And what does Canon do?

[jrista]

And, an EPIC Dragon with all the required trimmings is going to be in the $40-50k range, without lenses. A Scarlet is cheaper but can't shoot 6k at anywhere near 100fps.

Yeah, Red Dragon's products are phenomenal. If I did cinematography, I'd probably pick up one of their cameras. Arri also makes extremely nice products, but I think they are even more expensive than Red.

Why on earth would you want to buy such kit?

That's an awful lot of money to have sitting around doing nothing.

Just saying.

I honestly don't know if I've ever read a post from you that wasn't trying to pick a fight... ???

 

[Canonicon]

What will Canon do? Release a 7DII/X that will sell thousands of units (if not tens of thousands) for every Red camera sold.

So what?

Buy a P&S they sell even more of that crap.


The 7D MK2 will not even beat the Panasonic GH4 when it comes to video features. :

 

[wickidwombat]

am I the only one that thinks video shutter speeds are too slow to make this an effective method for shooting stills? regardless of data and bloat and all the other issues all you will end up with is terrabytes of blurred images...

 

[Canonicon]

am I the only one that thinks video shutter speeds are too slow to make this an effective method for shooting stills? regardless of data and bloat and all the other issues all you will end up with is terrabytes of blurred images...

People who actually tried it find it usefull.

 

[Efka76]

Red Dragon, Phase One, Hasselblad, medium format, cine lenses, etc. are the names, which most of us see only on internet screen These products are currently extremely expensive, however they show what technological achievements are possible in the future for standard consumers.

Neuro always advocates Canon by saying that Canon financial results are better than Nikon or other, that 5D Mark III outsells RED in thousands of times However, by looking at technological achievements during the last 20 years we can see how technology (especially computers) became so advanced, very cheap (compare 90's supercomputer abilities and price with simple current computer and price.... today even phone processor abilities are much more advanced than 90s' supercomputer).

Many years photography quality was related to optics only as it was quite hard to make significant and visible improvements in analog camera, however, with introduction of digital cameras everything has changed. Cameras are no different from computers, however, I do not see significant improvements in this area for years (especially from Canon side). My reasoning is the following:

1) The 2 main components in digital camera are sensors and processing chip. When computer processors became extremely powerful and quite cheap camera's processor advancement pace is much slower.

Sensor technology - I still can not understand why sensors are still so expensive. e.g. Canon using the same sensors for many years, R&D costs are already written-off few years ago, production facilities already paid-off also few years ago. As far as I understand initial sensor production costs were quite high, that's why smaller APS-C sensors were used (they were cheaper), however, today everybody should be producing FF sensors for fractional costs comparing to costs few years ago.

2) From Canon (industry leader, profitable company) I would expect significant R&D in sensor technology in order to fortify its leadership in the future as well. However, what we see: the same sensor is used for many years, 7D is not updated for 5 years. And we are living in technology years. For example, if Apply would sell their computers with 5 year old processors they would be bankrupt already.

Also, we see that Sony makes quite significant breakthroughs in sensor technology as their sensors have higher DR, better noise performance, investing in curved sensors and etc. This is how technology company's should behave.

3) Currently Canon has a very big number of different camera models, which seems stopping their technological advancement as Canon has to think quite hard how not to make good camera, i.e. not to include same features in newer camera models which are considered in lower level cameras. For example, Canon 6D was made a really cripled camera with old autofocus system in order not to canibalise 5D III.

Few years ago Steve Jobs get rid of many Apply products and concentrated company's effors on few models of compputers and 1 phone and made these products really superb. Canon also should revise their product portfolio. IMHO the following products cameras could be produced:

a) Pro level - Canon 1Dx (FF)
b) Semi pro - Canon 5D Mark III
c) Consumer - Canon 7D
d) Forget all Rebels and P&S cameras.

Also, camera prices should be at least 2 times less comparing to current prices, In such case much higher volume of cameras could be sold.

4) If Canon is not willing / able to produce good sensors it can buy sensors from Sony. In computer market there is Intel and AMD processor manufacturers. In sensor market also there is no need to have many sensor manufacturers.

5) Lenses - for many years Canon was considered as a real leader in manufacturing quality lenses, however, currently it started to significantly lose competition to Sigma and Tamron due to the following factors:

1) Canon does not update many of its popular lenses for many many years (e.g. Canon 50 1.4 is produced since 199X). Come on, guys, you can not expect that you can compete with Sigma 50 1.4 Art, which are produced by using the current technology comparing with 20 year old technology.

2) Canon does not listen to customer needs. E.g. 100-400 lens update many loyal customers are waiting for many years.

