What if Canon were no longer #1?

[Dylan777]

"The 5DIV costs more than the a7RIII, the 1DX II more than the a9" ==> I know you don't believe in Sony specs, both 7r III and A9(mirrorless) are much better cameras compared to 5D IV & 1DX II(DSLR) - from MP, AF points to fps. I strongly don't believe 5D and 1Dx are the main foods to keep Canon alive --- my crystal ball telling me is their budget models(rebels and cheap lenses).

I don't believe in Sony specs? What, do I think they're lying or something? However, it's true that I don't believe a spec list makes a better camera. Do you?

I have no doubt that Canon profits from both ends of their lineup, but I agree that the lower end generates more revenue for them. By the same token, Sony generates vastly more revenue from selling tiny sensors to smartphone manufacturers than from their ILC line.

" I guess the M-series is so far from decent that it only manages to outsell every other line of MILCs on the market (given that Canon has one line and is #2, whereas other makers have several MILC lines) " ==> you should be thanksful that mirrorless market are pressure Canon to release M5 & M6. Otherwise you would have shooting your M6 with an AF speed from M1.

The M and M2 are what put Canon into the #3 MILC position, and the M3 put them into #2. With only one line, it's clear that Canon has chosen to make only a limited investment in mirrorless so far. What pressure are you talking about?

"If careless is giving the market the right feature sets at the right price points such that the majority of ILC buyers choose a Canon ILC," ==> this is where Canon has an upper hand over other companies. They have much larger loyal customers willing to wait and buy Canon products, regardless, how behind they are. As long it has Canon logo on it, it's good as gold for them. Here an Exp: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=34133.0 , Yup it's in patent for Canon and hoping it will go into production. At same time, Sony A9 and others compact models are ready in their customer hands.

So it's your contention that people are mainly driven by brand loyalty and are willing to purchase inferior products just because of the logo on them? I'm sorry that your view of humanity is so cynical and dim. I believe people purchase the products that best meet their needs. But many on this forum seem to think their own personal needs represent the majority, and that's plain foolish.

"MILC sales have been flat for years and dSLRs still hold the solid majority of the market. " ==> I'm not good reading graph, maybe you can tell me??? Look at Oct numbers for 2017 in CIPA.

http://www.cipa.jp/stats/dc_e.html

I don't get your point here. The graph you attach shows exactly what I stated, MILC sales flat (and due to decreasing dSLR sales, MILC share is increasing, but still the minor fraction of ILCs). The Oct 2017 CIPA data show that dSLRs are 65% of the ILC market for October and the year to date. 65/35 is a solid majority.

"However, it's true that I don't believe a spec list makes a better camera. Do you?" ==> I do, because it helps my photography more enjoyable and more convenient( Eye-AF-Tracking no need to use joystick to focus on person eye, silent shooting 100% no sound, proper exposure, DOF in EVF etc...).

If spec list doesn't make camera better, why did you end up with 1Dx instead of 6d??? Do you truly believe that extra grip and extra weight from 1Dx helps you get more keepers at BIF/sports?

"The M and M2 are what put Canon into the #3 MILC position, and the M3 put them into #2" ===> the more you try to defend Canon the more I see your view more and more "cynical, dim and foolish". M1 with the price tag $799, was DOA(still remember that the $299 sale for M1?) and few later models didn't even show up in US(just Asia). And of course, you still brag about those products.


"I don't get your point here. The graph you attach shows exactly what I stated, MILC sales flat"==> yes, mirrorless is flat due to products have not yet matured - battery life, lack of native lenses and EVF etc.... At the same time, what do you see on DSLR market? It drops years by years, nearly 50%. Yes, ILC is getting smaller. Smartphones are getting better,better each years and it might have to do with that.

 

[neuroanatomist]

"However, it's true that I don't believe a spec list makes a better camera. Do you?" ==> I do, because it helps my photography more enjoyable and more convenient( Eye-AF-Tracking no need to use joystick to focus on person eye, silent shooting 100% no sound, proper exposure, DOF in EVF etc...).

If spec list doesn't make camera better, why did you end up with 1Dx instead of 6d??? Do you truly believe that extra grip and extra weight from 1Dx helps you get more keepers at BIF/sports?

Sure, features can help photography. But 'enjoyable and convenient' are highly subjective. After using a 70-200/2.8 mounted on a MILC for a couple of hours, I found the experience very inconvenient and the pain in my hand and wrist was anything but enjoyable. But, I can use my 1D X and 70-200/2.8 all day long with ease and comfort. Eye-AF sounds nice, but I can already focus on eyes. Truly silent shooting would be great if I shot weddings, but I don't. Too bad you couldn't achieve proper exposure without a MILC, I don't have any issues there. Was the DoF Preview button on your dSLR broken?

