2019 global camera market share numbers are out, Canon leads the way

privatebydesign

Garfield is back...
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
9,051
3,161
120
Or you can have polymer currency notes with different colours, sizes and even bumps on them for vision impaired people to know what value you have. Just need to license the technology from Australia.
Many countries have all those features and I doubt they licensed them.

But I never understood why the USA $ is so unfriendly to people with disabilities, the $1 is exactly the same size, shape, and color etc etc as the $5, $10, $20 and $100 notes, I think it is the only paper currency I have come across that does this.
 

cornieleous

5D4 + R5
Jul 13, 2020
208
733
And Nikon continues its slide to irrelevance. Who would have thought, a few years ago, that Sony would bypass Nikon? Very few, I would imagine.

To me it seemed inevitable. Nikon should have hit the panic button on sensors the second Sony made their first full frame and started trying to make their lenses look like Canon lenses. Sony has been obviously copying the best from everyone (lens looks, menus, PDAF, etc). Now that Sony ergonomics are no longer utter garbage, most innovations in the industry seem to be about image quality or focus performance or speed- all of which tie heavily into the sensors.

While everyone was mocking Canon for being behind on sensors by a 1.5-2 (mostly irrelevant) stops of DR, they bought their own chip and sensor foundry and hired their own technical staff to make sensors for themselves. Once the 5D4 was out Canon sensors were caught up enough not to matter to practical people who actually take real pictures. Canon lead the market in focus performance with DPAF, which everyone soon copied. With the R5 and R6, the sensor performance is incredible and on par with everyone else or better. Focusing, ergonomics, overall lens and accessory system, etc. are all class leading or extremely competitive.

It takes many millions and several years to start a chip division and fab/foundry and I don't think Nikon has that time. I haven't seen Nikon innovate significantly since they got into Sony sensors heavily with D650-D850. No idea why their lens lines seem to be stagnant as well. My best guess is Nikon will either release something incredible to right the ship, or be absorbed by Sony, or join with Panasonic within a couple years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SaharshD

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,606
1,455
Many countries have all those features and I doubt they licensed them.

But I never understood why the USA $ is so unfriendly to people with disabilities, the $1 is exactly the same size, shape, and color etc etc as the $5, $10, $20 and $100 notes, I think it is the only paper currency I have come across that does this.

A very, very, very long time ago the United States would print a sheet with multiple different denominations on it, e.g., two ones, a two and a five, or two fives, a ten and a twenty. That tended to drive them to be the same size. Now of course the sheets that go through the printer are the same size regardless of denomination, and a 4x8 layout is used (we're transitioning to 5x10).

We have transitioned to having a large number on the reverse of the note, and I understand the blind can feel the difference (though I find it hard to believe, myself).

The Hollerith "computer card" originated well before electronic computers, and it was sized to match the large-sized money the US used before 1928. That way he could use the same machinery banks used to handle currency.
 

David - Sydney

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
309
257
www.flickr.com
I just wish there were good low capacity cards tested that weren't Sony. I've hated that company since LONG before I got into photography.
I guess that that is up to the manufacturers to have higher speeds for their lower capacity cards. The weird one is Sandisk 128GB which isn't approved but people anecdotally saying that they are having no problems. Not to mention the weird V rating system on SD cards vs U rating.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,606
1,455
I guess that that is up to the manufacturers to have higher speeds for their lower capacity cards. The weird one is Sandisk 128GB which isn't approved but people anecdotally saying that they are having no problems. Not to mention the weird V rating system on SD cards vs U rating.
Now that is good info, as SanDisk would otherwise have been my first choice. I may just buy a SanDisk if I decide I ever want to play with CFExpress. That I will have to order online because my brick and mortar only carries promaster and Sony. But I can buy the reader from my brick and mortar!

There are actually THREE rating systems, that as near as I can tell are totally redundant. The number inside the C (the oldest) is MBps, the U rating is tens of MBps, the V rating is back to being MBps but it maxes out at 90 so any useful SD card should be a V90. (I go from memory here and might have a detail wrong.) The reason three systems are in use is the people designing labels are reluctant to drop any of them, even the number inside the C which tops out at 10MBps. It wouldn't be so bad except new rating systems are designed with a top number on them that gets overcome by progress, necessitating a new system.
 

David - Sydney

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
309
257
www.flickr.com
Many countries have all those features and I doubt they licensed them.

But I never understood why the USA $ is so unfriendly to people with disabilities, the $1 is exactly the same size, shape, and color etc etc as the $5, $10, $20 and $100 notes, I think it is the only paper currency I have come across that does this.
Clearly off topic but still interesting - to me :) )
Australia invented polymer currency >30 years ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymer_banknote
although Note Printing Australia doesn't actually make the substrate any longer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Note_Printing_Australia
but has produced currency for 19 countries
 

David - Sydney

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
309
257
www.flickr.com
Now that is good info, as SanDisk would otherwise have been my first choice. I may just buy a SanDisk if I decide I ever want to play with CFExpress. That I will have to order online because my brick and mortar only carries promaster and Sony. But I can buy the reader from my brick and mortar!

