Both Canon and Nikon are in deep trouble after financial reports.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kit Lens Jockey

EOS 7D MK II
Nov 12, 2016
542
198
I still say that Canon is just simply struggling with their mirrorless tech. Or maybe not struggling, but a little behind the curve at best.

Canon knows how to make glass, they have for a long time. And they have gone wild now that they are free to design lenses that have the shorter flange distance that the RF mount has.

But they are still trying to figure out the whole mirrorless thing, at least a mirrorless that has a high MP full frame sensor, and speed and operation the rivals the best (Sony).

I don't think their sensor or processor tech is quite there yet, but they're working on it. As far as I know, they have no sensor with on-board memory the way the A9 sensor does. And unless I'm wrong, even the processors in the EOS R are a holdover from DSLRs made to do mirrorless work.

So this is why you see tons of great lenses without a body that truly matches them. They just don't have the tech to make a professional mirrorless body quite yet (maybe a year from now?) But they have known how to make great lenses for decades.
 

canonmike

EOS 80D
Jan 5, 2013
119
55
I wrote several posts, but so many morons backfired at me. I have over 50+ years of experience in photography. Now, I have solid proof here.


Both Nikon and Canon made ill-fated decisions to focus on the mirrorless system. They were failures with a lot of technical problems in both bodies and lenses. They stopped to sell Nikon and Canon DSLR along with both F and EF lenses. They want to channel their money into the mirrorless system development. They lost a lot of money and laid off so many innocent employees into the street. Thousands of professional photographers were not happy toward both Nikon and Canon included myself which I stopped buy new products for my work.

Both Canon and Nikon are in deep financial trouble and may lead end of the business by the bankrupt. This due to flipped by upper management people included CEO.

The mirrorless camera system was never a reliable hardware design. Error in hardware caused a lot of trouble-prone. The engineers decided to design new models instead of correct hardware design with current cameras and lenses. I do not know if they can resolve the entire situation, I hate to say, it seems to me it was DONE.
Reading your commentary, I'm not quite sure what your native language is but you might gain a little more credibility if you had someone spell and grammar check your argument(s) before posting.
 

BillB

EOS 6D MK II
May 11, 2017
1,153
390
I’ve remarked this before:

Throughout most of photography’s history, a common belief has been that lenses matter far more than the bodies they attach to. Has that sentiment changed in the last year? If so, why? I haven’t witnessed a quantum leap in camera such that I can even begin to guess which body was used by looking at photos. Good lenses on the other hand still tend to manifest in photos.
For several important use cases for the expensive RF lenses that Canon has released, the R actually seems to be very well suited. Solid AF, a good EVF and a very good sensor, along with a good a touch screen interface matches up pretty well with the eye popping RF lens releases. We are not talking BIF spray and pray action photography here
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

Ah-Keong

EOS 80D
Dec 1, 2016
179
11
I believe it is more economically viable to spend the R&D costs into lens design with the RF mount iteration and recoup back the expenditure via lens sales before spending money into the body (AF sensor, quad-pixel AF, dual cards, graphics processor unit, computation processor unit, intelligence processor unit, etc) design. Optics design are kinda matured over the years and one design iteration can last say up to 10 years before a revision or iteration is required. That's why Canon places its bet on RF lens while reusing parts of the design from the 5D and the 6D into the R and RP respectively in order to capture lost ground from the Sony a7/a7R/a7S and Nikon Z6/Z7.

Whereas consumer electronics obsolete faster and with falling sales demand, the R&D expenditure of the consumer electronics (DSLM or mirrorless body) are more difficult to be recovered within a short time frame in a saturated competitive market.

I do hope Canon and Nikon comes out with something to challenge the Sony a9.
meanwhile I hope Canon can sell the 90D and the M6ii
 

canonnews

EOS RP
Dec 27, 2017
344
296
Canada
www.canonnews.com
I wrote several posts, but so many morons backfired at me. I have over 50+ years of experience in photography. Now, I have solid proof here.


Both Nikon and Canon made ill-fated decisions to focus on the mirrorless system. They were failures with a lot of technical problems in both bodies and lenses. They stopped to sell Nikon and Canon DSLR along with both F and EF lenses. They want to channel their money into the mirrorless system development. They lost a lot of money and laid off so many innocent employees into the street. Thousands of professional photographers were not happy toward both Nikon and Canon included myself which I stopped buy new products for my work.
That's a pretty high dose of creative writing. If an fstoppers opinion piece is your solid proof I kind of pity you.

