Canon needs to respond with SOMETHING

[sagittariansrock]

Nikon is a very different company. Nikon has practically made a reputation out of doing two things: Responding to competitors products (and responding extremely late, well beyond the time when the ship sailed and the train left the station), and creating hyperniche products like the Df or a 24karat gold plated, lizard-skin gripped $12,000 trophy camera that no one cares about other than as a curiosity on the internet every so often (oh yes, that thing really does exist...which actually blows my mind... ???). Sony doesn't even seem to have a plan, it's just "*BLAMM!* Shotguun and Ho'yeah! Let's see wut sticks! " wild-west product design and production that's burning their funds and burying them in a hole so deep and filled to the top with debt they will never be able to see sunlight again (let alone pay off).

Relax, I am sure Sony and Nikon needn't be bashed either

 

[jrista]

Nikon is a very different company. Nikon has practically made a reputation out of doing two things: Responding to competitors products (and responding extremely late, well beyond the time when the ship sailed and the train left the station), and creating hyperniche products like the Df or a 24karat gold plated, lizard-skin gripped $12,000 trophy camera that no one cares about other than as a curiosity on the internet every so often (oh yes, that thing really does exist...which actually blows my mind... ???). Sony doesn't even seem to have a plan, it's just "*BLAMM!* Shotguun and Ho'yeah! Let's see wut sticks! " wild-west product design and production that's burning their funds and burying them in a hole so deep and filled to the top with debt they will never be able to see sunlight again (let alone pay off).

Relax, I am sure Sony and Nikon needn't be bashed either

Hmm, not so sure about that. Given how much people slobber and drool all over them like love-sick puppies all the time, I think a little dose of SoNikon Reality was in order. ;P It does boggle my mind that anyone actually bought Nikon's gold-plated lizard skin camera....

 

[traingineer]

You should change your metaphor, it is is Canon who are chasing today .
Sony as one example sold more cameras in South Korea than Canon and Nikon in 2013 and I think the rest of the world will go the same way , from large SLR to smaller but with a FF sensor.

Nikon is a very different company. Nikon has practically made a reputation out of doing two things: Responding to competitors products (and responding extremely late, well beyond the time when the ship sailed and the train left the station), and creating hyperniche products like the Df or a 24karat gold plated, lizard-skin gripped $12,000 trophy camera that no one cares about other than as a curiosity on the internet every so often (oh yes, that thing really does exist...which actually blows my mind... ???). Sony doesn't even seem to have a plan, it's just "*BLAMM!* Shotguun and Ho'yeah! Let's see wut sticks! " wild-west product design and production that's burning their funds and burying them in a hole so deep and filled to the top with debt they will never be able to see sunlight again (let alone pay off).

It looks like the Hasselblad Lunar seems to be better value compared to that Nikon, and unlike the Nikon, the Lunar comes with a "luxurious starter" lens. ;D

 

[dak723]

Perhaps I am a bit dense, but I guess I don't understand this company loyalty business. People are "rooting" for Canon, or dismayed with Canon for not "competing" adequately against their opponents. This is not sports! If you aren't happy with their products, get the product you are happy with. Yes, for professionals or those with a lot of money invested in lenses, this may not be easy. But used lenses sell for a pretty good percentage of their original cost on Ebay and going from one system to another is not a total loss of money. If Canon does not adequately produce products you are satisfied with, move elsewhere. Why not? As I mentioned in my previous posts (although most would probably disagree), I buy a camera to last for many years as the incremental improvemetns are considerably minor, so the system I choose will not cost me in reinvestment every 2 or 3 years.

