June 24, 2017, 10:25:17 PM

Author Topic: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]  (Read 43776 times)

Orangutan

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1720
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #150 on: May 19, 2017, 08:51:44 AM »

They waste some years with inconvenient workflows and missing features, because Canon plays it slow.

...

Canon losing customers to Sony or Panasonic, and also losing reputation for their slow path innovation is a fact you can read, hear and see today.

...

Just right now Canon's tactics are a lose-lose situation for them and their customers.


Aside from your own personal observations, what evidence do you have that these are true assertions?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #150 on: May 19, 2017, 08:51:44 AM »

Orangutan

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1720
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #151 on: May 19, 2017, 09:05:38 AM »
...or what you can read in worldwide photo forums, or hear from photographers and filmmakers everywhere.  Because it's not a subjective feeling, it's based on the specs and features of existing camera models, and clearly visible different speeds of innovation between Canon/Nikon and Sony/Panasonic/Olympus.

How exactly is that more meaningful than actual sales data?

How is sales data more meaningful than being a photographer and filmmaker working on a project with tools that are artificially limited?

It isn't, and there's no problem if those people talk about the features they want.  The problem is that people like you make the false assumption that everyone else wants the same thing you do.

There are two different questions here:

What should an individual photographer buy?  The available item that best meets their needs.

What should a company make and sell?  The items that are likely to be profitable.


Do not confuse the two: while there is some overlap, they are not the same question.


GHPhotography

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 32
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #152 on: May 19, 2017, 09:14:22 AM »

What should an individual photographer buy?  The available item that best meets their needs.

What should a company make and sell?  The items that are likely to be profitable.


Do not confuse the two: while there is some overlap, they are not the same question.

I feel like this is 95% of the issue people have on this forum. It's perfectly fine to be mad at Canon for not making what you want, but refusing to believe data that doesn't support your personal view is dumb. The fact is Canon dominates the market, and is gaining market share. Market giants stay giant by focusing on what is good for business and innovating/shifting either a) to grab/create a new market or b) respond to a new threat to your market share. Canon is doing both, but like all giants it is slow to move. When it does move, though, history shows it makes a massive impact.
1DXII | 5DIV | EOS 3 | AE1-P | 24-70 f/2.8L II | 35 f/1.4L II | 50 f/1.4 | 70-200 f/2.8L is II | 85 f/1.8 | 135 f/2L | 300 f/2.8L is

transpo1

  • EOS M3
  • ****
  • Posts: 243
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #153 on: May 19, 2017, 09:33:56 AM »
Quote
Apparently you can't seem to accept the objective reality that Canon is the most popular global brand for dSLRs.  How sad.

In what way is the popularity of Canon relevant regarding the proven facts that their top products are behind in at least 20 important features?  Is this a forum about technical features, or the forum of the Wall Street Journal or brand values?

It's always funny to me how anytime someone on this forum has the temerity to criticize Canon for not offering the reasonable features they want, the answer always seems to be "marketshare and sales." It's like there's a whole forum of marketing professionals not photographers and artists 😉
I think the problem with this argumentation (features vs. market success) is not that those who use the argument of "market share and sales" are saying that this is the reason why they bought into a Canon system.
It is the argument that comes first from those wanting more features: "If feature X is missing, Canon is doomed!" (displayed in some more or less technical expressions).
Here comes counterargument that Canon seems to be doing something right, because of market share.

I don't know if I speak for the others in the "market share" fraction but I'd say it that way:
  • Of course I would like to have any kind of good, cool feature, gimmick and gizmo that is possible in my Camera.
  • But I can understand that by just demanding this in a forum and stress this with the "loss of success" argument won't have any real influence on the Canon dev. and marketing departments
  • If enough people vote with their purse, Canon might react
  • If you think that by arguing in that way and style, you can gather a big enough crowd behind you to change something, I'd say you seem to need more knowledge in marketing and  pol. campaigning

Quote
Apparently you can't seem to accept the objective reality that Canon is the most popular global brand for dSLRs.  How sad.

In what way is the popularity of Canon relevant regarding the proven facts that their top products are behind in at least 20 important features?  Is this a forum about technical features, or the forum of the Wall Street Journal or brand values?

