Canon will reclaim their full-frame megapixel crown [CR1]

[Quarkcharmed]

That's fine. If sensor specs float your boat, go for it. For other buyers, the question is whether the differences in sensor specs make any practical difference.

But again I don't care about other buyers on average. Some of them are definitely concerned about DR, Mp count, high ISO performance etc, myself included. Whether they make the majority of buyers or not - I don't care at all.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

It shouldn’t. Nor does it. That information is useful to someone analyzing the market, it someone buying a product.

Why do i need to analyse the market (i.e. global sales, market share, profit) before buying a product? I may be concerned about my brand to not collapse completely, but apart from that, how exactly should I use the global market share information?

 

[3kramd5]

Why do i need to analyse the market (i.e. global sales, market share, profit) before buying a product?

You don’t. Vendors do.

The reason it came up is that someone made a statement about what matters to buyers, and trends reflect that directly.

 

[neuroanatomist]

True. But how should this insight affect my buying decisions? Or anyone else's individual buying decisions?

As @3kramd5 stated, it shouldn’t. But when someone makes claims that Canon ‘must keep up with Sony’s sensors’ or ‘Canon is in trouble because everyone is switching brands to get p24 video in their ILCs’, those claims are shown to be false by the market share data.

 

[Don Haines]

Of course buyers don’t care about market share. But they do determine market share, in aggregate. Thus, their aggregate buying decisions give some insight into their priorities. Those insights are far more informative than anecdotes about what one person wants or what ‘all their friends’ are buying.

WOW! Next thing you know, you will be trying to tell us that the Canon marketing department, with access to sales records and future products, knows more about buying patterns than some random person on the internet! inconceivable!

 

[Quarkcharmed]

As @3kramd5 stated, it shouldn’t. But when someone makes claims that Canon ‘must keep up with Sony’s sensors’ or ‘Canon is in trouble because everyone is switching brands to get p24 video in their ILCs’, those claims are shown to be false by the market share data.

Ok. Whether or not Canon is in trouble as a business I don't know. Maybe those claims you mentioned are false. But so are the claims that the DR improvements won't affect anything. The sensor tech is what will affect my personal buying decisions.

As a buyer I'd like to upgrade from 5DIV. My glass will be the same so the sensor is what matters the most. So if Canon doesn't deliver in a few months, or delivers something significantly worse than Sony A7rIV, I'll just switch to Sony with an EF adapter.
But I'll look carefully because A7rIV looks a bit disappointing, I expected a 16 bit sensor from them. Should it have a 16 bit sensor, I'd be preordering right now.

 

[Besisika]

I'd like to know what you are photographing and how you are using those photographs that makes you so much more picky than others. The only thing I can think of is massive, billboard-sized prints that are displayed in locations where the viewers can actually walk right up and look at the images from a foot away. Are you Andreas Gursky?

Hard to argue with what you just said, because it totally makes sense. The bad thing about knowing the truth is that you stick to it, not wanting to find other truths.
Your opinion reminds me of the conversation 5 or 6 years ago. "Nobody has 4K TV and there is no advantage of having a 4K TV unless you watch and sit 1m away from it". Yet today, every new camera "must have" a 4K. Canon made a mistake listening to that kind of truth, will they make the same thing again with IBIS and megapixel race?
The idea behind innovation is so that people can find a new way of using a gear. Sorry if I do not share with you my ideas, at least not yet. It is not nice of me to behave that way, but allow me to do so.
My attitude toward photography is simple: "how can I stand out if I shoot like everybody else?". I hate repeating what a billion on our planet is doing. I want to do something else.
Maybe, I do not want to use a tripod on location because of security and other restrictions. Maybe, don't want to shoot tight any longer. Maybe, I don't want to be bound by framing properly rule any longer. Maybe, I found a way to shoot close ups the same way as full body shots. Maybe, I don't want to shoot at 1.4 indoors any longer. Maybe, I want on-location shots to look like in-studio shots. There is so much "maybe" that you could explore, then why stick to the way of your grandpa?
I hated shooting in mixed temperature lighting, until I discovered the work of Jake Hicks. The dude found his style in mixing colored light. That is the inspiration I need from others, not the ones who try to convince me that everything has been discovered.
I hope that shines a light on my arrogant attitude not to share with you what I shoot. Believe it or not but I do not want to be Andreas Gursky.
I am a firm believer that camera sales do not depend on the truth. It depends on what people believe to be the truth.
If I am convinced of the advantage of having IBIS when shooting a higher megapixel on-location, there are possibly others as well. The only question is how many?

