All is Quiet, but the Good Stuff is Coming

[BillB]

The regulars have determined that dual card slot has no value.

Therefore, we ask Canon to remove it from the 5D4, 5DS/R, 7D2 and 1DX2.

They all agree.

While we wait 5 years for updates to the above cameras, Canon can disable such feature via firmware update. Canon, please eliminate this frivolous capability. The members of Canonrumors have spoken.

And your point would be... ?

 

[Mikehit]

The regulars have determined that dual card slot has no value.

Therefore, we ask Canon to remove it from the 5D4, 5DS/R, 7D2 and 1DX2.

They all agree.

While we wait 5 years for updates to the above cameras, Canon can disable such feature via firmware update. Canon, please eliminate this frivolous capability. The members of Canonrumors have spoken.

Jeez, How many more straw men are you going to build. NO-ONE said dual card slots did not have a use, nor did we say that some people want it. What we contended was your assertion that card slots were essential to the target market for whom the 6D was designed (hint: 'target market' is more than just a few people who have specific needs).
And if dual card slots are so essential, surely it would be a factor that would mean people avoided the 6D.

So...again...given that in your view dual card slots are essential to the general public, why does the 6D outsell competitors who have dual card slots?

I think TJ is right. Your continued insistence on repeating unsubstantiated claims, and your repeated use of sarcasm is tantamount to bullying. Naughty boy.

 

[BillB]

G'day, and thank you to those who welcomed me, I guessed 2 out of the 3. Opinions. Yes it is healthy to challenge our differences, very healthy and enjoyable, it is how we progress. It is the nature of how we debate that determines 'what' we are.
Should someone believe 2+2 = 5 for example, do we try to change their view reasonably and calmly? over and over again sometimes; or do we shout at them, ridicule, humiliate them into submission? - net result, they may be too intimidated to ever ask a question again.
On that note, I'll leave the debate to get back to the number of card slots.

 

[hbr]

Welcome to CR, tj.

When someone shares an opinion people here usually respond by sharing their opinions either agreeing or disagreeing with the original poster. Sometimes it can get quite heated. But, when one joins a discussion or starts a thread by slinging sh_t all over the place, one should expect to get some thrown back at him. Calling other people names and saying their opinions are worthless is not the proper way to get a civil discussion. Another way to get a heated debate going is by saying that Canon is doomed just because Canon does not offer the subset of features that you want, or saying that Canon is doomed every time a competitor comes out with a new device that appears to have higher specs than the Canon devices.

There are a lot of fantastic photographers in this forum who are very kind and will freely give you advice or help you with a problem.

Cheers,
Brian

 

[Loswr]

Should someone believe 2+2 = 5 for example, do we try to change their view reasonably and calmly? over and over again sometimes; or do we shout at them, ridicule, humiliate them into submission? - net result, they may be too intimidated to ever ask a question again.

Should someone state, 2+2 = 5, a calm correction would be reasonable. Should someone state, 2+2 = 5 and anyone who doesn't think so is crap at math or a shill on the payroll of Casio's calculator department, and repeat that assertion ad infinitum, a calm correction isn't going to happen...it's the Internet, after all.

 

[BillB]

G'day, and thank you to those who welcomed me, I guessed 2 out of the 3. Opinions. Yes it is healthy to challenge our differences, very healthy and enjoyable, it is how we progress. It is the nature of how we debate that determines 'what' we are.
Should someone believe 2+2 = 5 for example, do we try to change their view reasonably and calmly? over and over again sometimes; or do we shout at them, ridicule, humiliate them into submission? - net result, they may be too intimidated to ever ask a question again.
On that note, I'll leave the debate to get back to the number of card slots.

Apologies for previous post. Hit the post button by mistake. I haven't been posting here until recently, but I have been following the forum for several years.

As in many forums, some people are playing wierd head games, and some people have unusual ways of trying to make a point. Also you have found yourself in a strange but not unusual exchange between the canon bashers and the canon fanboys, to use terms sometimes used by posters to refer to people who do not agree with them.

When the canon bashers and the canon fanboys get going, a silly game develops, and one should not take this game too seriously, if one feels the need to follow the game at all. There are posters called trolls who try to provoke these games.

A lot of people on this forum know a lot about photography, and you can get information that is very useful and interesting, and learn things that are very difficult to find anywhere else. You will find that you usually get clear and understandable answers when you ask questions, but as you have already seen, opinions are not always treated with respect and understanding by all those who feel the need to reply.

 

[K]

And so the Canon apologists bring out the canned excuse that - the "6D's target market is not _________"

This is their way of defending the 6D's lack of specs for its price range. Come up in every thread, sometimes many times, like clockwork.

I should compile of catalog of all the BS excuses, logical fallacies and apologetics made by the fan boys here. I did a tiny snip of that earlier in this thread - and it illustrates how ludicrous they sound.

