Announcements Coming The First Week of September [CR2]

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,202
1,522
fullstop said:
I believe there is a 5 year time window until computational imaging devices take over.
...
There is no reason Canon could and should not launch a compact, decent FF MILC for USD 999 ...
You are contradicting yourself. "Dying" market is a reason to increase prices, not to slash them.
 

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
Three of Canon's big recent innovations have been dual pixel technology, the touchscreen interface, and inexpensive and high quality (but slow) aps-c zooms. None of these innovations generate much internet buzz. The question would seem to be whose innovations are having the most market success, not who has been innovating and who has not.

Speaking for myself, the touchscreen interface on my 5D IV is at the got to have it level for me, especially since the IQ is plenty good enough for my purposes. But Canon does't innovate. Everybody knows that.
 

Mikehit

EOS R6
Jul 28, 2015
3,350
552
fullstop said:
24 APS-C vs. 80 FF sensors max. yield on an 8" wafer = factor 3.3, let's make it 5 to take into account less than optimal yields. If they use larger diameter wafers in 2018, ratio will be more favorable for FF, closer to 3x.

My *guess* for production costs is 30 bucks or so for APS-C CMOS sensors and 150 for FF sensors ["ceteris paribus", eg comparable sensor designs/generations, "industry-typical" lot size etc.]. Even if it were 50 for an APS-C sensor, FF would be around 250. But i think FF sensors are lower than that.

But if you believe the delta is 500 or 1000, let's hear your data and/or assumptions. Just continuously repeating your statements without any data or reasoning behind it does not make them true. :)

I'm not the one making a claim - you are. I have nothing to prove.
Your whole post is full of assumptions - where have you got those numbers from? That is all I am asking.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,946
Canada
Mikehit said:
fullstop said:
24 APS-C vs. 80 FF sensors max. yield on an 8" wafer = factor 3.3, let's make it 5 to take into account less than optimal yields. If they use larger diameter wafers in 2018, ratio will be more favorable for FF, closer to 3x.

My *guess* for production costs is 30 bucks or so for APS-C CMOS sensors and 150 for FF sensors ["ceteris paribus", eg comparable sensor designs/generations, "industry-typical" lot size etc.]. Even if it were 50 for an APS-C sensor, FF would be around 250. But i think FF sensors are lower than that.

But if you believe the delta is 500 or 1000, let's hear your data and/or assumptions. Just continuously repeating your statements without any data or reasoning behind it does not make them true. :)

I'm not the one making a claim - you are. I have nothing to prove.
Your whole post is full of assumptions - where have you got those numbers from? That is all I am asking.

I remember reading, about 10 years ago, that crop sensors cost around $25 to produce, and FF were about $150 to produce. I have no idea what current costs would be as they are now on a finer lithography, more complex, and yields may have gone up or down.....
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,946
Canada
BillB said:
Three of Canon's big recent innovations have been dual pixel technology, the touchscreen interface, and inexpensive and high quality (but slow) aps-c zooms. None of these innovations generate much internet buzz. The question would seem to be whose innovations are having the most market success, not who has been innovating and who has not.

Speaking for myself, the touchscreen interface on my 5D IV is at the got to have it level for me, especially since the IQ is plenty good enough for my purposes. But Canon does't innovate. Everybody knows that.

The touchscreen interface is not a Canon innovation, but they were certainly the ones to get it right! Canon’s user interface is the best in the business, probably responsible for a lot of their sales success, and generally ignored on the internet....
 

amorse

EOS R
Jan 26, 2017
823
1,113
www.instagram.com
Don Haines said:
BillB said:
Three of Canon's big recent innovations have been dual pixel technology, the touchscreen interface, and inexpensive and high quality (but slow) aps-c zooms. None of these innovations generate much internet buzz. The question would seem to be whose innovations are having the most market success, not who has been innovating and who has not.

Speaking for myself, the touchscreen interface on my 5D IV is at the got to have it level for me, especially since the IQ is plenty good enough for my purposes. But Canon does't innovate. Everybody knows that.

The touchscreen interface is not a Canon innovation, but they were certainly the ones to get it right! Canon’s user interface is the best in the business, probably responsible for a lot of their sales success, and generally ignored on the internet....
The touch screen on the 5D IV is amazing. I didn't know I needed it until I had it. Those sort of innovations are what makes Canon a contender though - doing the little things right.
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
fullstop said:
Quite telling for the state of affairs. Quite funny thing is, those small computational cameras that will eat the lunch of all "traditional camera bricks with fat lenses" will not come from Canon, Nikon, Fuji, Olympus, Pentax or even Sony, no they will come from Samsung, Apple, Xiaomi or some Chinese, Taiwanese, Indian start-up company.