 

[sdz]

Of course buyers don’t care about market share. [emphasis added] But they do determine market share, in aggregate. Thus, their aggregate buying decisions give some insight into their priorities. Those insights are far more informative than anecdotes about what one person wants or what ‘all their friends’ are buying.

So, you believe consumers do not care about market share. Yet, if, say, Pentax were to flounder and its struggles were known by consumers, they would ignore that information when making their camera purchase decisions. They would ignore the fact that a dead company will not service its products, provide updates, fail to provide an upgrade path, etc.

Yeah, you're a realist.

 

[Kit.]

You are hardly a realist. And I, along with everyone else, do get to decide what is and is not insulting.

You are insulting me by your claims that you are in the position to decide what must insult me. Please avoid making such claims in future.

 

[sdz]

You are insulting me by your claims that you are in the position to decide what must insult me. Please avoid making such claims in future.

I'll not do that.

Nice try, though. Everyone decides through usage the meaning of the words and phrases we use. Redin is hard, isn't it?

 

[sdz]

that was hardly a socially acceptable statement if at all.
do you mind watching you language, please?

Why should I watch my language? If I must contend with trolls following me around, I'll reply to them using words and phrases they can understand. If I am banned because of it, well, I'll survive.

 

[neuroanatomist]

You are hardly a realist. And I, along with everyone else, do get to decide what is and is not insulting. Where do you think word definitions originate? God.... The Devil.... Magic? Pull your head out of your ass. Read a book or two. Learn something useful.

Your statements are offensive and insulting. I do not care about p24 video, so Canon’s omission of it doesn’t bother me in the slightest, much less insult me. Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant to anyone but you, and your apparent belief that you get to decide what others care about is pure hubris (you might need to look that one up). I’m sorry that concept is so difficult for you to comprehend.

Meanwhile, here’s a definition for you, that fits your current behavior quite well...

pu·er·ile /ˈpyo͝orəl,ˈpyo͝orˌīl/ adjective
1. childishly silly and trivial.

So I’ll repeat...grow up. You’re just embarrassing yourself.

 

[Kit.]

I'll not do that.

Nice try, though. Everyone decides through usage the meaning of the words and phrases we use. Redin is hard, isn't it?

I decide that you are intentionally trying to insult me, and am going to act accordingly.

Good luck.

 

[sdz]

Your statements are offensive and insulting. I do not care about p24 video, so Canon’s omission of it doesn’t bother me in the slightest, much less insult me. Your opinion on the matter is irrelevant to anyone but you, and your apparent belief that you get to decide what others care about is pure hubris (you might need to look that one up). I’m sorry that concept is so difficult for you to comprehend.

Meanwhile, here’s a definition for you, that fits your current behavior quite well...

pu·er·ile /ˈpyo͝orəl,ˈpyo͝orˌīl/ adjective
1. childishly silly and trivial.

So I’ll repeat...grow up. You’re just embarrassing yourself.

Actually, I'm not embarrassing myself. For instance, you wrote this:

your apparent belief that you get to decide what others care about is pure hubris

It might be apparent to you that that I believe what you claim I believe. But I don't. I don't care much about what others care about. But, as I pointed out a while back, what others care or not care about is irrelevant to the social significance of an act. Canon removed a commonly present capacity from a camera. Few people will care about that. But, the fact that they removed that capacity reflects a disdain for its customers. Canon likely spent more money removing the capacity than they would have spent had they left it intact. That was an insult to its customers. It showed a scorn for those customers who needed or wanted that capacity.

Your claim misses the point I made, and is thus fallacious. It is also a red herring, and is thus fallacious. You might want to feel embarrassed by your faulty reasoning. But, I doubt you will.

 

[sdz]

I decide that you are intentionally trying to insult me, and am going to act accordingly.

Good luck.

