Lots of Talk, Very Little Solid Information About Canon's Next Cameras

[Talys]

Look I love my 5d3, and i wouldn't mind have a 5d4 and such, but come on...there hasn't been an exciting canon body since the 1dx2. The 5ds is basically the 5 series with more resolution and literally nothing else. 7d2 was a jokes at launch. 6d2, hat a tragic waste of resources just to hobble it anyways.

Virtually all DSLR releases in the past decade have been small, marginal upgrades. So there have been no exciting camera bodies made by anyone - not just Canon. And, once again, terms like "a joke at launch" and "tragic waste" are nothing but troll comments meant to inflame. Both of these cameras produce excellent images that are virtually indistinguishable from cameras made by other brands. And it is about the photos, isn't it?

The people looking for amazing, revolutionary camera releases and are constantly disappointed by "joke" launches can be divided into two types: those in search of technological improvements to improve photography, and those who are more interested in technology than photography.


I see amazing photography all the time, more often than not with very old cameras. The difference maker is the photographer, and their way of being able to "make something out of nothing" -- to take an average building and an average person, and very minimal equipment, yet by artistic talent and understanding of light, create a photograph that is flattering, interesting, and remarkable.

For those who want better photographs, go buy an older camera and stop being handicapped by barrages of menus and shooting modes, because eventually you will come to the inescapable truth that the same crappy scene taken with the best camera in the world still yields a crappy photograph. Turning dials and pushing buttons ultimately turn a boring photograph into a crisper boring photograph. Yay!

For those who want better technology, pick another poison, because the nature of photography equipment is plateaus of miniscule changes, followed by a few seismic leaps, then more long plateaus of miniscule changes. Why is that? Because the technology matures, and then it's just about little improvements. See above... the problem with the photograph is behind the viewfinder.

 

[Mikehit]

I see amazing photography all the time, more often than not with very old cameras. The difference maker is the photographer, and their way of being able to "make something out of nothing" -- to take an average building and an average person, and very minimal equipment, yet by artistic talent and understanding of light, create a photograph that is flattering, interesting, and remarkable.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/jul/27/london-olympics-2012-smartphone

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/6618756953/photojournalist-dan-chung-reflects-shooting-olympics-with-iphone

 

[greger]

Some of these posts have been very interesting. Me, I’m looking for a 7D lll in September. If it doesn’t have an articulating screen the 90D is the camera for me. I can live with 2 custom settings on the mode dial. As long as I can take BIF pics I’ll be a happy camper.

 

[fullstop]

1) 99% of really good images [other than studio work] DEPEND on "privileged access" to the scene. It is the first condition to be met, to set those images fundamentally apart "from what the masses can see themselves".

2) Creativity, "photographic eye" and skill come next.
3) Right equipment best suited to the task comes thereafter.

Disclaimer: Yes, even if I had the same access to/at Olympic games or a Metallica concert or behind-the-scenes at the Met opera or the oval office, my images would still suck in comparison to most pro's work, but they would be "by magnitudes better" than anything I will ever be able to get in (my) real life. Even if I was only allowed an iphone with add-on lenses/binoculars.

In terms of "technical quality" Dan Chung's London 2012 iphone 4S images suck of course. The only one i really like, is reduced to black and white and just the right amount of blur. So noise, colour and sharpness are totally unimportant.
https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/articles/6618756953/IMG_3344_Snapseed.jpg

whereas this one "is not even worth the pixels" to me:
https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/articles/6618756953/dc_IMG_0251_Snapseed.jpg
Imagine, what that image could have really been, had he used "proper gear".

 

[bwud]

Disclaimer: Yes, even if I had the same access to/at Olympic games or a Metallica concert

Speak of the devil

Some flavor of iPhone - I don’t remember what I had at the time

 

[ashmadux]

Look I love my 5d3, and i wouldn't mind have a 5d4 and such, but come on...there hasn't been an exciting canon body since the 1dx2. The 5ds is basically the 5 series with more resolution and literally nothing else. 7d2 was a jokes at launch. 6d2, hat a tragic waste of resources just to hobble it anyways.