In my time I have owned Olympus and Canon cameras. When my Original Rebel finally bit the dust, I bought a 6D. When I realized that the full frame 6D did not meet my needs for more zoom and less DOF for macro and shooting flowers (and was a bit heavy for casual walk-around use), I bought an Olympus EM-1. Neither camera does everything I wanted, but together they do. I was able to sell my Canon Macro lens as well as some other APS-C lenses that I no longer need and that covered a considerable percentage of the Olympus lenses I bought. If Nikon or Sony had made a camera that better suited my needs I would have bought that. The reality (at least from my perspective) is that all of these companies make excellent cameras. As someone else mentioned, compared to film cameras, all of them are heads and shoulders better. So, why does it matter so much what Canon does?

 

[Orangutan]

Perhaps I am a bit dense, but I guess I don't understand this company loyalty business. People are "rooting" for Canon, or dismayed with Canon for not "competing" adequately against their opponents.

<snip>

The reality (at least from my perspective) is that all of these companies make excellent cameras. As someone else mentioned, compared to film cameras, all of them are heads and shoulders better. So, why does it matter so much what Canon does?

Quite right. Generally the pro- Canon talk is in response to the anti-Canon talk. There seems to be a small, vocal group who think their photo needs are broadly representative of the entire market, so they're put out when Canon doesn't give them exactly what they want, and they try to argue that Canon's business will decline if they don't listen to their customers. Others, including me, point out that Canon is selling quite well, and has a history of incorporating tech and features when demanded by the market, but that they are a conservative, consistently profitable business.

That's really it, there seem to be two camps: (1) those who believe their niche demand represents the market as a whole; (2) those who may have individual preferences for new features, but acknowledge that the customer base (the "market") speaks with its own voice.

Of course we all want all the best features of the competing products, without losing the benefits of what we already have, or suffering an increase in price. Well, that ain't gonna happen. As you rightly point out, those with particular needs should choose the gear that meets those needs.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

Perhaps I am a bit dense, but I guess I don't understand this company loyalty business. People are "rooting" for Canon, or dismayed with Canon for not "competing" adequately against their opponents.

<snip>

The reality (at least from my perspective) is that all of these companies make excellent cameras. As someone else mentioned, compared to film cameras, all of them are heads and shoulders better. So, why does it matter so much what Canon does?

Quite right. Generally the pro- Canon talk is in response to the anti-Canon talk. There seems to be a small, vocal group who think their photo needs are broadly representative of the entire market, so they're put out when Canon doesn't give them exactly what they want, and they try to argue that Canon's business will decline if they don't listen to their customers. Others, including me, point out that Canon is selling quite well, and has a history of incorporating tech and features when demanded by the market, but that they are a conservative, consistently profitable business.

That's really it, there seem to be two camps: (1) those who believe their niche demand represents the market as a whole; (2) those who may have individual preferences for new features, but acknowledge that the customer base (the "market") speaks with its own voice.

Of course we all want all the best features of the competing products, without losing the benefits of what we already have, or suffering an increase in price. Well, that ain't gonna happen. As you rightly point out, those with particular needs should choose the gear that meets those needs.

-100...how dare you bring sound logic into this... LOL

 

[jrista]

Perhaps I am a bit dense, but I guess I don't understand this company loyalty business. People are "rooting" for Canon, or dismayed with Canon for not "competing" adequately against their opponents.

<snip>

The reality (at least from my perspective) is that all of these companies make excellent cameras. As someone else mentioned, compared to film cameras, all of them are heads and shoulders better. So, why does it matter so much what Canon does?

Quite right. Generally the pro- Canon talk is in response to the anti-Canon talk. There seems to be a small, vocal group who think their photo needs are broadly representative of the entire market, so they're put out when Canon doesn't give them exactly what they want, and they try to argue that Canon's business will decline if they don't listen to their customers. Others, including me, point out that Canon is selling quite well, and has a history of incorporating tech and features when demanded by the market, but that they are a conservative, consistently profitable business.

That's really it, there seem to be two camps: (1) those who believe their niche demand represents the market as a whole; (2) those who may have individual preferences for new features, but acknowledge that the customer base (the "market") speaks with its own voice.

