July 30, 2014, 03:36:32 PM

Author Topic: An article Canon should read.  (Read 15129 times)

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13616
    • View Profile
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #30 on: August 31, 2011, 11:30:23 AM »
What's next, attacking the apple because it is named after a fruit?


Well, the apple is a fruit.  Apple, Inc. is a maker of consumer electronics, computers, and software. 

NO you don't have your facts straight and have repeatedly demonstrated this here


Behavior of which, yourself, have also been guilty of in previous posts (or do you still maintain that a 17mm lens should have a rear element that is 17mm from the image plane?).

If canon would be like apple...
...there would be just ONE dslr and ONE compact model with a new release every year
...it would cost twice as much as every other cam


Because Apple only makes one model of computer, right?  And I'm sure there are plenty of equivalents to my 17" MBP or 13" MBA (oh, wait, that's two models right there!) that provide the same functionality in the same form factor with the same ease of use.  Please, point me to them!

If canon would be like apple...
...there wouldn't be any manual mode anymore because the mass market don't need that


Because Mac OS X doesn't include the Terminal app for a command-line Unix shell interface that allows me to alter most system parameters at will. 

But in a relevant comparison, every current Canon dSLR outside of the 1-series bodies includes the green square mode for a reason - that same 'mass market'.

If canon would be like apple...
...canon would sue, nikon, sony, panasonic and every other manufacturer who build cams who look like... well, who look like a cam, because canon thinks that it has invented cams


Because Canon hasn't ever filed infringement lawsuits, right?  FWIW, Nikon recently sued Sigma for patent violations around their VR system.

"Yes, it does.  What you fail to realize is that many professional shooters will forgo the build quality, waterproofing, etc. and choose the 5DII because the sensor is essentially the same at less than half the cost.  Sport and wildlife shooters are usually the ones who need the waterproofing, and they use the 1D line (1.3x crop), not the 1Ds."

Again demonstrating that failure to engage brain before opening mouth - NO they are NOT the same sensors, the 1DS has a much higher pixel count (for example), faster processing, etc. NO they are NOT essentially the same sensor


A good example of taking something out of context then offering unwarranted criticism.  Let's look at the original quote:

Quote
  Cannibalising the market for the 1DsIII with the introduction of the 5DII --- actually, NO; this doesn't cannibalize that market at all; these are for different markets (I don't think you understand build quality, waterproofing, etc.)


Yes, it does.  What you fail to realize is that many professional shooters will forgo the build quality, waterproofing, etc. and choose the 5DII because the sensor is essentially the same at less than half the cost.  Sport and wildlife shooters are usually the ones who need the waterproofing, and they use the 1D line (1.3x crop), not the 1Ds.


Clearly, DJL329 was stating that the 1DsIII and the 5DII have essentially the same sensor.  Do you disagree with that? (If so, you're disagreeing with Canon's published statements, but as you know ALL THE FACTS, you should have no problem with that.)


The opening posts are very interesting. ...Change is happening at a vastly accelerated pace, but since the original EOS 1 Canon have always been the ones defining it. I hope we will see a 1Ds IV shortly that confirms their commitment to visionary change....


Agreed!!
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #30 on: August 31, 2011, 11:30:23 AM »

unfocused

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1925
    • View Profile
    • Unfocused: A photo website
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #31 on: August 31, 2011, 12:43:28 PM »
Well, this certainly confirms that there is nothing quite like Apple to get the juices flowing on both sides (all started by one person re-posting a rather silly p.r. story masquerading as commentary).

Archangelrichard, you do realize that your extreme reaction only reinforces the impression that many have about the cult-like loyalty that Apple inspires in some users?

Apple and Canon are both successful companies. They are in the business to make money. It is very tragic that Mr. Jobs is apparently in the end stages of pancreatic cancer (I have had two friends die of this disease in the last several years and I hate to see anyone with this disease), but he is and always was a businessman, not a saint. To suggest that Mr. Jobs did not care about profit is silly. He returned to Apple in order to return it to profitability.

What I take issue with is the suggestion that somehow Canon should be "more like Apple" when people don't really think through the consequences of that kind of statement.