Does the number of AF points in a spec list equate to AF system performance? I'd take the 50D's 9-pt AF over the 6D's 11-pt AF, personally. The 6DII has 26 MP as a top-line spec, compared to only 18 MP in my 1D X. According to you, that makes the 6DII a better camera, right?

"The M and M2 are what put Canon into the #3 MILC position, and the M3 put them into #2" ===> the more you try to defend Canon the more I see your view more and more "cynical, dim and foolish". M1 with the price tag $799, was DOA(still remember that the $299 sale for M1?) and few later models didn't even show up in US(just Asia). And of course, you still brag about those products.

Of course I remember the 'fire sale'. Do you understand that MILCs are far more popular in Asia than in North America? 45% of the ILCs sold in Japan from Jan-Oct 2017 were mirrorless; in the Americas, only 22% of ILCs sold were mirrorless. So you're suggesting the fact that Americans don't buy mirrorless means they are of low quality? That's beyond cynical, that's asinine and bigoted. Try to open up your mind, just a little bit.

"I don't get your point here. The graph you attach shows exactly what I stated, MILC sales flat"==> yes, mirrorless is flat due to products have not yet matured - battery life, lack of native lenses and EVF etc.... At the same time, what do you see on DSLR market? It drops years by years, nearly 50%. Yes, ILC is getting smaller. Smartphones are getting better,better each years and it might have to do with that.

Since spec lists are so important to you, did you know that the number of shots per battery and EVF resolution are on the spec sheets, and the range of native lenses is on each company's website? But I guess you only care about the specs that are important to you, and if those are better, the camera is better. Do you think the specs that matter to you are the ones that matter to everyone?

So MILC's have been around for nearly 10 years (starting as mainstream with the Panasonic Lumix in 2008), but they haven't yet matured. Damn, that's pathetic! In 10 years, the consumer dSLR (starting with the Canon 300D in 2003) was more than fully mature...in fact, the decline of the dSLR market is at least partly due to market saturation – for the last decade, dSLRs have been sufficiently good and (relatively) affordable enough that most people only ever need to buy one kit.

 

[unfocused]

I know this is an impossible task, but I will try anyway -- let's inject a little sanity into the debate.

Are cameras durable goods? For most of the last 100 years, the answer has been "yes." People expected that if they bought a good quality camera, especially an interchangeable lens camera, it would have a lifespan of 10 years or more.

Enter the digital revolution and we all got hooked on rapid technological change. Improvements were coming so fast that a case could be made to upgrade your camera every two to three years. But, as with any technology, it matured and the improvements we see today are incremental.

At the same time, we saw a revolution in cell phones that turned them into the most popular and practical cameras for the majority of people.

So, there are two trends going on in the camera market. On the one hand the collapse of the point-and-shoot market because cell phones have turned out to be a better product than single-purpose cameras for most users.

On the other hand, in the higher end "enthusiast" and professional market, the pace of change is returning to the traditional pattern, where buyers are treating their cameras as durable goods, and see no need to upgrade frequently, because not that much is changing from model to model.

A third factor, still unknown as to its impact, is the advent of mirrorless cameras that may or may not be challenging the traditional SLR form factor.

While some people want to make predictions on the future of mirrorless, there simply isn't sufficient data yet to know anything.

Here is what we do know regarding mirrorless:

Mirrorless is a very good format for APS-C sensor cameras, because it hits a sweet spot of high quality and small size. But, even in the case of APS-C, the advantages shrink when you add longer lenses, or need to shoot sports or wildlife in action.

The jury is still out on full frame mirrorless. Physics is a difficult thing to overcome and most of the size advantages of mirrorless evaporate when you add full frame lenses into the picture -- especially if you want longer focal lengths.

Mirrorless cameras are capturing a sizable share of the market. However, in terms of actual numbers, the sales are flat. Will they continue to be an important, but smaller share of the overall interchangeable lens camera market, or will they suddenly shoot up in sales and dominate? So far, the numbers indicate that it is the former case, not the latter.

Regardless, mirrorless cameras have not had a significant impact on Canon's market position. Canon is demonstrating that they can and will compete aggressively in the mirrorless market. A case might be made that mirrorless is having an impact on Nikon's relative position in the market, but Nikon is demonstrating a willingness to compete aggressively against Sony, so I would not rule them out just yet.

