DPReview Interview With Canon Execs, \

[Canon Rumors Guy]

During the CP+ show earlier this month, DPReview had the chance to interview a few Canon executives about all things Canon imaging. DPReview asked most of the questions us enthusiasts wanted answered.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/1807023531/canon-interview-increased-competition-allows-us-to-level-up">From DPReview</a>:</strong></p>
<blockquote><p><strong>How important is it for Canon to add higher-end mirrorless products to your lineup?</strong></p>
<p>At Canon we have what’s called a ‘full lineup strategy’. This means that we want to satisfy all of the demands in the market, so we have mirrorless and also DSLR, which combined makes an EOS hierarchy. We want to fill the gaps to satisfy customer demands across the board.</p>
<p>The new M50 is an entry-level model, because that’s where the high-volume sales are. We want to establish ourselves in this market, and then move forward [from there]. In accordance with the full lineup strategy, we will be tackling [the mid-range and high-end mirrorless market] going forward.</p>
<p><strong>The EOS M50 offers 4K video and Dual Pixel CMOS AF, but not at the same time. Is there a technical reason for this limitation?</strong></p>
<p>With the EOS 5D Mark IV, we do offer 4K video and Dual Pixel CMOS autofocus, so technically it is feasible. But given the position of the M50 in the lineup, we can’t include all of the features available in a product like the 5D IV. Given the position of the product, we wanted to achieve the optimal balance [of features] in a camera in that range. We’ve optimized the M50 as best we can [for its market position], and within those parameters, the combination of 4K video and Dual Pixel CMOS autofocus was not possible. <a href="https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/1807023531/canon-interview-increased-competition-allows-us-to-level-up">Read the full interview at DPReview</a></p></blockquote>
<p>Image Credit // <a href="https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/1807023531/canon-interview-increased-competition-allows-us-to-level-up">DPReview</a></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[transpo1]

Um, yup Crop and no DPAF in 4K is cost / marketing decision, as suspected.

With the EOS 5D Mark IV, we do offer 4K video and Dual Pixel CMOS autofocus, so technically it is feasible. But given the position of the M50 in the lineup, we can’t include all of the features available in a product like the 5D IV. Given the position of the product, we wanted to achieve the optimal balance [of features] in a camera in that range. We’ve optimized the M50 as best we can [for its market position], and within those parameters, the combination of 4K video and Dual Pixel CMOS autofocus was not possible.

And lack of 4K in the rest of the lineup is a lack of perception by Canon into the marketplace- in other words, they were wrong about 4K, and do not have infallible market research, as many have stated. 4K came up faster than they anticipated.

The cost required to introduce [features like 4K] into cameras dictates the kind of features that we can introduce [in products of different classes]. 4K is important to offer in all market segments, and in the M50 we’ve achieved 4K at 25 fps, and that’s the best we can do at this time. We can’t introduce all of the features [in an entry-level camera] that we could in a higher-end model. Another point is that consumption of 4K footage in terms of devices to view 4K video – the penetration of those devices in the market, and their adoption, was a little faster than we expected.

I think most of us knew this all along

 

[lexaclarke]

I don't think there's anything surprising that a much cheaper much smaller much less powerful beginner's camera can't keep up with the much more expensive much more powerful professional one. If the M50 could do video as well as the top DSLRs then it would be in the same price range, not one fifth of the price.

 

[ichiru]

wow thanks for the article but that is such bullshit! Keep it up Canon, protect your 5DIV in the meanwhile I'll sell mine and buy an A7III and a6500. Idiots.

 

[Talys]

The most interesting parts to me were the discussions about the future of the mount on a mirrorless, and the EF mount.

It also interested me that they thought that autofocus and viewfinder were not yet competitive with DSLR, which is my experience, too. I am not a fan of subject tracking for still photography, because it is not close to 100% accurate and sometimes doesn't do what I want/expect. Putting that aside, I still vastly prefer DSLR autofocus for still photography.

Also, that we can expect a "professional" (read: 1D series) camera in Tokyo 2020 was cool to hear.

The wide angle photo of the camera room in South Korea was very cool; I hadn't seen that one before.