Virtually all DSLR releases in the past decade have been small, marginal upgrades. So there have been no exciting camera bodies made by anyone - not just Canon. And, once again, terms like "a joke at launch" and "tragic waste" are nothing but troll comments meant to inflame. Both of these cameras produce excellent images that are virtually indistinguishable from cameras made by other brands. And it is about the photos, isn't it?

The people looking for amazing, revolutionary camera releases and are constantly disappointed by "joke" launches can be divided into two types: those in search of technological improvements to improve photography, and those who are more interested in technology than photography.


I see amazing photography all the time, more often than not with very old cameras. The difference maker is the photographer, and their way of being able to "make something out of nothing" -- to take an average building and an average person, and very minimal equipment, yet by artistic talent and understanding of light, create a photograph that is flattering, interesting, and remarkable.

For those who want better photographs, go buy an older camera and stop being handicapped by barrages of menus and shooting modes, because eventually you will come to the inescapable truth that the same crappy scene taken with the best camera in the world still yields a crappy photograph. Turning dials and pushing buttons ultimately turn a boring photograph into a crisper boring photograph. Yay!

For those who want better technology, pick another poison, because the nature of photography equipment is plateaus of miniscule changes, followed by a few seismic leaps, then more long plateaus of miniscule changes. Why is that? Because the technology matures, and then it's just about little improvements. See above... the problem with the photograph is behind the viewfinder.

You guys make it difficult to have sensible conversations debate here, because well, THIS. And this is called, changing the conversation.

You want to talk about the merits of good photography, that's great, more power to you. But I could pinkie-swear we were discussing, or even the thread is about canon cameras....and not photographer skill.

And let's stop using the lame, tired argument that the tools are not important, which this segway always seems to imply. Yet the same people making this suggestion are on camera forum boards discussing, well...camera bodies. Cmon, ya'' can do better.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Look I love my 5d3, and i wouldn't mind have a 5d4 and such, but come on...there hasn't been an exciting canon body since the 1dx2. The 5ds is basically the 5 series with more resolution and literally nothing else. 7d2 was a jokes at launch. 6d2, hat a tragic waste of resources just to hobble it anyways.

You guys make it difficult to have sensible conversations debate here, because well, THIS. And this is called, changing the conversation.

But calling cameras people have purchased and are out there making excellent images with jokes and wastes of resources makes it really easy to have a sensible conversation. Yeah, that makes sense.

 

[jayphotoworks]

The people looking for amazing, revolutionary camera releases and are constantly disappointed by "joke" launches can be divided into two types: those in search of technological improvements to improve photography, and those who are more interested in technology than photography.

I think there are varying shades of gray in there as well. I enjoy the tech aspect as much as the photography, or in my case cinematography/video. The tech doesn't necessarily improve the end result, but it does simplify or improve the route in getting there. Canon wasn't always like this. Rewinding back 10 years or so, the 1D3 was my first flagship with LV and this feature was great to have without needing an angle finder and for overhead shots. The 1D4 added 1080 video which was even better. There was a period of time where Canon really pushed the envelope. The 1DX was the last Canon flagship I shot on which finally moved to FF and at a time I was still heavily shooting photos.

It's unfortunate that Canon's market share today dictates that they don't have to do much to appeal to the smaller or niche crowd or enthusiast. Perhaps this trend will change in the next wave of mirror-less cameras. I think some of the people here that appear to troll, simply haven't thought out how to best articulate themselves. There are different age groups with varying levels of english proficiency at play as well. I understand the general sentiment they are trying to convey, but the delivery could probably be improved. At the same time, I understand how writing about the competition in an environment that widely supports an opposing brand is fraught with peril, but at least some members here that support Canon could probably show a bit more empathy in that regards.

 

[scyrene]

The people looking for amazing, revolutionary camera releases and are constantly disappointed by "joke" launches can be divided into two types: those in search of technological improvements to improve photography, and those who are more interested in technology than photography.

I think there are varying shades of gray in there as well. I enjoy the tech aspect as much as the photography, or in my case cinematography/video. The tech doesn't necessarily improve the end result, but it does simplify or improve the route in getting there. Canon wasn't always like this. Rewinding back 10 years or so, the 1D3 was my first flagship with LV and this feature was great to have without needing an angle finder and for overhead shots. The 1D4 added 1080 video which was even better. There was a period of time where Canon really pushed the envelope. The 1DX was the last Canon flagship I shot on which finally moved to FF and at a time I was still heavily shooting photos.