Will eat the lunch of? That already happened.

Dedicated cameras are niche. Maybe 10 years from now Canon and Nikon will seem like Hasselblad does today.

Such is life.
 

fullstop

EOS R
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
Don Haines said:
The touchscreen interface is not a Canon innovation, but they were certainly the ones to get it right! Canon’s user interface is the best in the business, probably responsible for a lot of their sales success, and generally ignored on the internet....

that one i happily and fully agree! One of the main reasons I am still a Canon customer. :)
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,946
Canada
amorse said:
Don Haines said:
BillB said:
Three of Canon's big recent innovations have been dual pixel technology, the touchscreen interface, and inexpensive and high quality (but slow) aps-c zooms. None of these innovations generate much internet buzz. The question would seem to be whose innovations are having the most market success, not who has been innovating and who has not.

Speaking for myself, the touchscreen interface on my 5D IV is at the got to have it level for me, especially since the IQ is plenty good enough for my purposes. But Canon does't innovate. Everybody knows that.

The touchscreen interface is not a Canon innovation, but they were certainly the ones to get it right! Canon’s user interface is the best in the business, probably responsible for a lot of their sales success, and generally ignored on the internet....
The touch screen on the 5D IV is amazing. I didn't know I needed it until I had it. Those sort of innovations are what makes Canon a contender though - doing the little things right.

Yes.... 70D..... 80D.... 6D2.... 5DIV.... It's a safe bet that every Canon DSLR from here on out will have them....

They were slow getting into them.... When the 7D2 came out, it should have had one, but unfortunately, it did not. They took their time and did it right. Although I chafe a bit with the slow speed at which Canon moves, they seem to get things right. Once you see a feature, you know it is good and they have gotten the bugs out.... now if they can only realize that they can use their Bluetooth to talk to headsets...…
 

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
Don Haines said:
amorse said:
Don Haines said:
BillB said:
Three of Canon's big recent innovations have been dual pixel technology, the touchscreen interface, and inexpensive and high quality (but slow) aps-c zooms. None of these innovations generate much internet buzz. The question would seem to be whose innovations are having the most market success, not who has been innovating and who has not.

Speaking for myself, the touchscreen interface on my 5D IV is at the got to have it level for me, especially since the IQ is plenty good enough for my purposes. But Canon does't innovate. Everybody knows that.

The touchscreen interface is not a Canon innovation, but they were certainly the ones to get it right! Canon’s user interface is the best in the business, probably responsible for a lot of their sales success, and generally ignored on the internet....
The touch screen on the 5D IV is amazing. I didn't know I needed it until I had it. Those sort of innovations are what makes Canon a contender though - doing the little things right.

Yes.... 70D..... 80D.... 6D2.... 5DIV.... It's a safe bet that every Canon DSLR from here on out will have them....

They were slow getting into them.... When the 7D2 came out, it should have had one, but unfortunately, it did not. They took their time and did it right. Although I chafe a bit with the slow speed at which Canon moves, they seem to get things right. Once you see a feature, you know it is good and they have gotten the bugs out.... now if they can only realize that they can use their Bluetooth to talk to headsets...…

To me, getting it right is part of innovation, as is understanding where innovations can really make a difference. Canon couldn't have anticipated the appearance of DPR and DXO magic numbers and they likely underestimated the level of internet interest in new camera models, but Canon seems to trust its ability to assess markets and develop appropriate technology.

To me, a key Canon decision was to go with dual pixel technology. My guess is that Canon waited on dual pixel before putting ADC onboard a sensor, which explains why they were slow to respond to their DR "problem". (I am pretty sure that Canon never thought that their problem was as important as DPR made it out to be. Who knows how it would have played out without DPR's magic numbers?). I wonder whether dual pixel was also a pacing factor in the development of the touchscreen interface as well as ADC. Why waste money on the development of components and software that you are going to obsolete in a couple of years?
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
BillB said:
Don Haines said:
amorse said:
Don Haines said:
BillB said:
Three of Canon's big recent innovations have been dual pixel technology, the touchscreen interface, and inexpensive and high quality (but slow) aps-c zooms. None of these innovations generate much internet buzz. The question would seem to be whose innovations are having the most market success, not who has been innovating and who has not.

Speaking for myself, the touchscreen interface on my 5D IV is at the got to have it level for me, especially since the IQ is plenty good enough for my purposes. But Canon does't innovate. Everybody knows that.

The touchscreen interface is not a Canon innovation, but they were certainly the ones to get it right! Canon’s user interface is the best in the business, probably responsible for a lot of their sales success, and generally ignored on the internet....
The touch screen on the 5D IV is amazing. I didn't know I needed it until I had it. Those sort of innovations are what makes Canon a contender though - doing the little things right.

