C sensors out of the same wafer size as full frame.  e.g.  60D APS-C = 14.9x22.3mm = 332.27sq mm.  5D III FF =  24.0x36.0mm = 864 sq mm.   A 300mm wafer has about 70,500 sq mm.

With the number of cameras they sell, I think it's very unlikely they would see any cost savings with a single sensor design.  More likely they would lose a lot of money.

Which makes it very unlikely they would ever drop their prices as low as you're suggesting.  Realistically they'll stay the same or see a slight bump.  They'll likely try to keep the Rebel & X0D series close to the D5X00 & D7X00 series (if not slightly lower, which they traditionally are by about $100).

If they eliminated the X0D model, they are also eliminating any (semi)affordable DSLR with a good grip.

A Rebel for $600-950 vs a 7D II for $1700-2200 is a huge price difference.  It leaves a big gap for Nikon to fill w/ a $1200-1500 D7000 successor (which has a good grip & feels more solid than a Rebel).

If they don't have a 70D they have no D7000 successor equivalent & they lose all customers who think the Rebel is too small but don't want to spend 140+% more $$$ (than a X0D or D7X00) to get in a 7D successor.

If they really wanted to stand out from the pack, what they could do is increase the size of their APS-C.  All APS-C sensor are not the same size despite sharing the same name.  Canon could make a APS-C sensor that, while still smaller than full frame, is larger than Nikons 1.52X Crop factor.  That's the only way I can see them drawing out 500nm sensors.   That would create a problem w/ the current crop sensor lenses causing vignetting however, so that's unlikely to ever happen.

Unless, they could just have the camera shoot a lower megapixel crop of the larger APS-C if it detects a older crop lens is attached, and if a full frame or newer crop lens is attached then it shoots the full sensor at a higher MegaPixel.   That would be interesting.   Dollars to donuts it won't happen though.

I know where you're getting at, but like I said the price section isn't what I was trying to get at. It's the way of thinking that I am trying to show you. Most of us are use to seeing a Rebel , then a X0D, then XD, all having incremental upgrades. But instead of that, why not have a Rebel line that isn't crippled. See you're scared that Nikon will have an advantage of that middle price ground with something "similar". But think about it, no one will have anything similar to this idea I'm trying to get. This is why it's bad for us consumers when we can't tell the difference between Nikon and Canon products, no one is revolutionizing the market.

The cost of FF is expensive, but that doesn't necessarily make a product expensive. The cost of R&D and these random sidetracked "improvements" to the cameras they're doing is what's really making a camera expensive. Instead of wasting time and money with "middle ground" products they will focus on just 4 line product, which in itself will lower costs. Also think about it, if Canon stopped crippling their lines, how would you think of Canon now? A lot more people would get Canon, which in turns means Canon makes more of the Rebels which will keep cost per item lower.

Rebel would be the best entry camera, not being crippled in sensor and AF designs, but being limited by the 3 main areas I suggested. All the way up 1D which would have the MP needed for product shooters but not sacrifice the speed and noise quality everyone else would need. Think about it, people shouldn't have to choose anymore, the only reason we do is because no one is bringing or creating anything new to the plate.

You get me?

There's a limit to volume savings.  Canon is only able to fab X amount of sensors.  If they can sell them all for $200-800 but they sell them for $50-200 instead there's no benefit, just loss.

There's also the issue of pixel size.  If they put FF sensors into APS-C cameras & just cripple it with firmware, it's not just the cost of the FF sensor they're losing, it's the megapixel race.  FF sensors have much larger pixel sizes, bigger microlenses for better high ISO performance.  But that also means if you used the same design on an APS-C camera you'd end up w/ a 6ish MP camera which consumers would look at as if Canon is nuts, trying to rip them off, is 1/4 the resolution of Nikon's APS-C.

Hackers would love it I'm sure. They'd likely find a way to activate the whole sensor.

Canon's current R&D method is working for the most part, they're just dragging their feet switching to a smaller fab; because they already own their own 500nm.  The rest of their tech is evolving fine though.  Autofocus (sensitivity, accuracy, recognition, & prediction), video, touch screen, & color accuracy are all areas they've stayed ahead of Nikon.

I understand you'd like to see generational leaps closer to what you see in the computer industry, but with Cameras they can't use the same model.  Their material costs are higher & their volume is lower.