It's unfortunate that Canon's market share today dictates that they don't have to do much to appeal to the smaller or niche crowd or enthusiast. Perhaps this trend will change in the next wave of mirror-less cameras. I think some of the people here that appear to troll, simply haven't thought out how to best articulate themselves. There are different age groups with varying levels of english proficiency at play as well. I understand the general sentiment they are trying to convey, but the delivery could probably be improved. At the same time, I understand how writing about the competition in an environment that widely supports an opposing brand is fraught with peril, but at least some members here that support Canon could probably show a bit more empathy in that regards.

But do you think the envelope can be pushed that much these days - by anyone? Digital cameras developed more rapidly in their infancy, because that's generally what happens with technology. Things start to level out once things become mature. Being the dominant manufacturer may make them less inclined to take risks, as some see it (or rather, they've hit on a winning formula), but I think that's often overstated. Adding video or live view, to take your examples, were leaps. What similar leaps are left?

 

[ashmadux]

Look I love my 5d3, and i wouldn't mind have a 5d4 and such, but come on...there hasn't been an exciting canon body since the 1dx2. The 5ds is basically the 5 series with more resolution and literally nothing else. 7d2 was a jokes at launch. 6d2, hat a tragic waste of resources just to hobble it anyways.

You guys make it difficult to have sensible conversations debate here, because well, THIS. And this is called, changing the conversation.

But calling cameras people have purchased and are out there making excellent images with jokes and wastes of resources makes it really easy to have a sensible conversation. Yeah, that makes sense.

Um, I have an M1, 30k images. That camera doesn't exactly get love from the community (quite the opposite). Yet you dont see me in threads crying about it. Oh, and I LOVE to use the adapter too (hides under the desk).

And what's your point you're making now? Feelings? WTH....I believe you are purposely being 'intellectually foolish' in your responses, and it is still disappointing since I do have respect for your technical knowledge. Even in these forums where your weak attempts at disparaging others opinions with cheesy, dry pot shots, many a canon fan have been disappointed for quite some time by our favorite camera maker.

That said, if you choose to go all into the woods to defend your nonsense rebuttal, please go back in time and find all the excitement for those bodies when they dropped. The common thread with canon cameras has been 'mild update' for YEARS, including the 5d4. You have fun with that, smart guy.

 

[Mikehit]

The people looking for amazing, revolutionary camera releases and are constantly disappointed by "joke" launches can be divided into two types: those in search of technological improvements to improve photography, and those who are more interested in technology than photography.

I think there are varying shades of gray in there as well. I enjoy the tech aspect as much as the photography, or in my case cinematography/video. The tech doesn't necessarily improve the end result, but it does simplify or improve the route in getting there. Canon wasn't always like this. Rewinding back 10 years or so, the 1D3 was my first flagship with LV and this feature was great to have without needing an angle finder and for overhead shots. The 1D4 added 1080 video which was even better. There was a period of time where Canon really pushed the envelope. The 1DX was the last Canon flagship I shot on which finally moved to FF and at a time I was still heavily shooting photos.

It's unfortunate that Canon's market share today dictates that they don't have to do much to appeal to the smaller or niche crowd or enthusiast. Perhaps this trend will change in the next wave of mirror-less cameras. I think some of the people here that appear to troll, simply haven't thought out how to best articulate themselves. There are different age groups with varying levels of english proficiency at play as well. I understand the general sentiment they are trying to convey, but the delivery could probably be improved. At the same time, I understand how writing about the competition in an environment that widely supports an opposing brand is fraught with peril, but at least some members here that support Canon could probably show a bit more empathy in that regards.

Regards the bit in red, Canon had a definite shift in the late 2000's and went from high profile functions to just making the cameras better to use. Maybe they saw the obvious in diminishing returns and decided to only release 'new techy' when ti was ready and when it was a major improvement.
After all the hullabaloo of disappointment over the 5DIV, and how it was not worth upgrading because of the disappointing specs, anyone who did go from mk3 to mk4 said how it was better in almost every way because of hte way Canon had developed existing functions.
For myself, I have always found Canon to be poor at self-promotion and do little to explain how good new menu items are for example.