Yes.... 70D..... 80D.... 6D2.... 5DIV.... It's a safe bet that every Canon DSLR from here on out will have them....

They were slow getting into them.... When the 7D2 came out, it should have had one, but unfortunately, it did not. They took their time and did it right. Although I chafe a bit with the slow speed at which Canon moves, they seem to get things right. Once you see a feature, you know it is good and they have gotten the bugs out.... now if they can only realize that they can use their Bluetooth to talk to headsets...…

To me, getting it right is part of innovation, as is understanding where innovations can really make a difference. Canon couldn't have anticipated the appearance of DPR and DXO magic numbers and they likely underestimated the level of internet interest in new camera models, but Canon seems to trust its ability to assess markets and develop appropriate technology.

To me, a key Canon decision was to go with dual pixel technology. My guess is that Canon waited on dual pixel before putting ADC onboard a sensor, which explains why they were slow to respond to their DR "problem". (I am pretty sure that Canon never thought that their problem was as important as DPR made it out to be. Who knows how it would have played out without DPR's magic numbers?). I wonder whether dual pixel was also a pacing factor in the development of the touchscreen interface as well as ADC. Why waste money on the development of components and software that you are going to obsolete in a couple of years?

Bill, you’re suggesting canon has a long term strategy and that they don’t arbitrarily “nerf” a haphazard product line. I don’t buy it.
 

rrcphoto

EOS R6
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
BillB said:
Don Haines said:
amorse said:
Don Haines said:
BillB said:
Three of Canon's big recent innovations have been dual pixel technology, the touchscreen interface, and inexpensive and high quality (but slow) aps-c zooms. None of these innovations generate much internet buzz. The question would seem to be whose innovations are having the most market success, not who has been innovating and who has not.

Speaking for myself, the touchscreen interface on my 5D IV is at the got to have it level for me, especially since the IQ is plenty good enough for my purposes. But Canon does't innovate. Everybody knows that.

The touchscreen interface is not a Canon innovation, but they were certainly the ones to get it right! Canon’s user interface is the best in the business, probably responsible for a lot of their sales success, and generally ignored on the internet....
The touch screen on the 5D IV is amazing. I didn't know I needed it until I had it. Those sort of innovations are what makes Canon a contender though - doing the little things right.

Yes.... 70D..... 80D.... 6D2.... 5DIV.... It's a safe bet that every Canon DSLR from here on out will have them....

They were slow getting into them.... When the 7D2 came out, it should have had one, but unfortunately, it did not. They took their time and did it right. Although I chafe a bit with the slow speed at which Canon moves, they seem to get things right. Once you see a feature, you know it is good and they have gotten the bugs out.... now if they can only realize that they can use their Bluetooth to talk to headsets...…

To me, getting it right is part of innovation, as is understanding where innovations can really make a difference. Canon couldn't have anticipated the appearance of DPR and DXO magic numbers and they likely underestimated the level of internet interest in new camera models, but Canon seems to trust its ability to assess markets and develop appropriate technology.

To me, a key Canon decision was to go with dual pixel technology. My guess is that Canon waited on dual pixel before putting ADC onboard a sensor, which explains why they were slow to respond to their DR "problem". (I am pretty sure that Canon never thought that their problem was as important as DPR made it out to be. Who knows how it would have played out without DPR's magic numbers?). I wonder whether dual pixel was also a pacing factor in the development of the touchscreen interface as well as ADC. Why waste money on the development of components and software that you are going to obsolete in a couple of years?

I think people over estimate the importance of DXO and DPR magic numbers way too much.

Dual pixel's and quite possibly ADC was limited by when Canon's new fab line got up and running. Even though we haven't had chipworks data for a while, it's nearly impossible for canon to have been doing the new 70D and onwards sensors and also the full frame DPAF sensors with 500nm design rules.

it explains the rather slow pause getting off the older 18mp sensors, everything was waiting for that.

since then, 2013, canon has replaced almost it's entire lineup with DPAF sensors, and is working on at least the 3rd generation of those sensors now.

ADC patents weren't really seen at all until around a year before the 1DX Mark II release, so there's that - it's not has if canon had it and sat on it for years.

the timeline and release of new technology sensor wise always started with the APS-C sensors first, I would imagine that will continue to be the implementation strategy for Canon as it's just easier to do things on smaller sensors first than it is with full frame sensors.

Canon did touchscreens before DPAF btw. the 60D had a touchscreen and multiple rebels well before DPAF.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
BillB said:
My guess is that Canon waited on dual pixel before putting ADC onboard a sensor, which explains why they were slow to respond to their DR "problem".

