If image quality is next to nothing then you can be happy with your phone. Nobody is forcing you to buy it.
Canon EOS M200 coming soon
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
If image quality is next to nothing then you can be happy with your phone. Nobody is forcing you to buy it.
Again let's assume it's true that forum members are not typical camera customers (which is arguable but anyway).
So I'll just repeat my question, so they cannot discuss the rumours and speculate about the cameras they want on the forum dedicated to rumours and speculations? Or why is it important here that they're not typical?
I didn't see it in this thread, but even if someone's believing here they're "typical camera customers", what's the problem?
My suspicion is that the Crop R people will end up being served a full frame camera...with a crop mode. (Heck, that already exists if you adapt an EF-S lens to the R mount.) Do that with an 83 MP full frame, and you have a 32 MP crop behind an R mount.
The problem is they’re spamming threads with complaints how Canon is stupid and ******* for not catering to their uncommon use case that they actually think is the norm. Even with bodies that they’re obviously not in the target audience of.
Unfortunately, it is all about revenue and Bottomline, asset utilisation and cost of goods, productivity and time to value.
It takes an amazingly good sales person, A Dealmaker, a visionary strategist to commit a senior decision maker to a strategy overhaul. Typically, not possible unless there is a alarming financial data to support the claim. Well, I see what Canon is doing now from a strategy standpoint. They bought some time with R body at release, polishing quirks with firmware revisions and continue working on a pro level bodies to support a host of amazing RF glass.
Personally I am convinced that the 5D level R body cameras will be an absolute success.
You may be correct in circumstances where price is not an issue. And even then. It remains to be seen what the high resolution R camera speed limitations will be like.(fps figure)
But you are looking at US$4000 camera.
Me too. And actually I'm going to be purchasing the EOS R next month for my trip to Kenya. Just the body and the adapter. I saw the new firmware and I think it's a winner. I've been using my M5 for a while and the touch to focus function isn't terrible even on a small camera. I think its time to part from my trusty 5D3. Should be a good "upgrade".
Yeah, this is the issue many of us have. Every rumour thread gets hijacked by the same complaints, even when they're totally irrelevant. So Canon is going to release an entry-level body, and yet you still get people saying 'where's my 7D3/mirrorless 5D/top-of-the-line Sony killer?'; it's boring (and frankly pathetic).
Yeah, but so what?
Let them whine, who cares. Canon won't collapse because of whining.
Yeah, but so what?
Well, some of us are annoyed by unnecessary noise in our conversations. I'd have thought that most people are. Some of us are also annoyed by being reminded that stupid people exist and are indeed abundant.
Maybe, but it would only make sense if that crop mode enables faster shooting. Otherwise I'd be pointless.
I'm only interested in Canon roadmap because I'm looking for an upgrade. Basically I'm looking into what's available now and what will be available in a few months. Otherwise I don't really care much about Canon profits, market share etc. Likewise I just skip or ignore "Canon is *******" posts.
I suspect so for a few reasons.
The high resolution full frame sensors allow easy cropping. Of course a dedicated crop camera can likely retain high frame rates etc - look at Nikon's D500. I think most would prefer the flexibility of full frame with the exception of those always at the long end eg birders. However they are a relatively small group in terms of getting a product line built just for them and more and more of them will go full frame anyway.
Secondly is ergonomics. I remember lots of people arguing about what size the RF mount would be with regard to allowing small bodies but also not being too restrictive. Well Canon nicely side stepped that - it's a large mount, not as wide as Nikon's but much bigger than Sony. And if you want a small camera? The M series is absolutely tiny even compared to Sony's A7 series. Sometimes it's better not to compromise.
A lot of people think this is some sort of accident and mistake by Canon. I know Thom Hogan, a man I respect, keeps going on about it in industry analysis. He is trapped in the mindset of 10 years ago when Nikon and Canon did manage to get people into their systems with a cheap rebel and gradually took them all the way to full frame in part because of the single mount while also keeping birders using crop cameras as full frame were 12 megapixels.
