Canon needs to respond with SOMETHING

[mackguyver]

Canon does not respond, simply because they are making money while Sony and other imaging companies are losing a ton of money. Sales of digital cameras in general are poor, with P&S and Mirrorless being weakest. Introducing a major new product incurs a huge amount of cost, which comes directly out of profits. Unless the new product is going to make a profit, its better to stick with the existing one that has all the development and tooling costs already paid for, so every sale is quite profitable. Its not a good time to be throwing money away on new product releases that won't generate enough income to break even.


When Canon does come up with a major new product, you can be sure that it will have been researched and will sell. Profits are never guaranteed, but Canon has a good track record. In the meantime, look for products that are minor upgrades, basically a new label and a couple of software features added, but nothing that requires huge tooling expenses.

+100

Also, who's to say that Canon doesn't have a 7DII, 1D X II EOS M X(?) and lots of other goodies ready to go to production?

As Mt Spokane says, product launches, especially international ones cost millions of dollars and need to be timed carefully to ensure maximum effect. If people are still buying their current products and aren't as likely to be excited by new products, why launch now in a depressed economy? Demand and likelihood of success are the drivers.

Some may remember when DVDs came out way back in 1997. Everyone wanted Star Wars, but George Lucas said that he wanted to wait until more people had the players. By waiting several years, he built up a massive demand and made far more money. Canon is likely doing this, especially with the 7DII.

 

[DRR]

Perhaps us old-timers think differently, but what I want in a camera is reliability and the ability to take good pictures easily. I'm amazed at the number of folks that need a new camera every couple years. I would rather have a camera that lasts for as long as possible - cameras are expensive!

I had the original digital rebel since it was introduced. I only bought a new Canon 6D when the AF started going wacky. It still took pictures that were plenty good enough for outdoor use. I don't need more megapixels, higher ISO, more than 1 AF point, or many of the newfangled bells and whistles. If you like bells and whistles, check out the Sony. If you want a camera that lasts 10 years, has an excellent lens lineup, and takes excellent photos than you can stick with old-reliable Canon.

I disagree

The reason that new cameras are nothing like old cameras, is because they're no longer only cameras. In the film days, camera development moved a lot slower, because at the end of the day, it was a box with a shutter, highly dependent on what type of film you loaded inside of it.

In that sense, a digital camera, is both a camera and film. Sure it's always nice to have more AF points, but when you upgrade a digital camera, you instantly upgrade the film of every camera you are about to take, also.

This is also why I contend that the old idiom of "upgrade glass first" is less true these days. An upgraded body may make a huge difference in the quality of photograph you are able to take - potentially much greater than upgrading lenses. Would you rather shoot with the 35mm f/2 IS on a 1DX, or a 35mm f/1.4L on a Rebel XT? The former's going to give you much better pictures in a much wider range of situations, that's for sure.

 

[Don Haines]

Yes, 7d2 with 5d3 noise/iso performance please!

Isn't that what the best (astro)physicists do for a living? (laws, theories, meh)

It's a quite ironic quote from "Scotty"..... Star Trek regularly violated the laws of physics.....

 

[ahsanford]

All these manufacturers are just falling into Canon's trap. Canon, by letting all the other manufacturers innovate first, will lure them into a sense of security and profit. Just want Canon wants them to do. ;D

Then, like a puma, Canon will pounce!

Canon is breaking the old paradigm that innovation needs to be done faster than its competitors. A new business plan. ;D

How about "slow and steady wins the race"...

Canon is more like the old Radiohead tune: "No alarms and no surprises, please."

- A

 

[sagittariansrock]

The other thing they are doing that others have pointed out is the shotgun approach. A new system, new SLR, new mirrorless, seemingly every month or two. Which one will they stand behind? Will they support firmware upgrades of older gear? Having gone through their Blu-ray players and some other stuff, I can say that their quality isn't what it used to be and once you buy it (unless it's a PlayStation) they rarely support any updates. Panasonic on the other hand had supported cameras and other gear years and years past their release.

+1.

It is really sad seeing the decline of a company like Sony. They used to stand for the pinnacle of quality in the fields of television, consumer laptops, portable music players and video game devices. Playstation 4 is very nice but not revolutionary, especially if you look at the competition. Portable music players are completely out of the market- iPods and smartphones are ruling the field. And Sony TVs are suffering from major losses. The laptop division has been sold out.
I think whoever Sony is getting their strategy guidance from, is doing a terrible job.