Of course we all want all the best features of the competing products, without losing the benefits of what we already have, or suffering an increase in price. Well, that ain't gonna happen. As you rightly point out, those with particular needs should choose the gear that meets those needs.

+1 Well put.

 

[sagittariansrock]

You should change your metaphor, it is is Canon who are chasing today .
Sony as one example sold more cameras in South Korea than Canon and Nikon in 2013 and I think the rest of the world will go the same way , from large SLR to smaller but with a FF sensor.

Canon has never chased anyone. They never chased anyone in the past, and they are not chasing anyone now. Canon does what Canon does, for whatever reasons Canon decides to do them. People are constantly complaining about how "Canon hasn't responded to <pickyourpoison>" and "Canon MUST respond to <yaddayadda>"...they constantly complain, because Canon is not in the business of "responding" to anyone for anything...never have, and I don't have reason to suspect they ever will.

Canon builds products for THEIR customers. They build EXCELLENT products for THEIR customers. The fact that Canon builds excellent products for their customers is the reason why they are one of the top imaging companies in the world, and the top photography company in the world. Canon delivers what their customers ASK for, and they make sure that what they deliver lives up to the expectations their customers have, and their own reputation.

Nikon is a very different company. Nikon has practically made a reputation out of doing two things: Responding to competitors products (and responding extremely late, well beyond the time when the ship sailed and the train left the station), and creating hyperniche products like the Df or a 24karat gold plated, lizard-skin gripped $12,000 trophy camera that no one cares about other than as a curiosity on the internet every so often (oh yes, that thing really does exist...which actually blows my mind... ???). Sony doesn't even seem to have a plan, it's just "*BLAMM!* Shotguun and Ho'yeah! Let's see wut sticks! " wild-west product design and production that's burning their funds and burying them in a hole so deep and filled to the top with debt they will never be able to see sunlight again (let alone pay off).


Canon is not, and will not, be responding with anything to any competitor's product any time soon. Canon will release the 7D II, or the 5D IV, or the 1D XI or whatever the next big thing is when THEY decide it meets the necessary requirements and is capable of maintaining and building up Canon's reputation as the worlds top (and most profitable) photography company. When the next big thing is released, it WILL be a phenomenal product that DOES live up to Canon's reputation as a top-notch photography company, and even if it doesn't have 25 stops of DR, 150 megapixels, 100fps, a 900 image frame buffer, a 200 point AF system that works in both mirror mode and live view/video mode, a 12000ppi 10-bit full-color high DR 60fps EVF and quad memory card slots supporting both CF and CFast2 all for the rock bottom low price of $500....good grief ppl....do you realize what you all sound like when you bring up the "Canon MUST respond!" and "Canon charges too much!" and "I want this, and this, and that, and OH YEAH THIS THING TOO! AND IT HAS TO BE $1500!!!!!!1!1!111111~~! *gimmegimmehgimmeeeenglfheee* *gasp* *GASP* *SUUCKING IN AIR....*"? :

Bleh...it would be a wonderful day if everyone could just be happy with the fact that pretty much every single camera on the market today puts nearly every camera from the film era to complete and total, utter shame when it comes to IQ. Even when it comes to drum-scanned large format film, while you gain in resolution, even that can't really touch the color depth and brilliance of a high resolution digital sensor these days.

your reliance on the Canon brand is astonishing
at the same time I can read from you that Canon is behind in sensor tech and I and many many Canon owners longs for a high resolution, high DR camera now.
a bit contradictory.

What is contradictory is that you are still using Canon cameras. No offense, but isn't it a bit silly to LONG for high-res, high-DR when all you need to do is BUY a D800/A7r?
Hopefully you will answer this question instead of further BS-ing in your next post.

 

[jrista]

You should change your metaphor, it is is Canon who are chasing today .
Sony as one example sold more cameras in South Korea than Canon and Nikon in 2013 and I think the rest of the world will go the same way , from large SLR to smaller but with a FF sensor.

