Does Canon really deserve this?
- Thread starter sanj
- Start date
Sometimes, we get lost in evaluating the products of a company, and forget about influences that affect how it can operate. As several people have mentioned, the storms etc - affecting its ability to R&D and build product. But, even with that tragedy, Canon has managed to produce a new 7D Mk2, a new 100-400 Mk2 among other lenses and gear.
I, for one at least, believe the complete package matters, and not one part (think sensor debate here) Canon has been doing the job well for me over twenty years - and if/when it fails, I'll change and shed no tears. I've still got and use often a 100-400 bought in 1999 ... and still debate upgrading to the Mk II - will wait and see it first. Shot for years with a 30D and then a 7D until just recently .... upgrading to the 5DM3 and now the 7D2 as a very effective pair.
I read a lot of problems with the 7D2, and it 'scares' me into testing and testing, and shooting it more and more, trying to find something wrong with it before the return period expires (Nov 30th) -- and every time I go out, I come back with a whole lot of sharp detailed color balanced images ... So, it confirms my personal belief that Canon builds very good equipment. But so does Nikon and Sony, and others -- no debate there.
I'm certain some of the guys on here have truly had problems with the 7D2, and a new product (no matter who builds it) will have some 'bad ones' .. which we hear more about than the good ones. But I also believe some need to learn the camera itself too, and figure out what causes the issues. AF system, hmmm, a dang nice one, but different, so it takes time to figure out exactly what it does best, and how - AND, equally, how the AF set up interacts with other auto-features. It takes time ... and I had a tough time with its AF at first, and still am confused at times, and look at a shot and say "Hmmm, what happened here?."
It's a great camera - it is what it is tho', and has its limits just like any other camera / lens technology. In fact, it performs better than I anticipated - which makes me happy. Maybe I'm just one of he lucky ones, that got a good copy - no issues. At first, shot a lot of deletes (and worried), now get a lot of keepers. It's just that curve happens with all new equipment.
I read a lot of real detailed 'Canon nit-picking' on here, and tech debate that ends up evaluating extremely minor differences or discrepancies. Most of which don't matter much in the real world of photography, but gives folks something to complain about - or often expresses extensive tech knowledge most folks don't have, need or care about in the workflow. The image and print speaks for itself - and finding a null detail at the micron level ?? Well, it irrelevant usually.
Canon does what Canon does - whether we like it or not - and if some other company suits the need better, go buy it, instead of complaining about Canon - mainly, because it does no good and wastes time.
So, does Canon really deserve this? [The complaints?] No, I think not ... not really.
I, for one at least, believe the complete package matters, and not one part (think sensor debate here) Canon has been doing the job well for me over twenty years - and if/when it fails, I'll change and shed no tears. I've still got and use often a 100-400 bought in 1999 ... and still debate upgrading to the Mk II - will wait and see it first. Shot for years with a 30D and then a 7D until just recently .... upgrading to the 5DM3 and now the 7D2 as a very effective pair.
I read a lot of problems with the 7D2, and it 'scares' me into testing and testing, and shooting it more and more, trying to find something wrong with it before the return period expires (Nov 30th) -- and every time I go out, I come back with a whole lot of sharp detailed color balanced images ... So, it confirms my personal belief that Canon builds very good equipment. But so does Nikon and Sony, and others -- no debate there.
I'm certain some of the guys on here have truly had problems with the 7D2, and a new product (no matter who builds it) will have some 'bad ones' .. which we hear more about than the good ones. But I also believe some need to learn the camera itself too, and figure out what causes the issues. AF system, hmmm, a dang nice one, but different, so it takes time to figure out exactly what it does best, and how - AND, equally, how the AF set up interacts with other auto-features. It takes time ... and I had a tough time with its AF at first, and still am confused at times, and look at a shot and say "Hmmm, what happened here?."
It's a great camera - it is what it is tho', and has its limits just like any other camera / lens technology. In fact, it performs better than I anticipated - which makes me happy. Maybe I'm just one of he lucky ones, that got a good copy - no issues. At first, shot a lot of deletes (and worried), now get a lot of keepers. It's just that curve happens with all new equipment.