Whomever on Earth this camera was designed for, it was priced a certain way - and whether you like it or not, the competition priced a far superior specced camera the same, which gives up NOTHING to the 6D and likely the 6D2 - for which suits the needs even of the specific target market the 6D was allegedly created to target via its price and lack of features. Therefore, the 6D and 6D2 are as such, by price and feature, lower value options.


The fact that excuses are made ad nauseam shows that this simple point and truth cannot be refuted.


It's ok guys. Really, it's OK to admit that one camera in the Canon lineup doesn't live up to what it should be. This isn't a throw the baby out with the bathwater situation here. Canon is still a great company. Your massive investment in glass and bodies was a good decision. This shouldn't impact your pride. Don't be insecure. It's ok. Deep breath. Inhale. Exhale.

 

[ahsanford]

Should someone state, 2+2 = 5, a calm correction would be reasonable. Should someone state, 2+2 = 5 and anyone who doesn't think so is crap at math or a shill on the payroll of Casio's calculator department, and repeat that assertion ad infinitum, a calm correction isn't going to happen...it's the Internet, after all.

Didn't you hear? We're in a post-truth, 'alternative facts' world.

Those casio calculator bemoaners wield nuclear weapons these days.

- A

 

[unfocused]

...Whomever on Earth this camera was designed for, it was priced a certain way - and whether you like it or not, the competition priced a far superior specced camera the same, which gives up NOTHING to the 6D and likely the 6D2 - for which suits the needs even of the specific target market the 6D was allegedly created to target via its price and lack of features. Therefore, the 6D and 6D2 are as such, by price and feature, lower value options.

The fact that excuses are made ad nauseam shows that this simple point and truth cannot be refuted...

Except that your "truth" really isn't true.

"Value" is determined by the market. It is not determined by you...it is not determined by me...it is not determined by Neuro or anyone else on this forum. "Value" is not something that is determined by spec lists.

Individuals have individual definitions of "value" and they can legitimately vary. But the beauty of the marketplace is that, collectively, the market determines value. And in the case of the Canon 6D, the market determined it to be the best value in full frame cameras -- what determines that is the fact that it outsold and continues to outsell its competitors.

I don't know if you read much, but if you do, you may be aware of numerous studies that show that crowds tend to get things right, even though individuals often get things very wrong. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wisdom_of_the_crowd That's why polling works. As individuals, we are all wrong about a lot of things, but in a large group, we tend to get things right.

So, while you are welcome to have your own standards for what constitutes a good value, it is delusional to expect that others should judge a product by your standards.

You are certainly allowed to have a different opinion on what constitutes the best value for you. In fact, the 6D was not the best value for me.

What cannot be disputed is that the market has chosen Canon to be the leading camera brand and among individual full frame cameras, the market chose the 6D. I fail to understand why that concept is so difficult for some people to accept.

 

[BillB]

And so the Canon apologists bring out the canned excuse that - the "6D's target market is not _________"

This is their way of defending the 6D's lack of specs for its price range. Come up in every thread, sometimes many times, like clockwork.

I should compile of catalog of all the BS excuses, logical fallacies and apologetics made by the fan boys here. I did a tiny snip of that earlier in this thread - and it illustrates how ludicrous they sound.

Whomever on Earth this camera was designed for, it was priced a certain way - and whether you like it or not, the competition priced a far superior specced camera the same, which gives up NOTHING to the 6D and likely the 6D2 - for which suits the needs even of the specific target market the 6D was allegedly created to target via its price and lack of features. Therefore, the 6D and 6D2 are as such, by price and feature, lower value options.


The fact that excuses are made ad nauseam shows that this simple point and truth cannot be refuted.


It's ok guys. Really, it's OK to admit that one camera in the Canon lineup doesn't live up to what it should be. This isn't a throw the baby out with the bathwater situation here. Canon is still a great company. Your massive investment in glass and bodies was a good decision. This shouldn't impact your pride. Don't be insecure. It's ok. Deep breath. Inhale. Exhale.

I do not understand what point you are trying to make. Of course the 6D is underspec'd by today's standards. Canon will announce it's replacement in a few weeks. Why do you keep flogging this dead horse and try to browbeat us into agreeing with you when pretty much all agree on the limitations of the 6D? (Although some of us have managed to take some pretty good photographs with it.)

You have reached some conclusions about what the 6DII specifications will be, which you insist on repeating over and over again, with more and more exagerration and ridicule. You have also continually used exagerration and ridicule to attack anyone who might choose a 6DII over a D750, which you continually tell us is on sale for $1500. It seems to me that the sensible thing to do would be to wait on Canon's announcement of the 6DII to see what the specs actually are before getting completely wrapped around the axle about its anticipated shortcomings.