Canon has never chased anyone. They never chased anyone in the past, and they are not chasing anyone now. Canon does what Canon does, for whatever reasons Canon decides to do them. People are constantly complaining about how "Canon hasn't responded to <pickyourpoison>" and "Canon MUST respond to <yaddayadda>"...they constantly complain, because Canon is not in the business of "responding" to anyone for anything...never have, and I don't have reason to suspect they ever will.

Canon builds products for THEIR customers. They build EXCELLENT products for THEIR customers. The fact that Canon builds excellent products for their customers is the reason why they are one of the top imaging companies in the world, and the top photography company in the world. Canon delivers what their customers ASK for, and they make sure that what they deliver lives up to the expectations their customers have, and their own reputation.

Nikon is a very different company. Nikon has practically made a reputation out of doing two things: Responding to competitors products (and responding extremely late, well beyond the time when the ship sailed and the train left the station), and creating hyperniche products like the Df or a 24karat gold plated, lizard-skin gripped $12,000 trophy camera that no one cares about other than as a curiosity on the internet every so often (oh yes, that thing really does exist...which actually blows my mind... ???). Sony doesn't even seem to have a plan, it's just "*BLAMM!* Shotguun and Ho'yeah! Let's see wut sticks! " wild-west product design and production that's burning their funds and burying them in a hole so deep and filled to the top with debt they will never be able to see sunlight again (let alone pay off).


Canon is not, and will not, be responding with anything to any competitor's product any time soon. Canon will release the 7D II, or the 5D IV, or the 1D XI or whatever the next big thing is when THEY decide it meets the necessary requirements and is capable of maintaining and building up Canon's reputation as the worlds top (and most profitable) photography company. When the next big thing is released, it WILL be a phenomenal product that DOES live up to Canon's reputation as a top-notch photography company, and even if it doesn't have 25 stops of DR, 150 megapixels, 100fps, a 900 image frame buffer, a 200 point AF system that works in both mirror mode and live view/video mode, a 12000ppi 10-bit full-color high DR 60fps EVF and quad memory card slots supporting both CF and CFast2 all for the rock bottom low price of $500....good grief ppl....do you realize what you all sound like when you bring up the "Canon MUST respond!" and "Canon charges too much!" and "I want this, and this, and that, and OH YEAH THIS THING TOO! AND IT HAS TO BE $1500!!!!!!1!1!111111~~! *gimmegimmehgimmeeeenglfheee* *gasp* *GASP* *SUUCKING IN AIR....*"? :

Bleh...it would be a wonderful day if everyone could just be happy with the fact that pretty much every single camera on the market today puts nearly every camera from the film era to complete and total, utter shame when it comes to IQ. Even when it comes to drum-scanned large format film, while you gain in resolution, even that can't really touch the color depth and brilliance of a high resolution digital sensor these days.

your reliance on the Canon brand is astonishing
at the same time I can read from you that Canon is behind in sensor tech and I and many many Canon owners longs for a high resolution, high DR camera now.
a bit contradictory.

It's only contradictory if you assume that the sensor is the sole source of image quality, or that Canon's sensor IQ is the single source of their success as a photography company. Clearly, given the plethora of evidence, the fact that Canon's sensor IQ is no longer "the best of the best of the best" has nothing to do with the fact that Canon makes excellent cameras, excellent lenses, has the best customer service department of any camera company, and sells more cameras than any other camera company.

It's also only contradictory if you assume Canon is incapable of progressing and leapfrogging the competition, again. There is only one individual I know of who has persistently pushed the notion that Canon is literally incapable of competing. He was permanently banned from these forums for his constant antagonism...I certainly hope you are not him.

The fact that you insist that Canon specifically provide you with a high megapixel, high DR camera indicates that you seem to rely on Canon more than I do. Unless one of Canon's next camera releases has a notable improvement on DR, I myself will be picking up a Sony A7r for my high DR, high resolution landscape work. If you really, truly, honestly NEED more dynamic range, and you are really, truly, honestly not completely and utterly dependent upon Canon, then you would have stopped complaining about Canon offering a high DR camera a very long time ago...because there are other options out there that already offer what you supposedly need!