I read a lot of real detailed 'Canon nit-picking' on here, and tech debate that ends up evaluating extremely minor differences or discrepancies. Most of which don't matter much in the real world of photography, but gives folks something to complain about - or often expresses extensive tech knowledge most folks don't have, need or care about in the workflow. The image and print speaks for itself - and finding a null detail at the micron level ?? Well, it irrelevant usually.
Canon does what Canon does - whether we like it or not - and if some other company suits the need better, go buy it, instead of complaining about Canon - mainly, because it does no good and wastes time.
So, does Canon really deserve this? [The complaints?] No, I think not ... not really.
Upvote
0
To me it doesn't really matter that others are innovating faster than Canon in some areas. So far I have been largely disappointed with Nikon and Sony as a system. The envelope is pushed so far that their equipment is not very reliable and certainly not very durable.
The reason I chose Canon was I needed a system that would stand up to challenges, including environmental, and work when I needed it to. Both Nikon and Sony have fallen short on that with me. Regardless of Canon's "lack of innovation" in some areas...and I say some areas because there are plenty of areas for which they are ahead in innovation, AF technology being one of them...Canon has continued to delivery exceptional quality for what I need it for.
At this point and anywhere in the foreseeable future, I do not see myself switching systems even if I had the $$$ to just start over.
The reason I chose Canon was I needed a system that would stand up to challenges, including environmental, and work when I needed it to. Both Nikon and Sony have fallen short on that with me. Regardless of Canon's "lack of innovation" in some areas...and I say some areas because there are plenty of areas for which they are ahead in innovation, AF technology being one of them...Canon has continued to delivery exceptional quality for what I need it for.
At this point and anywhere in the foreseeable future, I do not see myself switching systems even if I had the $$$ to just start over.
Upvote
0
monkey44 said:Sometimes, we get lost in evaluating the products of a company, and forget about influences that affect how it can operate. As several people have mentioned, the storms etc - affecting its ability to R&D and build product. But, even with that tragedy, Canon has managed to produce a new 7D Mk2, a new 100-400 Mk2 among other lenses and gear.
I, for one at least, believe the complete package matters, and not one part (think sensor debate here) Canon has been doing the job well for me over twenty years - and if/when it fails, I'll change and shed no tears. I've still got and use often a 100-400 bought in 1999 ... and still debate upgrading to the Mk II - will wait and see it first. Shot for years with a 30D and then a 7D until just recently .... upgrading to the 5DM3 and now the 7D2 as a very effective pair.
I read a lot of problems with the 7D2, and it 'scares' me into testing and testing, and shooting it more and more, trying to find something wrong with it before the return period expires (Nov 30th) -- and every time I go out, I come back with a whole lot of sharp detailed color balanced images ... So, it confirms my personal belief that Canon builds very good equipment. But so does Nikon and Sony, and others -- no debate there.
I'm certain some of the guys on here have truly had problems with the 7D2, and a new product (no matter who builds it) will have some 'bad ones' .. which we hear more about than the good ones. But I also believe some need to learn the camera itself too, and figure out what causes the issues. AF system, hmmm, a dang nice one, but different, so it takes time to figure out exactly what it does best, and how - AND, equally, how the AF set up interacts with other auto-features. It takes time ... and I had a tough time with its AF at first, and still am confused at times, and look at a shot and say "Hmmm, what happened here?."
It's a great camera - it is what it is tho', and has its limits just like any other camera / lens technology. In fact, it performs better than I anticipated - which makes me happy. Maybe I'm just one of he lucky ones, that got a good copy - no issues. At first, shot a lot of deletes (and worried), now get a lot of keepers. It's just that curve happens with all new equipment.
I read a lot of real detailed 'Canon nit-picking' on here, and tech debate that ends up evaluating extremely minor differences or discrepancies. Most of which don't matter much in the real world of photography, but gives folks something to complain about - or often expresses extensive tech knowledge most folks don't have, need or care about in the workflow. The image and print speaks for itself - and finding a null detail at the micron level ?? Well, it irrelevant usually.