So yes, Canon do still innovate but not in the way many people measure it on websites and forums. And no, I am not saying everyone has to like what they do but everyone needs to appreciate that what they do do, they do it extremely well.
Some companies wow you by releasing new models every year or two, when all they are doing is fix bugs that should not have been there in the original model.

 

[fullstop]

But do you think the envelope can be pushed that much these days - by anyone?

Yes. Canon could finally make compact, fully competent, amateur-affordable mirrorless FF camera/s with excellent IQ, functionality and performance. Possibly including some or all of the following things Canon should be able to do, but has not done yet:
* Eye Control AF v2.0 [in addition to "Eye tracking AF"]
* wireless RT flash controller built-in or as a user mountable module [if easier with FCC regulations]
* wireless ETTL protocol v2.0 with 2nd curtain sync
* distance-based focus trap
* DOF mode v2.0
etc.

plus a lineup of nice, compact and amateur-affordable lenses to along with it.

Many fellow forum members here would probably agree, that for Canon this would really mean "pushing the envelope" ... ;D

 

[Mikehit]

But do you think the envelope can be pushed that much these days - by anyone?

Yes. Canon could finally make compact, fully competent, amateur-affordable mirrorless FF camera/s with excellent IQ, functionality and performance. Possibly including some or all of the following things Canon should be able to do, but has not done yet:
* Eye Control AF v2.0 [in addition to "Eye tracking AF"]
* wireless RT flash controller built-in or as a user mountable module [if easier with FCC regulations]
* wireless ETTL protocol v2.0 with 2nd curtain sync
* distance-based focus trap
* DOF mode v2.0
etc.

plus a lineup of nice, compact and amateur-affordable lenses to along with it.

Many fellow forum members here would probably agree, that for Canon this would really mean "pushing the envelope" ... ;D

Hardly 'pushing boundaries'....

 

[Talys]

Yes. Canon could finally make compact, fully competent, amateur-affordable mirrorless FF camera/s with excellent IQ, functionality and performance. Possibly including some or all of the following things Canon should be able to do, but has not done yet:
* Eye Control AF v2.0 [in addition to "Eye tracking AF"]
* wireless RT flash controller built-in or as a user mountable module [if easier with FCC regulations]
* wireless ETTL protocol v2.0 with 2nd curtain sync
* distance-based focus trap
* DOF mode v2.0
etc.

plus a lineup of nice, compact and amateur-affordable lenses to along with it.

Many fellow forum members here would probably agree, that for Canon this would really mean "pushing the envelope" ... ;D

Great, I'll be happy for the crowd that wants this, if Canon builds such a thing, but I won't be amongst one of those customers. I do not want:

1. A full frame camera that is Compact - because I have APSC cameras and smartphones that are much better at that. But what I need in full frame is something that is a good ergonomic fit for bigger, heavier lenses.

2. Amateur-affordable compact lenses - because this will entail compromises I'm not happy with. Canon hasn't figured out yet to defy physics, so the lenses I want won't be any shorter or lighter.


It's like me saying that I look forward to the black paint without red stripe half-size version of the 200-400+TC. Smokin' hot pipe dream, but I'm better off buying lottery tickets or smoking more pipes.

 

[neuroanatomist]

That said, if you choose to go all into the woods to defend your nonsense rebuttal, please go back in time and find all the excitement for those bodies when they dropped. The common thread with canon cameras has been 'mild update' for YEARS, including the 5d4. You have fun with that, smart guy.

Lol. That's been true for all ILCs for years. Granted, there has been some sycophantic internet gushing about Sony's releases, but hey, if you send me on all-expense-paid junkets to great locations to try out your gear, maybe I'd gush about it, too.

No one gets excited about a new Camry sedan or a new Chevy truck, but people buy them...and they work. Conversely, there's been lots of excitement about the new Tesla models, which work great except for the few people they happen to kill.