 

[cbphoto]

Some day soon we'll see

[CR2] Canon smartphone with EF mount to be announced at Photokina.

Until then we'll have to suffer through dozens of inane camera "enhancements".

 

[Eldar]

I have been out playing with my new toy today, the Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art. I have shot lots of rubbish pictures, just to verify if this lens delivers or not. I have now spent the better part of this evening looking through the images and, reflecting on the topic of this thread, I wonder what I am missing. Color, sharpness, bokeh and all the rest of it, which in sum constitutes my images are just superb (the images are still mostly rubbish though ...)

Yes, I want a higher MP camera. Yes, I want more DR. Yes, I want better manual focus ability. Yes I want improved AF and yes I want a lot more. But having seen the sharpness, resolution, color and everything else I get from what I have, I wonder if anyone (other than the pixel peepers at CR ) will be able to see/tell if I got the new 14 f-stop sensor, with 45MP and ... all the rest of it.

(I will get it though, regardless of the answer to the question above )

 

[unfocused]

Imagine a 5D4 with the next-gen of the D800 sensor...

I'd rather not.

Let me explain. Two quotes from the same reviewer.

While the D800 managed to hold noise to a Low or better rating only up to ISO 800, it remained in acceptable territory up to ISO 3200. If you apply heavy noise reduction, you should be able to bring ISO 6400 down to acceptable levels while maintaining a lot of resolving power. If you don’t plan to print an image very large, you will occasionally be able to get good results at ISO 6400.

Looking for clean images in very low light? Welcome to Mark III country. The camera earned an Extremely Low rating from ISO 50 through 400, stepping up to Very Low from ISO 800 through 3200, and Low at ISO 6400 and 12,800. It doesn’t become Unacceptable, and then only barely so, at ISO 51,200. Even at ISO 102,400, the noise score is only 4.4—compared with 4.9 at ISO 25,600 on the Mark II.

It seems you cannot change the laws of physics. I don't have anything against megapixels, but if the price you pay is higher noise, I'd rather not.

 

[sagittariansrock]

I'd love an interchangeable sensor camera someday

[I know, I know it exists in the MF territory- I'm talking about dSLRs. Although at this time it is counter-productive from a marketing standpoint]

 

[tolusina]

I'd love an interchangeable sensor camera someday

[I know, I know it exists in the MF territory- I'm talking about dSLRs. Although at this time it is counter-productive from a marketing standpoint]

Film?



.

 

[sagittariansrock]

I'd love an interchangeable sensor camera someday

[I know, I know it exists in the MF territory- I'm talking about dSLRs. Although at this time it is counter-productive from a marketing standpoint]

Film?



.

Not really. Changing films allowed flexibility in terms of ISO and look, graininess, etc. The availability of different ISOs and post-processing (software like DxO Filmpack) have made that unnecessary.
I'm talking more about resolution, responding to the posts above re 5DIII and D800.
It will be nice if you can switch to a high-MP back for, say, landscapes for large prints, or to a low-MP back for low-light work.
It will probably happen someday if competition and the market forces it. For now, it will be suicidal.

 

[JorritJ]

I have shot lots of rubbish pictures. I wonder what I am missing.

Yes, I want a higher MP camera. Yes, I want more DR. Yes, I want better manual focus ability. Yes I want improved AF and yes I want a lot more. But having seen the sharpness, resolution, color and everything else I get from what I have, I wonder if anyone (other than the pixel peepers at CR ) will be able to see/tell if I got the new 14 f-stop sensor, with 45MP and ... all the rest of it.

As always it depends on the situation, doesn't it ?

Most of my shooting, my 5D3 does just fine with any number of the lenses I have at my disposal. I dare say the limiting factor is myself in most shots.

But right now I'm primarily looking for the perfect gear for me to bring on my next safari. Sure, I could go out, flex the ol' creditcard and buy a 1D X and a 200-400 1.x (or multiple bodies and some long primes), but aside from the costs being ridiculous, who wants to lug all that around if they don't really have to? Not to mention that it would be overskill.

So both of these have been rumored for a long time, but if a 7D2 were to drop and come with an improved sensor and 5D3 AF, coupled with a 100-400 II (can we keep push-pull? nay-sayers be damned!), well then hot diggity I'll be pretty excited.