3) Price: just compare Canons 24-70 2.8 L with Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC. Tamron is twice cheaper, has vibration control and just only fractionally lower quality. Many customers are happy by paying twice less and getting superb product. Another case Canon 600 mm lens comparison with Tamron 150-600. Of course, Tamron quality is worse but not 10 times comparing to their price difference.

This shows that Canon is either ripping its customers or is not controlling its costs and not able to produce quality products cheaper.

 

[Canonicon]

Neuro always advocates Canon by saying that Canon financial results are better than Nikon or other, that 5D Mark III outsells RED in thousands of times

And we know how important that is for the enduser, that Canon makes more money than Hasselblad or Phase One. :

I mean, who does not buy his camera because of company profits? :

When the profit would give us impressive new technology other companys don´t have... well yes that would be something.

From Canon (industry leader, profitable company) I would expect significant R&D in sensor technology in order to fortify its leadership in the future as well. However, what we see: the same sensor is used for many years, 7D is not updated for 5 years. And we are living in technology years. For example, if Apply would sell their computers with 5 year old processors they would be bankrupt already.

+1000

And when they update the sensor it can no more than keep up with the competition but not beat it (70D).

You have to look at the whole system today to justify buying Canon.
The bodys alone are not such a big argument anymore.

Why?
Because others brands closed the gap and Canon can or will not counter that.

 

[alistairm1]

Good grief. One HUNDRED frames per second. And people complain about 50mp image sizes...it doesn't matter if all you have is 19mp, at 100fps full RAW stills your going to eat all the disk space on the planet in less than a year!

19Mp... say 25MB raw files, that's only 2.5GB per second... it would take 26 minutes to fill up a 4Tb drive....

and then you have to sort through the pictures to see which frame best captured the squirrel

LOL. You would fill up nearly 81,000 4TB hard drives in a year. That's nearly 324Petabytes in a year. 8)

I would hate to have to sort that.

Well, money is no object, right? Just hire a team of photographers to sort and process your images.

I'm cheap so I'll have to outsource, or as my company calls it, "right shoring"

The company I work for calls it right shoring. The staff all call it wrong shoring.

 

[FEBS]

Neuro always advocates Canon by saying that Canon financial results are better than Nikon or other, that 5D Mark III outsells RED in thousands of times

And we know how important that is for the enduser, that Canon makes more money than Hasselblad or Phase One. :

I mean, who does not buy his camera because of company profits? :

When the profit would give us impressive new technology other companys don´t have... well yes that would be something.

From Canon (industry leader, profitable company) I would expect significant R&D in sensor technology in order to fortify its leadership in the future as well. However, what we see: the same sensor is used for many years, 7D is not updated for 5 years. And we are living in technology years. For example, if Apply would sell their computers with 5 year old processors they would be bankrupt already.

+1000

And when they update the sensor it can no more than keep up with the competition but not beat it (70D).

You have to look at the whole system today to justify buying Canon.
The bodys alone are not such a big argument anymore.

Why?
Because others brands closed the gap and Canon can or will not counter that.

So just please look for the company which offers in your eyes good cameras and makes least profit. Don't cry if after a few years of investment in camera and lenses this company doesn't exists anymore. I invested a lot in photography during the past years, but I want a financial healthy company which earns money and satisfies his shareholders. That's strategic thinking about my investment. If it was only 100$, then of course I don't mind. So, I have concerns about Sony. I'm really convinced that Canon is still delivering cameras and lenses in 5 years.

A company like Nikon has strategic a big problem. They are fully dependent on sensors of Sony. What if the next release of sensor of Sony is only kept for Sony itself. Then Nikon really has a problem.

Combined use of a sensor can give great advantages, however business is business. No one can tell what happens next year. Look at F1 racing. In the past we had many successful combinations of chassis/team with engine. However, no one can force the other company to go on. It happened several times because of different strategy of management/shareholders.

The only way a company can survive is by generating profit !!!!
Not by delivering the best high quality products !!

 

[Lawliet]

A company like Nikon has strategic a big problem. They are fully dependent on sensors of Sony. What if the next release of sensor of Sony is only kept for Sony itself. Then Nikon really has a problem.

Not exactly, considering that they have more then one supplier.
Currently Sony, Toshiba and Aptina are on the list. The sensors of the D3/D4 custom built and perform quite well despite not being Sony's.
I.e. Sony dropping Nikon would imply giving that business to their competition & at least damaging if not burning some bridges. Quite a steep price to play for a short term advantage.

You have to look at the whole system today to justify buying Canon.

Or for a long term perspective: the whole system, and the surrounding ecosystem, a few years down the road.
Somewhere between the current offerings of S&T in the lens department and the chinese flashgun tools or AirTTL the bodies became a much stronger factor. Other unique points of sale are being reduced to a few niche cases(and over there some irony lies in waiting).