 

[Mikehit]

Therefore, the 6D and 6D2 are as such, by price and feature, lower value options.

So why does it outsell the competitors?

 

[Loswr]

Those casio calculator bemoaners wield nuclear weapons these days.

Well, not directly. They have to go through the guy carrying the nucular* football golf bag.

*intentional misspelling

As individuals, we are all wrong about a lot of things, but in a large group, we tend to get things right.

The key is a 'large' group. For example, millions versus, say...538.

 

[K]

Therefore, the 6D and 6D2 are as such, by price and feature, lower value options.

So why does it outsell the competitors?

Stop being lazy and read the thread. We've been through this 10x.

Canon is market leader, has the most users. Users who've bought lenses cannot easily and freely just up and buy a competitor camera, or maintain two incompatible systems simultaneously. Therefore, users "put up with" lesser offering because it is economically worse to make a switch than to tolerate lower value. Plus it is a hassle.

Again, the fact that it sells well, partially because it has been out longer, secondly because there's more Canon users (commited/stuck whatever you want to call it to the system) -- has ZERO impact on the fact that it, as a body is lower value and underspecced compared to what the competition is offering.

 

[Loswr]

Stop being lazy and read the thread. We've been through this 10x.

Canon is market leader, has the most users. Users who've bought lenses cannot easily and freely just up and buy a competitor camera, or maintain two incompatible systems simultaneously. Therefore, users "put up with" lesser offering because it is economically worse to make a switch than to tolerate lower value. Plus it is a hassle.

Again, the fact that it sells well, partially because it has been out longer, secondly because there's more Canon users (commited/stuck whatever you want to call it to the system) -- has ZERO impact on the fact that it, as a body is lower value and underspecced compared to what the competition is offering.

Stop being lazy and read other threads. Saying the earth is flat or 2+2=5 ten times doesn't make it correct.

It has been claimed countless times on this forum that all anyone has to do is buy a Sony FF MILC and a metabones adapter, and they can continue happily using their full complement of Canon lenses.

As has also been pointed out many times, those moving from APS-C to FF will, in many cases, have few or no FF lenses (and unlike Nikon and Sony, crop lenses cannot be used on Canon FF bodies to 'ease the transition').

The fact that it's been out longer and still outsells the competition says exactly the opposite of what you are claiming.

As unfocused pointed out, the market determines value...not you. The market has determined the 6D has ample value.

Come back when you have an argument that isn't so full of holes it leaks like a sieve.

 

[ahsanford]

Stop being lazy and read the thread. We've been through this 10x.

Canon is market leader, has the most users. Users who've bought lenses cannot easily and freely just up and buy a competitor camera, or maintain two incompatible systems simultaneously. Therefore, users "put up with" lesser offering because it is economically worse to make a switch than to tolerate lower value. Plus it is a hassle.

Again, the fact that it sells well, partially because it has been out longer, secondly because there's more Canon users (commited/stuck whatever you want to call it to the system) -- has ZERO impact on the fact that it, as a body is lower value and underspecced compared to what the competition is offering.

Yet you continue to drive past the point that things outside of the body itself offer value. In your eyes, the mount ecosystem is some ponderous anchor or prison that holds people back from migrating towards higher value bodies, while others consider the EF portfolio to be the brand's greatest strength!

This isn't Stockholm Syndrome, or fear of the pain/cost/annoyance of leaving the mothership for another offering. We are prisoners to nothing. We just have a different set of priorities than yours. You apparently value body features (AF points, tilty-flippy, card slots) more than you value the lens portfolio. In that set of priorities, the 6D will always be underwater to you.

To the rest of us, and apparently to the rest of the market, lenses/quality/color/service/reliability matter more than body features do.

- A

 

[Loswr]

We just have a different set of priorities than yours. You apparently value body features (AF points, tilty-flippy, card slots) more than you value the lens portfolio. In that set of priorities, the 6D will always be underwater to you.

To the rest of us, and apparently to the rest of the market, lenses/quality/color/service/reliability matter more than body features do.

If a tree falls in the forest, and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? Well, yes. But if a feature is present in a camera and a buyer doesn't care about that feature, does it add value for that buyer? No.

My 1D X has a LAN port, and I couldn't care less about it. For me, it adds no value. For sports shooters who need to connect to a support van at venue, it may be a critical feature. It's Canon's job to determine which features will be perceived as vaulable to the majority of the target market for a particular model. In the case of the 6D, they determined that a second card slot would not add value for their user base to the extent that it would outweigh the tradeoffs needed to implement that feature (in terms of body size, cost, etc.). But 'K' wants a dual slot, precious. He wants it and he must have it. Thus, the 6D is low value crap, and if the 6DII comes out with just one slot, it, too, will be low value crap. To him. BFD. :

 

[Mikehit]

Stop being lazy and read the thread. We've been through this 10x.