Are there alternatives? Sure. Do I need it? Nope. Will I bail to Sony/Nikon if it doesn't happen? Probably not for quite a while longer. But it sure as hell would be nice to have. I think most people here have their own situation they want feature X or Y for.

In the end though, Canon does what Canon does. There's enough big boys in that company and I'm sure they've done the numbers. Canon is not driven by the same excitement a lot of photographers are, they just exist to make money. If they have the technology, then they will release it at what they think is the most opportune moment. If they don't have the technology, then it really doesn't matter either way what we or they think about it, as you can't sell something you don't have. I'm sure they have a bunch of people working on making the next big thing though - but that doesn't mean they'll succeed.

 

[tolusina]

..... Not to mention that it would be overskill.....

Oh, how I love a good typo!
More, I'd love to have some of that overskill, I'd have to spare and could spread some around!!
Overskill, a good word that, good accidental invention there Jorrit!! :thumbup:
---

I'd love an interchangeable sensor camera someday

[I know, I know it exists in the MF territory- I'm talking about dSLRs. Although at this time it is counter-productive from a marketing standpoint]

Film?



.

Not really. Changing films allowed flexibility in terms of ISO and look, graininess, etc. The availability of different ISOs and post-processing (software like DxO Filmpack) have made that unnecessary.
I'm talking more about resolution, responding to the posts above re 5DIII and D800.
It will be nice if you can switch to a high-MP back for, say, landscapes for large prints, or to a low-MP back for low-light work.
It will probably happen someday if competition and the market forces it. For now, it will be suicidal.

Film, never had to clean a sensor either.
I was just trying to lighten things up a bit, this thread has gone way too serious for what, to me, is a fairly frivolous topic.

So, I went out to shoot today, it was grey and bland, pictures were too. If only I'd been shooting that new whatever it is Sony, MoMa would be knocking on my door already for the prints.
---
Meanwhile, back to the interchangeable sensor idea, I like it, but how does the shutter synch with image capture by the sensor? I mean, they do it in MF, how is it done?

Back in history, there were three head to head competing bodies in the pro, 35mm SLR market,
Pentax LX, Nikon F3 and Canon F-1.
All three had changeable screens, finders and backs, roll magazines, motor drives, data backs.
I guess I only daydreamed a digital back for the LX, I just googled the topic, found my own daydream post on CR from last October, sheesh......
I hadn't been aware of digital backs for any of these, though it seems they'd have been good candidates.
So I googled some more, found this nikonweb thread regarding a Nikon F3 Hawkeye, digital backed F3 from long ago, http://www.nikonweb.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=530
Then I found about a Kodak Hawkeye II / Nikon F3 for NASA at http://nikonrumors.com/2014/04/16/the-kodak-hawkeye-ii-nikon-f3-was-one-of-the-first-electronic-stills-cameras-used-by-nasa-in-space.aspx/
---
Ah yes, for a full frame 35mm format replaceable back built with current technology, we can dream.

As I told Carole so many years ago, "You have to let Joe have the dream. You don't have to let him have the car".

I don't think we're getting the car....................

 

[dak723]

The reason that new cameras are nothing like old cameras, is because they're no longer only cameras. In the film days, camera development moved a lot slower, because at the end of the day, it was a box with a shutter, highly dependent on what type of film you loaded inside of it.

In that sense, a digital camera, is both a camera and film. Sure it's always nice to have more AF points, but when you upgrade a digital camera, you instantly upgrade the film of every camera you are about to take, also.

This is also why I contend that the old idiom of "upgrade glass first" is less true these days. An upgraded body may make a huge difference in the quality of photograph you are able to take - potentially much greater than upgrading lenses. Would you rather shoot with the 35mm f/2 IS on a 1DX, or a 35mm f/1.4L on a Rebel XT? The former's going to give you much better pictures in a much wider range of situations, that's for sure.

I agree that old cameras were essentially a box that held the film and that the digital camera is much more than that. That was not my point. My point was - and is - that the changes in each new generation of camera are comparatively small, in my opinion. As an average hobbyist, the pictures I take with my original rebel and those I took with a 60D I rented - and even the 6D I now own - are just about the same in IQ when viewed on a computer screen or printed 4 x 6 size (and perhaps even slightly larger). Of course, the marketing of each new camera will tell how much improved they are - and the consumer wants to believe it, too - so that they feel great about their new purchase. Twice I upgraded over the years and each time the camera was returned because the pictures I was taking with the original rebel were just as good. In fact, my percentage of accurately exposed pics is still probably higher with the original rebel than my 6D. I returned the first 2 6Ds I purchased because of exposure issues (one under exposed, the other over exposed!) until I found one that was accurate.