 

[Canonicon]

Neuro always advocates Canon by saying that Canon financial results are better than Nikon or other, that 5D Mark III outsells RED in thousands of times

And we know how important that is for the enduser, that Canon makes more money than Hasselblad or Phase One. :

I mean, who does not buy his camera because of company profits? :

When the profit would give us impressive new technology other companys don´t have... well yes that would be something.

From Canon (industry leader, profitable company) I would expect significant R&D in sensor technology in order to fortify its leadership in the future as well. However, what we see: the same sensor is used for many years, 7D is not updated for 5 years. And we are living in technology years. For example, if Apply would sell their computers with 5 year old processors they would be bankrupt already.

+1000

And when they update the sensor it can no more than keep up with the competition but not beat it (70D).

You have to look at the whole system today to justify buying Canon.
The bodys alone are not such a big argument anymore.

Why?
Because others brands closed the gap and Canon can or will not counter that.

So just please look for the company which offers in your eyes good cameras and makes least profit. Don't cry if after a few years of investment in camera and lenses this company doesn't exists anymore. I invested a lot in photography during the past years, but I want a financial healthy company which earns money and satisfies his shareholders. That's strategic thinking about my investment. If it was only 100$, then of course I don't mind. So, I have concerns about Sony. I'm really convinced that Canon is still delivering cameras and lenses in 5 years.

Did you buy a Nokia phone or Sony TV?

Today a market leader gone tomorrow.

It´s all fine what you say and i fully agree in part, but i still wish Canon would do more. Push the boundaries.

 

[FEBS]

A company like Nikon has strategic a big problem. They are fully dependent on sensors of Sony. What if the next release of sensor of Sony is only kept for Sony itself. Then Nikon really has a problem.

Not exactly, considering that they have more then one supplier.
Currently Sony, Toshiba and Aptina are on the list. The sensors of the D3/D4 custom built and perform quite well despite not being Sony's.
I.e. Sony dropping Nikon would imply giving that business to their competition & at least damaging if not burning some bridges. Quite a steep price to play for a short term advantage.

I agree that the D3/D4 sensors are custom built and perform very well. However, will a Nikon D4 user be satisfied when a new D4 would come with only a 16Mp version. To make clear, I would have no problem with that as I also have a 1Dx with 'only' 18Mp. it's not only the pixels that is counting. It's the complete system. Would the same people say over here then that the D4s is 2 generations behind on the D810 with Sony's sensor? I agree fully that Nikon is multi sourcing what is a very good purchase strategic, however they are not buying the same product at all those places. The Sony Exmor with the big Mp is really top. If that source would be cutted off, they have a big problem for the Dxxx and Dxxxx series.

Sony dropping Nikon, might also give opportunities for Sony to buy after a short period Nikon if they don't succeed to get a good sensor. The development team of Nikon is really shrinked down as they are buying so many sensors and no longer developing. Combining Sony and Nikon in one company might create a real big competitor on the market for Canon. They would have decent glass then and very good sensor technology. Who can say that the cooperation of Nikon and Sony is not kind of startup of a relation to find out if they can work together. No one can say, as business is business. They always want to create win-win situations. Sony is doing a checkup of the company in meantime. The camera department is still a department that makes money. The TV department doesn't. No one can tell what they might decide at the end.

 

[FEBS]

Did you buy a Nokia phone or Sony TV?

Today a market leader gone tomorrow.

It´s all fine what you say and i fully agree in part, but i still wish Canon would do more. Push the boundaries.

Yes I did. I did use Nokia and had Sony TV. That's fully true, you will never know.

However, pushing the boundaries for me doesn't mean increasing the Mp, and make a Mp race of it. For me it is the complete system that I take into account.

 

[Canonicon]

Did you buy a Nokia phone or Sony TV?

Today a market leader gone tomorrow.

It´s all fine what you say and i fully agree in part, but i still wish Canon would do more. Push the boundaries.

Yes I did. I did use Nokia and had Sony TV. That's fully true, you will never know.

However, pushing the boundaries for me doesn't mean increasing the Mp, and make a Mp race of it. For me it is the complete system that I take into account.

For me neither.
Give me around 30MP on FF and i will never ask for more i think.
Or maybe 90MP for oversampling with no AA filter.

But there are other things Canon can improve on their sensors and cameras

The 7D Mk2 just does not seem to be the miracle that was hyped at CR and other websites the last 3 years.

Especially not for Video.

 

[tolusina]

Red, no flash
weddings, events, not
ever
​

 

[Canonicon]

Red, no flash
weddings, events, not
ever
​

No flash yet.

You could use LED video lights, sure it´s no real substitute.