It's always funny to me how anytime someone on this forum has the temerity to criticize Canon for not offering the reasonable features they want, the answer always seems to be "marketshare and sales." It's like there's a whole forum of marketing professionals not photographers and artists 😉
I think the problem with this argumentation (features vs. market success) is not that those who use the argument of "market share and sales" are saying that this is the reason why they bought into a Canon system.
It is the argument that comes first from those wanting more features: "If feature X is missing, Canon is doomed!" (displayed in some more or less technical expressions).
Here comes counterargument that Canon seems to be doing something right, because of market share.

I don't know if I speak for the others in the "market share" fraction but I'd say it that way:
  • Of course I would like to have any kind of good, cool feature, gimmick and gizmo that is possible in my Camera.
  • But I can understand that by just demanding this in a forum and stress this with the "loss of success" argument won't have any real influence on the Canon dev. and marketing departments
  • If enough people vote with their purse, Canon might react
  • If you think that by arguing in that way and style, you can gather a big enough crowd behind you to change something, I'd say you seem to need more knowledge in marketing and  pol. campaigning

I'd argue that we've already had influence and people have already voted with their purse in the video department. Sony is the premiere option for 4K video these days, which is likely one of the reasons Canon added C-Log to the 5DIV.

I, for one, voted with my wallet and did not purchase a 5DIV, but have stayed on this forum because I love Canon products and want them to be more competitive with features for my needs. Just the same way you photog guys want an 85mm 1.4 IS or 200-600 or whatever the most anticipated lens is right now. (Full disclosure, I would love an 85mm IS.)

Market share is only an argument in so far as a company has it- it's the "might makes right" argument. What we are anticipating is a time when others start to catch up with Canon market share. Sony has a LONG way to go from a photography perspective but they are outputting some impressive technology and lenses. What we are saying is that Canon has to be a bit more competitive in features in order to hold onto that market share in the long term.

From a video perspective- we don't know the numbers- but my hunch is that the market share looks quite different. I believe most people have already voted with their wallets in this regard. And since a major requirement of the new Full Frame mirrorless rumor the OP stated is 4K video, then, well- there you have an example of Canon trying to add a feature to match their competitors in an effort to maintain that market share.

Woody

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 919
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #154 on: May 19, 2017, 09:51:57 AM »
Market share is only an argument in so far as a company has it- it's the "might makes right" argument. What we are anticipating is a time when others start to catch up with Canon market share. Sony has a LONG way to go from a photography perspective but they are outputting some impressive technology and lenses. What we are saying is that Canon has to be a bit more competitive in features in order to hold onto that market share in the long term.

Well said.

But keep in mind that impressive technology does not guarantee success. Just look at history: Minolta, Pentax and Samsung (photography-wise). One can almost say the same about the current state of Nikon: their OVF facial tracking capability and awesome sensor quality (thanks largely to Sony) are the envy of many, still their ILC market share is declining...

Rockskipper

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 29
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #155 on: May 19, 2017, 10:21:36 AM »
Probably the most important thing about buying a camera is your perceptions of what you're going to get and whether or not that matches what you do get. Canon is now to the point that they pretty much own the average person's perceptions that they're the top of the line, or at the very least, one will get a darn good camera and also lenses and support. When you start spending the kind of money you can put into camera equipment (I just spent over 5k this week alone, and I'm a hobbyist), you want that feeling that there will be someone out there if you need to make a repair or support call.

Canon's marketing has made sure that the average consumer gets a warm fuzzy feeling when they think about them (things like their Boy Scouts and National Parks programs), as well as making sure there are lots of fantastic photos out there for people to look at. Most consumers aren't pros, and I would guess not even at the enthusiast level, but they just want to make nice photos. Canon, whether their technology is superior or not, provides this at about any price point you want.

Just try to buy something at the Canon Store and you'll see how loyal people can be. It can be difficult to use and sometimes doesn't work at all (try to read reviews or info on the 6D) and should be an embarrassment to such a large successful company. But people buy there anyway (or so I assume, as I did). Canon owns the perceptions and also has good products, whether they be superior or not is not as important to the average Joe or Jill, as long as they can take nice photos. They don't pixel peep.