 

[traingineer]

You should change your metaphor, it is is Canon who are chasing today .
Sony as one example sold more cameras in South Korea than Canon and Nikon in 2013 and I think the rest of the world will go the same way , from large SLR to smaller but with a FF sensor.

Canon has never chased anyone. They never chased anyone in the past, and they are not chasing anyone now. Canon does what Canon does, for whatever reasons Canon decides to do them. People are constantly complaining about how "Canon hasn't responded to <pickyourpoison>" and "Canon MUST respond to <yaddayadda>"...they constantly complain, because Canon is not in the business of "responding" to anyone for anything...never have, and I don't have reason to suspect they ever will.

Canon builds products for THEIR customers. They build EXCELLENT products for THEIR customers. The fact that Canon builds excellent products for their customers is the reason why they are one of the top imaging companies in the world, and the top photography company in the world. Canon delivers what their customers ASK for, and they make sure that what they deliver lives up to the expectations their customers have, and their own reputation.

Nikon is a very different company. Nikon has practically made a reputation out of doing two things: Responding to competitors products (and responding extremely late, well beyond the time when the ship sailed and the train left the station), and creating hyperniche products like the Df or a 24karat gold plated, lizard-skin gripped $12,000 trophy camera that no one cares about other than as a curiosity on the internet every so often (oh yes, that thing really does exist...which actually blows my mind... ???). Sony doesn't even seem to have a plan, it's just "*BLAMM!* Shotguun and Ho'yeah! Let's see wut sticks! " wild-west product design and production that's burning their funds and burying them in a hole so deep and filled to the top with debt they will never be able to see sunlight again (let alone pay off).


Canon is not, and will not, be responding with anything to any competitor's product any time soon. Canon will release the 7D II, or the 5D IV, or the 1D XI or whatever the next big thing is when THEY decide it meets the necessary requirements and is capable of maintaining and building up Canon's reputation as the worlds top (and most profitable) photography company. When the next big thing is released, it WILL be a phenomenal product that DOES live up to Canon's reputation as a top-notch photography company, and even if it doesn't have 25 stops of DR, 150 megapixels, 100fps, a 900 image frame buffer, a 200 point AF system that works in both mirror mode and live view/video mode, a 12000ppi 10-bit full-color high DR 60fps EVF and quad memory card slots supporting both CF and CFast2 all for the rock bottom low price of $500....good grief ppl....do you realize what you all sound like when you bring up the "Canon MUST respond!" and "Canon charges too much!" and "I want this, and this, and that, and OH YEAH THIS THING TOO! AND IT HAS TO BE $1500!!!!!!1!1!111111~~! *gimmegimmehgimmeeeenglfheee* *gasp* *GASP* *SUUCKING IN AIR....*"? :

Bleh...it would be a wonderful day if everyone could just be happy with the fact that pretty much every single camera on the market today puts nearly every camera from the film era to complete and total, utter shame when it comes to IQ. Even when it comes to drum-scanned large format film, while you gain in resolution, even that can't really touch the color depth and brilliance of a high resolution digital sensor these days.

your reliance on the Canon brand is astonishing
at the same time I can read from you that Canon is behind in sensor tech and I and many many Canon owners longs for a high resolution, high DR camera now.
a bit contradictory.

There is only one individual I know of who has persistently pushed the notion that Canon is literally incapable of competing. He was permanently banned from these forums for his constant antagonism...I certainly hope you are not him.

Would that individual be the person who thinks the D800's sensor beats any other camera in every single way and is the best sensor in history?

 

[sagittariansrock]

You should change your metaphor, it is is Canon who are chasing today .
Sony as one example sold more cameras in South Korea than Canon and Nikon in 2013 and I think the rest of the world will go the same way , from large SLR to smaller but with a FF sensor.