Both Canon and Nikon have about a century of experience with the ups and downs of the camera market. They have seen the boom and bust cycle before and have emerged stronger for it. Sony does not have that same experience or record.

Dylan777 is a tireless advocate for Sony. He went all in, selling his Canon gear and buying Sony. Having made the plunge, he has a vested interest in feeling good about his decision and he feels compelled to tell everyone what a great decision he made. He is entitled to his own opinion. But he isn't entitled to his own facts.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I know this is an impossible task, but I will try anyway -- let's inject a little sanity into the debate.

 

[Don Haines]

I know this is an impossible task, but I will try anyway -- let's inject a little sanity into the debate.

Are cameras durable goods? For most of the last 100 years, the answer has been "yes." People expected that if they bought a good quality camera, especially an interchangeable lens camera, it would have a lifespan of 10 years or more.

Enter the digital revolution and we all got hooked on rapid technological change. Improvements were coming so fast that a case could be made to upgrade your camera every two to three years. But, as with any technology, it matured and the improvements we see today are incremental.

At the same time, we saw a revolution in cell phones that turned them into the most popular and practical cameras for the majority of people.

So, there are two trends going on in the camera market. On the one hand the collapse of the point-and-shoot market because cell phones have turned out to be a better product than single-purpose cameras for most users.

On the other hand, in the higher end "enthusiast" and professional market, the pace of change is returning to the traditional pattern, where buyers are treating their cameras as durable goods, and see no need to upgrade frequently, because not that much is changing from model to model.

A third factor, still unknown as to its impact, is the advent of mirrorless cameras that may or may not be challenging the traditional SLR form factor.

While some people want to make predictions on the future of mirrorless, there simply isn't sufficient data yet to know anything.

Here is what we do know regarding mirrorless:

Mirrorless is a very good format for APS-C sensor cameras, because it hits a sweet spot of high quality and small size. But, even in the case of APS-C, the advantages shrink when you add longer lenses, or need to shoot sports or wildlife in action.

The jury is still out on full frame mirrorless. Physics is a difficult thing to overcome and most of the size advantages of mirrorless evaporate when you add full frame lenses into the picture -- especially if you want longer focal lengths.

Mirrorless cameras are capturing a sizable share of the market. However, in terms of actual numbers, the sales are flat. Will they continue to be an important, but smaller share of the overall interchangeable lens camera market, or will they suddenly shoot up in sales and dominate? So far, the numbers indicate that it is the former case, not the latter.

Regardless, mirrorless cameras have not had a significant impact on Canon's market position. Canon is demonstrating that they can and will compete aggressively in the mirrorless market. A case might be made that mirrorless is having an impact on Nikon's relative position in the market, but Nikon is demonstrating a willingness to compete aggressively against Sony, so I would not rule them out just yet.

Both Canon and Nikon have about a century of experience with the ups and downs of the camera market. They have seen the boom and bust cycle before and have emerged stronger for it. Sony does not have that same experience or record.

Dylan777 is a tireless advocate for Sony. He went all in, selling his Canon gear and buying Sony. Having made the plunge, he has a vested interest in feeling good about his decision and he feels compelled to tell everyone what a great decision he made. He is entitled to his own opinion. But he isn't entitled to his own facts.

+1

High end cameras are evolving into durable goods. The lenses are already there. Year to year sales have very little relation to the usage stats..... for example, I might be a fanatic canon shooter, but not buy a new body for at least 5 more years....

 

[ahsanford]

+1

High end cameras are evolving into durable goods. The lenses are already there. Year to year sales have very little relation to the usage stats..... for example, I might be a fanatic canon shooter, but not buy a new body for at least 5 more years....

Disclaimer: I am not a professional that depends on my gear to make a living.

That said, Don's nailed it. That's 100% me. I giggle at the thought of spending $3k+ for a 5D4 when my 5D3 is still 90% as good some five years after buying it.

And it's not for the lack of money. I have the money to buy a new rig every year if I was so inclined, but it's against my nature to chase happiness through tech or convince myself that moving from point A to point B on the plot below is going to be some barrier-smashing technological advancement that I need.

- A

 

[Dylan777]

I enjoy healthy debate with any well-mannered persons. The more we get into the debate, the more improper languages got into conversation.

I might have went too deep with Neuro on Canon vs Sony(DSLR vs Mirrorless) and if I have hurt anyone feeling, I sincerely apologize.

Dylan

 

[slclick]

Some folks live in a bizarre universe which breaks their camera bodies when the subsequent model is released. Glad I don't, my 5D3 is nearly as good as the day I bought it (early adopter) and far more camera than I need ...I would have been a good 6D user if it had been out at the time.