Canon does what Canon does - whether we like it or not - and if some other company suits the need better, go buy it, instead of complaining about Canon - mainly, because it does no good and wastes time.
So, does Canon really deserve this? [The complaints?] No, I think not ... not really.
+1! There seems to be a lot of gravitating to one negative point--ad infinitum.
Glad you're loving your 7D Mark II! Still saving for mine.
Upvote
0
My guess is that Canon has probably been dragging their feet on announcing higher pixel count bodies until they got a number of lens updates done. Doesn't make much sense to put out a hirez body only to offer older lenses that mask any benefits. Of course DR is another story, but for me, I rarely shoot at base ISO anyway.
Upvote
0
http://www.cameraegg.org/rumors-5d-mark-iv-price-for-3799-to-be-announced-on-march-17th-2015/
Upvote
0
sanj said:
There definitely seem to be a few posters who for some reason concentrate on denigrating Canon. Generally they seem to post long justification for their opinion. Anyone who reads what they write would be given the impression that Canon camera can't take a decent image. And everyone with the slightest judgement can see that simply isn't the case.
I don't know if they really believe the stuff they post, or if they are just trolls.
Upvote
0
LovePhotography said:
Thanks for posting, but totally incredible as far as specs go. No 5D iii successor will ever only have 98% viewfinder coverage. And first the "rumor" says 2x CF slot, while a little further down the page it says "weight with SD card". Mentioning a specific price point so long in advance immediately and utterly invalidates any rumor, as far as i an concerned.
That said, i do believe canon has to come up with a 5d iv mirrorslapper some time soon and it better has a spanking new higher res sensor ... Otherwise they dont have to bother at all. I also expect it to not have 4k video. At least not internally, because canon will cripple away that feature to "protect" 1d c and c500 etc. I could well imagine that canon jacks up launch price to 3799 ... And get bitten by that decision. It would basically price the camera totally out of the enthusiast/semi-pro sphere .. Which accounts for probably 80% of potential sales of such a mirrorslapper. Well, we will see.
Me ... Not really interested any longer, if sony a9 is a killer.
Upvote
0
There's a psychological process behind this which should be acknowledged.
A. People tend to complain a lot more than they tend to compliment. In the case of sensors, people feel it's acceptable to say "Canon should improve their sensors! [a year's wait] Canon should still improve their sensors! [repeat till rapture]", e.g. as a kind of constructive criticism, than say "Canon sensors are great! [a year's wait] Canon sensors are great! [repeat till rapture]".
B. People are willing to accept a lot more criticism than compliments. X consecutive complimenting posts are more likely to make people think the poster receives some benefits from Canon, than X consecutive complaints are to lead people to suspect one is receiving benefits from competitors / bitches for bitching's sake / whatever.
A. People tend to complain a lot more than they tend to compliment. In the case of sensors, people feel it's acceptable to say "Canon should improve their sensors! [a year's wait] Canon should still improve their sensors! [repeat till rapture]", e.g. as a kind of constructive criticism, than say "Canon sensors are great! [a year's wait] Canon sensors are great! [repeat till rapture]".
B. People are willing to accept a lot more criticism than compliments. X consecutive complimenting posts are more likely to make people think the poster receives some benefits from Canon, than X consecutive complaints are to lead people to suspect one is receiving benefits from competitors / bitches for bitching's sake / whatever.
Upvote
0
AvTvM said:
I don't think the 5DIV will be a 'mirror slapper', or at least not if you don't want it to be.
With this talk of a 'modular' dslr going round I think the next 5D could have an interchangeable viewfinder, that is an optical pentaprism one for those that want to shoot stills with a high quality OVF, and an electronic EVF for those that want to lock the mirror up and use it for either stills or primarily video.
This way you get the best of both worlds.
Upvote
0
Seriously, anyone who can afford a DSLR is most likely to live in a certain comfort and fortune. And when you have no big problems like how to get money for food or water, you need something to let off steam; and that is why people are stomping on Canon all the time.