But DPAF pre-dated Canon's on-chip ADC sensors:

70D = July 2013
First on-chip ADC with a Canon (non-Sony-licensed) sensor = Feb 2016

- A
 

rrcphoto

EOS R6
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
3kramd5 said:
Bill, you’re suggesting canon has a long term strategy and that they don’t arbitrarily “nerf” a haphazard product line. I don’t buy it.


when it takes up to 3+ years to develop a camera body, and longer than that to do lenses, you can't help but have long term strategies in place.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,946
Canada
rrcphoto said:
Canon did touchscreens before DPAF btw. the 60D had a touchscreen and multiple rebels well before DPAF.

Not sure about that last one.... my 60D does not have a touchscreen :)

I still don't regard touchscreens in Canon cameras as innovation..... They were in common use on an awful lot of stuff for a long time.... Back in the 1990's I was integrating them into equipment controllers, they are old technology!
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,946
Canada
rrcphoto said:
3kramd5 said:
Bill, you’re suggesting canon has a long term strategy and that they don’t arbitrarily “nerf” a haphazard product line. I don’t buy it.


when it takes up to 3+ years to develop a camera body, and longer than that to do lenses, you can't help but have long term strategies in place.


Yes, having to grow your fluorite crystals can slow things down a bit....
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
3kramd5 said:
Bill, you’re suggesting canon has a long term strategy and that they don’t arbitrarily “nerf” a haphazard product line. I don’t buy it.

Agree. I think Canon does have a long-term strategy on core technology, but it also monkeys around in all sorts of ways to set up this pyramid of features/prices/enticements to get you to step up and pay more.

Just off the cuff:

6D2 not getting an on-chip ADC sensor
No spot metering at an off-center AF point unless you get a 1-series body
The WiFi SD card not being made compatible with the 5D3 (this one's picky, I admit)
Single card slot in the 6D2
No coexistence of DPAF and 4K for the M50
Flash sync: 6-series 1/180, 5-Series 1/200, 1-series 1/250

We can call those things nerfing, 'strategic feature omission' or too expensive to implement for that price point -- doesn't really matter. It's business, I get it. We are not entitled to tech that is offered at the same market slot / price point as the competition.

- A
 

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
ahsanford said:
3kramd5 said:
Bill, you’re suggesting canon has a long term strategy and that they don’t arbitrarily “nerf” a haphazard product line. I don’t buy it.

Agree. I think Canon does have a long-term strategy on core technology, but it also monkeys around in all sorts of ways to set up this pyramid of features/prices/enticements to get you to step up and pay more.

Just off the cuff:

6D2 not getting an on-chip ADC sensor
No spot metering at an off-center AF point unless you get a 1-series body
The WiFi SD card not being made compatible with the 5D3 (this one's picky, I admit)
Single card slot in the 6D2
No coexistence of DPAF and 4K for the M50
Flash sync: 6-series 1/180, 5-Series 1/200, 1-series 1/250

We can call those things nerfing, 'strategic feature omission' or too expensive to implement for that price point -- doesn't really matter. It's business, I get it. We are not entitled to tech that is offered at the same market slot / price point as the competition.

- A

Agreed. Trying to figure out why specific features did or did not end up on a specific camera is speculative at best, but I don't think that refutes the idea that Canon has had a coherent mirrorless technology development based on dual pixel technology.

Having said that, the 6DII sensor decision is baffling to me. Was it a cost decision? Was the original idea to get the 6DII to market before an ADC chip could be ready, but for some reason delays screwed up the timing? Was Canon being Canon and simply ignoring the foreseeable internet firestorm because in their opinion the 6DII sensor was just fine, no matter what DPR was going to say?
 

rrcphoto

EOS R6
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
Don Haines said:
rrcphoto said:
3kramd5 said:
Bill, you’re suggesting canon has a long term strategy and that they don’t arbitrarily “nerf” a haphazard product line. I don’t buy it.


when it takes up to 3+ years to develop a camera body, and longer than that to do lenses, you can't help but have long term strategies in place.


Yes, having to grow your fluorite crystals can slow things down a bit....

fun fact, it took a full year to grow a crystal for the 1200mm lens.
 

rrcphoto

EOS R6
Jun 20, 2013
2,505
147
Don Haines said:
rrcphoto said:
Canon did touchscreens before DPAF btw. the 60D had a touchscreen and multiple rebels well before DPAF.

Not sure about that last one.... my 60D does not have a touchscreen :)

my mistake! i thought it did. well the EOS-M had a smooth and fully operational touchscreen in 2012, a year before the 70D. it wasn't held up by DPAF which was what my meaning was.