On this forum people endlessly debate the relative merits of esoteric technologies and standards. Some people actually get angry that Canon has so far been unable to produce a camera that shares or exceeds the human eye's ability to reconcile range, tone, speed, focus, etc. (in fact there are even those who get angry because Canon hasn't yet produced a sensor that exceeds the human eye in low-light sensitivity).

The fact is that each new generation of today's digital cameras are improving upon the image quality of previous generations. The quality and flexibility available today was completely unimaginable just a few short years ago when film dominated the marketplace.

This has happened because Canon and Nikon have not (at least so far) abandoned the quality-conscious consumer and professional markets, even though they could certainly do so and probably increase their profits and reduce costs. 

In contrast, Apple has undeniably "dumbed-down" the audio quality of recorded music. As a result of Apple's admittedly impressive ability to innovate and market its innovations, all of us are condemned to a marketplace where recorded music sounds less, not more, like real life.

I am able to enjoy my 7D and the quality of images it produces because Canon has integrated my narrow market segment into their business plan. I know they are doing that because it makes them money, but none-the-less I appreciate their investment in quality and willingness to serve a niche market.

Wherever I travel I see people happily snapping pictures with their phones and it reminds me what I dinosaur I am with my big, heavy SLR. I hope that there will always be a market for consumers like myself, but I have to admit I am fearful that "innovative" products like the iPhone and iPad will further erode the camera market. I really don't want photography to suffer the same fate that recorded music has, where "good enough" displaces great.

I may be on the path to extinction, but for the time being, I'm kind of happy that companies like Canon and Nikon continue to compete for my money.
pictures sharp. life not so much. www.unfocusedmg.com

Sunnystate

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
    • View Profile
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #32 on: August 31, 2011, 01:26:44 PM »
Well, this certainly confirms that there is nothing quite like Apple to get the juices flowing on both sides (all started by one person re-posting a rather silly p.r. story masquerading as commentary).

Archangelrichard, you do realize that your extreme reaction only reinforces the impression that many have about the cult-like loyalty that Apple inspires in some users?

Apple and Canon are both successful companies. They are in the business to make money. It is very tragic that Mr. Jobs is apparently in the end stages of pancreatic cancer (I have had two friends die of this disease in the last several years and I hate to see anyone with this disease), but he is and always was a businessman, not a saint. To suggest that Mr. Jobs did not care about profit is silly. He returned to Apple in order to return it to profitability.

What I take issue with is the suggestion that somehow Canon should be "more like Apple" when people don't really think through the consequences of that kind of statement.

On this forum people endlessly debate the relative merits of esoteric technologies and standards. Some people actually get angry that Canon has so far been unable to produce a camera that shares or exceeds the human eye's ability to reconcile range, tone, speed, focus, etc. (in fact there are even those who get angry because Canon hasn't yet produced a sensor that exceeds the human eye in low-light sensitivity).

The fact is that each new generation of today's digital cameras are improving upon the image quality of previous generations. The quality and flexibility available today was completely unimaginable just a few short years ago when film dominated the marketplace.

This has happened because Canon and Nikon have not (at least so far) abandoned the quality-conscious consumer and professional markets, even though they could certainly do so and probably increase their profits and reduce costs. 

In contrast, Apple has undeniably "dumbed-down" the audio quality of recorded music. As a result of Apple's admittedly impressive ability to innovate and market its innovations, all of us are condemned to a marketplace where recorded music sounds less, not more, like real life.

I am able to enjoy my 7D and the quality of images it produces because Canon has integrated my narrow market segment into their business plan. I know they are doing that because it makes them money, but none-the-less I appreciate their investment in quality and willingness to serve a niche market.

Wherever I travel I see people happily snapping pictures with their phones and it reminds me what I dinosaur I am with my big, heavy SLR. I hope that there will always be a market for consumers like myself, but I have to admit I am fearful that "innovative" products like the iPhone and iPad will further erode the camera market. I really don't want photography to suffer the same fate that recorded music has, where "good enough" displaces great.

I may be on the path to extinction, but for the time being, I'm kind of happy that companies like Canon and Nikon continue to compete for my money.