You also. I already decided you intention meant to insult me. My motto: Play fair with the fair people, be a bastard with the bastards.

 

[Drcampbellicu]

For some it’s a distraction to focus on megapixels and not other improvements. It can be terrific marketing

I am sure that some folks really want this.
I am confident that more people are asking for other improvements. I support any improvement in photography but this camera better have more than just megapixels or else it will be a niche product.

Sensible canon fans want to see canon really innovate again with their bodies. Megapixels is one way to do that but I think many would like to see other things instead or as well.

Canon lenses are still the best: by far
Their bodies are no longer the best.
Hopefully that changes soon.



QUOTE="melgross, post: 785683, member: 378601"]
You know, with all the disparaging of the “megapixel wars”, people seem to forget that those wars, thought of back then as the sharpness wars, began in the very beginning of photography, in the early 19th century.

This is nothing new, and I don’t understand why some seem so upset about it.
[/QUOTE]

 

[SecureGSM]

Why should I watch my language? If I must contend with trolls following me around, I'll reply to them using words and phrases they can understand. If I am banned because of it, well, I'll survive.

it is up to the forum moderator to decide. you are reported.

 

[Drcampbellicu]

I have watched this forum for years
I don’t understand the rules here

Is the forum explicitly for just positive views on canon?
If it’s an open forum then I don’t understand why a criticism is repeatedly attacked by the same members. The pattern of behavior and the members who do this is pretty consistent. It only serves to create an echo chamber.

Is it reasonable to expect a range of opinions without toxicity?

If you are referring to 4k 24fps video: The RP, R, 5D Mark IV and 1DX Mark II all have 4k 24fps. So, what are you talking about?



No, Ford removed the truck bed and cabs from the F-150 so people could have a Muscle Car and named it "Mustang". They also knew most pickup truck drivers don't want convertible tops. They only put two doors because most people looking at Mustangs don't want 4 doors on a car like that. The back seat in the Mustang is useless when I'm in the car... except for grocery hauling. The back seat in a 4 door F-150 is good. They also intentionally crippled the trucks by not having 6 doors and a hatch back. Most also are not loading children into baby seats in Mustangs. Your comparisons of cars is just weird. Any car made these days can go fast. When I lived in Nevada, I used to get my Focus up to 110 mph (not the upper limit of it's speed). Can a Mustang or Raptor go faster? Probably, but that is a moot point. They put you in jail for that. "Quick" (0-60) is an entirely different thing. Your trouble with the subject you are complaining about is obvious. Why not just buy a Sony and be happy? Or at least look up the specs before saying such outlandish things about cameras you know nothing about and don't own.

The problem is people who think a manufacturer is making cameras just for them. No. Manufacturers have to make their stuff for the mass market they wish to capture (Canon is very good at this). You ain't the market, obviously. Go buy what you want. Nobody cares.

 

[SecureGSM]

I have watched this forum for years
I don’t understand the rules here

here they are . Just FYI:

Posting rules

Some users have asked for a set of posting rules. We are not into the business of making a specific set of rules and laws, its impossible to cover everything. Moderators will use their best judgement to remove offensive items and issue warnings or even bans. Here are some general common...

www.canonrumors.com

 

[Drcampbellicu]

I bird and do scuba photography as a hobby
I have a few canon friends that have the same opinion about mirrorless.

Most of them are older and will not switch. I am personally excited for mirrorless. I think it will be better over time in almost every facet but it will be a disruptive change

My biggest concern is that I realize that my current L lenses are about to be coal mines: ancient history. Has anyone started a serious conversation about this?

We need to stop quibbling about Sony and Nikon. Canon itself seems to be hinting that their future is mirrorless based on these impressive new lenses that they’re releasing.




QUOTE="Mike27713, post: 785981, member: 383077"]
Canon can stick their Mirrorless cameras up their Cannon! I will always avoid mirrorless. I don't wanna compose on a TV screen! I have been waiting for several years for Canon to come out with a 5Dsr2. Money has long been in my pocket for it. Maybe I can find another manufacturer that will do a high megapixel DSLR and sell off my Canon equipment. I've been a Canon customer for many decades. If I wanted a large point and shoot, I would have bought one a long time ago!
[/QUOTE]