Granted, for those taking pics in low light, huge strides have been made in high ISO performance. Other than that, the IQ in the first digital cameras has held up surprisingly well, in my opinion.

 

[David Hull]

Re: Canon needs to respond with SOMETHING

Why?

Case in point…

I am committed to Canon myself...

Sony dSLRs aren't even close to competitive with Canon (or Nikon) from a market share standpoint, and this new Sony camera isn't going to change that.

Not only that, Sony isn't Canon and it is going to be a long time before they are truly competitive (if ever) as a full service camera company. Canon has a huge service organization that will fix just about anything that breaks in a week or less -- try that with Sony. Canon has a lot more lenses to choose from and even if you don't own them, there are dozens of places where you can rent them -- once again, try that with Sony.

Why is it that all reason goes out the window every time some other manufacturer releases a camera with some new "wiz-bang" feature. Let's see, IBIS was supposed to be a hit out of the park for Sony but it wasn't. The awesome sensor technology hasn't done it for them either.

 

[tolusina]

.......Why is it that all reason goes out the window every time some other manufacturer releases a camera with some new "wiz-bang" feature.......

Well put.

 

[ramonjsantiago]

Canon doesn't just "needs to respond with SOMETHING".
Canon needs to hit a home run with their next product.

If you look at it from my point of view, that of a high end amateur, Can hasn't produced anything competitive in the last four years other than the 200-400mm L. At a fairly astronomical price at that.

And no, the 5dm3 was not a home run. Maybe a single. Every other manufacturer for the level I consider has surpassed Canon in both lenses and cameras.

Even Sigma, a third-party, has produced superior glass with their 35mm and 50mm ART lenses.
Canon's answer? another mediocre Powershot.

Producing those kinds of products is keeping Canon very profitable, but I don't consider them a technological advance, nor a reason to upgrade.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

I think most of us that frequent CR are open minded enough to accept other products outside of Canon. I know many already own Sony, Olympus and Fuji products, mostly in the mirrorless lines.

When a company excels at something, it makes sense to buy their products over another, even if it's a favorite like Canon.

I haven't ever been drawn to Sony for their DSLR line but I have loved Sony ever since I was a kid in the early '70's for soooo many other things. I am saddened to see the Sony brand diminish over the years.

The only non-Canon DSLR that I have seriously considered (but haven't jumped on yet) has been the Pentax K-3 with a couple of the WR lenses. This fits with my heavy outdoor use and Pentax has a great following and a solid reputation. I just haven't wanted to get into a whole other system yet.

 

[sagittariansrock]

Canon doesn't just "needs to respond with SOMETHING".
Canon needs to hit a home run with their next product.

If you look at it from my point of view, that of a high end amateur, Can hasn't produced anything competitive in the last four years other than the 200-400mm L. At a fairly astronomical price at that.

And no, the 5dm3 was not a home run. Maybe a single. Every other manufacturer for the level I consider has surpassed Canon in both lenses and cameras.

Even Sigma, a third-party, has produced superior glass with their 35mm and 50mm ART lenses.
Canon's answer? another mediocre Powershot.

Producing those kinds of products is keeping Canon very profitable, but I don't consider them a technological advance, nor a reason to upgrade.

I am so glad that Canon hasn't tried to do some technological acrobatics and provided us with a nice, reliable ecosystem.
I have a friend who really wants to buy the A7r but is worried about the lack of lenses. Getting an adapter is the only answer, but that defeats the purpose of a compact camera. Shouldn't Sony be focusing on making lenses for that system?

Innovation will not help if you keep bombarding tropical consumers with excellent room heaters.

In any case, I hope Sony and Nikon keep making excellent cameras, and do good business. I don't think it is a good thing for one company to have monopoly and no competition. We as consumers will suffer as a result.

 

[distant.star]

.
Canon is a business.

For a good while now they have been better at their business than any other company. They continue to be far better at their business than any other company.

It seems distressingly arrogant to me that anyone would suggest what Canon "needs" to do. Better would be to sit quietly, listen, watch and learn how a successful business is run.