I am happy with what my gear delivers, because when I bought it back in 2011/12, it was the perfect choice for me and I have not enough money to switch systems. Once you bought into a certain brand to a considerably high degree, probably sticking to it for at least 10 years, you want the flaws to be better.
I have a 7D, one of most love-or-hate-ish bodies Canon made in the nearer past. It shows all the signs because of which its haters hated it: it is noisy at high ISO, there are some AF inconsistencies and the DR is not top of the line. But it delivers. If you know your gear, its strengths and weaknesses, you can produce some stunning images!
The main reasons why Canon is critizised are conservativeness, IQ and no innovation in the CSC segment.
They are to blame that they did not evolve the M system in the past, let's see what comes. Fuji, Sony and Samsung did come up with great products here.
When people talk about how bad Canon IQ is, they always refer to DR. I never heard anyone complaining about noise in recent bodies, Canon is top here. Sony has some great DR, but if you apply NR to a degree so that the image is less noisy than the Canon one and sharpen it, there are artefacts at ISO 1600 that destroy your image.
As for conservativeness, they are lacking a high MP body, that is right, there is certainly a demand for that and their lenses cry for it. But anything else: the 7DII is a conservative body, no question. But is it bad? It is, by general agreement, one of the best APS-C cameras on the market and the best for sports and wildlife. And what was it targeted for again? Sports and wildlife? Looks like they developed the right body here... If they had made it mirrorless, the AF wouldn't have been half as good and everyone would have said: "Look at Canon, trying to keep up with the other manufacturers..." The 5DIII is also a conservative body. When the D750 (which is basically a 5DIII for a little less money) came out, everyone was shouting: "This is a perfect camera, this is what we've been waiting for!!!" I still think the 5DIII is one of the best bodies on the planet, alongside with the 1DX, the D4s and the D810.
People buy Canon because of their lenses, their AF (which is the best you can get) and their reliability.
And I'd like to see all those critics buying other brands... As if Canon was the only brand with flaws!
Nikon - the handling is a joke, you need two hands to set ISO!! The AF and lens selection are behind Canon.
Pentax - not a good lens selection, AF is a joke.
Samsung - lacking mid-range lenses, but these guys are really coming up
Fuji - still no RAW at ISO 100 and > 6400... What is that? Also, AF is not that great...
Sony - great sensors, but no fast zoom lenses, I don't like the handling, AF with the FF bodies is not that good.
All in all, when I think about it, there are no-go's with some brands and some decisive factors with the others; I would still buy Canon.
I am happy with what my gear delivers, because when I bought it back in 2011/12, it was the perfect choice for me and I have not enough money to switch systems. Once you bought into a certain brand to a considerably high degree, probably sticking to it for at least 10 years, you want the flaws to be better.
I have a 7D, one of most love-or-hate-ish bodies Canon made in the nearer past. It shows all the signs because of which its haters hated it: it is noisy at high ISO, there are some AF inconsistencies and the DR is not top of the line. But it delivers. If you know your gear, its strengths and weaknesses, you can produce some stunning images!
The main reasons why Canon is critizised are conservativeness, IQ and no innovation in the CSC segment.
They are to blame that they did not evolve the M system in the past, let's see what comes. Fuji, Sony and Samsung did come up with great products here.
When people talk about how bad Canon IQ is, they always refer to DR. I never heard anyone complaining about noise in recent bodies, Canon is top here. Sony has some great DR, but if you apply NR to a degree so that the image is less noisy than the Canon one and sharpen it, there are artefacts at ISO 1600 that destroy your image.
As for conservativeness, they are lacking a high MP body, that is right, there is certainly a demand for that and their lenses cry for it. But anything else: the 7DII is a conservative body, no question. But is it bad? It is, by general agreement, one of the best APS-C cameras on the market and the best for sports and wildlife. And what was it targeted for again? Sports and wildlife? Looks like they developed the right body here... If they had made it mirrorless, the AF wouldn't have been half as good and everyone would have said: "Look at Canon, trying to keep up with the other manufacturers..." The 5DIII is also a conservative body. When the D750 (which is basically a 5DIII for a little less money) came out, everyone was shouting: "This is a perfect camera, this is what we've been waiting for!!!" I still think the 5DIII is one of the best bodies on the planet, alongside with the 1DX, the D4s and the D810.