 

[fullstop]

Hardly 'pushing boundaries'....

well Mike. If I suggest "boundary pushing" Canon gear like coming up with the first lightfield/computational camera sized like the L16 and at least "as good" in all aspects as a 5D IV [other than size] - you'd be first to cry "oO fullstop in his dream universe", right?

To spare you all that excitement, we were only talking about "pushing the envelope" here. Within well established boundaries.

The few things I've suggested would already mean "really, really pushing the envelope" for Canon, apparently. For this esteemed, highly innovative, market-leading company even an accurate and more precise battery gauge seems to be "pushing the envelope" - and for some esteemed fellow forum members too. ;D

 

[neuroanatomist]

For this esteemed, highly innovative, market-leading company even an accurate and more precise battery gauge seems to be "pushing the envelope" - and for some esteemed fellow forum members too. ;D

Don’t you think you’re mischaracterizing the discussion, just a wee bit? It was pretty much agreed that Canon could implement such a feature easily (for batteries with appropriate hardware, e.g. the LP-E6). At issue was the the fact that certain individuals, such as you, place a much higher level of importance on that feature than other individuals – and, presumably, Canon.

 

[Mikehit]

To spare you all that excitement, we were only talking about "pushing the envelope" here. Within well established boundaries.

Depends if you are talking about pushing the envelop within the current boundaries of Canon, or pushing the envelope of the market as a whole. All of those are not implemented by anyone which suggests to me they need significant development. To you, the fact that they do not exist means Canon is not trying hard enough.

I love the idea of hoverboards and anti-gravity boots - how stupid of tech companies not to have marketed them already.

 

[ahsanford]

Hardly 'pushing boundaries'....

To spare you all that excitement, we were only talking about "pushing the envelope" here. Within well established boundaries.

But take FF mirrorless for a moment: Canon's mandate is not to blow people away with some Ferrari spec'd supercamera or some optical science fiction made real.

Canon's FF mirrorless mandate -- besides land-grabbing a ripe market Sony has kindly nurtured with a lot of investment -- is to:

• Expand what SLR photographers can do in targeted ways:
  
  • Breathe LiveView shooting information into a photographer's general handheld shooting routine. This doesn't mean that Canon will want everyone to have their EVF looking like Iron Man's HUD, but it's an opportunity to bring customization to the handheld viewfinder experience.
    
    
  • Bring a smaller kit to do the same job or make carrying a second camera less of a burden and more likely to happen -- obv. this opportunity is greatly limited by your glass, what you are shooting, etc.
    
    
  • Unlock the potential of handheld manual focus glass without the fuss of focusing screen changes and the lack of confidence a briefly flickering AF confirmation dot gives you.
    
    
  • [Insert your FF mirrorless wish here -- adapt old lenses, adapt Nikkor glass, bring your camera more places with you, etc.]
    
  
  
• Bring new blood to Canon. Court new users, younger folks, the IG community who really don't give a damn about DR or fps and just want to take better pictures with something that doesn't look like their Dad's camera. Some of these folks have the money and desire to want more -- they see FF output that pops on IG and they are curious how to do it themselves.
  
  
• Retain the love and loyalty of their current customers. Eliminate 'Canon doesn't offer X' (at a higher/segment-level, not a feature-level) from the list of reasons why someone would leave. This is not going to be a please the userbase in specifics sort of thing. Very much like with EOS M, it's not mind-blowing but it's there, it's effective, and it's 10x easier to just get one of those than cross the aisle and take on the pain points of a new system, lenses, interface, etc.

None of the things on that list require some EXMOR sensor hotness, a company culture of wild innovation, some radical departure from the market, etc.

Many folks want FF mirrorless to be exciting, buzzworthy and cool. Canon wants it to simply exist, work well and be well-targeted to make specific moves in the market. Those are two very different things.

- A

 

[dak723]

Many folks want FF mirrorless to be exciting, buzzworthy and cool. Canon wants it to simply exist, work well and be well-targeted to make specific moves in the market. Those are two very different things.

- A

Very often companies that promote "exciting, buzzworthy and cool" usually do so because there products do not work that well. Sony FF is a great example, in my experience. Maybe because I am older, "exciting, buzzworthy and cool" have very little appeal to me - in fact are probably negatives for the reason stated above. Give me "easy to use, well made and reliable" any day of the week.