Canon executives say a lot more coming in 2019

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,243
675
Sad to say, but you keep being wrong here. Appealing to a wider customer base will win more money and marketshare in the end and they will eventually have to do this R&D anyway to keep from being left behind in overall video spec. (In fact, they’re probably doing it already.)
Sad to say, but you keep being wrong here - and not listening.

No, they don't need to do the R&D of fitting a software feature into the particular hardware limitations "anyway" if this software feature is marginal for the target market of that hardware and there is less limited hardware that they produce for the target market of this software feature.

And if they do this R&D, they increase the cost of the product and the chances of the release schedule slippage, both of which decrease the number of sales on their target market.
 

scyrene

EOR R
Dec 4, 2013
2,492
345
UK
www.flickr.com
Still. I joined Canon's Australian R&D group in 2011 and he was then 74, and they categorically said they'd be installing younger blood progressively and now he's an 82-year-old fossil still running them. You can see why Canon are no longer the trail blazers.
Nothing like a bit of casual ageism eh?
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,604
2,060
I don’t know— they’re “infallible market research” that you’ve been extolling the virtues of for years lagged way behind the MILC curve and now they’re playing catch up. So no, I don’t trust it. I work for a very large company, so I know how they can have the “best glasses” but not see the forest from the trees. Corporations are big ships that take a long time to turn...and sometimes don’t see the iceberg until late in the game. Yes, I’m being dramatic— Canon, does not have any profitability issues to worry about— but you get the idea. ;)
I’m not claiming they’re infallible...just that their understand of the ILC market is superior to yours. In this case far superior, as your post makes it quite clear that you don’t ‘get the idea’. But I’ll try to spell it out for you one more time.

If Canon ‘lagged behind the curve’, they’d have lost ILC market share. They didn’t. They chose to stay out of a small market segment until it matured enough to matter to them. ILC comprises DSLR and MILC segments, and since those segments are counted together, favoring advancement in one over the other is not logical for the market leader (conversely, a minor player in the market may choose to focus on only on the segment where the market leader is not heavily engaged, i.e. Sony).

For the past decade, Canon has had just under 50% of the ILC market. When Canon entered the MILC segment with the EOS M line, that segment only represented less than 20% of the ILC market (and the majority of MILCs at the time we’re m4/3). Currently, the MILC segment is close to 40% of the ILC market, and the EOS M series is the best-selling MILC line globally. Meanwhile, Canon has recently launched two successful full frame MILCs (FF ILCs are only a small sub-segment), and they continue to maintain an ILC market share of about 50%. Nothing lost, not behind.

Making sense yet?
 

scyrene

EOR R
Dec 4, 2013
2,492
345
UK
www.flickr.com
Dont be sad, it’s a forum ! If you want the truth go do a PHD. You’ll have 5 years to ponder on truth and exactitude ! Than you can go on forums and just have fun while other people think you’re all about truth...
You can certainly spout any nonsense you like here, but you'll get called out for it. Just because it's a forum doesn't mean facts don't matter. The main outcome will be people think you're an idiot, although a lot of people don't seem to care about that.
 

transpo1

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 12, 2011
743
90
I’m not claiming they’re infallible...just that their understand of the ILC market is superior to yours. In this case far superior, as your post makes it quite clear that you don’t ‘get the idea’. But I’ll try to spell it out for you one more time.

If Canon ‘lagged behind the curve’, they’d have lost ILC market share. They didn’t. They chose to stay out of a small market segment until it matured enough to matter to them. ILC comprises DSLR and MILC segments, and since those segments are counted together, favoring advancement in one over the other is not logical for the market leader (conversely, a minor player in the market may choose to focus on only on the segment where the market leader is not heavily engaged, i.e. Sony).

For the past decade, Canon has had just under 50% of the ILC market. When Canon entered the MILC segment with the EOS M line, that segment only represented less than 20% of the ILC market (and the majority of MILCs at the time we’re m4/3). Currently, the MILC segment is close to 40% of the ILC market, and the EOS M series is the best-selling MILC line globally. Meanwhile, Canon has recently launched two successful full frame MILCs (FF ILCs are only a small sub-segment), and they continue to maintain an ILC market share of about 50%. Nothing lost, not behind.

