It seems that a lot of people here on the forum (my self included) feels as if canon has been, deliberately nerfing there own cameras recently.
I don´t know if it is the case or not, but i get where the feeling is coming from. When you are spending thousends of dollars on a new camera, you want to feel as though canon is giving you the best possible product they can, at a given time and price point. If not, you are likely to suffer from buyers remorse or you might not buy at all. Perhaps you have already invested a lot of money in to glass, so you are reluctant to switch brands and thus feel canon is forcing your hand. The end result is alienation.
I think the reason people get so exited about cameras like the Nikon D810 or the Sony A7r II is that those cameras feel like the pinnacle of what Nikon and sony could produce. They don't feel compromised.
Well to the point. I think a lot of this stems from, the order in witch canon puts out there products. Their high end cameras seem to be updated on a generational basis, rather then incrementally. It goes something like 1D, 5D, 6D, 7D each coming out roughly 6 mouthes apart. 5DsR and 1Dc being the exceptions to the rule, i think?
I would argue that canon is better off reversing the order, and here is why.
When canon puts out there highest end camera first, technology moves forward in the mean time, until the release of there next model on step down the camera latter. This narrows the technological gab between models.
An example of this, could be the 5d mark III sensor vs. the 6D sensor. Here the 6D sensor was in many ways better then the one found in the 5D mark III. This is somewhat at odds with the 5D sitting higher on the camera latter, and being about 50% more expensive.
Had the releas of the 2 cameras been reversed, the more expensive camera would have been the one with the best sensor. It would have been ahed R&D wise by something like 6 months.
One way to counter this discrepancy however is to nerf your lower end cameras. This way it becomes harder for your newer and cheeper cameras to compete with your older and more expensive cameras.
Now whether canon is nerfing cameras or not, is hard to say. It would seem like a bad business plan to me. Your competing brands are not going to nerf there cameras, in order not to compete with you. Quite the opposite.
However canon is in such a dominating position on the camera market, that it might actually be a viable plan for them, if only in the short term.
Wether nerfing is going on or not. I would still argue that a reversed order of high end camera updates would be better for canon. It would mean, that the most expensive and high end camera would always be the camera with the newest tech. Thus widening the tech gab between models to better reflect the differences in price.
A reversal of order might be a hard maneuver to pull of now though
I don´t know if it is the case or not, but i get where the feeling is coming from. When you are spending thousends of dollars on a new camera, you want to feel as though canon is giving you the best possible product they can, at a given time and price point. If not, you are likely to suffer from buyers remorse or you might not buy at all. Perhaps you have already invested a lot of money in to glass, so you are reluctant to switch brands and thus feel canon is forcing your hand. The end result is alienation.
I think the reason people get so exited about cameras like the Nikon D810 or the Sony A7r II is that those cameras feel like the pinnacle of what Nikon and sony could produce. They don't feel compromised.
Well to the point. I think a lot of this stems from, the order in witch canon puts out there products. Their high end cameras seem to be updated on a generational basis, rather then incrementally. It goes something like 1D, 5D, 6D, 7D each coming out roughly 6 mouthes apart. 5DsR and 1Dc being the exceptions to the rule, i think?
I would argue that canon is better off reversing the order, and here is why.
When canon puts out there highest end camera first, technology moves forward in the mean time, until the release of there next model on step down the camera latter. This narrows the technological gab between models.
An example of this, could be the 5d mark III sensor vs. the 6D sensor. Here the 6D sensor was in many ways better then the one found in the 5D mark III. This is somewhat at odds with the 5D sitting higher on the camera latter, and being about 50% more expensive.
Had the releas of the 2 cameras been reversed, the more expensive camera would have been the one with the best sensor. It would have been ahed R&D wise by something like 6 months.
One way to counter this discrepancy however is to nerf your lower end cameras. This way it becomes harder for your newer and cheeper cameras to compete with your older and more expensive cameras.
Now whether canon is nerfing cameras or not, is hard to say. It would seem like a bad business plan to me. Your competing brands are not going to nerf there cameras, in order not to compete with you. Quite the opposite.
However canon is in such a dominating position on the camera market, that it might actually be a viable plan for them, if only in the short term.
Wether nerfing is going on or not. I would still argue that a reversed order of high end camera updates would be better for canon. It would mean, that the most expensive and high end camera would always be the camera with the newest tech. Thus widening the tech gab between models to better reflect the differences in price.
A reversal of order might be a hard maneuver to pull of now though
