Canon did everything it could in 5D3

[GND]

Supposed dDLR megapixel roadmap:
36MP: Sonikon, 02.2012 <CR3>
40Mp: Canon, 09.2012 (EOS-5Dx) <CR2>
50Mp: Canon, 2014 (EOS-3D)
60Mp: Sonikon, 2014
60Mp: Canon, 2016 (Olympic year)
100Mp: Sonikon, 2019 (D-1000, solar powered)
120Mp: Canon, 2020 (cost GBP2020, green body), iPhone 14 released 22Mp with panoramic function
End of dSLR as we know it.

So, the sensor story has roughly 8 more years life. Meanwhile, people realize nearly everything has been photographed so they switch to iPhone.

 

[Woody]

Just a note about the 7D sensor.

When the 7D was first announced in 2009, its main competition was the D300. If we compare the sensors in both cameras, the 7D simply blew the D300 away. DPReview described the sensor as 'class leading' and this is supported by DXOMark test results (ignore their silly overall scores).

Fast-forward to 2012: we now have the 5D3 vs D800 sensors. I expected 5D3 to make huge strides in terms of low ISO dynamic range, but Canon made no improvement whatsoever. I don't think many people are too bothered by its lower pixel count vs D800, but the lack of progress in the dynamic range department is rather disappointing, to say the least. Now, if the DPReview early preview test shots for Olympus E-M5 are any indication, it looks like Olympus has achieved the kind of progress one expects from modern sensors these days. I guess this is why many people feel let down by current Canon sensors.

Having said all that, when I needed a FF camera recently, I looked for a few things: optical viewfinder quality, excellent high ISO performance, reliable AF in low light. So, in my book, the 5D3 delivered.

Addendum:
Just some evidence of Canon's successful sales and marketing departments in China, the world's largest market for high-end cameras. From http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2012-04/22/c_131543148.htm

"Although professional cameras are more expensive in China than in other countries, China has a faster growth rate compared with developed economies such as the United States and Japan.

China has already become the largest market for selling our latest high-end camera 5D Mark III, which started to sell last month and has almost sold out now...

High-end digital single lens reflex cameras account for about 50 percent of the total sales of all Canon cameras in China, which is much bigger than other countries..."

Canon clearly knows what they're doing.

 

[AvTvM]

Canon is the master of intensely annoying "market differentiation" - meaning crippling of camera features for pure marketing speculations, which most of the time turn out to be dead wrong and are costing them market share.

In addition Canon has a very real and serious problem in their CMOS sensor development as far as dark noise is concerned. Their apparent incompetence in this area significantly degrades DR performance of all their cameras compared to recent Nikon/Sony sensor technology, who have been achieving breakthrough after breakthrough since the D3 and D3s.

5D3 is exactly what the 5D2 should have been from the start. Not less, but certainly not more. 5D3 pricing is way to high, even though initial demand is reasonably strong, driven by many upgrade-happy users pissed off with the 5D2's totally inadequate AF-system and helped by Nikon's inability to properly supply the market with product.

 

[tomscott]

In terms of whether they did everything they could. Nope. The camera is an homologation of used parts, put together to create not only a great camera but also to do it cheaply. The profit on these cameras will be really good I assume, the cost of R&D on this camera is minimal, slightly updated sensor to keep the frame rate up and slight improvement to noise and DR, AF system moved from 1DX, body does have some ergonomic changes which is nice and a little more weather sealing. They just raided the parts bin instead of truly innovating this product which is fine by me, but for a £1000 premium... kind of annoying but what do you do?

I'm not sure I would consider a COMPLETELY new AF system that's only on TWO cameras "used parts", especially when it beat the camera it was "taken" from to market. How many people would have loved to have had the "used" AF system out of the 1DsMKIII in the 5DMKII? Hell, I know I would have. Almost EVERY manufacturer shares parts across products. Go look at almost any brand of vehicle in different models and you'll see things like steering wheels, control knobs, door handles and engines being used across multiple platforms.

You misinterpret what I mean, I meant that the AF wasn't designed specifically for the 5D MKIII it was designed for the 1DX and it has borrowed it. Which is fine. What I was meaning was the R&D isnt extreme because they have recycled tech, the AF is amazing and I welcome it but the overall point being the tech already existed yet we pay an extra £1000 premium over the 5D MKII. There is a lot of profit in this camera for Canon because it is not unique tech.