Making sense yet?
Your stats seem to make sense on the surface, but I'm curious: why don't they have more RF lenses shipping? Why don't they have a high-res and/or pro FF MILC body shipping? They're rushing out a bunch of lenses late this year and their next FF MILC body will likely be next year. Nice try, but judging by the way a conservative corporation like Canon works- no, it just doesn't add up. They're rushing now and everyone knows it, and left money on the MILC table a bit too long. Nice to think they were purposely letting the market mature because of their "infallible market research" but that's not the case here. These items were fast-tracked for a reason.
 

Architect1776

Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Aug 18, 2017
330
278
117
Williamsport, PA
I’m afraid you don’t understand the concept because from your posts there is very little you understand about filmmaking in general. But i’ll Try to spell it out for you one more time. Most professionals are forced to shoot in 4K by their clients. It’s a requirement. Those looking to do professional work should no longer look to HD if they are looking at shooting something. Netflix requires 4K for all new programming.

Making sense yet?
That is why Canon makes real video cameras for QUALITY films not just backyard wanna be users.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

transpo1

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 12, 2011
743
90
Sad to say, but you keep being wrong here - and not listening.

No, they don't need to do the R&D of fitting a software feature into the particular hardware limitations "anyway" if this software feature is marginal for the target market of that hardware and there is less limited hardware that they produce for the target market of this software feature.

And if they do this R&D, they increase the cost of the product and the chances of the release schedule slippage, both of which decrease the number of sales on their target market.
I've been listening the whole time but I simply disagree with your assessment of sales potential. If they invested in the R&D and released a MILC FF stills camera with killer FF video features, I believe they would sell more cameras than they ever dreamed, more than making up for the wait with their target audience. Perhaps this is why they have yet to deliver a pro FF MILC camera. Either way, they have to do this R&D sooner or later.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,604
2,060
Your stats seem to make sense on the surface, but I'm curious: why don't they have more RF lenses shipping? Why don't they have a high-res and/or pro FF MILC body shipping? They're rushing out a bunch of lenses late this year and their next FF MILC body will likely be next year. Nice try, but judging by the way a conservative corporation like Canon works- no, it just doesn't add up. They're rushing now and everyone knows it, and left money on the MILC table a bit too long. Nice to think they were purposely letting the market mature because of their "infallible market research" but that's not the case here. These items were fast-tracked for a reason.
Canon led the FF ILC market last year (at least in Japan, which is the only geography for which we have data, but it's also the most popular region for mirrorless), i.e. there were more FF DSLRs sold than FF MILCs. From your I-know-better-than-Canon point of view, why do they need to rush things out?
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,604
2,060
I've been listening the whole time but I simply disagree with your assessment of sales potential. If they invested in the R&D and released a MILC FF stills camera with killer FF video features, I believe they would sell more cameras than they ever dreamed, more than making up for the wait with their target audience. Perhaps this is why they have yet to deliver a pro FF MILC camera. Either way, they have to do this R&D sooner or later.
The market for a 'killer FF video feature MILC' and the market for a 'pro FF MILC' are minuscule in comparison to the market for a 'relatively cheap FF MILC'. Thus, we have the EOS RP...demonstrating once again that Canon knows the market better than you.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,386
819
You're trying to prove the difference in DR between the best Canon and best Sony is insignificant, but I'm often scratching the limits of my 5DIV in landscape photography
And you would do so with a Sony A73 or Nikon D850 as well. No currently shipping camera has the DR necessary to cover the most extreme scenes which can be found.

So the argument on insignificance just doesn't hold for me, based on my experience.
What experience? Show me the pair of images you shot on a Canon 5D4 and Sony where the Sony had more recoverable detail vs. a small difference in noise in the recovered detail while pixel peeping.

You don't understand the tests at those sites if you think 1ev difference in scoring means anything other than slight noise differences in recovered detail. Look again at the S1 and 7D examples and that's a 3.5ev difference in scoring.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,386
819
I don’t know— they’re “infallible market research” that you’ve been extolling the virtues of for years lagged way behind the MILC curve and now they’re playing catch up.
DSLRs continue to out sell MILCs every where but Japan, and the Canon EOS M series has repeatedly out sold the Alpha series. Canon's total ILC marketshare has barely budged with almost all of Sony's gains coming at Nikon's expense.

What was wrong with their market research again?
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,604
2,060
DSLRs continue to out sell MILCs every where but Japan, and the Canon EOS M series has repeatedly out sold the Alpha series. Canon's total ILC marketshare has barely budged with almost all of Sony's gains coming at Nikon's expense.