I know where you're getting at, but like I said the price section isn't what I was trying to get at.

You've actually put the cart before the horse. Apple has clearly shown that price strategy comes first when figuring out model differentiation.

Take a look at any of their product lines, and you'll see they almost always have four different models with fairly uniform spacing of the price between each. They then have a similar type of overlap between product lines -- MacBook Air => MacBook Pro => iMac => Mac Pro.

The net result is that it's easy for a customer to mentally slot into a broad category of desired product, easy to figure out which model fits the budget, and then -- and this is key -- the price points are closely spaced enough for the customer to reasonably imagine stretching a bit and buying the next model up.

That is, if you want to have a laptop and your budget is $1,000, the MacBook Air is right there for you. But just $100 more gets you twice the flash ("disk") storage, an easy upsell. Or $1,200 gets you the entry-level MacBook Pro, with much more impressive specs and not all that much more heft.

Viewed from that perspective, Canon's got it pretty close to right. The Rebel line needs some cleanup; they should ditch the T3 and drop the price of the T2i and do a bit of rounding; I'd put it at T2i @ $600 => T3i @ $700 => T4i @ $1000.  When the T5i comes out, price it at $1,100 and drop the prices of the others by $100, retire the T2i, and continue that pattern. I'd drop the 60D, call the rumored 70D an 8D instead and price it at $1200. The 7DII keeps the 7D price at $1600 (and the 7D goes away), then the 6D @ $2100, drop the 5DII when stock runs out, and the pro-level stuff they can price however they want. You're then left with three Rebels and three xD models for the masses, with gradual price jumps along the way. Funky branding and pricing is probably a bit of a plus for the top end, which is why the huge leaps and lack of naming consistency isn't a problem for the 5DIII and 1Dx and anything else (like the super megapickle studio camera) that might come along.

In tabular form:

T2i : $600
T3i : $700
T4i : $1000
----------------
8D : $1200
7D : $1600
6D : $2100
----------------
(pro stuff however it falls out)

Cheers,

b&

While I agree with the reasoning behind your argument for the most part, I think raising the price of a rebel to $1,100 is a bit much, considering the D5X00 launches at less than $900. 


One of the reasons Canon continue to outsell Nikons is price.  They usually launch very close in price, but then Canon drops their price in 3 months & then again in 6; making them the cheaper alternative.  The fact they can do this while still making their cameras in Japan (as opposed to China like Nikon) is impressive in itself, imo.

fonts

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #209 on: January 30, 2013, 01:06:42 AM »


Quote

There's a limit to volume savings.  Canon is only able to fab X amount of sensors.  If they can sell them all for $200-800 but they sell them for $50-200 instead there's no benefit, just loss.

There's also the issue of pixel size.  If they put FF sensors into APS-C cameras & just cripple it with firmware, it's not just the cost of the FF sensor they're losing, it's the megapixel race.  FF sensors have much larger pixel sizes, bigger microlenses for better high ISO performance.  But that also means if you used the same design on an APS-C camera you'd end up w/ a 6ish MP camera which consumers would look at as if Canon is nuts, trying to rip them off, is 1/4 the resolution of Nikon's APS-C.

Hackers would love it I'm sure. They'd likely find a way to activate the whole sensor.

Canon's current R&D method is working for the most part, they're just dragging their feet switching to a smaller fab; because they already own their own 500nm.  The rest of their tech is evolving fine though.  Autofocus (sensitivity, accuracy, recognition, & prediction), video, touch screen, & color accuracy are all areas they've stayed ahead of Nikon.

I understand you'd like to see generational leaps closer to what you see in the computer industry, but with Cameras they can't use the same model.  Their material costs are higher & their volume is lower.

Of course the Rebel line should be a crop sensor to save money. But anything after that it should be FF which can then turn into APS-H/C so that users that want to you it for reach they can. Most of the drawbacks associate with that is because we are still seeing the same technology of sensors but with this drive set of making the best than technology will improve to the point where it would minimize or wipe the current negatives to it.

And crippling firmware is the opposite of where I'm getting at. As you would get higher up the line the things that would change are processor power/efficiency, MP, and Shutter (FPS, etc)   

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon's Roadmap for 2013 [CR2]
« Reply #209 on: January 30, 2013, 01:06:42 AM »