 

[LifeAfter]

Maybe they did what they could technically,
BUt NOT financially- THE PRICE, they could/can do a loooot better

 

[Loswr]

Canon is the master of intensely annoying "market differentiation" - meaning crippling of camera features for pure marketing speculations, which most of the time turn out to be dead wrong and are costing them market share.

Why do people make statements like this? What makes you think it is costing them market share, and more importantly, do you have any data to back that up? The availbale data show that Canon's market share for dSLRs has been increasing for the past several years. So by the relevant objective measure, Canon is doing things right, not 'dead wrong'.

 

[peederj]

What generally happens with companies employing crippleware strategies is the competition catches up without crippling. And all the opinion leaders who learned enough about the systems to identify the crippling loudly proclaim the competitive entrant and make a lot of noise in that direction. The lumbering giant then finally decripples (usually doesn't price slash, that would humiliate the faithful) thinking it was time to play the ace they had been holding back. At that point, we enter a world like that of cars: the giant may still have a few advantages left from economies of scale and depth of staff, but the upstarts are all established and legit and the choice becomes a matter of politics, style, and price. The giant slowly erodes in stature as they are too slow to respond to the fickleness of an open market.

And it all could have been avoided with the tolerance of a little cannibalism. The giant could have completely prevented the establishment of competition and maintained an effective monopoly indefinitely. Which may have been worse for the customer in the long run. Indeed, the staff themselves may be crippling their own employer, knowing that creating an opening for competitors to flourish will provide for their own job security and negotiation power.

 

[Neeneko]

Why do people make statements like this? What makes you think it is costing them market share, and moreimportantly, do you have any data to back that up? The availbale data show that Canon's market share for dSLRs has been increasing for the past several years. So by the relevant objective measure, Canon is doing things right, not 'dead wrong'.

That was my thought....
I agreed with the first part, and am often annoyed by Canon's approach to the market. However I full admit that it has been very profitable for them. The segment I am part of is an edge case, I get grumpy that only niche players with small capacity and high prices cater to it, and I wish companies with the volume to bring prices down would pay more attention to us.... so I am often frustrated that companies like Canon will not even try..... but I acknowledge that their groove has worked for them.

Though there is probably market that they COULD exploit that they currently are not. They have been heavily focusing on a few areas and, if not for glass investment and brand loyalty they probably would be loosing a lot more people. That will probably be the real risk to them from the mirrorless segment... once it gets fleshed out better and has a wider range of bodies including high end ones, the ability to put any glass on them could really start hurting Canon.

 

[AvTvM]

Canon is the master of intensely annoying "market differentiation" - meaning crippling of camera features for pure marketing speculations, which most of the time turn out to be dead wrong and are costing them market share.

Why do people make statements like this? What makes you think it is costing them market share, and more importantly, do you have any data to back that up? The availbale data show that Canon's market share for dSLRs has been increasing for the past several years. So by the relevant objective measure, Canon is doing things right, not 'dead wrong'.

market share data I know, shows the opposite. Nikon and SOny have taken a lot of DSLR-market away from Canon over the past 6-7 years.

Why is Canon dead wrong? They could have built on their early DSLR-dominance. You may remember, that once upon a time their CMOS sensors were way better, especially at hi-ISO than anything else on the market! They totally squandered that and are WORSE today than competitors.

Had they focused on selling the very best cameras in every market segment - best sensor and all the best photographic features, no holds barred ... they would completely OWN the entire DSLR market by now and Nikon would be in bankrupcy by now!

Sepcifically, Canon fucked up when they

* brought the measly 50D instead of the 7D ... that would have killed Nikon's immense success with the D300
* brought the 5D2 with 1Ds III AF-system - that would have killed Nikons D700 immediately
* brought the 1D IV instead of the ill-fated 1D III ... that would have stopped the D3/s in its tracks
* sold the 1Ds III for a reasonable 4k ... that would have killed the D3x
* stuck their video crap into video cams ... Cxxx cameras from 1k to 20 k ... all available with EF-mount. Those Video types did not buy the 5D2 and 7D BECAUSE of their love for vpoorly video-suited DSLRs. They bought them solely for one reason: because no similarly decent videcam [e.g. a C100 or whatever] @ 1k and 2.5 k USD was available on the market!