Both Canon and Nikon are in deep financial trouble and may lead end of the business by the bankrupt. This due to flipped by upper management people included CEO.

The mirrorless camera system was never a reliable hardware design. Error in hardware caused a lot of trouble-prone. The engineers decided to design new models instead of correct hardware design with current cameras and lenses. I do not know if they can resolve the entire situation, I hate to say, it seems to me it was DONE.
Cameras only make up a portion of Canon's sales. If you actually spent time looking at the financials you would have quickly realized that only a portion of the downturn of sales came from cameras, and even then, only a portion of that would have come from full-frame mirrorless. Canon has spent litterally billions of their cash war chest in ensuring they had new business lines because they saw the end to cameras and printers as a whole.

Nikon could be in trouble though, that part was correct but probably not what you wanted

That post you copied is just someone complaining that yet again, canon or nikon didn't roll out the EXACT lenses they wanted, therefore they OBVIOUSLY don't know the market.

It kind of saddens me to see such posts, and yours really, because it ignores the basic truths of the market today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aussie shooter

canonnews

EOS RP
Dec 27, 2017
344
296
Canada
www.canonnews.com
I scratched my head when Canon released the humble R with some massive lenses. But at least Canon seem to have hope, and at least they are trying new approaches. They don't have many competitors left, and the competitors themselves are struggling to find a business model that works.
Fun fact: Sony launched G-master in January 2016. At that time, Sony had as far as camera bodies; A7II, A7RII, A7SII - none of them were that much different than the EOS R. it wasn't for another full year after G-master that the A7's third version started to come, and it took 2 full years for the A7III to come out. Even the a9 was released 16 months after G-master.

Somehow that was all okay.
 

bokehmon22

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
356
186
I’ve remarked this before:

Throughout most of photography’s history, a common belief has been that lenses matter far more than the bodies they attach to. Has that sentiment changed in the last year? If so, why? I haven’t witnessed a quantum leap in camera such that I can even begin to guess which body was used by looking at photos. Good lenses on the other hand still tend to manifest in photos.

I tend to remain in the earlier camp, with one minor change: lights/modifiers (when appropriate) are more important than lenses, and lenses are far more important than bodies. Also, IMO, none of the camera makers offer adequate lighting for their systems (unless one counts Hasselblad’s partnership with Broncolor).
Lens matters, but so do camera bodies, lighting/modifiers etc.

We used to hold lens in higher regard because Canon was among the best back in the days without a lot of quality and affordable option. Things have change tremendously with so many lens manufacturers making quality lenses like Tamron, Sigma, Sony, Samyang etc that offer as good of a quality lens or better (Sigma 135 Art, Sony 135 vs Canon 135) without paying "L" price.

I also haven't seen a quantum leap in lens quality between Canon vs other manufacturers that justify me paying the premium prices.

Camera just like lens have come a long way that any recent purchase will yield superb result in the right hand. Whether I shoot Canon, Sony, Nikon, Panasonic, it won't matter that much, but I sure enjoy certain features on the camera that make the photography experience more enjoyable and easier for me to capture the pictures and latitude in post.

I'll take any trinity from any major manufacture but Canon have yet to produce a specialize lens like a 105 1.4 that I enjoy using.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,083
404
Lens matters, but so do camera bodies, lighting/modifiers etc.
Yes, of course. Everything matters. Memory cards, batteries, charging cords, bodies, lenses; you can’t execute a photo without all basic components of a system. For my purposes, I have a hierarchy which informs how I direct finite resources. To me, lenses still matter more than bodies. Would I get noticeably better images if I used a Phase one medium format camera than my 1Dx? Maybe (situational of course). Can I look at three prints shot by one photographer with the same light and equivalent lens for each but one with a 5Div, one a d850, and one an a7Riii, and reliably recognize which came from which? Highly unlikely.

We used to hold lens in higher regard because Canon was among the best back in the days without a lot of quality and affordable option. Things have change tremendously with so many lens manufacturers making quality lenses like Tamron, Sigma, Sony, Samyang etc that offer as good of a quality lens or better (Sigma 135 Art, Sony 135 vs Canon 135) without paying "L" price.
I don’t see how a wider availability of lenses affects the relative importance of lenses. Maybe it affects which brand one chooses, but they’d be doing so based on lenses being available for that brand.