People buy Canon because of their lenses, their AF (which is the best you can get) and their reliability.
And I'd like to see all those critics buying other brands... As if Canon was the only brand with flaws!
Nikon - the handling is a joke, you need two hands to set ISO!! The AF and lens selection are behind Canon.
Pentax - not a good lens selection, AF is a joke.
Samsung - lacking mid-range lenses, but these guys are really coming up
Fuji - still no RAW at ISO 100 and > 6400... What is that? Also, AF is not that great...
Sony - great sensors, but no fast zoom lenses, I don't like the handling, AF with the FF bodies is not that good.
All in all, when I think about it, there are no-go's with some brands and some decisive factors with the others; I would still buy Canon.
Upvote
0
No, they absolutely and definitely do not deserve anything like the level of criticism they get on here. And I don't for one minute believe that it reflects the Canon user base as a whole either.
Canon have produced DSLR *systems* that are reliable, have excellent features and handling and frankly a class leading set of lenses in terms of price / performance.
Some people have rightly pointed out that compared to the competition they are lagging and things like low ISO DR might get mentioned occasionally . . . This is fair enough and if that's important to you then of course you will consider other systems.
However, what amazes me is when people review cameras like the 70D and 7DII and say something like "Well the DR has only improved by 1 stop (or whatever), this proves Canon isn't innovating / doesn't care about their customers".
Stop it already!
if you come to that conclusion from analysing one factor of one subsystem's performance then it really suggests you haven't thought it through. It's okay, no in fact. it's right and proper that people raise criticism but the way that it gets blown out of all proportion into some kind of conclusion that Canon produces a poor ecosystem for us to work within simply lacks credibility.
I feel confident Canon will up their game on the sensor front, in fact they have been and there will be more to come. But there is only so much R&D to go round and Canon is limited like any other company in any other field. I'd rather they innovated incrementally than producing here today gone tomorrow products like Sony. I want something I can rely on, that I can get to know and grow with as a photographer without having to re-invest in lenses etc every few years. THAT is a much harder challenge than just bumping up sensor performance, throwing it in a camera and getting it out there. Anyone who has worked in IT and technology (and probably other professions) for a period of time comes to learn that.
Carry on Canon, please keep doing what you're doing. Don't start doing what people mistake for "innovation" when it is really more like "experimentation".
Canon have produced DSLR *systems* that are reliable, have excellent features and handling and frankly a class leading set of lenses in terms of price / performance.
Some people have rightly pointed out that compared to the competition they are lagging and things like low ISO DR might get mentioned occasionally . . . This is fair enough and if that's important to you then of course you will consider other systems.
However, what amazes me is when people review cameras like the 70D and 7DII and say something like "Well the DR has only improved by 1 stop (or whatever), this proves Canon isn't innovating / doesn't care about their customers".
Stop it already!
if you come to that conclusion from analysing one factor of one subsystem's performance then it really suggests you haven't thought it through. It's okay, no in fact. it's right and proper that people raise criticism but the way that it gets blown out of all proportion into some kind of conclusion that Canon produces a poor ecosystem for us to work within simply lacks credibility.
I feel confident Canon will up their game on the sensor front, in fact they have been and there will be more to come. But there is only so much R&D to go round and Canon is limited like any other company in any other field. I'd rather they innovated incrementally than producing here today gone tomorrow products like Sony. I want something I can rely on, that I can get to know and grow with as a photographer without having to re-invest in lenses etc every few years. THAT is a much harder challenge than just bumping up sensor performance, throwing it in a camera and getting it out there. Anyone who has worked in IT and technology (and probably other professions) for a period of time comes to learn that.
Carry on Canon, please keep doing what you're doing. Don't start doing what people mistake for "innovation" when it is really more like "experimentation".