Mikehit

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1520
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #156 on: May 19, 2017, 10:22:17 AM »

I'd argue that we've already had influence and people have already voted with their purse in the video department. Sony is the premiere option for 4K video these days, which is likely one of the reasons Canon added C-Log to the 5DIV.

I, for one, voted with my wallet and did not purchase a 5DIV, but have stayed on this forum because I love Canon products and want them to be more competitive with features for my needs. Just the same way you photog guys want an 85mm 1.4 IS or 200-600 or whatever the most anticipated lens is right now. (Full disclosure, I would love an 85mm IS.)

Market share is only an argument in so far as a company has it- it's the "might makes right" argument. What we are anticipating is a time when others start to catch up with Canon market share. Sony has a LONG way to go from a photography perspective but they are outputting some impressive technology and lenses. What we are saying is that Canon has to be a bit more competitive in features in order to hold onto that market share in the long term.

From a video perspective- we don't know the numbers- but my hunch is that the market share looks quite different. I believe most people have already voted with their wallets in this regard. And since a major requirement of the new Full Frame mirrorless rumor the OP stated is 4K video, then, well- there you have an example of Canon trying to add a feature to match their competitors in an effort to maintain that market share.

The other issue is a skewed perspective.
There is a growing minority of people who want a 'stills' camera to double up as a semi-professional video camera. On image quality the Sony is ahead of Canon.
Because these people want a 2-in-1 camera there are more complaints against Canon for not upping their video than there are complaints against Sony for not addressing the shortfalls in their stills functionality.

In some ways I see that as a compliment to Canon in that people think Canon is most likely to get the whole package right when they see the need to, and they are unable to understand why Canon hasn't done it yet.
You could also interpret it as when Canon do decide to do it, Sony are toast because their one advantage will have gone.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #156 on: May 19, 2017, 10:22:17 AM »

Mikehit

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1520
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #157 on: May 19, 2017, 10:25:58 AM »

...and sometimes doesn't work at all (try to read reviews or info on the 6D) and should be an embarrassment to such a large successful company.

Really? Please enlighten me

addola

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 19
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #158 on: May 19, 2017, 11:04:20 AM »
Ahhh, did you just tell me to "go back to learn optical formulas" then proceeded to use the comma & decimal interchangeably?

Oh no! I was joking about that! Hence the "Ha!"! My bad! Maybe I should put a smiley face :) instead. I know that in Europe you use the decimal/comma differently with Euros!

Take a look at DxOMark scores for transmission (T-Stop for actual transmission as opposed to F-Stop). I noticed that with Sony FF lenses, the transmission seem higher (closer to F-Stop) than SLR counterpart (Disclaimer: this is unscientific, and I could be wrong, but it's interesting)
6D, EF 17-40L, Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC, EF70-200L f/2.8 IS ii, EF 50/1.4, Rokinon 12mm fisheye.

rrcphoto

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1747
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #159 on: May 19, 2017, 11:16:29 AM »
I can tell you though that I will never go back to shooting landscape with an OVF.  Clinging to an OVF is a lot like clinging to film.  It's that big of a game changer, no question.
well, that's you. I can't ever see the benefit of shooting landscape with anything BUT an OVF.  otherwise you don't get the natural contrast, dynamic range of the scene as you are framing the image. you get a 8 bit blocked up video stream that can even approach distracting at higher ISO's because of noise.

Nor can that video stream really indicate when you are raw clipped, and will artificially clip at "jpg" levels and not at raw latitude levels.

essentially it's a "make do" for a lack of understanding of the scene, your sensor and what your histogram is suggesting to you.

I find it always curious that some assert that they need high DR sensors and the works and then view the image data through a low DR and usually tight contrast curve EVF....



neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 20995
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #160 on: May 19, 2017, 12:07:24 PM »
Canon losing customers to Sony or Panasonic, and also losing reputation for their slow path innovation is a fact you can read, hear and see today.  It doesn't need any apocalyptic predictions for that - and as Canon will catch up at some point, this problem might not exist anymore in the years 2020/2021/2022 to eternity.