I also haven't seen a quantum leap in lens quality between Canon vs other manufacturers that justify me paying the premium prices.
Nor have I. But I do see a marked difference in quality between various canon lenses, between various Sony lenses, between various nikkor lenses, etc; and i would still allot more of my budget to lenses than body, even if I were buying one of each. This is regardless of brand; mine was a brand-agnostic statement in reply to a question as to why canon would come out with expensive lenses for perceived deficient cameras. Why? Because of what many photographers value more.

I know what I value more. That’s why I shoot with a pre-owned camera with a lowly 18MP sensor with forum-maligned dynamic range, attached to a 17 year old 24-70 lens, but using lights and modifiers which dwarf the value of both.

797E30E8-6124-4534-8DB9-D4A3350F44FE.jpeg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

bokehmon22

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
356
186
I know what I value more. That’s why I shoot with a pre-owned camera with a lowly 18MP sensor with forum-maligned dynamic range, attached to a 17 year old 24-70 lens, but using lights and modifiers which dwarf the value of both.

View attachment 186233
If you have are looking for value based and have no problem using old camera and lens, why don't you also go for the best bang for performance route for light like the Godox/Adorama system? I doubt anyone can tell the differences in Profoto quality or performance, but it's your money.

My entire wedding lighting kits of 3 strobes, 4 speedlights, 4 modifiers, 3 triggers probably cost around one of your Profoto light.

Nor have I. But I do see a marked difference in quality between various canon lenses, between various Sony lenses, between various nikkor lenses, etc; and i would still allot more of my budget to lenses than body, even if I were buying one of each. This is regardless of brand; mine was a brand-agnostic statement in reply to a question as to why canon would come out with expensive lenses for perceived deficient cameras. Why? Because of what many photographers value more.
I don't really pixel peep at 100% so I can't really tell. To me, they are all good enough to get the job done and let me worry about other important matters.

Many photographers do prioritize lenses over body but they aren't majority. If photographer prioritize lens over body, Canon should be top of sale charts. They aren't because there are many deciding factors when making the camera purchase - lens choice, price, camera body, etc.

Even though I make money off photography, I wouldn't spend money needlessly on photography equipments just to have the best when alternative get close or even better than Canon lens like Tamron & Sigma. None of my clients care about minute details photographers nor I do when I see a great photo.

When I see a great photo on the internet, I know it isn't just the camera and lens. I couldn't care less about them shooting with the latest Canon 15-35, 24-70, 70-200, camera body or Profoto lighting but how is it light, pose, composition, creativity, etc. Many photographers prefer to spend money on new camera bodies because it allowed them to do things they couldn't do before (eyeAF, IBIS, good C-AF, focus bracketing, 4K 60, better dynamic range, high ISO, more FPS) to give them creative freedom to do whatever they want.
 

bokehmon22

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
356
186
No one else but Canon produces the specialized TS-E 17mm or 11-24/4 that I enjoy using.
You can see if it can be adapted on other camera via adapter. Otherwise stay with Canon.

11-24 F4? There are other alternative such as Sigma 12-24 F4, Sigma 14-24, Tamron 15-30 2.8.

The best landscape photographers I've admire and images I've seen aren't even shot with those lenses. I'm not missing out much when I can do vertical or horizonal panorama for the rare time I need it.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,083
404
If you have are looking for value based and have no problem using old camera and lens, why don't you also go for the best bang for performance route for light like the Godox/Adorama system? I doubt anyone can tell the differences in Profoto quality or performance, but it's your money.
I shoot a lot of high speed studio stuff (think: dance, gymnastics, etc) pushing 12-14 FPS bursts to catch peak action. These lights do it easily, sustained, and with a very tight control window. I haven’t seen a godox light which matches the recycle speed, which i would need in order to make that evaluation.

Many photographers do prioritize lenses over body but they aren't majority. If photographer prioritize lens over body, Canon should be top of sale charts. They aren't because there are many deciding factors when making the camera purchase - lens choice, price, camera body, etc.
I think they used to be in the majority. What I’m wondering is when that changed.