Canon has never chased anyone. They never chased anyone in the past, and they are not chasing anyone now. Canon does what Canon does, for whatever reasons Canon decides to do them. People are constantly complaining about how "Canon hasn't responded to <pickyourpoison>" and "Canon MUST respond to <yaddayadda>"...they constantly complain, because Canon is not in the business of "responding" to anyone for anything...never have, and I don't have reason to suspect they ever will.

Canon builds products for THEIR customers. They build EXCELLENT products for THEIR customers. The fact that Canon builds excellent products for their customers is the reason why they are one of the top imaging companies in the world, and the top photography company in the world. Canon delivers what their customers ASK for, and they make sure that what they deliver lives up to the expectations their customers have, and their own reputation.

Nikon is a very different company. Nikon has practically made a reputation out of doing two things: Responding to competitors products (and responding extremely late, well beyond the time when the ship sailed and the train left the station), and creating hyperniche products like the Df or a 24karat gold plated, lizard-skin gripped $12,000 trophy camera that no one cares about other than as a curiosity on the internet every so often (oh yes, that thing really does exist...which actually blows my mind... ???). Sony doesn't even seem to have a plan, it's just "*BLAMM!* Shotguun and Ho'yeah! Let's see wut sticks! " wild-west product design and production that's burning their funds and burying them in a hole so deep and filled to the top with debt they will never be able to see sunlight again (let alone pay off).


Canon is not, and will not, be responding with anything to any competitor's product any time soon. Canon will release the 7D II, or the 5D IV, or the 1D XI or whatever the next big thing is when THEY decide it meets the necessary requirements and is capable of maintaining and building up Canon's reputation as the worlds top (and most profitable) photography company. When the next big thing is released, it WILL be a phenomenal product that DOES live up to Canon's reputation as a top-notch photography company, and even if it doesn't have 25 stops of DR, 150 megapixels, 100fps, a 900 image frame buffer, a 200 point AF system that works in both mirror mode and live view/video mode, a 12000ppi 10-bit full-color high DR 60fps EVF and quad memory card slots supporting both CF and CFast2 all for the rock bottom low price of $500....good grief ppl....do you realize what you all sound like when you bring up the "Canon MUST respond!" and "Canon charges too much!" and "I want this, and this, and that, and OH YEAH THIS THING TOO! AND IT HAS TO BE $1500!!!!!!1!1!111111~~! *gimmegimmehgimmeeeenglfheee* *gasp* *GASP* *SUUCKING IN AIR....*"? :

Bleh...it would be a wonderful day if everyone could just be happy with the fact that pretty much every single camera on the market today puts nearly every camera from the film era to complete and total, utter shame when it comes to IQ. Even when it comes to drum-scanned large format film, while you gain in resolution, even that can't really touch the color depth and brilliance of a high resolution digital sensor these days.

your reliance on the Canon brand is astonishing
at the same time I can read from you that Canon is behind in sensor tech and I and many many Canon owners longs for a high resolution, high DR camera now.
a bit contradictory.

There is only one individual I know of who has persistently pushed the notion that Canon is literally incapable of competing. He was permanently banned from these forums for his constant antagonism...I certainly hope you are not him.

Would that individual be the person who thinks the D800's sensor beats any other camera in every single way and is the best sensor in history?

AFAIK, MR's posts were longer and more passionate. I think this is a new entity.

 

[traingineer]

AFAIK, MR's posts were longer and more passionate. I think this is a new entity.

Well I was thinking of Risendal but I have met some people who really do think the sensor is better than any lens/body out there.

 

[AvTvM]

As far as i am concerned, Canon needs to respond with a full frame mirrorless line (cameras + native lenses) very soon.
To be precise, before sony (or fuji) come up with an A8 or A8R that improves on the 3 things the A7/R are still lacking in (af performance including tracking, battery charge 500 shots+ and totally silent and vibration-free electronic shutter).