Seems like you knew how to get right, sophisticated enough for your needs camera,  but you just don't know how to get good quality music, and this is Apple's fault in your mind?
If you desire, there are even vinyl still produced, CD's and digital music without any compression available.

Do you really expect educated enough consumer to run $30.000 sound system from the iPod, listen to downloaded Beethoven from iTunes? At the same token expect uncompressed 1 GB file on the teenagers iPod to listen lady Gaga on the school bus? Really?

I am really tired of this kind of flowed rhetoric that it is everywhere now, especially on all political sites.

« Last Edit: August 31, 2011, 01:28:37 PM by Sunnystate »

jgrabner

  • Guest
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #33 on: August 31, 2011, 03:38:44 PM »
Let's see...if Canon were more like Apple we would have a proprietary file format for all images that would allow us to view, print and manipulate those images using only Canon hardware and software.
actually, Apple would "invent" an entirely new storage card which it has patents on and will only be sold by Apple itself. It would cost three times as much as an SD card but would have the "benefit" of nobody being able to transfer pictures from one card to another without not paying Apple $100 per year for their online sharing software.

Quote
Canon would create a lens mount that would only function with Canon lenses, so that no third-party lenses could be used on its cameras.
and every company that dares to make an adaptor would get sued

Quote
Canon would abandon all but the low and highest-end markets, creating only mass consumer products and specialized products for a very narrow segment of the professional class.
the cameras would only have one button: "take picture"

Quote
It would find a way to charge consumers for each image and lock up the marketplace so that consumers could not freely exchange their own images.
well, they would ship a viewer software with each camera for free, which has to be installed on your computer and which is then the only way to transfer the images to your pc. You would not be able to process these pictures in any software that is not made by Apple, so they will sell you special versions of Lightroom and Photoshop for big bucks, which then can use the images from the Apple cameras.

and of course you image recognition software will prevent you from taking "obscene", "racist", "violent", or any not picture not deemed "appropriate" by Apple censorship.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13616
    • View Profile
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #34 on: August 31, 2011, 03:44:44 PM »
Let's see...if Canon were more like Apple we would have a proprietary file format for all images that would allow us to view, print and manipulate those images using only Canon hardware and software.
actually, Apple would "invent" an entirely new storage card which it has patents on and will only be sold by Apple itself.

Yeah...but the data throughput would be faster than anything in the industry, and it would have a cool iSomething name.   ::)
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

dstppy

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 880
    • View Profile
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #35 on: August 31, 2011, 04:18:51 PM »
well, they would ship a viewer software with each camera for free, which has to be installed on your computer and which is then the only way to transfer the images to your pc. You would not be able to process these pictures in any software that is not made by Apple, so they will sell you special versions of Lightroom and Photoshop for big bucks, which then can use the images from the Apple cameras.

and of course you image recognition software will prevent you from taking "obscene", "racist", "violent", or any not picture not deemed "appropriate" by Apple censorship.

Boy, you saved me a bundle there -- I thought the iphone had a browser, mms and e-mail.

I'da been real upset if my MMS pictures to my friends get filtered because I like to send updates on my dirty socks.

How much time a week do people who dislike apple spend obsessing about it?
Canon Rumors is presently creating photographer shortages in Middle Earth (all the trolls emigrated here)

Dave

  • Guest
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #36 on: August 31, 2011, 10:06:32 PM »
Quote from: Bruce Photography
why does that sound absolutely unacceptable on a camera but most people accept it for their smartphone?

I keep asking myself that question for a long time... And well... haven't come to an answer... I really love the design of the iPhone. But I still don't have one (and probably will not).

Quote from: archangelrichard
so there is just 1 iPod?, 1 iMac?, 1 iPad? 1 iPhone?

Okay three iPods (the touch is just a crippled iPhone). But yeah. Basically ther is one iPhone, one iMac and one iPad.  An iPhone 16GB and an iPhone 32GB are'nt different models. They are just the result of the restrictions from Apple concerning expansion.
Imo this is the secret oft Apples success... Look at Nokia or Samsung, how many different mobile phones they have. , resulting in a lot of costs for development, production and support.