Canon is market leader, has the most users. Users who've bought lenses cannot easily and freely just up and buy a competitor camera, or maintain two incompatible systems simultaneously. Therefore, users "put up with" lesser offering because it is economically worse to make a switch than to tolerate lower value. Plus it is a hassle.

Again, the fact that it sells well, partially because it has been out longer, secondly because there's more Canon users (commited/stuck whatever you want to call it to the system) -- has ZERO impact on the fact that it, as a body is lower value and underspecced compared to what the competition is offering.

All you are doing is illustrating what even you admit in your times of lucidity. People do not buy into a camera they buy into a system and for majority the advantage of the system outweighs the lack of dual card slots. That means for me, dual card slots are way down the list of priorities when I buy a camera. At one time I used the dual card slots on the 7D so I do not have to change cards so easily - now I don't care.
But you see you also have stymied your own claims - if dual card slots are 'essential' (your word, not mine) then surely it would be worth the aggravation of changing brands?

If Canon are demonstrating they are 5 years behind everyone else in the technology they use - if that technology was so vital, they would forego the aggravation and switch. But not even you think those specs are worth the hassle.
Doesn't that put into perspective your claims as to how 'poorly' spec the Canon cameras are?

I can buy a higher spec car for the same money as the Qashqui I have. But I know and trust the reliability of Nissan, so I don't really care about what anyone else offers me. Same with my TV and my other tech gear. I keep aware of developments, sure I do, but that does not drive me to switch brands.

 

[K]

We wait and see the specs of the 6D2 and whether Canon lays an egg.

It stands to reason based on past trends, that is what will happen - since Canon will not provide 5D4 AF in the 6D2 the same way Nikon provides their top AF in lower bodies. (let alone the dual card slot).

The irony. Canon built their whole rep on their AF. They were the AF kings, but Nikon has the edge on AF in two ways. First, it works better - secondly, they offer higher level AF across their lineup.


6D2 will sell wonderfully, thanks the the larger Canon user base. This will suffice as evidence to the fanatics here that it represents a great value compared to the competition. They'll reassure themselves to prevent any insecurities from creeping into their brand loyalty and buying decisions.

I never accused anyone here of actually being on the Canon payroll. I only accused many of sounding like they are. Which is even WORSE, because they are worshiping a brand and defending it for free.


This is the Canon Cult. A sure sign of a cult is the inability for members to speak negatively on any aspect whatsoever. Reading their rhetoric and propaganda - it is always positive, never a criticism. This implies Canon is perfection. Notice how the cultists refuse to ever say anything bad about Canon regardless of the thread or topic, no matter how warranted and truthful it might be. It is full on, complete denial all the time, always. And full on apologetics. Overall, I've said mostly positive things about Canon as they create mostly great products. But as soon as one product is called out for being weaksauce and poor value for dollars spent -- the CULT goes into overtime and swarms.

 

[Mikehit]

We wait and see the specs of the 6D2 and whether Canon lays an egg.

It stands to reason based on past trends, that is what will happen - since Canon will not provide 5D4 AF in the 6D2 the same way Nikon provides their top AF in lower bodies. (let alone the dual card slot).

The irony. Canon built their whole rep on their AF. They were the AF kings, but Nikon has the edge on AF in two ways. First, it works better - secondly, they offer higher level AF across their lineup.


6D2 will sell wonderfully, thanks the the larger Canon user base. This will suffice as evidence to the fanatics here that it represents a great value compared to the competition. They'll reassure themselves to prevent any insecurities from creeping into their brand loyalty and buying decisions.

I never accused anyone here of actually being on the Canon payroll. I only accused many of sounding like they are. Which is even WORSE, because they are worshiping a brand and defending it for free.


This is the Canon Cult. A sure sign of a cult is the inability for members to speak negatively on any aspect whatsoever. Reading their rhetoric and propaganda - it is always positive, never a criticism. This implies Canon is perfection. Notice how the cultists refuse to ever say anything bad about Canon regardless of the thread or topic, no matter how warranted and truthful it might be. It is full on, complete denial all the time, always. And full on apologetics. Overall, I've said mostly positive things about Canon as they create mostly great products. But as soon as one product is called out for being weaksauce and poor value for dollars spent -- the CULT goes into overtime and swarms.

Admit it. You are Sean Spicer, really, aren't you....

 

[Don Haines]

So in just about every level of DSLR from introductory Rebel up to the 1DX2, Canon releases a camera and (in general) the specs are better than the equivalent Nikon.... The Nikon releases a camera and it is better (in general) than the corresponding Canon..... and Canon releases on better than Nikon, and the pattern repeats forever......

So here we are, arguing about one feature on a camera due to be replaced.....