I don't think there's anything surprising that a much cheaper much smaller much less powerful beginner's camera can't keep up with the much more expensive much more powerful professional one. If the M50 could do video as well as the top DSLRs then it would be in the same price range, not one fifth of the price.

Exactly!

wow thanks for the article but that is such bullshit! Keep it up Canon, protect your 5DIV in the meanwhile I'll sell mine and buy an A7III and a6500. Idiots.

Which part did you think was bull?

Is it that you simply don't like that Canon does not lower prices and add features features of flagship models down to the more entry level models (ie A7iii price), do you not like the direction that they're charting out, or what?

The 5DMk4 is a very different camera from the A7iii and A6500. If you're happy with it, you might not be happy with the Sony -- and vice versa. As you own a 5D4 already, what is about the 5D4 that you aren't happy with?

 

[Isaacheus]

I don't think there's anything surprising that a much cheaper much smaller much less powerful beginner's camera can't keep up with the much more expensive much more powerful professional one. If the M50 could do video as well as the top DSLRs then it would be in the same price range, not one fifth of the price.

I'd agree for the most part yep, I think the limitations on the 5dmk4 will mean that the lower priced options will be reduced further than need be though.

Giving the M50 dpaf in 4k would have been good, and with the crop, it'd still be under the performance of the 5dmk4.
If they released a firmware update to the 5d, like the same 4k codec as the m50 and no crop, then they'd have far more room to move underneath that price point

 

[MintChocs]

I think Canon are taking a huge gamble that they will win the mirrorless market. They might do so on the lower end but on the mid level FF I think they will lose to Sony. APS-C owners of the XXD/80D might move to Fuji. Canon is safe at the 1Dx level.

 

[Woody]

With the EOS 5D Mark IV, we do offer 4K video and Dual Pixel CMOS autofocus, so technically it is feasible. But given the position of the M50 in the lineup, we can’t include all of the features available in a product like the 5D IV.

So, it's the usual Canon crippling at work again! ;D

 

[Ozarker]

The word crippling should be banned from use by those who use it wrongly. Crippling means what is now considered crippled had the features to begin with and then those features were taken away.

But hey, I'm all for every camera at every price point all having the same features. The m50 should absolutely have all the same features of a 1DX II at an M50 price. : : :

Where do these people come from?

 

[Woody]

And lack of 4K in the rest of the lineup is a lack of perception by Canon into the marketplace- in other words, they were wrong about 4K, and do not have infallible market research, as many have stated. 4K came up faster than they anticipated.

We just carried out a little experiment couple of days ago in our lab. We used three 65" televisions with different configurations: (i) 1080p input into 4k TV (ii) 4k input into 4k TV (iii) 1080p input into 1080p TV. We used identical scene for comparison.

When we viewed the output at normal viewing distance, more than 1 m away, none of us (there were six of us in the lab) could tell the difference. We could only tell the difference when we stood 30 cm away from each screen and pixel-peep at specific areas of the scene. Sure, configuration (ii) gave the best output, but it was only visible when we pixel-peeped at 30 cm distance from the TV.

I feel Canon was not wrong. 4k is over-hyped. It's great for pixel-peepers and serious video editors. But for the man-in-the-street, it's an overkill.

 

[gmon750]

wow thanks for the article but that is such bullshit! Keep it up Canon, protect your 5DIV in the meanwhile I'll sell mine and buy an A7III and a6500. Idiots.

Such an ignorant post.

So go ahead. If you think that new Sony is going to make photos from a 5DM4 suddenly obsolete and unusable, then it just proves that you're more a weekend shooter and not someone that really is in a position to use either camera to its fullest extent. Either camera provides photo quality that most will never be able to distinguish.

So give it a rest. Threats of jumping ship get really old.

 

[Talys]

And lack of 4K in the rest of the lineup is a lack of perception by Canon into the marketplace- in other words, they were wrong about 4K, and do not have infallible market research, as many have stated. 4K came up faster than they anticipated.

We just carried out a little experiment couple of days ago in our lab. We used three 65" televisions with different configurations: (i) 1080p input into 4k TV (ii) 4k input into 4k TV (iii) 1080p input into 1080p TV. We used identical scene for comparison.

When we viewed the output at normal viewing distance, more than 1 m away, none of us (there were six of us in the lab) could tell the difference. We could only tell the difference when we stood 30 cm away from each screen and pixel-peep at specific areas of the scene. Sure, configuration (ii) gave the best output, but it was only visible when we pixel-peeped at 30 cm distance from the TV.

I feel Canon was not wrong. 4k is over-hyped. It's great for pixel-peepers and serious video editors. But for the man-in-the-street, it's an overkill.

This is the way I've felt since day 1 of the 4k mania. I really, really don't get it for the average person, considering the file sizes and the difficulty in post. I would think that really good 1080 would be much more important.

 

[RGF]

Re: DPReview Interview With Canon Execs,

A lot was missing there.

First only a tiny mention of the top end of the market - the 2020 Olympics in Japan. Perhaps 1Dx M3, maybe 600 DO? or 500/600 w/ drop in converters?

What about a step down - not entry level but the 5D M5 and 7D M3. Both these cameras are seriously lagging behind Nikon. I suspect that Canon's refresh will be behind the current Nikon counterpart (D850 and D500). I find it frustrating when a company cuts features from products in order to protect the top of the line.

 

[Talys]

Re: DPReview Interview With Canon Execs,

A lot was missing there.

First only a tiny mention of the top end of the market - the 2020 Olympics in Japan. Perhaps 1Dx M3, maybe 600 DO? or 500/600 w/ drop in converters?

What about a step down - not entry level but the 5D M5 and 7D M3. Both these cameras are seriously lagging behind Nikon. I suspect that Canon's refresh will be behind the current Nikon counterpart (D850 and D500). I find it frustrating when a company cuts features from products in order to protect the top of the line.

Well, just because they didn't talk about 5D, doesn't mean that 5D isn't in the lineup.

The question was very specifically about Tokyo 2020, so I think for sure that will mean a 1D, because he says,:

"The Tokyo Olympics is a very important opportunity for us. If we look at the professional camera market, we would like to introduce a professional model at that time. Having said that, we take reliability very seriously. "

I don't read that as a lens, and second, they're pretty clear in the article that professional = 1D, plus, if you look at the Canon photography room in 2018, it was all 1D's and 200-400.

 

[-pekr-]

The word crippling should be banned from use by those who use it wrongly. Crippling means what is now considered crippled had the features to begin with and then those features were taken away.

But hey, I'm all for every camera at every price point all having the same features. The m50 should absolutely have all the same features of a 1DX II at an M50 price. : : :

Where do these people come from?

Oh my, another this camera for the price of that one argument. And I thought it is just Neuero, who has no clue how to eventually differentiate 6DII to 5DIV, unless giving 6DII an old-school sensor.

Looking at the bunch of guys interviewed, it looks like a nice panopticum, well suited for a retirement house already, if they can't identify essential features and how to further differentiate their product lines.

 

[Isaacheus]

And lack of 4K in the rest of the lineup is a lack of perception by Canon into the marketplace- in other words, they were wrong about 4K, and do not have infallible market research, as many have stated. 4K came up faster than they anticipated.

We just carried out a little experiment couple of days ago in our lab. We used three 65" televisions with different configurations: (i) 1080p input into 4k TV (ii) 4k input into 4k TV (iii) 1080p input into 1080p TV. We used identical scene for comparison.

When we viewed the output at normal viewing distance, more than 1 m away, none of us (there were six of us in the lab) could tell the difference. We could only tell the difference when we stood 30 cm away from each screen and pixel-peep at specific areas of the scene. Sure, configuration (ii) gave the best output, but it was only visible when we pixel-peeped at 30 cm distance from the TV.

I feel Canon was not wrong. 4k is over-hyped. It's great for pixel-peepers and serious video editors. But for the man-in-the-street, it's an overkill.

I think a lot of it comes down to the input being displayed - there's a huge difference between 1080 and 4k (even compressed 4K) when I'm viewing the timelapses I shoot. I haven't shot a lot of wildlife, but the other side of 4k is the better colour when downsampled to 1080 too.

Not saying that it's useful all the time, but I feel there's a significant improvement in viewing quality for most of what I do at least. I'd really like to see canon including the option on more models, without large compromises

 

[JP]

It's just like the D30 all over again... Just wait... hold your horses... you switchers will be sorry... ;-)

 

[hne]

And lack of 4K in the rest of the lineup is a lack of perception by Canon into the marketplace- in other words, they were wrong about 4K, and do not have infallible market research, as many have stated. 4K came up faster than they anticipated.

We just carried out a little experiment couple of days ago in our lab. We used three 65" televisions with different configurations: (i) 1080p input into 4k TV (ii) 4k input into 4k TV (iii) 1080p input into 1080p TV. We used identical scene for comparison.

When we viewed the output at normal viewing distance, more than 1 m away, none of us (there were six of us in the lab) could tell the difference. We could only tell the difference when we stood 30 cm away from each screen and pixel-peep at specific areas of the scene. Sure, configuration (ii) gave the best output, but it was only visible when we pixel-peeped at 30 cm distance from the TV.

I feel Canon was not wrong. 4k is over-hyped. It's great for pixel-peepers and serious video editors. But for the man-in-the-street, it's an overkill.

I think a lot of it comes down to the input being displayed - there's a huge difference between 1080 and 4k (even compressed 4K) when I'm viewing the timelapses I shoot. I haven't shot a lot of wildlife, but the other side of 4k is the better colour when downsampled to 1080 too.

Not saying that it's useful all the time, but I feel there's a significant improvement in viewing quality for most of what I do at least. I'd really like to see canon including the option on more models, without large compromises

I have to agree here. When you have high-contrast details that are in a static position on screen, you have use for extra resolution. But even then, I wouldn't pay extra for 4K resolution unless I had a reason to go for a TV with a diagonal larger than the viewing distance. At the 65" diagonal mentioned, I fully believe a person with normal eye sight would be able to distinguish between the sets at a 1m distance given some really nasty input like white text on black background. But only if you knew what to look for.

Now, REC2020 includes quite a bit more than allowing for higher resolutions. The larger colour gamut and additional allowance of dynamic range would be clearly visible from any practical distance, for example.

I'm with Canon in the team that can't understand why people want 4K resolution everywhere.

 

[BillB]

And lack of 4K in the rest of the lineup is a lack of perception by Canon into the marketplace- in other words, they were wrong about 4K, and do not have infallible market research, as many have stated. 4K came up faster than they anticipated.

We just carried out a little experiment couple of days ago in our lab. We used three 65" televisions with different configurations: (i) 1080p input into 4k TV (ii) 4k input into 4k TV (iii) 1080p input into 1080p TV. We used identical scene for comparison.

When we viewed the output at normal viewing distance, more than 1 m away, none of us (there were six of us in the lab) could tell the difference. We could only tell the difference when we stood 30 cm away from each screen and pixel-peep at specific areas of the scene. Sure, configuration (ii) gave the best output, but it was only visible when we pixel-peeped at 30 cm distance from the TV.

I feel Canon was not wrong. 4k is over-hyped. It's great for pixel-peepers and serious video editors. But for the man-in-the-street, it's an overkill.

This is the way I've felt since day 1 of the 4k mania. I really, really don't get it for the average person, considering the file sizes and the difficulty in post. I would think that really good 1080 would be much more important.

Part of what is going on is just internet entertainment. Any difference that can be hyped will be hyped and asking whether there is any practical significance can be a real buzzkill, in addition requiring serious work to come up with a useful answer. A lot of the buzz isn't really about about actually improving image quality. Otherwise there would be a lot more discussion about using tripods and processing 4K files.

 

[neuroanatomist]

The word crippling should be banned from use by those who use it wrongly. Crippling means what is now considered crippled had the features to begin with and then those features were taken away.

But hey, I'm all for every camera at every price point all having the same features. The m50 should absolutely have all the same features of a 1DX II at an M50 price. : : :

Where do these people come from?

Oh my, another this camera for the price of that one argument. And I thought it is just Neuero, who has no clue how to eventually differentiate 6DII to 5DIV, unless giving 6DII an old-school sensor.

Looking at the bunch of guys interviewed, it looks like a nice panopticum, well suited for a retirement house already, if they can't identify essential features and how to further differentiate their product lines.

That's ok...you criticize, and Canon will sell lots of cameras, even if you have no clue as to why.