Just right now Canon's tactics are a lose-lose situation for them and their customers.

While it's technically true that Canon is losing customers to Sony or Panasonic, it's also true that Sony and Panasonic are losing customers to Canon.  Given that Canon has been gaining ILC market share while Sony has lost it, your implication that Canon is losing net customers as 'fact' is at odds with reality.  But we've already established that you prefer to believe your opinion over documented fact...I believe you earlier recommended that someone seek medical attention...a psychiatrist is the appropriate medical professional to address the problems of those who cannot accept reality. 


Quote
Apparently you can't seem to accept the objective reality that Canon is the most popular global brand for dSLRs.  How sad.
In what way is the popularity of Canon relevant regarding the proven facts that their top products are behind in at least 20 important features?  Is this a forum about technical features, or the forum of the Wall Street Journal or brand values?

It is relevant because in spite of your contention that Canon is 'behind in at least 20 features' that you personally find important, Canon's popularity and nearly 50% and growing ILC market share indicate that the majority of consumers don't find those 20 features particularly important, or don't think that Canon is behind in the areas that matter to them. 

Obviously, you're welcome to have and share your opinion. Just don't go thinking that your opinion is universally shared…the actual facts clearly show that your opinion is irrelevant in the context of the ILC market.


Any average customer - and those millions of people who bought cheap DSLRs - appreciates what an EVF can do if you show it to them (a viewfinder that shows the right exposure and focus helps, lets you see video and review shots etc etc).  The reason why most of these people DON'T buy any new DSLR's or add lenses is, that the workflow completely sucks, and they are not supported in improving their skills.

So now you're speaking for millions of customers, and claiming to have knowledge of what drives their purchasing decisions? Talk about delusional…  Millions of people don't buy new cameras and lenses because 'the workflow completely sucks'?  Completely asinine.  It's far more likely that in most cases, the camera and lens(es) they have are meeting their needs perfectly well.
EOS 1D X, EOS M2, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 20995
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #161 on: May 19, 2017, 12:27:40 PM »
Market share is only an argument in so far as a company has it- it's the "might makes right" argument. What we are anticipating is a time when others start to catch up with Canon market share. Sony has a LONG way to go from a photography perspective but they are outputting some impressive technology and lenses. What we are saying is that Canon has to be a bit more competitive in features in order to hold onto that market share in the long term.

Is this the same 'we' that are anticipating purple unicorns to fly by, gold dubloons to rain down from the sky, and world peace?   ::)

There have been countless claims on the Internet like yours...Canon has to be more competitive in _____________ (fill in the blank with your favorite feature) or else they will  _____________ (fill in the blank with your favorite dire fate).

Several years ago, Sony's implementation of on-sensor ADC enabled them to increase their dynamic range relative to Canon's sensors.  Lots of people on this forum stated with absolute certainty that photographers would defect to Sony and Nikon (who began using Sony's sensors) in droves, and Canon would be doomed.  But what really happened?   First Nikon and then Sony lost marketshare to Canon, such that Canon now holds nearly 50% of the ILC market.

So, you go right on anticipating…  Have fun riding the unicorn, and don't spend all the gold in one place.  ;)
EOS 1D X, EOS M2, lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

tcmatthews

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 402
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #162 on: May 19, 2017, 12:39:52 PM »
I can tell you though that I will never go back to shooting landscape with an OVF.  Clinging to an OVF is a lot like clinging to film.  It's that big of a game changer, no question.
well, that's you. I can't ever see the benefit of shooting landscape with anything BUT an OVF.  otherwise you don't get the natural contrast, dynamic range of the scene as you are framing the image. you get a 8 bit blocked up video stream that can even approach distracting at higher ISO's because of noise.

Nor can that video stream really indicate when you are raw clipped, and will artificially clip at "jpg" levels and not at raw latitude levels.

essentially it's a "make do" for a lack of understanding of the scene, your sensor and what your histogram is suggesting to you.

I find it always curious that some assert that they need high DR sensors and the works and then view the image data through a low DR and usually tight contrast curve EVF....

Are you serious I cannot remember the last time I shot any serious landscape not on a tripod in live-view.  Normally this is with the histogram for reference. 