I would prefer that camera to have a canon UI, but if canon does not make one in time, I'll definitely and happily buy another brand. And no, I will not buy another chunky mirror-slapper.

And yes, i count for one camera, but i am not the only one.

 

[sdsr]

To answer someone else's point - maybe pixel-peeping could be a vanity exercise, but when I'm impressed technically by what I see when pixel-peeping I'm impressed not by me but by whoever made the equipment in question.

Don't take it personally, we are all vain in some way or the other, and often subconsciously. And we are as often vain about what we own than about what we have accomplished.
In any case, that didn't answer my point- I was hoping you can share some comparison between the IQ of A7r vs whichever Canon dSLR you use. Not that I am doubting you, I am just curious. I have heard very good things about the A7r and just recently almost coerced a friend into buying it (he is a Sony person- I did try forcing 6D down his throat first, unsuccessfully).

[What? Bonafide is not in the dictionary? ]

Well, I'm very fond of my 6D (not sure I'm vain about it, though; I mean, how could one be with all the 1DX owners around here...) and don't feel inclined to part with it (and as you or someone else said, I rather doubt I would ever regard the Sony as more than an adjunct fancy toy, at least for now). I probably will post some photos I've taken with my A7r (there's a thread elsewhere where others have occasionally done so) with a Canon lens or two attached, but so far, at least, I've not done any direct comparisons of the sort that a camera tester/reviewer would do; the closest I've come is to walk around Longwood Gardens with 5DIII + 100L and repeat the process with Sony A7r + 100L relying solely on focus peaking (as an experiment), at times trying to reproduce a photo I took earlier; but of course that doesn't count if you want a direct comparison because I wasn't in exactly the same place, the light had changed, etc. If you don't care about direct comparisons, however....

(I'll also repeat what I've said before, that I would really prefer it if Canon came out with something similar, but with better ergonomics - which wouldn't be surprising - and IBIS - which would. I certainly don't feel any special fondness for Sony (though if Canon does come through I would seek out an adapter for the Sony/Zeiss 55mm 1.8...).

 

[sdsr]

Perhaps I am a bit dense, but I guess I don't understand this company loyalty business. People are "rooting" for Canon, or dismayed with Canon for not "competing" adequately against their opponents. This is not sports! If you aren't happy with their products, get the product you are happy with. Yes, for professionals or those with a lot of money invested in lenses, this may not be easy. But used lenses sell for a pretty good percentage of their original cost on Ebay and going from one system to another is not a total loss of money. If Canon does not adequately produce products you are satisfied with, move elsewhere. Why not? As I mentioned in my previous posts (although most would probably disagree), I buy a camera to last for many years as the incremental improvemetns are considerably minor, so the system I choose will not cost me in reinvestment every 2 or 3 years.

In my time I have owned Olympus and Canon cameras. When my Original Rebel finally bit the dust, I bought a 6D. When I realized that the full frame 6D did not meet my needs for more zoom and less DOF for macro and shooting flowers (and was a bit heavy for casual walk-around use), I bought an Olympus EM-1. Neither camera does everything I wanted, but together they do. I was able to sell my Canon Macro lens as well as some other APS-C lenses that I no longer need and that covered a considerable percentage of the Olympus lenses I bought. If Nikon or Sony had made a camera that better suited my needs I would have bought that. The reality (at least from my perspective) is that all of these companies make excellent cameras. As someone else mentioned, compared to film cameras, all of them are heads and shoulders better. So, why does it matter so much what Canon does?

