Canon not going global shutter with next round of EOS R camera bodies

[DhlcadR6]

It's still mind-blowing Nikon lost that much market share.

It's not a surprise. Nikon was very weak on DSLR video that pushed/gifted those users to Canon EF and eventually Sony E. And I remember back in the days Nikon has much more spec orientated users, so Sony's "Superior" specsheet suits their taste.

Nikon's failure in 1-series failed to capture casual consumers like m43, Sony NEX(E) and EF-M. So other than Phtography enthusiasts, Nikon is not well-known in the consumer market anymore. Combined with their lack of marketing during 2010s~pre-2022. It's no doubt they lose the market to Sony.

 

[justaCanonuser]

It's still mind-blowing Nikon lost that much market share.

Maybe Nikon's lousy quality drove disappointed users to other brands. My wife and I shoot wildlife since many years side by side, in particular in rugged environments, with comparable gears. I only once needed service in the past 15 yrs, the thumb wheel of my 7D (Mk I) had to be repaired. My wife's D300 needed a mirror plate replacement after 80.000 shutter actuations only - my old 7D works until today with well up to 200.000 actuations, a friend uses it still. Shooting once a misty landscape in really heavy rain, some buttons of my wife's D300S suddenly died and never recovered, my much wetter 5D3 (I didn't hide it all the time under a plastic sheet) worked flawlessly. Her light 300mm f/4 (non-VR) Nikkor tele needed a new AF drive twice - my EF 300mm f/4 L IS USM, which is technically more complex, never had any issue. Even her Sigma 500mm f/4.5 lens from 2012 needed an AF drive exchange already. I am sure those issues are caused by the AF control implemented in Nikon DSLRs, you hear always a harsh rattle because those cameras tend to pump in particular all tele lenses (AFMA doesn't improve it). My nearly 30 years old EF 500mm f/4.5 L USM, a battered club of a lens (but perfect optics, no fungus yet), still works flawlessly with its original USM drive - and it survived some severe crashs out in the wilderness.

To sum up: our quality issues with Nikon gear can't be just bad luck. I think it mirrors the cheaper and less well-controlled production environment in Thailand - my wife's D500 is Made in Thailand, my R7 Made in Japan. So I am happy to pay a plus for Canon prosumer gear and get Japanese quality. I hope that those notorious cost control guys who don't care about quality and the longterm future of a company never get hands on Canon's management.

 

[E_ATL]

When you write an article, shouldn't you define the article subject? Why is it assumed that everyone knows what a global shutter is, or why we want it?

 

[Quack]

It's still mind-blowing Nikon lost that much market share.

Not mind blowing at all. Sony had (and still has) a wonderful propaganda machine in place with their dedicated fanbase, as well as the number of YouTubers that clearly promote their cameras. Considering that the main source of information and reviews for anyone buying a camera today is the internet, the company that best controls the influencers will gain market share. Propaganda works.

For those that argue that Nikon lost market share due to poor quality, that may be so, but considering that Nikon lost their market share to Sony makes me doubtful. Sony, by personal experience and from years of monitoring the internet, has the worst quality cameras, in my opinion. Shutters failing enough so that a Class action law suit was started in NY State a few years ago. Constant reports about the dust on sensor issues with their cameras from the beginning and continuing at least into 2021. Their early models has the worst weather sealing of all the brands. Even today, cheaper glass in the EVF has led many reviewers to say that both Nikon and Canon EVFs are clearer and brighter despite having lower resolution. But more impressive specs matter because the initial reviews by influencers usually comes down to a spec by spec comparison to the other brands. Potential buyers will equate higher resolution EVF with better EVF, even if it is not the case.

 

[EricN]

I know the reasons it happened. The part I have trouble with is how nobody high enough to change Nikons stratagy in an effective way in these areas did so. Yes, I know other company have lost more market share in a shorter time period.

 

[snapshot]

I know the reasons it happened. The part I have trouble with is how nobody high enough to change Nikons stratagy in an effective way in these areas did so. Yes, I know other company have lost more market share in a shorter time period.

i am sure the reasons were not so clear to management. the major effect is 'consumer' photography went to the cell phone. there used to be all kinds of cheap cameras from pocket size built in zoom cameras to aps-c dslrs. both nikon and canon had a ton of them and the market share associated with all that is gone. also nikon relied on sonly sensors and when they brought out a new camera they seemed to be in limited supply. market experimentation is hard and companies don't want to compete with themselves. is mirrorless about being smaller/lighter? anybody try the nikon 1 v1? how was it compared to m43? canon scored big with home grown sensors featuring DP autofocus. wonder what would have happened if all they had was contrast based auto-focus.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I know the reasons it happened. The part I have trouble with is how nobody high enough to change Nikons stratagy in an effective way in these areas did so. Yes, I know other company have lost more market share in a shorter time period.