I like low angles and do not use  a OVF or EVF on any of my cameras when shooting landscape.  I have also found that the camera JPG settings can really throw off the live-view so I have found it necessary to set the JPEG image profile to faithful/Neutral or what ever it is called on the camera you are using.  This started when I was not paying attention to the histogram and hand an entire series of images underexposed because the JPG setting embedded in the Raw image had the contrast turned up. 

I could see how a punched up high contrast EVF could cause the same issue.  But in neutral settings with histogram this should be a non-issue.

All this said I prefer the bracketing and time-laps options on Canon to Sony. 
7D II, 60D, Rebel XS + some Canon lenses, A7II + Sony + some Sony lenses, OMD EM1,OMD EM5 + some m43 lenses, adapters and Fd and M42 lens.  Sold 6D,Nex6,EOS M1

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #162 on: May 19, 2017, 12:39:52 PM »

xps

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 758
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #163 on: May 19, 2017, 12:54:00 PM »
I´ve seen the new Sony on an advertisement show this week. Not helding in my hands, but shown to us by an sony representative. Impressing, how fast this body is, and how accurate focussing works. And it is really silent.
Yes, I know, the mounted lenses are not for wildlife, but for wedding photographers. But it wouled be an option for BIF mounted on Canon lenses.

I hope Canon will bring out an mirrorless FF body in the next month. But this will not come true.
There is much discussion about that on the net. No one really knows (besides Canon managers). Some say, salesmanagement, others say Canon is still struggling to come close to Sony, and others are thinking Canon is waiting until Sony and Nikon offer their new products - to decide which feature has to be implemented and which not...
Canon will bring ml-FF bodies on the market, and some will be disappointed by their specs. But most of us will buy it and will be (the more or the less) satisfied with them.
Our best friends at Sony are an extremly hard working motor on the market. Developing many new lenses and bodies (just wait for the 7RIII). and this will be good for us Canonians too, as Sony "increases the lattice" and Canon has to compeed.

rrcphoto

  • 1D X Mark II
  • *******
  • Posts: 1747
Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #164 on: May 19, 2017, 01:13:36 PM »
I can tell you though that I will never go back to shooting landscape with an OVF.  Clinging to an OVF is a lot like clinging to film.  It's that big of a game changer, no question.
well, that's you. I can't ever see the benefit of shooting landscape with anything BUT an OVF.  otherwise you don't get the natural contrast, dynamic range of the scene as you are framing the image. you get a 8 bit blocked up video stream that can even approach distracting at higher ISO's because of noise.

Nor can that video stream really indicate when you are raw clipped, and will artificially clip at "jpg" levels and not at raw latitude levels.

essentially it's a "make do" for a lack of understanding of the scene, your sensor and what your histogram is suggesting to you.

I find it always curious that some assert that they need high DR sensors and the works and then view the image data through a low DR and usually tight contrast curve EVF....

Are you serious I cannot remember the last time I shot any serious landscape not on a tripod in live-view.  Normally this is with the histogram for reference. 

I like low angles and do not use  a OVF or EVF on any of my cameras when shooting landscape.  I have also found that the camera JPG settings can really throw off the live-view so I have found it necessary to set the JPEG image profile to faithful/Neutral or what ever it is called on the camera you are using.  This started when I was not paying attention to the histogram and hand an entire series of images underexposed because the JPG setting embedded in the Raw image had the contrast turned up. 

I could see how a punched up high contrast EVF could cause the same issue.  But in neutral settings with histogram this should be a non-issue.

All this said I prefer the bracketing and time-laps options on Canon to Sony.

I find back LCD / liveview LCD experience different from an EVF or OVF.

usually I use the liveview for rough histogram and framing but review the scene by "looking up" at it without either an OVF or LCD.

an EVF and an OVF share the same experience where you do the majority of composition and framing and the "idea" of the shot via the viewfinder.

and yes, you have to choose flat / neutral Jpg profile or that will affect your histogram.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2017, 01:16:23 PM by rrcphoto »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon Full Frame Mirrorless Talk [CR1]
« Reply #164 on: May 19, 2017, 01:13:36 PM »