I actually think you agree
1.Canon didn’t respond with updates like ibis and mirrorless in a timely fashion and gave Sony life. if the reason was that their fav was delayed then so be it. The reason isn’t important to me as a customer.
2. I agree that canon should have done rf sooner but I assure you they wouldn’t have done it without Sony blazing a trail. Ford wouldn’t have created the mustang E if it wasn’t for Tesla. Mirrorless itself, Ibis, better DR, eye Af and Af tracking ala mirrorless and smaller bodies all feel like reactionary changes from canon.
3. I don’t think I said that canon panicked. They don’t have to panic because they have a core group of photographers that have canon lenses and will only switch as a last resort. But they didn’t lead on several features and had to react. My verbiage is that the R was rushed. At launch it was unimpressive and the firmware updates were its true destiny. Canon needs to release the R at that time even though it was half baked without the latest firmware. Canon had its new lenses ready before its bodies. It also understood that new photographers were either buying dead end rebels or non canon mirrorless cameras.
every Consumer company has soft advertising. Leaks, influencers, fan websites, etc are all options. I wouldn’t put anything past a big company like canon. They wanted to stop defections in 2019 while they prep eared their response.
my 2 cents
QUOTE="canonnews, post: 814046, member: 380139"]
I disagree.
The RF mount was a natural progression as was the 1.0 camera bodies.
None of them could have been done until Canon updated their fab to produce DPAF full frame sensors, once it was done, and the decision was made to use the RF mount (most likely because of IBIS + IS) then releasing the cameras made a lot of sense. To do it later, would have been progressively harder because Canon would have most likely released the 1DX Mark III, the 5D Mark V,etc camera bodies which would have made it even more difficult for EF users to transition over to the RF mount.
As it is the 5D Mark IV is difficult enough for people to decide to move to the EOS R system, perhaps with the R5 Canon will have a compelling body. For this reason alone, Canon should have done the RF mount sooner. Nothing to do with Sony,etc.
But to say Canon panicked? How can they when it takes around 3+ years to develop a camera?
Canon also doesn't leak.
If Canon wanted the world to know - they'd do a development announcement.
[/QUOTE]
I disagree.
The RF mount was a natural progression as was the 1.0 camera bodies.
None of them could have been done until Canon updated their fab to produce DPAF full frame sensors, once it was done, and the decision was made to use the RF mount (most likely because of IBIS + IS) then releasing the cameras made a lot of sense. To do it later, would have been progressively harder because Canon would have most likely released the 1DX Mark III, the 5D Mark V,etc camera bodies which would have made it even more difficult for EF users to transition over to the RF mount.
As it is the 5D Mark IV is difficult enough for people to decide to move to the EOS R system, perhaps with the R5 Canon will have a compelling body. For this reason alone, Canon should have done the RF mount sooner. Nothing to do with Sony,etc.
But to say Canon panicked? How can they when it takes around 3+ years to develop a camera?
Canon also doesn't leak.
If Canon wanted the world to know - they'd do a development announcement.