There are actually THREE rating systems, that as near as I can tell are totally redundant. The number inside the C (the oldest) is MBps, the U rating is tens of MBps, the V rating is back to being MBps but it maxes out at 90 so any useful SD card should be a V90. (I go from memory here and might have a detail wrong.) The reason three systems are in use is the people designing labels are reluctant to drop any of them, even the number inside the C which tops out at 10MBps. It wouldn't be so bad except new rating systems are designed with a top number on them that gets overcome by progress, necessitating a new system.
Approved CFe cards:
https://www.canon-europe.com/suppor...r_products/content/faq/?itemid=tcm:13-1997134
CFe - only the 512GB Sandisk is approved. Lexar 128GB is also approved
I ordered my Sony CFe card from Amazon that got it from the US as none were locally available.

SD - Sandisk 128GB is rated U3 only (no V rating) but comes in 8th in this speed comparison (sustained write) - ahead of other V60 and V90 cards. Almost double the write speed of the V90 Delkin card!
https://havecamerawilltravel.com/photographer/fastest-sd-cards/
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,606
1,455
Approved CFe cards:
https://www.canon-europe.com/suppor...r_products/content/faq/?itemid=tcm:13-1997134
CFe - only the 512GB Sandisk is approved. Lexar 128GB is also approved
I ordered my Sony CFe card from Amazon that got it from the US as none were locally available.

SD - Sandisk 128GB is rated U3 only (no V rating) but comes in 8th in this speed comparison (sustained write) - ahead of other V60 and V90 cards. Almost double the write speed of the V90 Delkin card!
https://havecamerawilltravel.com/photographer/fastest-sd-cards/
Yeah I saw the original rating and really have heard too many bad things about Lexar to want to buy their 128GB card.

V90 is well under the speed of any reasonable SD II (or whatever they call it) card; they'll need a fourth rating system (hopefully one that addresses sustained write speed) to clutter up the labels even more.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
1,691
558
Davidson, NC
The Hollerith "computer card" originated well before electronic computers, and it was sized to match the large-sized money the US used before 1928. That way he could use the same machinery banks used to handle currency.
Hollerith developed his card technology from that used Jacquard looms. I don't know how the size compared.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,057
1,801
Or you can have polymer currency notes with different colours, sizes and even bumps on them for vision impaired people to know what value you have. Just need to license the technology from Australia.

Many countries have all those features and I doubt they licensed them.

But I never understood why the USA $ is so unfriendly to people with disabilities, the $1 is exactly the same size, shape, and color etc etc as the $5, $10, $20 and $100 notes, I think it is the only paper currency I have come across that does this.
I've got a cousin who has been blind from birth. I don't know how she does it, but she can tell by feel the difference in U.S. currency denominations.
 
Last edited:

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,057
1,801
Well, I guess Canon had a number of choices here.

1. They could have left out the offending modes and then everyone would been whining about the "Cripple Hammer" saying that they had an 8k capable camera but they crippled the camera, saving that feature for their expensive video line never knowing that there was a good reason that they left those modes out.

2. They Could have put in a fan or some sort of heat-pipe based passive cooling making the camera larger, heavier, with less weather sealing and shorter battery life which would tick off their stills users (like myself) who have no real interest in video.

3. They could take the path that they did and enable all the video possibilities even though they incur some limitations as a result of their efforts to achieve some of the other design goals for the device.

As for me, I would have been pretty happy with #1, but I wouldn't have been too happy paying $3900 for it. As for the "always wanted" part, people in Canon forums have been bellyaching about banding, 1 stop less DR, no IBIS, one card slot and not enough resolution for ages. This thing checks off all those boxes (IMO, anyway). However, the 5D series has always been priced in the $3300 to $3500 range. It looks like they tacked on another $400 for their perception of the value of the HD video (that really doesn't work well). I'll be curious how long the market supports that.
$3,499 in 2012 when the 5D Mark III came out in 2012 is worth $3,949 in 2020 dollars

$3,499 in 2016 when the 5D Mark IV was rolled out in 2016 is worth $3,777 in 2020 dollars.

The average of the two is $3,863 which is $36 less than the introductory price of the R5.

Tell me again how the price went up $400 when adjusted for inflation?
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Mar 25, 2011
16,280
1,313
$3,499 in 2012 when the 5D Mark III came out in 2012 is worth $3,949 in 2020 dollars

$3,499 in 2016 when the 5D Mark IV was rolled out in 2016 is worth $3,777 in 2020 dollars.

The average of the two is $3,863 which is $36 less than the introductory price of the R5.

Tell me again how the price went up $400 when adjusted for inflation?
Prices of the 5 series drop or remain the same each time a new one is introduced because of inflation. its the same for many electronic devices. TV sets are a prime example, prices of the new models are amazingly low compared to smaller screens with less resolutions in the past.

Look at the original 5D Mark 1 price adjusted for inflation. The R5 is a bargain.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
3,057
1,801
I guess that that is up to the manufacturers to have higher speeds for their lower capacity cards. The weird one is Sandisk 128GB which isn't approved but people anecdotally saying that they are having no problems. Not to mention the weird V rating system on SD cards vs U rating.