Quote
not their market; you are blaming Apple for making a product for a market you are no part of

Sorry, but this is ridiculous. I know many (I mean MANY) iPhone useres who really love their iPhone but are CRAVING to have an SD Card or an USB. I really love iPhones. But this is the only reason I will buy a Samsung S2

Quote
and again the proof would be that Apple could easily buy adobe and has not;

But they did that on Software like Logic or Final Cut


Quote
are you now claiming that Apple has sued every maker of MP3 player

Here in Germany Apple just have sued Samsung for building... oh wait... let me quote Apple...

Quote
- a rectangular product with four rounded edges
- a flat clear surface covering the front of the product
- a metalic  frame aroudn that surface
- a display that is under that clear surface
- if the product is switched on there are coloured Icons on the display

Source: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Apple-geht-auch-gegen-Motorola-Xoom-vor-1321392.html


No this not a joke... This are Apples charges against Samsung. Since these is the description for the patent of the iPad.

And sorry, I have Apple products here. And I have no general problem with apple. But like it or not: These ARE facts.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #36 on: August 31, 2011, 10:06:32 PM »

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3304
    • View Profile
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #37 on: September 01, 2011, 01:25:15 PM »
"When the pressure is on and the CEO of a big public company has to choose between doing what’s best for the customer or making the quarter’s numbers… most CEOs will choose the numbers.

Apple never has."

Haha, yeah right.


I agree that Apple is a terrifically run company. But let's not pretend that their practice transcends the rules and norms of business. I really hate Apple worship.

1. I hate Apple worship when it comes to tech since their Apple II's were very soon outdated junk and yet even when there were advanced computers running at 16x the speed, with 4096 colors at once, stereo wave sampled sound built in and pre-emptive multi-tasking, salesman were still pushing the same priced APple II trash over the vastly better stuff. The MAC was basically junk within a year compared to competition and people worshiped that forever. And so on.

2. But you do have to say that they certainly knew how to market and run a company, MS too, way better than the likes of the other players (who actually had FAR more inventive and powerful hardware and OS). In fact, the fact that most people don't even know this just goes to show how good Apple and MS management actually was.


LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3304
    • View Profile
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #38 on: September 01, 2011, 01:27:04 PM »
Excellent article explaining why large companies are often "disrupted," why Apple hasn't succumbed to this, and why Canon SHOULD try to cannibalize its own products by innovating new ones. Anyone with Canon gear should read this. Very eye-opening.

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/08/29/jobs-made-apple-great-by-ignoring-profit/


Yeah I've been saying this for almost half a decade now. They used to be so far ahead they could've run away with it for stills and then they even had chance with video, instead they have slowly bled stills market share and the video market share might plummet soon.


LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3304
    • View Profile
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #39 on: September 01, 2011, 01:28:26 PM »
Excellent article explaining why large companies are often "disrupted," why Apple hasn't succumbed to this, and why Canon SHOULD try to cannibalize its own products by innovating new ones. Anyone with Canon gear should read this. Very eye-opening.

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/08/29/jobs-made-apple-great-by-ignoring-profit/


that said, i do hate how jobs switched over from the early hackers computer to a total 1984 closed down, locked down system, simply awful, as bad as Canon in that regard

Peter Hill

  • Guest
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #40 on: September 01, 2011, 10:57:54 PM »
"Actually here in Belgium there is one : canonline.be, the only photography store which sells only Canon."

No, that's not a Canon store, that's just a shop selling only Canons. There are heaps of those, and that's not what I meant. Canon, unlike Apple, does not do retail business.

ZeuZ

  • Guest
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #41 on: September 02, 2011, 08:44:24 AM »
"Actually here in Belgium there is one : canonline.be, the only photography store which sells only Canon."

No, that's not a Canon store, that's just a shop selling only Canons. There are heaps of those, and that's not what I meant. Canon, unlike Apple, does not do retail business.