 

[3kramd5]

Some folks live in a bizarre universe which breaks their camera bodies when the subsequent model is released. Glad I don't, my 5D3 is nearly as good as the day I bought it (early adopter) and far more camera than I need ...I would have been a good 6D user if it had been out at the time.

Nearly?

 

[ahsanford]

Some folks live in a bizarre universe which breaks their camera bodies when the subsequent model is released. Glad I don't, my 5D3 is nearly as good as the day I bought it (early adopter) and far more camera than I need ...I would have been a good 6D user if it had been out at the time.

+1. Again, this is 95% me. My upgrade-from-crop-to-FF choice was in early 2012, and it was between the 5D2 and 5D3. I had an 'Apple get-in-early and maximize time before my phone / laptop / etc. is obsoleted' mindset at the time and went all in on the 5D3 shortly after it was announced. Were the 6D on offer at that time, I very well may have gotten it.

Now, 5 years in the rear view with it and I'm actually glad I went big. It's built like a weapon, it has a massive ecosystem of third party items to use with it, and it continues to not say no to new things I try to do with it. I may have gotten hamstring or outgrown a 6D, but other than a mythically better sensor that will not appear, I have yet to bonk my head or trip myself up on what the 5D3 cannot do -- which I why I haven't upgraded.

Further, the more I shoot and the more I learn about new bodies, cameras are much less like phones and their buyer's remorse, perception of obsolescence, etc. My 5D3 is an instrument that does a job and I enjoy using it -- period. I whinge about little things regularly here, but in truth I'm delighted with what I already have.

- A

 

[Don Haines]

+1

High end cameras are evolving into durable goods. The lenses are already there. Year to year sales have very little relation to the usage stats..... for example, I might be a fanatic canon shooter, but not buy a new body for at least 5 more years....

Disclaimer: I am not a professional that depends on my gear to make a living.

That said, Don's nailed it. That's 100% me. I giggle at the thought of spending $3k+ for a 5D4 when my 5D3 is still 90% as good some five years after buying it.

And it's not for the lack of money. I have the money to buy a new rig every year if I was so inclined, but it's against my nature to chase happiness through tech or convince myself that moving from point A to point B on the plot below is going to be some barrier-smashing technological advancement that I need.

- A

I bought my first digital camera in 1994.... since then, both at home and at work, I have yet to upgrade to the next model.... At a minimum, I skip models because the incremental differences are just not worth it to me. When the DSLRs first started to appear, there were great leaps in capability between models..... like jumping from a max ISO of 1600 to 6400.... now we are lucky to see a third of a stop jump with the next model. And realistically, the quality of imaging between Canon, Nikon, and Sony is so close as to be irrelevant.... your AF system is worth way more to you than your sensor, nobody cares what the DR is of a blurred photo... just like they don't care about the quality of your picture of the branch that the eagle was sitting on and you missed because poor ergonomics slowed you down enough to miss the shot...

At least to my mind, glass is a far better place to put your imaging dollars....

 

[slclick]

Some folks live in a bizarre universe which breaks their camera bodies when the subsequent model is released. Glad I don't, my 5D3 is nearly as good as the day I bought it (early adopter) and far more camera than I need ...I would have been a good 6D user if it had been out at the time.

Nearly?

Sure, what is so hard to understand about that? The sensor gets dirty, I clean it but it's still not pristine and the exterior has wear marks. I have used it for over 5 years and 90k snaps. Nearly sounds pretty good to me.

 

[slclick]

Some folks live in a bizarre universe which breaks their camera bodies when the subsequent model is released. Glad I don't, my 5D3 is nearly as good as the day I bought it (early adopter) and far more camera than I need ...I would have been a good 6D user if it had been out at the time.

+1. Again, this is 95% me. My upgrade-from-crop-to-FF choice was in early 2012, and it was between the 5D2 and 5D3. I had an 'Apple get-in-early and maximize time before my phone / laptop / etc. is obsoleted' mindset at the time and went all in on the 5D3 shortly after it was announced. Were the 6D on offer at that time, I very well may have gotten it.

Now, 5 years in the rear view with it and I'm actually glad I went big. It's built like a weapon, it has a massive ecosystem of third party items to use with it, and it continues to not say no to new things I try to do with it. I may have gotten hamstring or outgrown a 6D, but other than a mythically better sensor that will not appear, I have yet to bonk my head or trip myself up on what the 5D3 cannot do -- which I why I haven't upgraded.