Upvote
0
sanj said:
I am a very satisfied customer. I also think canon has set he pace and innovated in other ways besides the sensor. I do hope to see sensor improvements in the next xD body, especially in low ISO read noise. But, that said, my 5DIII is so amazingly good. It is a better camera than I am a photographer. Sure 3rd party lenses are getting better, but Canon is releasing some interesting lenses and I am happy to have competition. But this year alone Canon has released 3 lenses I am considering adding.
I've been around CR since 2010. I actually don't see the switch in the negativity you mention. This site has always had a very healthy dose of criticism and negativity. There have been a few more conflicts over the negativity as I believe certain people are getting fed up with it. Before, it was often unopposed. And perhaps the negativity has manifested itself more specifically on the sensors (mostly) and mirrorless (lesser). But the most positive response I can think of to a Canon dSLR from this site was the 7DII. The 6D was absolutely shredded here. Delays in the 1DX, Big White lenses, etc too. The 5DIII, a complete disappointment and minor upgrade at best over the 5DII which would result in waves of defections to Nikon and the D800 if you were to read the original threads on CR.
There is some very interesting content on this site. But I guess I disagree with your premise. To me, the interesting content is actually growing more frequent.
Upvote
0
As a Canon user since the mid-1980's, I have a strong attachment to the brand. Before jumping across to Fuji, I gave Canon a chance and waited for their mirrorless option. But it just wasn't what I wanted and sadly had to go elsewhere.
I still use Canon DSLRs for some things, but my kit hasn't changed in ages - Canon just haven't made anything that has excited me in a long time. I think the 40/2.8 is the only Canon lens I've purchased in the last three years, and the new 100-400 is the first serious lens in a long time that I'm likely to buy. But the only reason I'd consider buying a new body is if a camera breaks and I need to replace it. Even though my cameras are several years old, for what I shoot, I don't think a new camera would be of any significant improvement.
Apart from some topics I haven't noticed an upsurge in negative comments. This is still a very friendly, helpful forum. But I can understand why those with particular interest, needs and desires might be disappointed with Canon's lack of development in some areas.
I still use Canon DSLRs for some things, but my kit hasn't changed in ages - Canon just haven't made anything that has excited me in a long time. I think the 40/2.8 is the only Canon lens I've purchased in the last three years, and the new 100-400 is the first serious lens in a long time that I'm likely to buy. But the only reason I'd consider buying a new body is if a camera breaks and I need to replace it. Even though my cameras are several years old, for what I shoot, I don't think a new camera would be of any significant improvement.
Apart from some topics I haven't noticed an upsurge in negative comments. This is still a very friendly, helpful forum. But I can understand why those with particular interest, needs and desires might be disappointed with Canon's lack of development in some areas.
Upvote
0
I'm more than happy with my Canon gear and think the recent negativity is largely undeserved. They make fine equipment that works as expected without fail. Seriously, the stuff is rock solid reliable. OK, so the eyecup cover of my used and abused t2i viewfinder came off (shocker) so it's not all roses!
Sony sensors - yeah, they're all right I guess. Am I jealous? Not really. I'd rather have Canon ergonomics and I've been shooting RAW from day one and can squeeze a lot of detail out of a single exposure now. No issues at all. The 6D files are really nice to work with!
As a tech geek I would love to see some cool new gadgets but then again I have no need for them as the gear I have gets the job done. After that it's pure lust!
Sometimes reading CR forums you might think Canon is some kind of old has been grandpa of a company but like someone mentioned before look at all the cool stuff they gave us recently -
7D Mk II - how many of us had given up hope? It's real and it's badass!
100-400 II - did someone say unicorn?
16-35 f/4L IS - oh, hello wide angle lens that is super awesome! (Who doesn't want one of these?)
10-18 IS STM - people complained about good cheap lenses. Well?
EF-S 24mm f/2.8 - pancake in crop flavor. Who doesn't like pancakes?
But hold on wait a minute none of that matters guys, you know why? Because DXO who like to pull numbers out of their rear aperture said that the DR is poor at ISO 100, so forget it. Throw it all away. Nothing to see here.