I think you're exactly right, including the sport analogy (I mentioned a while back in the some Sigma 50mm 1.4 thread, all this talk of what Canon "needs" to do reminds me of fans who need their team to have the best of everything). Like you, I enjoy owning both Canon and Olympus M43, and recently added a Sony. In some ways it's a silly extravagance, I suppose, and for many/most it's probably not feasible or sensible or even interesting, but I rather enjoy trying out new stuff, and as you say they're all good in different ways (and much of the time the differences in image quality are pretty trivial). Promiscuity, in this context at any rate, is fun; and if divorce is warranted, well, it's easier than many think (when I switched from Pentax to Canon I lost on the body but not on the lenses, and, as I learned quite a lot from using the body that wasn't really a loss anyway).

 

[sdsr]

Although I would love to have seen Canon put focus peaking in as standard on the EOS M I think their reasoning behind not including it is simply because the vast majority of people using it would not be using manual focus lenses with it. It's very much a consumer level camera aimed at the amateur. Most of whom will just use the kit lens. To be fair for static subjects you can easily just tap the zoom button to help focus. Focus peaking is more for useful for video. I have ML installed and after the initial "wow - focus peaking!!" moment I haven't really needed it, and I have two FD leneses that I regularly use with it. For me the Magic Zoom function is better especially in bright sunlight.

Aside from all that, don't you think focus peaking can be rather tricky to master? In my experience it works most reliably on fairly simple subjects that are fairly close; but if you have, say, a building 100 yards away with a large tree close in front of it, and want to focus on one rather than the other, good luck - all of it will likely get focus peaking and you may get an unpleasant surprise when you examine the result. Magnification is more reliable (though it's nice if they're combined - a sort of belt-and-suspenders combination that works rather well on the Sony A7s, at least (perhaps others too, I can't remember).

 

[Loswr]

And yes, i count for one camera, but i am not the only one.

Certainly not, but the number of people who share that viewpoint is so small relative to Canon's market share that it becomes insignificant.

I think you'd best hope Sony decides to make an a8R with the features you want, before they decide to abandon yet another market segment.

 

[sagittariansrock]

I probably will post some photos I've taken with my A7r (there's a thread elsewhere where others have occasionally done so) with a Canon lens or two attached, but so far, at least, I've not done any direct comparisons of the sort that a camera tester/reviewer would do; the closest I've come is to walk around Longwood Gardens with 5DIII + 100L and repeat the process with Sony A7r + 100L relying solely on focus peaking (as an experiment), at times trying to reproduce a photo I took earlier; but of course that doesn't count if you want a direct comparison because I wasn't in exactly the same place, the light had changed, etc. If you don't care about direct comparisons, however....

Direct comparisons have their place, but personal observations are also valuable to me, because that is what makes a person keep or sell an equipment.
Looking forward to the pictures. Thanks.

 

[Hillsilly]

Sony's problem is that cameras are a fairly mature product. Apart from some minor tinkering, there isn't a lot that is going to make a large segment of target purchasers (ie those who will likely buy multiple lenses) sit up and pay attention. This new Alpha 77ii is a classic example. It looks like a nice camera and seems well specc'd. But I struggle to see how it differs noticeably from, say, a 70D. Given that most serious camera buyers have an entrenched "Canon (or Nikon) is best" attitude, the new 77ii won't win a lot of converts. In many ways, its no different to the Pentax K3 - another nice camera which few people seem to care about.

Although, if you were starting afresh, it might be a different story. The Sony "G" and "Zeiss" lenses are very nice and the lenses can be used (with an adapter) on the a7/a7r. And almost everyone seems to like the image quality from Sony sensors. I can see why people would be interested in buying into the Sony system. But if you had the budget for their top of the line lenses, would you really be buying a 77ii? I doubt it.

 

[Sporgon]

It is obvious, for anyone who like real, natural, virtually-analog capture , we need a high resolution DR camera

Therefore it is obvius for anyone who wants rugged data that doesn't depend on luck of alignment of pixels and subject transients, and survives geometrical processing like CA, distortion, and perspective correction, rotation, and arbitrary resampling in practically lossless manner.

For someone who doesn't care about imaging quality, I guess it can be sufficient and they can use low resolution cameras with inferior DR.

Halla ! Biggie