BUT ... what did Canon do? Eyery step of the way only the BARE MINIMUM, always TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE. Always obsessed with "cannibalization" ... and ALWAYS full-bore marketing-differentiation, criplling "lowly" camera bodies and denying them readily available useful photographic features - irrespective of whether this would have helped them to capture market share from competitors. Always nickling and diming clients. Making them upgarde to a same-sensor camera just to get a decent AF-system. Or charging them extra for hard to get lens shades instead of throwing those 1$ production cost items into the box like all reasonable competitors do!

All of this is why Nikon is back stronger than ever and why Canon has been losing market share all along.
All of this is why I more and more had it with Canon and will likely switch to Nikon once I move to FF.

 

[peederj]

Preach.

 

[Louis]

Canon is the master of intensely annoying "market differentiation" - meaning crippling of camera features for pure marketing speculations, which most of the time turn out to be dead wrong and are costing them market share.

Why do people make statements like this? What makes you think it is costing them market share, and more importantly, do you have any data to back that up? The availbale data show that Canon's market share for dSLRs has been increasing for the past several years. So by the relevant objective measure, Canon is doing things right, not 'dead wrong'.

market share data I know, shows the opposite. Nikon and SOny have taken a lot of DSLR-market away from Canon over the past 6-7 years.

Why is Canon dead wrong? They could have built on their early DSLR-dominance. You may remember, that once upon a time their CMOS sensors were way better, especially at hi-ISO than anything else on the market! They totally squandered that and are WORSE today than competitors.

Had they focused on selling the very best cameras in every market segment - best sensor and all the best photographic features, no holds barred ... they would completely OWN the entire DSLR market by now and Nikon would be in bankrupcy by now!

Sepcifically, Canon F_____ up when they

* brought the measly 50D instead of the 7D ... that would have killed Nikon's immense success with the D300
* brought the 5D2 with 1Ds III AF-system - that would have killed Nikons D700 immediately
* brought the 1D IV instead of the ill-fated 1D III ... that would have stopped the D3/s in its tracks
* sold the 1Ds III for a reasonable 4k ... that would have killed the D3x
* stuck their video crap into video cams ... Cxxx cameras from 1k to 20 k ... all available with EF-mount. Those Video types did not buy the 5D2 and 7D BECAUSE of their love for vpoorly video-suited DSLRs. They bought them solely for one reason: because no similarly decent videcam [e.g. a C100 or whatever] @ 1k and 2.5 k USD was available on the market!

BUT ... what did Canon do? Eyery step of the way only the BARE MINIMUM, always TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE. Always obsessed with "cannibalization" ... and ALWAYS full-bore marketing-differentiation, criplling "lowly" camera bodies and denying them readily available useful photographic features - irrespective of whether this would have helped them to capture market share from competitors. Always nickling and diming clients. Making them upgarde to a same-sensor camera just to get a decent AF-system. Or charging them extra for hard to get lens shades instead of throwing those 1$ production cost items into the box like all reasonable competitors do!

All of this is why Nikon is back stronger than ever and why Canon has been losing market share all along.
All of this is why I more and more had it with Canon and will likely switch to Nikon once I move to FF.

so good, and so agree

 

[Loswr]

Nikon and SOny have taken a lot of DSLR-market away from Canon over the past 6-7 years.

Sepcifically, Canon F_____ up when they...

All of this is why Nikon is back stronger than ever and why Canon has been losing market share all along.

WTF? Show me the data, please? What, cat got your keyboard? Let me help.

2007 IDC Worldwide Digital Camera Market Share Review, cited here: Canon was again number 1 with share of 43 percent...Nikon was second with share of 40 percent...Sony again placed third, with a share of 6 percent, unchanged from 2005.

2010 IDC Worldwide Digital Camera Market Share Review, cited here: In the market for cameras with interchangeable lens, or single lens reflex cameras, Canon controlled 44.5 percent of the market, followed by Nikon with 29.8 percent and Sony with 11.9 percent, according to the data.