Nikon basically screwed up the Nikon 1 and never recovered.
They were late on mirrorless and Never caught up to Canon on DSLR sales.

 

[EricN]

i am sure the reasons were not so clear to management. the major effect is 'consumer' photography went to the cell phone. there used to be all kinds of cheap cameras from pocket size built in zoom cameras to aps-c dslrs. both nikon and canon had a ton of them and the market share associated with all that is gone. also nikon relied on sonly sensors and when they brought out a new camera they seemed to be in limited supply. market experimentation is hard and companies don't want to compete with themselves. is mirrorless about being smaller/lighter? anybody try the nikon 1 v1? how was it compared to m43? canon scored big with home grown sensors featuring DP autofocus. wonder what would have happened if all they had was contrast based auto-focus.

That's true, "hindsight is 20/20."

 

[EOS 4 Life]

That's true, "hindsight is 20/20."

Not really.
We remember things wrong all of the time.

 

[EricN]

Not really.
We remember things wrong all of the time.

I meant it as, "when you look at the past, it's easy to see mistakes clearly."

Agreeing with what you said, I often remember images flipped left to right, or with some stronger feature than was actually present.

 

[koenkooi]

Not really.
We remember things wrong all of the time.

Leaning into the saying: 20/20 is not perfect vision, it’s the average. 20/10 would be actually impressive

 

[P-visie]

Leaning into the saying: 20/20 is not perfect vision, it’s the average. 20/10 would be actually impressive

That’s how Sonyfanboys read the Sony specsheets

 

[Nathan Phillips]

I don't know on what basis you drew the conclusion that Sony holds the crown in terms of DR and AF, but you can see very nicely in the graph from www.photonstophotos.net that you are wrong.
Unfortunately, I can't show you the chart for AF operation, but even if it existed, it would look very similar.

View attachment 212907

From my experience and use case, Sony has sticker AF and better DR. I’m a canon user and still think this. Staying canon too… and I’m mostly referring to the R5 compared to Sony. The R5 does not have good DR and at low light the AF is not good. This is from experience

 

[neuroanatomist]

From my experience and use case, Sony has sticker AF and better DR. I’m a canon user and still think this. Staying canon too… and I’m mostly referring to the R5 compared to Sony. The R5 does not have good DR and at low light the AF is not good. This is from experience

Can't argue with your experience, but experience is subjective and data are objective. The data show that at best a minor difference between the DR of the R5 and the Sony cameras with the highest DR, and if there's a slight edge it goes to Canon.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

R5 does not have good DR

As a happy R5 owner I am baffled by this statement unless you mean video.

 

[Del Paso]

That’s how Sonyfanboys read the Sony specsheets

What? They can read?

 

[neuroanatomist]

What? They can read?

 

[Nathan Phillips]

As a happy R5 owner I am baffled by this statement unless you mean video.

Photo is great. Definitely referring to video

 

[Michael Clark]

Nobody who knows me could convincingly claim I'm not a gear-head. I find myself talking enthusiastically about the pros and cons of gear as much as the actual photography at times. (Maybe other CR members can relate, suddenly realizing that whoever we're talking to has started to zone out. )

In fact, I don't really care what is inside a camera, but what comes out of the camera. It's all about image quality, performance, durability, reliability, ergonomics, price, and service when I decide what to buy.

Which has made it easy to stick with Canon.

(When it comes to lighting, I'm a Godox man--mostly. Sorry, Paul Buff, but you just couldn't let go of Balcar mounts and other problematic ergonomics.)

I doubt Paul cares at this point. He died in 2015.

 

[Michael Clark]

The target market seems to be pro sports and journalism.
Those disciplines do not tend to denoise.
Denoising is typical for wildlife but the a1 is more suitable for them.
Photographers of amateur sports would do with cheaper cameras.
Canon already has them covered with the R5, R6, R7, R8, and R10.

I don't think there's a significant real target market for it at all.

With the introduction of the α1, the α9 series has become largely irrelevant. Most real sports shooters (that is, those making a full-time living at it) are using the α1 if they're shooting Sony. The vast majority still shoot Canon with a small fraction shooting Nikon.

It seems to me the α9 Mark III is a HALO camera that no one will buy but wannabees will brag about to make them feel better about their α6400 that hasn't been updated in over four years.