:) tomatoes tomaatoes, it's a store and it only sells Canon, a Canon store, but you're right, Canon doesn't run retail like apples.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13616
    • View Profile
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #42 on: September 04, 2011, 12:38:38 AM »
"Clearly, DJL329 was stating that the 1DsIII and the 5DII have essentially the same sensor.  Do you disagree with that?" -- yes, I do.  --


I'm going to assume you disagree with the clause about the 1DsIII and the 5DII having the same sensor.  If you're disagreeing with the fact that that was the intent of DJL329 statement, reading comprehension is clearly an issue for you, and you might want to go re-read his original post, which I quoted.

"If so, you're disagreeing with Canon's published statements" -- well. Canon never said they were the same sensor but Similar; or as dpreview puts it "21 megapixel CMOS sensor (very similar to the sensor in the EOS-1Ds Mark III)"


They are similar, true.  The 5DII's sensor has modified circuitry for NR.  The photosites themselves are identical, in size, number and electronic characteristics.

being so much longer your basic notion of handholding at 1 over the focal length is out the window; that depended on lenses with normal gemoetry that have a smaller arc of movement; the longer the lens the greater the arc so you have to use the actual length - and just eyeballing it it is close to 135mm real length at 17mm focus so you hand hold at 1/125th of a second and no slower


Silly me, I didn't realize that the 1/focal length rule was based on the physical length of the lens.  I though it derived from the field of view relative to the impact of angular motion.  It's great to know that I can handhold a 200mm f/2.8L II prime at a 1/125 s, but a fully-extended 70-200mm f/2.8L zoom needs 1/200 s.  Speaking of the 70-200mm, as an internal zoom lens I suppose it can be handheld at the same shutter speed at both 70mm and 200mm settings, because the physical length of the lens doesn't change - right?  Oh, and that must also mean that sensor size has no effect on the shutter speed at which a lens can be handheld, because a different sensor won't change the physical length of a lens.  But maybe you were talking only about the 17-85mm lens - you can handhold that at a minimum 1/125 s whether it's set to 17mm or 85mm?  Since Canon bodies are programmed uses the 1/focal length rule to select the shutter speed in Av mode, I suppose the camera would avoid shutter speeds less than 1/125 s with that lens set at 17mm?  Try it...I bet you know something Canon's engineers don't.  Maybe you should send the engineers at the Canon Optics R&D Center in Utsunomiya those links to Wikipedia and the MIT lecture notes, because your understanding of optics probably surpasses theirs as much as it surpasses my own.  But thanks for the link to the lecture notes/slides.  A bit basic, though - since I've built multiphoton microscope systems from the ground up, I've got a reasonable understanding of optical physics. 

"Because Apple only makes one model of computer, right?" - actually; NO. Please get your facts straight

"Because Mac OS X doesn't include the Terminal app for a command-line Unix shell interface that allows me to alter most system parameters at will." - It doesn't? Really?

NO, I don't know everything but clearly I know and more importantly understand more than some


Clearly, you can't include sarcasm on that short list of things which you understand.  In case it wasn't clear to you, the above discussion of the 1/focal length rule was replete with sarcasm. 

But just as clearly, I'm guilty of feeding the troll.  Apologies to the members of this forum who maintain the ability to be civil and carry on intelligent discourse.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #42 on: September 04, 2011, 12:38:38 AM »

Eagle Eye

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #43 on: September 04, 2011, 10:56:59 AM »
If Canon were more like Apple, they would insall a direct print button on their cameras that would interface with Canon printers...

People, lets settle this thread down.  Obviously Apple and Canon are both doing something right, as they are both profitable companies.  Complain all you want about one or the other, but you cant dismiss that hard fact.
Gear! When do we get gear?!

DJL329

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 467
    • View Profile
Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #44 on: September 04, 2011, 11:50:02 AM »
But just as clearly, I'm guilty of feeding the troll.  Apologies to the members of this forum who maintain the ability to be civil and carry on intelligent discourse.

Quite right, neuroanatomist.  The best course of action for us all is to simply ignore this person.  Don't read his responses and certainly don't reply to them.
Canon EOS 5D Mark III | EF 14mm f/2.8L | EF 28mm f/1.8 | EF 50mm f/1.4 | EF 85mm f/1.8 | EF 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | EF 300mm f/4L IS

canon rumors FORUM

Re: An article Canon should read.
« Reply #44 on: September 04, 2011, 11:50:02 AM »