Sorry, but your 'facts' are bull$h!t. As some simple math shows, Canon has not been 'losing market share all along' in fact, they've gained market share, going from 43% to 44.5%. Nikon is the one that's been losing market share - they lost more than 10% and that's a pretty siginificant loss - and they lost much of it to Sony.

So, what did Canon really do? Sell more dSLRs than any other manufacturer, year over year. If that sounds like they're f__king up to you...well, you need to learn to interpert actual facts a bit more carefully.

All of this is why I more and more had it with Canon and will likely switch to Nikon once I move to FF.

Canon, I'm sure, is quaking in their financial boots at your threat. Or not. Either way, don't tell us, we don't care. Just go buy a D800 and be happy...

 

[Woody]

Yup, Neuroanatomist is absolutely right here.

Canon has been growing from strength to strength in terms of worldwide market shares, contrary to fallacies propagated on the web. Canon's market shares may have eroded in developed countries like Japan and USA, but these are developed markets with little potential for growth. So, losing their market shares in these countries does not mean much. On the other hand, Canon's sales and marketing department has very shrewdly placed their bet on China, a developing country where the number of middle-income families is growing at a very rapid pace. In fact, as pointed in the linked article I provided, the Chinese market for high-end cameras is now larger than that in USA and Japan. If Canon manages to get a foothold in this market, they've made it big, really big. Why should they bother with small groups of whiners from stagnant developed markets?

The fact that Canon's 2012 Q1 results for DLSR sales is phenomenal bears testament to the effectiveness of their sales and marketing department. From http://seekingalpha.com/article/538551-canon-s-management-discusses-q1-2012-results-earnings-call-transcript?source=marketwatch

"Among this market environment, we achieved a nearly 30% increase in unit sales of SLR cameras reflecting strong sales of our entry level models, and strong demand for recently launched camera targeting advanced, amateur users. We also continue to see the best sales for interchangeable lenses."

 

[awinphoto]

Nikon and SOny have taken a lot of DSLR-market away from Canon over the past 6-7 years.

Sepcifically, Canon F_____ up when they...

All of this is why Nikon is back stronger than ever and why Canon has been losing market share all along.

WTF? Show me the data, please? What, cat got your keyboard? Let me help.

2007 IDC Worldwide Digital Camera Market Share Review, cited here: Canon was again number 1 with share of 43 percent...Nikon was second with share of 40 percent...Sony again placed third, with a share of 6 percent, unchanged from 2005.

2010 IDC Worldwide Digital Camera Market Share Review, cited here: In the market for cameras with interchangeable lens, or single lens reflex cameras, Canon controlled 44.5 percent of the market, followed by Nikon with 29.8 percent and Sony with 11.9 percent, according to the data.

Sorry, but your 'facts' are bull$h!t. As some simple math shows, Canon has not been 'losing market share all along' in fact, they've gained market share, going from 43% to 44.5%. Nikon is the one that's been losing market share - they lost more than 10% and that's a pretty siginificant loss - and they lost much of it to Sony.

So, what did Canon really do? Sell more dSLRs than any other manufacturer, year over year. If that sounds like they're f__king up to you...well, you need to learn to interpert actual facts a bit more carefully.

All of this is why I more and more had it with Canon and will likely switch to Nikon once I move to FF.

Canon, I'm sure, is quaking in their financial boots at your threat. Or not. Either way, don't tell us, we don't care. Just go buy a D800 and be happy...

Bravo... good thing i wasn't drinking coffee when i read your post. =)

 

[V8Beast]

Canon is the master of intensely annoying "market differentiation" - meaning crippling of camera features for pure marketing speculations, which most of the time turn out to be dead wrong and are costing them market share.

Why do people make statements like this? What makes you think it is costing them market share, and more importantly, do you have any data to back that up? The availbale data show that Canon's market share for dSLRs has been increasing for the past several years. So by the relevant objective measure, Canon is doing things right, not 'dead wrong'.

"Canon is losing market share" claims usually boil down to a bunch of internet fanatics who think their opinions are more important than they really are, just because like-minded internet fanatics give them e-high-fives and virtual pats on the back. Gee, my online buddies agree with me, so it must be true.