Many photographers prefer to spend money on new camera bodies because it allowed them to do things they couldn't do before
Yes, that would be a great reason to update a camera body.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,619
2,105
Many photographers do prioritize lenses over body but they aren't majority. If photographer prioritize lens over body, Canon should be top of sale charts. They aren't because there are many deciding factors when making the camera purchase - lens choice, price, camera body, etc.
Actually, Canon is at the top of the sales charts. Where have you been for the past 16 years?
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,083
404
I don't care about leading sales that include all the rebels series. How are they doing in FF mirrorless market?
I imagine it’s too soon to draw any conclusions. They’re a newcomer, entering at the same time as another newcomer. Both Canon and Nikon show capture growth, but it will take time to stabilize.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,619
2,105
I don't care about leading sales that include all the rebels series. How are they doing in FF mirrorless market?
I don’t care about leading sales that include all cameras. How are they doing in pink Hello Kitty branded cameras?

I get that you only care about what’s important to you personally, but try to at least grasp the fact that you live in a larger world than the one existing between your ears.
 

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
4,235
795
If releasing the superb new L-lenses was such a horrible idea, why are we all talking about the bodies to come? Because they released lenses that are capable of handling far higher res and speed than the R offers. So by releasing the RF-L’s they tell us higher end bodies are coming, but meanwhile, have the excellent R to go with them.

I was not very happy with the midrange 85 L IS on the R, but the RF85 on the R is mind blowing, so lenses do matter A LOT.

And frankly I would be pretty p!ssed if I spent all my money on a high end R and okay lenses, and then for me personally, see the 1.2’s I could no longer afford. I can only speak for me, but the R combined with the RF50 and RF85 has seriously changed my whole mentality towards photography.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,170
1,747
Irving, Texas
If releasing the superb new L-lenses was such a horrible idea, why are we all talking about the bodies to come? Because they released lenses that are capable of handling far higher res and speed than the R offers. So by releasing the RF-L’s they tell us higher end bodies are coming, but meanwhile, have the excellent R to go with them.

I was not very happy with the midrange 85 L IS on the R, but the RF85 on the R is mind blowing, so lenses do matter A LOT.

And frankly I would be pretty p!ssed if I spent all my money on a high end R and okay lenses, and then for me personally, see the 1.2’s I could no longer afford. I can only speak for me, but the R combined with the RF50 and RF85 has seriously changed my whole mentality towards photography.
Same here. If the f/2.8's came out first, that is what I'd have gotten. Then I would be pissed (at myself, not Canon) because I would never be able to get what I got. Still holding out for a shorter zoom on the long side of 70mm. Hopefully a 70-135 f/2. For some reason, I think something like that will happen. Happy to be wrong though. If so, then an RF 135mm prime would suit me fine. That's all I hope for... either one. Set for life. Well, maybe a body upgrade someday. ;) To be honest, I don't "need" a camera or lenses at all. I just like to take photos.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Viggo

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,083
404
If you have are looking for value based and have no problem using old camera and lens, why don't you also go for the best bang for performance route for light like the Godox/Adorama system? I doubt anyone can tell the differences in Profoto quality or performance,


In addition to what I mentioned above, I also have concern for the reliability of the godox product line. The lights I eventually bought have fairly sophisticated cooling. Despite pushing more power through massive capacitor banks far more frequently than the elinchrom lights they replaced, they run much cooler (to the touch) and quieter. While I’ve not analyzed their bills of material, my prejudice, informed by a career in electronics development, is that the godox is likely to use cheaper components (consumer grade vs industrial grade, with lower allowable theta JC), and suffer a lower MTTF. Naturally I can not prove it, but the quality of the godox products I’ve handled left me wanting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Viggo

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
4,235
795
In addition to what I mentioned above, I also have concern for the reliability of the godox product line. The lights I eventually bought have fairly sophisticated cooling. Despite pushing more power through massive capacitor banks far more frequently than the elinchrom lights they replaced, they run much cooler (to the touch) and quieter. While I’ve not analyzed their bills of material, my prejudice, informed by a career in electronics development, is that the godox is likely to use cheaper components (consumer grade vs industrial grade, with lower allowable theta JC), and suffer a lower MTTF. Naturally I can not prove it, but the quality of the godox products I’ve handled left me wanting.
It was the same for me, I’ve had ad360 and used the ad600, but I bought a B1. Sadly Profoto couldn’t get the AirTTL to work with the 6d and 1dx2, and it was issues in HSS also. Finally got fed up and bought the Broncolor Siros 800 L, and it’s just soooi good, ironically it uses the Godox hardware for remote, haha. Batterylife of the AirTTL is horrible, but with Bron I’ve changed batteries ONE time, they never run out. And for power outside HS is way better than HSS. What I really miss with Profoto is their white, metal Beauty Dish and the original Magnum reflector .
 
Status
Not open for further replies.