In the days of SLR this made some sense. The crop cameras couldn't really be that small anyway so you might as well use SLR sized lenses plus it meant two groups - birders and upgraders - were well served by being able to use full frame glass on crop. I think Canon decided to not make decisions just for those groups but instead look at the big picture. The average person is still far more likely to put price and size as the first two priorities. For the average person the M line is perfect, far better than the Ef-S line I think in terms of ergonomics.
One question it leaves is the 7D user of course. In terms of resolution he will be able to use full frame and crop. But what about size and build quality etc? I would love a tougher version of the M5 with a grip. I accept we won't get tilt-shift lenses etc but looking to competitors like Sigma and Fuji clearly something like an 18-35/1.8 and 56/1.2 would be desirable and allow some nice lenses to sell alongside the kit zooms.
It isn't important or relevant to be typical, it is important and relevant to realize your wishes, desires and needs in a camera are not typical of the general camera buying population, and Canon are more interested in the later than you personally.
This means saying things like 'I need uncropped 4k', 'I need 24p', 'I need 15 stops of DR' and then following on with, 'if the next Canon doesn't have 'X' feature they are *******/DOA/I'm jumping ship/I'll get a Sony' is an entirely illogical extension.
Canon for whatever reason, probably expensive market research rather than hysterical guessing, have decided model 'Y' doesn't need 24p or an intervalometer and their sales history points to the fact that they get the price to feature ratio right consistently more accurately than any other camera manufacturer.
Canon пожалуйста M5II + пара линз:
1. EF-M 12-48 / 1.8-4 ( https://www.canonwatch.com/canon-patent-for-12-48mm-f-1-8-4-0-lens-for-eos-m -система / ). Еще лучше - 11-55 / 1,8-2,8!
2. EF-M 55-250 / 2.8-4 + Удлинитель EF-M 2x
it's a shame that like many patents, CW gets it entirely wrong, even though all he does usually is read what I wrote. I've even tried to help and correct him on some of his off base conclusions or comments on patents, only to get into a brick wall against head session after back and forth emails.
here's the original post that CW "copied" and somehow even in that translation, got it wrong:
Canon Patent Application: Various lenses for ... Micro Four Thirds sensor size?
This is a strange lens patent application from Canon. Atypically there are 5 or so different sensor sizes that Canon create lenses for. broadcast cameras, 2/3" compact, 1" powershot, APS-C and full frame. Every now and then, you see strange ones, such as this one, where the image height is...
www.canonnews.com
I mean I even explain why it can' t be APS-C :/
That 12-48mm was for m43 sensors, and not for the EF-M unless they magically shrink the size of APS-C sensors when I wasn't looking.
the 55-250 2.8-4 would be quite large. I doubt you'd see that any time soon (consider the size of a 70-200 f/4)
Last edited:
canonnews, thank you very much for explaining the patent!it's a shame that like many patents, CW gets it entirely wrong, even though all he does usually is read what I wrote. I've even tried to help and correct him on some of his off base conclusions or comments on patents, only to get into a brick wall against head session after back and forth emails.
here's the original post that CW "copied" and somehow even in that translation, got it wrong:
Canon Patent Application: Various lenses for ... Micro Four Thirds sensor size?
This is a strange lens patent application from Canon. Atypically there are 5 or so different sensor sizes that Canon create lenses for. broadcast cameras, 2/3" compact, 1" powershot, APS-C and full frame. Every now and then, you see strange ones, such as this one, where the image height is...www.canonnews.com
I mean I even explain why it can' t be APS-C :/
That 12-48mm was for m43 sensors, and not for the EF-M unless they magically shrink the size of APS-C sensors when I wasn't looking.
the 55-250 2.8-4 would be quite large. I doubt you'd see that any time soon (consider the size of a 70-200 f/4)
I understand that any of the two lenses that I wrote about, unfortunately, is unlikely to appear in life. I really wanted versatility with a minimum of optics.
I have to think about a much more expensive Canon FF camera. I don’t want to sacrifice a possible shallow depth of field and, as a result, a possible bokeh.
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)