What was wrong with their market research again?
You know how bullets just bounce right off Superman’s chest? Apparently some people’s opinions are impervious to facts in just the same way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

rrcphoto

EOS 5D MK IV
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
Your stats seem to make sense on the surface, but I'm curious: why don't they have more RF lenses shipping? Why don't they have a high-res and/or pro FF MILC body shipping?
because there's no real rush or panic to get them out the door immediately and next Q1 has a ton of shows that Canon wants to showcase at, not to mention it's Photokina first of the annual shows year, a Canon Expo year AND an Olympic year. what's going on after CP+ this year? a whole lot of nothing.

I think it's time you face the cold hard truth. what you, a forum warrior thinks the market should do or produce and what Canon feels the market needs and what will sell, are two different things. Admit the fact that you agree to disagree with Canon's feel of the market, and move on. Find something else to keep you interested and engaged. Obviously, Canon isn't and hasn't for YEARS kept you interested an engaged outside of complaining about video features, and you are still here. Meanwhile there's plenty of other cameras out there and companies that seem to be a better fit. yet you are still here.

it's really strange.

Professionally, if i had a tool that didn't do the job i needed to do, i would sell it and get the tool that did. no questions asked. I wouldn't wait and endlessly complain about it for 2 or 3 years.

cameras are nothing but tools not a religious experience.
 
Last edited:

QuisUtDeus

EOS 80D
Feb 20, 2019
115
80
Just jumping back to the discussion...
Newer sensor doesn't always mean better sensor, but it's my reasonable expectation as a consumer. I expect to see some improvement in the new camera models as someone who pays money.
A newer car with a newer, better engine doesn't get you to your destination any faster, assuming your old one met a certain minimum.

Any why no complaints about Sony's DR not improving over the past years?
 

QuisUtDeus

EOS 80D
Feb 20, 2019
115
80
I’m afraid you don’t understand the concept because from your posts there is very little you understand about filmmaking in general. But i’ll Try to spell it out for you one more time. Most professionals are forced to shoot in 4K by their clients. It’s a requirement. Those looking to do professional work should no longer look to HD if they are looking at shooting something. Netflix requires 4K for all new programming.

Making sense yet?
You're shooting a Netflix program? Cool! What's the name going to be? I'll be sure to watch it when it comes out.
 

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
488
321
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,386
819
This analogy isn't relevant. Better DR simply means more keepers.
If the difference is >2ev and if you shoot wide DR scenes and if you shoot RAW and if you know how to recover the shadows in post...you'll get a few shots that would require HDR techniques on the lower DR sensor.

If you're talking about a 1ev difference you'll see a noise difference while pixel peeping.

Because it's been improving.
So finally to the level Nikon was at in 2012. Silly Sony and their old sensor designs, when will they offer us something new? :LOL:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Del Paso

QuisUtDeus

EOS 80D
Feb 20, 2019
115
80
So finally to the level Nikon was at in 2012. Silly Sony and their old sensor designs, when will they offer us something new? :LOL:
And that shows effectively no improvement to the mk2 (which saw no screaming about old tech and expectations of improvement) and an optimistic half-stop with the mk3, which is exactly the kind of improvement Canon gets skewered for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

bhf3737

---
Sep 9, 2015
448
436
Calgary, Canada
www.flickr.com
I’m afraid you don’t understand the concept because from your posts there is very little you understand about filmmaking in general. But i’ll Try to spell it out for you one more time. Most professionals are forced to shoot in 4K by their clients. It’s a requirement. Those looking to do professional work should no longer look to HD if they are looking at shooting something. Netflix requires 4K for all new programming.

Making sense yet?
Half the truth is often a whole lie, isn't it?
Half-truth you said was: "Netflix requires 4K for all new programming".
The other half that you forgot to mention is: "Minimum data-rate of Bitrate of 240 Mbps at 23.98 fps" (REF)
What is the max bitrate of Sony MILC cameras (that you said earlier your pro crew use for film making): 100mbps in 4K.
And interestingly, on the same reference, I don't see any MILC of any brand listed as approved camera by Netflix for content creation and delivery!
So who are the pros who use MILC for film making anyway? and what they do with their contents created? Watch it in basement with their grandma?
Now who doesn’t understand about film making in general?
Edit: Same goes with your market analysis statements!:unsure:
 
Last edited: