Interview: Understanding the Canon EOS R

Jun 6, 2012
202
20
In that context, explain the fact that Sony and Nikon have delivered APS-C and FF ILCs with better base ISO sensor metrics continuously since ~2009, yet Canon has dominated the ILC market that entire time, with their current ~49% global ILC market share exceeding that of Nikon and Sony combined. (Don't worry, I'm not expecting a response since the only appropriate one would be "I was wrong," and I doubt you'll admit that.)

In reality, you (along with some other forum members) need to come to grips with the fact that your personal priorities are not necessarily aligned with those of the broader market.
How am I wrong. Canon brand in general is stronger and people are already invested in them and are used to Canon cameras. That goes further than just specs. If everyone was informed about all the current cameras equally about the specs and features, they knew what they wanted to do with them, didn't have brand loyalty, and had some cash to spar for a new camera and lenses, the sales numbers would be vastly different. There is a reason why people go to other brands, they simply did their homework, have the money, and isn't afraid to switch. My personal preference is to stay with Canon a bit longer so this isnt about my priorities. Overall I can still do what I need to do with the very reliable Canon brand but I would love a lot of the Nikon/Sony/Panasonic features/quality on a Canon.
 
Jun 6, 2012
202
20
Who exactly are these people you're talking about? You think people who spend large portions of their working life with a camera in their hands would use something that causes them physical pain for a marginal increase in image quality? Really??

And frankly, who knows what you mean by image quality anyway... Resolution? DR? At base ISO or elsewhere? High ISO performance? Colour reproduction? Noise characterisitics? And that's before you get to the fact that any image taken through a lens has a range of qualities attributable to the lens not the sensor.

That you think frame rate is something to do with image quality doesn't help your case, and frankly, what does full frame 4k have to do with image quality? I guess the Sony F55, Panasonic Varicam, Red Helium, Arri Alexa/Amira and and C700 must all be woefully inadequate video cameras as they dont have full frame sensors? Well I guess those fools in Hollywood just haven't realised it yet, but you've clearly got it all worked out.

I'm inclined to think that when you said 'people' you meant to say 'idiots'. Idiots want the 'best image quality' and are willing to endure pain to get it. Except they don't actually know what it is they want. And if they did, they'd probably be buying medium format stills cameras and cinema cameras for video. Except I guess that's too much image quality. So maybe this mythical thing isn't actually so important anyway. So why are these people willing to endure pain throughout most of their working life for this thing they don't really need? Because they're idiots.
You said a couple of things that support what I said. Those big ass cameras are painful to hold for long periods (unless rigged) but the quality is good, if not why not make big films with DSLRS, the FF thing is said because it is a FF camera and the lens are made to accommodate the camera, just like a lot of cinema lenses are S35 to accomodete those sensors. A 1.74 crop is for who, do they make 1.74 crop lenses? You dont spend $1500 or 4k on a good 35mm for it to be like 40mm or have to buy an 10-18mm crap lens just to use 4K with a reasonable viewing range at a decent price.
 
Jan 21, 2015
192
34
the things you named are like the least things most peopel care about. I think the number one concern with people is image quality. they would get a camera that hurts their hands for the best image quality. Higher framerates, FF 4k, and greater dynamic range helps people create whatever they want easier and opens doors to new types of imagery from them.
Then why do people ALWAYS want lighter cameras and often want smaller cameras? Ease of use matters.
 

neuroanatomist

Spends too much time on this forum
Jul 21, 2010
23,360
399
I think the number one concern with people is image quality. they would get a camera that hurts their hands for the best image quality.
You claim that people’s #1 concern is image quality. Do you really need someone to explain to you how claiming to know everyone’s priorities is not merely wrong, it’s asinine and ludicrous?
 
Likes: sdz
Jan 26, 2017
243
88
www.flickr.com
How am I wrong. Canon brand in general is stronger and people are already invested in them and are used to Canon cameras. That goes further than just specs. If everyone was informed about all the current cameras equally about the specs and features, they knew what they wanted to do with them, didn't have brand loyalty, and had some cash to spar for a new camera and lenses, the sales numbers would be vastly different. There is a reason why people go to other brands, they simply did their homework, have the money, and isn't afraid to switch. My personal preference is to stay with Canon a bit longer so this isnt about my priorities. Overall I can still do what I need to do with the very reliable Canon brand but I would love a lot of the Nikon/Sony/Panasonic features/quality on a Canon.
To be fair, that is all speculation. Pinning people's choice not to move to another brand on not knowing any better, not being able to afford to move, or having brand loyalty is somewhat short sighted. There is always the possibility that those choosing to stay prefer the value proposition made by Canon's products - believe it or not, Canon does have advantages in some spaces. As consumers, we choose what best fits our needs and our needs are not identical.

I can't speak for any other user, but I am well aware of the additional benefits provided by other manufacturers and sensor performance but choose to stay, even though I'd place myself in the camp that strongly values image quality. For me, I broadly prefer Canon DSLRs because their weather sealing is better than the mirrorless options available right now, they have an un-matched lens lineup, and they have never let me down - I've never had a field failure which I couldn't fix. I'd love an extra stop of DR, sure, but that limited weather sealing has more of a likelihood of ruining a shot than a touch less DR. I can solve a DR issue by bracketing or using filters, but I can't solve poor weather sealing when I'm in a downpour. For me, Canon makes sense.

A friend of mine was looking to upgrade to a new camera and has different needs than I do. He asked for my opinion and I recommended he look at a Sony a7iii because it fit his needs well (in my mind). He ended up showing a lot more interest in the EOS R. Why? Because its EVF is much higher resolution and that was one of his top priorities, and his other priorities were equally matched between both cameras. Does that make him uneducated on the benefits of an other brand? No, that makes him a consumer that is seeking a specific feature and choosing the product which best fits his needs.

The reality is that any consumer should choose what best fits their needs. If a Sony camera fits more peoples' needs, then Sony will grow rapidly and brands not sufficiently servicing this need will shrink. The mistake is assuming one persons needs are equivalent to everyone's needs.
 

neuroanatomist

Spends too much time on this forum
Jul 21, 2010
23,360
399
If everyone was informed about all the current cameras equally about the specs and features, they knew what they wanted to do with them, didn't have brand loyalty, and had some cash to spar for a new camera and lenses, the sales numbers would be vastly different.
And you know this...how? Have you been visiting alternate realities lately?

There is a reason why people go to other brands, they simply did their homework, have the money, and isn't afraid to switch.
This is the one statement in your post that makes sense. Of course, the fact that Canon has gained market share in recent years suggests that those people who have done their homework, have the money and aren’t afraid to spend it have chosen Canon over other brands more frequently than not. Kinda blows holes in the rest of your argument, doesn’t it? ;)
 
Likes: Viggo
Nah, FF4K has a serious point. Mainly being, getting he most out of the lenses. Cropping that heavily is a tough pill to swallow for those wanting especially wide shots. Though, probably not the biggest deal for those looking to shoot distant nature.
Not necessarily. Even the RED Super35 4-perf shoots with a sensor size (24.89 x 18.66mm) which is only a tad larger than the area that EOS R reads for 4K and definitely smaller than the FF (36x24mm).Those expensive video lenses all can only cover the Super35 sensor size not the FF. I have not heard any pro video producer saying that he/she cannot get a wide enough shot because his/her camera does not have or cannot read FF sensor!! I have never seen pro video producers operate the camera from the front, either.
 
Feb 6, 2015
80
2
None of that is at all surprising. They used existing/old technology and therefore have all of the limitations of their current camera systems now present in their brand new mirrorless.

I know many people will defend anything Canon does, but there is no question that Canon offers much less for the money vs. their competitors. And with the EOS R, they have clearly committed to continuing this.

I've only ever used Canon. I like my Canon cameras. But I also like the benefits of new technology and forward thinking. I unfortunately have to take a loss on my glass collection as I transition to a competing brand. EOS R is not a bad camera, it's just not a great camera. And at it's price point, it offers poor value. :/
I love Canon Camera and esp its EF lens, its color science, ease of use etc ... and you are probably right that at its (Canon EOS R) price point in comparison to others, it should at least par with Nikon Z6 /Sony A7iii to make it attractive for those who want to try this camera with the EF lens. Perhaps it will drop a little just b4 X'mas ( I could be wrong). Here's something to humor while debate goes on -
 
Likes: canuteboy
Jul 19, 2017
5
8
Talking about sensor performance on these current generation full frame bodies seems a little like the car magazines talking about which sub-4-second 0-60 supercar is faster. Like what's the difference really between 3.74 and 3.79 seconds 0-60? Driver skill will be a much bigger factor, but either way they're both fast as blazes! Same with these sensors. I have no wants with the 5DIV sensor-wise. 30 MP is insane resolution for me, having been using DSLR's since they were 4 MP. I have no desire for more. Same with dynamic range, etc. High ISO performance with these things is insane, you can pull shadows up like madness creating images in conditions we could only dream of image years ago. All this measure-bating is silly. Is the Sony sensor technically better on paper? A lot of people say so, so I who am I to argue? But more importantly who cares? If you were racing down the track in a Koenigsegg CCR which you be upset that it wasn't as fast as a Bugatti Chiron?
 
Sep 10, 2018
53
20
funny how some people need to divert from sensor performance or lack of some video features whenever criticism is voiced.

some of the "senior" staff here is arguing for 6 years that way, as i noticed reading older posts lately.

just saying "yes canon lacks in sensor performance compared to sony and i wish they would be as good" is not possible for some people.
"i wish canon would have IBIS and 4K without a heavy crop".... not possible to say for some.

or at least be open minded that other people want these features. nope... they need to divert to lens collection, market share, ergonomics, support.
it is an instant reflex for some.

some people don´t see all the benefits in canon cameras but sure some other people here won´t acknowledge shortcomings either (some may do with grinding teeth).

and it´s always the same arguments from both sides..... for 6, maybe 7 years.
and they all claim they are not fanboys ... LOL
you don´t waste your live writing 10000+ post on a GEAR forum when you are not a BRAND fanboy.


by the way:

i think the EOS R is a nice camera for my needs (won´t buy it because i have a 5D MK4). if i had no 5D MK4 i would wait until it is 200 euro cheaper.
but i saw some videos that showed some ugly banding when pushing shadows. noticable worse than the 5D MK4.
 
Last edited:

transpo1

EOS Rebel SL2
Jan 12, 2011
625
33
Canon may lead in camera marketshare, but Sony totally dominates the sensor game. Current estimates say they now command about 50% of the market. A recent article posted here demonstrated that Sony's huge advantage comes from their domination of the smartphone sensor market. Being able to research and innovate on small sensors in far more cost effective. And yes, they have the best patents. In other words, they make far more money than anyone esle selling sensors allowing them to spend far more money on sensor development. So, it is not surprising at all.
No, you misunderstood- it’s not surprising that Sony dominates (I was guessing they had roughly 50% based on who they sell sensors to), but what is surprising is that the #1 camera company doesn’t have equivalent sensor tech. I love the fact that Canon seems to do sensors themselves but perhaps they need to partner with Samsung.

Anyone have any info on how much / and what sensors Canon outsources, if any? Would love to know more about this.
 
Likes: canonmike

transpo1

EOS Rebel SL2
Jan 12, 2011
625
33
Not necessarily. Even the RED Super35 4-perf shoots with a sensor size (24.89 x 18.66mm) which is only a tad larger than the area that EOS R reads for 4K and definitely smaller than the FF (36x24mm).Those expensive video lenses all can only cover the Super35 sensor size not the FF. I have not heard any pro video producer saying that he/she cannot get a wide enough shot because his/her camera does not have or cannot read FF sensor!! I have never seen pro video producers operate the camera from the front, either.
If a pro video producer wants to buy a nice stills camera that will also serve as a backup video camera, however, he / she may be turned off by a 1.7x, jello ridden crop. Pro video producers were very excited about FF HD video when the 5DII enabled it 8 years ago and this same functionality with newer 4K video is what is lacking in Canon’s current generation of FF 6D/5D class cameras now. Not to mention, the video quality is just not that sharp or inspiring.

With FF 4K 60p, pro video producers (and many hobbyists) would buy these things en masse for the purposes I described above.
 

neuroanatomist

Spends too much time on this forum
Jul 21, 2010
23,360
399
Anyone have any info on how much / and what sensors Canon outsources, if any? Would love to know more about this.
My understanding is that APS-C/Super35-sized and FF sensors are produced internally, whereas smaller sensors for many but not all models (of PowerShots and camcorders) are purchased from other manufacturers.
 
Oct 6, 2015
151
42
what is surprising is that the #1 camera company doesn’t have equivalent sensor tech.
A point of view could be that Canon isn't the n°1 camera company. It's Apple. Dedicated cameras (whether for video or stills) represent only a tiny percentage of the overall imaging sensor market. Canon may dominate the camera market, but their share of the imaging sensors market fell at 3% in 2016 - and most likely even lower today (vs more than 9% in 2012) : https://www.vision-systems.com/arti...nsors-expand-machine-vision-applications.html
It's even lower now than Panasonic :D.
I guess that this is one of the reasons why Canon decided in 2016 to sell sensors to third parties.
 
Oct 26, 2013
966
109
...To continue to exist they need to keep capturing new photographers. They are gaining a reputation for not being at the forefront of technology in sensors and video. This doesn’t bother me too much but matters more to new entrants who perhaps have no experience of Canon and just read reviews. Canon need to be wary of that. /QUOTE]

Yes, it is worrisome to Canon, I am sure, that they have this reputation. And it should be worrisome to anyone who doesn't have an agenda, but is interested in accuracy. The reputation comes from all the ignorant reveiwers and (probable) Sony trolls who have realized that public perception can be influenced by what are essentially propaganda videos and reviews - mainly on YouTube. Even though people joke, "It must be true, I saw it on the internet," they do act as if what they see on the internet is true. You can see this attitude every day on this forum as well as others - as people continually base their opinions on what they read on the internet. Obviously, there are accurate and truthful reviews out there, but the amount of propaganda is overwhelming. Within a day or two, look how many videos absolutely slammed both Nikon and Canon upon their FF mirrorless announcements. It's shameful, as most of these videos were clearly done with a "pro-Sony" aganda in mind, and by folks who couldn't possibly have had enough time to really review the camera. And, yet, when Sony releases a new camera, we see none of these slamming videos - even though actual Sony users can find plenty to complain about as well.

Now that Nikon and Canon have made their announcements, I would have to say that Canon's innovations seem to be far more interesting - and useful - than what other brands have done as they move into mirrorless. The adaptors with control ring or filters is really smart, in my opinion. The closing curtains when changing lenses is another really useful innovation. Not to say that Canon cameras are perfect. Yes, the don't offer all the specs that other brands do. But they do some things - I think many here would agree - better than anyone else.

But Canon will still get slammed, because as market leader, they are the big target. Whether their reputation will continue to suffer, will depend a lot on those like you and me who pass along info on the internet. If many folks continue to push their agenda regardless of the facts or the reality, then Canon will continue to suffer.
 
Oct 26, 2013
966
109
The question is, what is EF-M for? From what we can tell, it's for smaller size (and perhaps lower price). Replacing EF-M with RF abolishes that advantage. Smaller size adds other restrictions - so if EF-M lenses don't get certain features RF lenses do, that's because the latter are more premium products, prioritising aspects other than size.
I believe in one of the Rudy Winston Canon videos announcing the "R", he refers to the EOS M as Canon's "Compact line". For those wanting really small and light (and inexpensive) it is a great choice, in my opinion. While I'm interested in the R, I have no plans to sell or no longer use my M50. In all likelihood, I will use it more than the R for general shooting due to its size (and the wide focal range of the 18-150 lens).
 
Likes: scyrene
Oct 6, 2015
151
42
The adaptors with control ring or filters is really smart, in my opinion. The closing curtains when changing lenses is another really useful innovation.
I'm not sure that I'd have picked these two as "innovative" features.
- regarding the adapters, we won't be talking about them much in 10 years. It's a terrific idea to add value to existing EF lenses on the RF mount, but not a useful idea in the long run.
- regarding the shutter : that will only be of value for a few years until mechanical shutters disappear altogether from our cameras (thanks to fast enough electronic shutters). So Canon will have, just like anyone else, to find ways to make the sensor's coverglass resistant to damage at some point. Besides I'm not 100% sold on the idea that exposing the shutter blades is a much better idea than exposing the sensor's cover filters.

Personally there are other features from the R that I find more interesting, at least on a conceptual, theoretical basis, and for the longer term (I'm not sold on the implementation). I like very much, for example, the digitalisation of the mode dial (although the execution is a mixed bag) - and Canon's first tentative and still quite timid attempt to get rid of the dated mode concept with the Fv mode (very similar to Pentax's hyper mode, though). None of that is truly innovative (the Phase One XF got rid of the mode concept a while ago), but I see this as a more interesting evolution for cameras going forward. Same applies to Canon acknowledging DPAF's ability to make software points a fully software construct by providing more than 5000 AF points and trying to design the camera to handle this number of AF points without becoming too cumbersome. The focus aid feature with tracking isn't new as it was already present on their video cameras, but it's one of the most genuinely useful feature I've seen in the last few years for manual focusing.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
1,870
117
Vancouver, BC
How am I wrong. Canon brand in general is stronger and people are already invested in them and are used to Canon cameras. That goes further than just specs. If everyone was informed about all the current cameras equally about the specs and features, they knew what they wanted to do with them, didn't have brand loyalty, and had some cash to spar for a new camera and lenses, the sales numbers would be vastly different. There is a reason why people go to other brands, they simply did their homework, have the money, and isn't afraid to switch. My personal preference is to stay with Canon a bit longer so this isnt about my priorities. Overall I can still do what I need to do with the very reliable Canon brand but I would love a lot of the Nikon/Sony/Panasonic features/quality on a Canon.
The problem I have with your whole argument comes down to the "if people did their homework" part. You're basically saying, if people would compare spec sheets and lab tests and listen to reviewers who compare spec sheets and lab tests, many people would leave Canon. But doing your homework should be about more than comparing spec sheets and looking at numbers on a chart. It should involve renting or borrowing a camera system that you'll invest at least $3,000 on, and seeing if it serves your purposes.

For me, in 2018, the lab tests and spec sheets are fun to look at, but play almost no part in my buying decision. I'd much rather try the device and decide based on the photographs I am able to get from it and how it handles situations that I'm most often have to deal with or work around.

From a macro level, you're also making the assumption that most people who are buying full frame cameras aren't informed buyers. I don't think that's true -- I do not believe people who buy expensive cameras are all brand-loyal lemmings or financially locked in to the system. I know that I am not. I've given both the Sony A7R3 and the Nikon D850 a fair shake, and while I really like some features in each of them, not only are none of those are enough to compel me to switch, but looking at the device overall, I just prefer my 6D2 -- and if only it had a flippy screen, a 5D4.
 

neuroanatomist

Spends too much time on this forum
Jul 21, 2010
23,360
399
funny how some people need to divert from sensor performance or lack of some video features whenever criticism is voiced.

some of the "senior" staff here is arguing for 6 years that way, as i noticed reading older posts lately.

just saying "yes canon lacks in sensor performance compared to sony and i wish they would be as good" is not possible for some people.
"i wish canon would have IBIS and 4K without a heavy crop".... not possible to say for some.

or at least be open minded that other people want these features. nope... they need to divert to lens collection, market share, ergonomics, support.
it is an instant reflex for some.

some people don´t see all the benefits in canon cameras but sure some other people here won´t acknowledge shortcomings either (some may do with grinding teeth).

and it´s always the same arguments from both sides..... for 6, maybe 7 years.
and they all claim they are not fanboys ... LOL
you don´t waste your live writing 10000+ post on a GEAR forum when you are not a BRAND fanboy.
Funny how some people think a statement of relevant facts constitutes a diversion.

Just saying yes Canon delivers products with features and performance that the majority of buyers find desirable is not possible for some people.

"I wish Sony had an extensive, more affordable lens lineup, a more intuitive user interface and better weather sealing,"...not possible to say for some.

Or at least be open minded that their personal desires may not represent those of the majority. Nope…they need to continually harp on base ISO DR and 4K video specifications. It is a habitual reflex for some.

Some people don´t see all the shortcomings in Canon cameras but sure some other people here won´t acknowledge benefits either (some may do with grinding teeth).

And it´s always the same arguments from both sides...for 6, maybe 7 years. They all claim they are not trolls ... LOL
you don´t create multiple new accounts or post many similar threads on the same topic on a GEAR forum when you are not a TROLL.

:p