Further, the more I shoot and the more I learn about new bodies, cameras are much less like phones and their buyer's remorse, perception of obsolescence, etc. My 5D3 is an instrument that does a job and I enjoy using it -- period. I whinge about little things regularly here, but in truth I'm delighted with what I already have.

- A

this

 

[neuroanatomist]

Some folks live in a bizarre universe which breaks their camera bodies when the subsequent model is released. Glad I don't, my 5D3 is nearly as good as the day I bought it (early adopter) and far more camera than I need ...I would have been a good 6D user if it had been out at the time.

+1. Again, this is 95% me. My upgrade-from-crop-to-FF choice was in early 2012, and it was between the 5D2 and 5D3. I had an 'Apple get-in-early and maximize time before my phone / laptop / etc. is obsoleted' mindset at the time and went all in on the 5D3 shortly after it was announced. Were the 6D on offer at that time, I very well may have gotten it.

Now, 5 years in the rear view with it and I'm actually glad I went big. It's built like a weapon, it has a massive ecosystem of third party items to use with it, and it continues to not say no to new things I try to do with it. I may have gotten hamstring or outgrown a 6D, but other than a mythically better sensor that will not appear, I have yet to bonk my head or trip myself up on what the 5D3 cannot do -- which I why I haven't upgraded.

Further, the more I shoot and the more I learn about new bodies, cameras are much less like phones and their buyer's remorse, perception of obsolescence, etc. My 5D3 is an instrument that does a job and I enjoy using it -- period. I whinge about little things regularly here, but in truth I'm delighted with what I already have.

This is pretty much me, as well. I've upgraded bodies only when the one I had did not meet my needs. Started with a T1i/500D, when first getting back into photography after a long P&S hiatus and finding the camera couldn't keep up with our young daughter – I wasn't sure if photography would be a long term hobby, or quickly fade from interest. It was the former, and as I started shooting birds the T1i wasn't cutting it, so I switched to the 7D. Wanted better IQ for low light shooting of kids, added the 5DII (the 5DIII was not yet available). Then the 1D X was announced, combining the speed/AF of the 7D with the IQ of full frame, and I preordered one.

The 1D X II came along...and while I could buy one, the 1D X does what I need. So...I buy lenses.

 

[dcm]

+1

Similar story. My equipment has evolved as my skills and interests grew, moving from film to G series to T2i/S95 to 6D/M to 1DX2/M5. I started purchasing L lenses with the T2i and still have a few on my wish list but I can wait until have I have time and opportunity to use them.

It helps to have a supportive wife, she even suggested we drive down to Bosque del Apache NWR for the day to take some photos while we were visiting Sante Fe, NM, last November. I need to get her some better binoculars one of these days. ;D

 

[3kramd5]

Some folks live in a bizarre universe which breaks their camera bodies when the subsequent model is released. Glad I don't, my 5D3 is nearly as good as the day I bought it (early adopter) and far more camera than I need ...I would have been a good 6D user if it had been out at the time.

Nearly?

Sure, what is so hard to understand about that? The sensor gets dirty, I clean it but it's still not pristine and the exterior has wear marks. I have used it for over 5 years and 90k snaps. Nearly sounds pretty good to me.

It’s not hard to understand what nearly means, I was merely wondering what has become deficient in such a way that it still works but not quite as well. Wear marks don’t affect how well it works. A dirty sensor might but as stated can be cleaned. Buttons can fail or become less responsive (what I expected in your camera). I’d say to the best of my ability to tell, mine works exactly as well as the day I bought it.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I need to get her some better binoculars one of these days. ;D

Might I recommend the Canon 10x42 L IS WP binoculars? ;D

 

[Orangutan]

I need to get her some better binoculars one of these days. ;D

Might I recommend the Canon 10x42 L IS WP binoculars? ;D

Fanboi! ;D

 

[neuroanatomist]

I need to get her some better binoculars one of these days. ;D

Might I recommend the Canon 10x42 L IS WP binoculars? ;D

Fanboi! ;D

Perhaps, but honestly, IS binoculars are great. I have a standard set from Nikon, and the Canon 10x30 IS (which I got for free), and the IS makes a huge difference. I may pick up the 10x42's at some point...

 

[Orangutan]

I need to get her some better binoculars one of these days. ;D

Might I recommend the Canon 10x42 L IS WP binoculars? ;D

Fanboi! ;D

Perhaps, but honestly, IS binoculars are great. I have a standard set from Nikon, and the Canon 10x30 IS (which I got for free), and the IS makes a huge difference. I may pick up the 10x42's at some point...

Oh, but real birders only use Swarovski, you can't possibly get good results with Canon binoculars!