Now that is good info, as SanDisk would otherwise have been my first choice. I may just buy a SanDisk if I decide I ever want to play with CFExpress. That I will have to order online because my brick and mortar only carries promaster and Sony. But I can buy the reader from my brick and mortar!

There are actually THREE rating systems, that as near as I can tell are totally redundant. The number inside the C (the oldest) is MBps, the U rating is tens of MBps, the V rating is back to being MBps but it maxes out at 90 so any useful SD card should be a V90. (I go from memory here and might have a detail wrong.) The reason three systems are in use is the people designing labels are reluctant to drop any of them, even the number inside the C which tops out at 10MBps. It wouldn't be so bad except new rating systems are designed with a top number on them that gets overcome by progress, necessitating a new system.
U ratings are maximum sustained read speeds.

V ratings are minimum sustained write speeds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris.Chapterten

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,606
1,455
U ratings are maximum sustained read speeds.

V ratings are minimum sustained write speeds.
According to this, they are BOTH minimum write speeds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SD_card

Which means I was wrong in thinking they were max speeds.

Regardless--the sorts of speeds expected of a UHS 2 card , much less a CFExpress, are well in excess of V90, so the ratings are essentially meaningless; it's like maxing out an aptitude test--there's no way to know the guy's ability, just that it's somewhere north of the test's maximum.
 

dwarven

EOS 90D
Dec 12, 2019
146
164
Just out of curiosity, would you mind naming some of these unique lenses?

There are plenty more, and they're all significantly lighter than their closest full frame counterparts. I'd also encourage you to do some side by side comparisons of MFT and cell phone pictures, because it seems you don't really know what you're talking about. Here, I'll even get you started on your new learning experience.
 
Last edited:

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
1,606
1,455

There are plenty more, and they're all significantly lighter than their closest full frame counterparts. I'd also encourage you to do some side by side comparisons of MFT and cell phone pictures, because it seems you don't really know what you're talking about. Here, I'll even get you started on your new learning experience.
Panasonic/Lumix does have an M5 mark II. :D
 

David - Sydney

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 7, 2014
309
257
www.flickr.com
According to this, they are BOTH minimum write speeds: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SD_card

Which means I was wrong in thinking they were max speeds.

Regardless--the sorts of speeds expected of a UHS 2 card , much less a CFExpress, are well in excess of V90, so the ratings are essentially meaningless; it's like maxing out an aptitude test--there's no way to know the guy's ability, just that it's somewhere north of the test's maximum.
The R5 advanced user guide (page 904) states what Vxx speed is needed for different video formats. 10 bit 8K IPB needs V90 for instance (minimum 90MB/s) with the USH-II half duplex max speed of ~300MB/s
The strange part of all this is that the UHS-II spec was released in 2011, 2016 was UHS-III(~600MB/s) and SD express in 2017 covering gigabit speeds and 2020 now up to 4GB/s. UHS-II cards are pretty new in the market. Who knows when SD Express might turn up in a local store near you.
 

Joules

EOS R
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,038
1,160
Hamburg, Germany

There are plenty more, and they're all significantly lighter than their closest full frame counterparts. I'd also encourage you to do some side by side comparisons of MFT and cell phone pictures, because it seems you don't really know what you're talking about. Here, I'll even get you started on your new learning experience.
Thanks for pointing those lenses out. I do wonder though how unique they'll actually be in the long term.

The 40-150 mm already has an equivalent that's 40 g lighter at only 710 g (although on an R, with the 110 g adapter it would actually be 70 g heavier):

There are no equivalents for the zooms yet, but since we now know Canon is willing to push into the realm of slow aperture telephotos, that may well change in the near future.

As for the 12-100, that looks really versatile considering the weight. The closest choice would be the also quite new super zoom:

190 g heavier at 750 g. But also far less expensive and with greater range and light gathering ability, so it is an apples to oranges comparison.

Any way, I don't think we disagree on how smartphones compare to ILC and MFT specifically. I know what type of quality you get from crop sensors. I never said smartphones deliver the same image quality. But lets make my position clear just to avoid further confusion: If you know what you're doing, you can get amazing pictures with MFT and will encounter many situations where a smartphone would limit you severely if you shoot a lot of different subject genres.

I think we agree here, right?

So, let me repeat my original point: a lot of people are content with their smartphones, as they value different things than us photo enthusiasts when it comes to the process and results of photographing. They don't put the same value as us on the ability to have greater control about the settings, change the lens to fit the situation at hand and get the overall better quality associated with gathering more light.

As Smartphones become more capable due to computational photography and more cameras, the number of these people increases. So those that buy dedicated cameras become fewer. We still agree, right?

So, we have people who see the pictures of ILC and don't see a sufficient difference for their personal shooting preferences to justify spending or carrying more than they do with their smartphone.

And then you have the people who are willing to spend and carry more. Among those, I think the group that is so concerned with size and weight that they consider MFT, but not so concerned that the stick with smartphones, is not the majority. So it's a niche. And you can absolutely survive as a company by serving a niche. Seems like Olympus didn't. Either they did not operate well enough, or the market has decided that despite being as great as they are, their cameras aren't great enough.