 

[Loswr]

By the tone on these forums, you would think no one wants anything better than what they had five or ten years ago. (I know that isn't true, it doesn't seem logical that the photographers on this forum wouldn't want a better camera in their hands......yet if it really is....wow...)

Are you being disingenuous, or is it actually your contention that Canon cameras have not improved? The T5i/700D is not a better camera than the T1i/500D? Is the 70D not a better camera than the 40D? The 5DIII...not a better camera than the 5DII? How about the 1D X...not a better camera than the 1DsIII?

If you honestly believe those cameras are no better than their predecessors, that's surprising...and rather sad. The reality is that Canon cameras have improved substantially over the years – most people on this forum have little to complain about because they have better cameras. Canon cameras will continue to improve. Those improvements aren't necessarily going to be in areas where you want to see them, and they aren't likely to be in areas where a small minority of buyers want to see them.

It isn't about one person's opinion. If a thousand, ten thousand, a million "pixel peepers" (read: people who care about getting improved IQ) demanded Canon change something (and not necessarily on forums...in writing, in person, at conferences to Canon reps, whatever)...do you think Canon would ignore them?

Of course Canon would not ignore a majority opinion like that. But...people here on CR forums have been claiming for years that Canon needs to improve 'sensor IQ' (a bandbuggy – it's not really big enough to be called a wagon – onto which you've only recently jumped). If there had really been a million people clamoring for something for years, Canon would already have responded. Yet they haven't. Why not? Because there simply aren't that many people clamoring for it.

 

[Lawliet]

I agree that the D3/D4 sensors are custom built and perform very well. However, will a Nikon D4 user be satisfied when a new D4 would come with only a 16Mp version. To make clear, I would have no problem with that as I also have a 1Dx with 'only' 18Mp. it's not only the pixels that is counting. It's the complete system. Would the same people say over here then that the D4s is 2 generations behind on the D810 with Sony's sensor?

They have access to a fab that can handle 35mm sensors and at least two companies who create smaller sensors that perform on par with Sony's. Working something out shouldn't be impossible. It's hard to say no to the company that makes the machines you need to make your semiconductors after all
Not the most pleasant way, but strategic deterrence involves options that neither party wants to become reality.

The two generations isn't about the resolution, but about signal quality. Its much easier to get a picture from a D4 past the editors then one from a 5D3 w/o debanding. And the debanding in turn softens the image in rather unpredictable ways. And costs money.
D8x0 otoh/additionally is more about not having to go to the Phase One, with its associated costs.

I agree fully that Nikon is multi sourcing what is a very good purchase strategic, however they are not buying the same product at all those places. The Sony Exmor with the big Mp is really top. If that source would be cutted off, they have a big problem for the Dxxx and Dxxxx series.

The Toshiba sensor is good enough to keep people from noticing that some of the current Dxxxx aren't Exmor.

As for buying Nikon - they are part of the Mitsubishi group, and those folks wouldn't want to see their supplier of lithography equipment and such getting under the control of someone else.

Thats maybe the meta-part of the story - it's not that Exmor is so extraordinary good, its just the best known, but that all but one of the others are in the same ballpark.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

What is the point of this thread? This is a canon site. If you don't like what canon has to offer, then go to another forum. Pretty simple.

I have checked the forum rules and there is nothing about only posting positive things about Canon.

If you don't like what a poster has to offer, then go to another thread. Pretty simple.

I prefer tollerance over censorship.

 

[scyrene]

Most new threads seem to be transparent attempts to rekindle the 'Canon is failing' narrative. I suppose some of it is frustration - although since nothing has been officially announced, that's rather premature. Tiresome.

As for extracting video stills, I have done it (setting up a camera to film a bird feeder), and most of the frames are blurred with moving subjects (because the exposure time per frame is conventionally slow, to preserve video quality). It's useful for record shots, but is absolutely no substitute for a real still. 4k would add more resolution, but it's still not the same level of detail. And the motion problems would remain. I believe it will be a niche application at best.

 

[Loswr]

Most new threads seem to be transparent attempts to rekindle the 'Canon is failing' narrative. I suppose some of it is frustration - although since nothing has been officially announced, that's rather premature. Tiresome.

+1

The trolls and DRones don't have real facts to fuel their ire, so they're gnawing old bones. If it's any consolation, when the announcements are actually made, we can look forward to a freshly-fueled round of complaint threads. Of course, that'll be nothing compared to the 7DII/X hitting the streets...then the lens-cap-shooting-5-stop-pushing folks (the small handful of them, that is) will post many threads showing the 'terrible IQ' and whining about how it's a bad camera and Canon really blew it and they're doomed and everyone will switch to Nikon or Sony. Meanwhile, the 7DII/X will be very popular with buyers, produce great images in capable hands, and life in the real world will go on.