Sony sensors - yeah, they're all right I guess. Am I jealous? Not really. I'd rather have Canon ergonomics and I've been shooting RAW from day one and can squeeze a lot of detail out of a single exposure now. No issues at all. The 6D files are really nice to work with!
As a tech geek I would love to see some cool new gadgets but then again I have no need for them as the gear I have gets the job done. After that it's pure lust!
Sometimes reading CR forums you might think Canon is some kind of old has been grandpa of a company but like someone mentioned before look at all the cool stuff they gave us recently -
7D Mk II - how many of us had given up hope? It's real and it's badass!
100-400 II - did someone say unicorn?
16-35 f/4L IS - oh, hello wide angle lens that is super awesome! (Who doesn't want one of these?)
10-18 IS STM - people complained about good cheap lenses. Well?
EF-S 24mm f/2.8 - pancake in crop flavor. Who doesn't like pancakes?
But hold on wait a minute none of that matters guys, you know why? Because DXO who like to pull numbers out of their rear aperture said that the DR is poor at ISO 100, so forget it. Throw it all away. Nothing to see here.
Upvote
0
Most of the critical comments directed against Canon revolve around:
a) Dynamic range
b) Pixel count
c) Video capabilities
d) In camera tools
Regarding (a), that is minor for most users, both with stills and video. Some people doing specialist work might have an issue, but it does not affect most.
I don't see what the big deal is about pixel count. Unless you are producing a huge image in a lossless format, the current resolutions are more than adequate.
Video capabilities are a valid criticism. The video capabilities in pretty much all consumer cameras lag far behind the competition.
In camera tools (lack thereof, or poor implementation) are a valid criticism. Having an extensive tool set and wide control of shooting parameters is something that a modern camera should have. Programmable and flexible tools such as peaking and exposure indicators are a must have feature in any modern camera.
The fact that some people don't have a problem does not mean that other people's issues have no merit. They are customers as well.
One should also not forget that the vast majority of purchasers buy the badge on the front of the camera, so suggesting that because a particular manufacturer sells a lot of product implies that the product has exceptional quality is a load of rubbish. The quality of a product is determined by it's capabilities alone, not how well it sells.
a) Dynamic range
b) Pixel count
c) Video capabilities
d) In camera tools
Regarding (a), that is minor for most users, both with stills and video. Some people doing specialist work might have an issue, but it does not affect most.
I don't see what the big deal is about pixel count. Unless you are producing a huge image in a lossless format, the current resolutions are more than adequate.
Video capabilities are a valid criticism. The video capabilities in pretty much all consumer cameras lag far behind the competition.
In camera tools (lack thereof, or poor implementation) are a valid criticism. Having an extensive tool set and wide control of shooting parameters is something that a modern camera should have. Programmable and flexible tools such as peaking and exposure indicators are a must have feature in any modern camera.
The fact that some people don't have a problem does not mean that other people's issues have no merit. They are customers as well.
One should also not forget that the vast majority of purchasers buy the badge on the front of the camera, so suggesting that because a particular manufacturer sells a lot of product implies that the product has exceptional quality is a load of rubbish. The quality of a product is determined by it's capabilities alone, not how well it sells.
Upvote
0
WOW!
Please stop awarding Canon with human like attributes, Its A Corporation! Canon have no feelings, can not be sad, has no shame or any other feelings, unlike the small mom and pap corner stores killed by Walmart or thousand small farmers before that etc. Where were you than? What kind of culture is this that very intelligent adult humans spent time and resources to conduct crusades to glorify a brand name? Please go take some pictures with a CAMERA no matter what the logo and do something good for other human beings in the season of Thanksgiving instead.
Thank you and bless you all.
Please stop awarding Canon with human like attributes, Its A Corporation! Canon have no feelings, can not be sad, has no shame or any other feelings, unlike the small mom and pap corner stores killed by Walmart or thousand small farmers before that etc. Where were you than? What kind of culture is this that very intelligent adult humans spent time and resources to conduct crusades to glorify a brand name? Please go take some pictures with a CAMERA no matter what the logo and do something good for other human beings in the season of Thanksgiving instead.
Thank you and bless you all.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
