Canon will reclaim their full-frame megapixel crown [CR1]

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
24,647
2,167
Canon removed a commonly present capacity from a camera. Few people will care about that. But, the fact that they removed that capacity reflects a disdain for its customers. Canon likely spent more money removing the capacity than they would have spent had they left it intact. That was an insult to its customers. It showed a scorn for those customers who needed or wanted that capacity.
Has Canon publicly stated their reasoning for dropping 1080p24 from the RP? Have you had personal communications with Canon execs where they’ve explained their rationale? I suspect the answer to both is no. Thus, your ascription of motivation to them is purely your speculative opinion. As if Canon execs sit in a boardroom formulating strategies to alienate their customers.


Far more likely, it’s a simple business decision. They put in 2160p24, no need for p24 at lower resolutions. Or, if people want 1080p24, they’ll have to buy the R to get it, meaning more revenue for Canon (unless they buy a competitor’s camera, but if product differentiation was their intent, I’m sure they ran projections based on their data to estimate net effect on profit of that decision).

The point is, there are logical business reasons for the decision. You aren’t happy with their decision, so you personally feel insulted and scorned. The thing is, no one else...and certainly not Canon, gives a damn how you feel. Nor do you get to determine how others should feel about it.

If you feel scorned, by all means unleash the full fury that Hell hath no fury like on them, and don’t buy any more Canon products. That’ll show ‘em. :rolleyes:

Ps. The ascription of any ‘emotional’ motivation – negative or positive – to a large corporation’s view of their customers is naïve at best. Canon didn’t omit 1080p24 from the RP out of disdain for customers any more than they included focus stacking in the RP because they love their customers with all their little corporate hearts. But then again, feeling personally insulted by a corporate business decision fits with the definition of puerile. Like when your mommy took your favorite toy away and you cried.
 

Drcampbellicu

EOS 90D
Jul 31, 2019
127
90
I understand your position

I wish some of these discussions wouldn’t escalate but it’s a free country.

I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these intense debates turn more casual people off from posting. It might reinforce a troll vs fanboy image for websites like this. I want to assume that there’s a middle ground but am not sure what that is

I'll decide, and I'll live with the consequences.
 

sdz

EOS RP
Sep 13, 2016
253
193
Pittsburgh, PA
I understand your position

I wish some of these discussions wouldn’t escalate but it’s a free country.

I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these intense debates turn more casual people off from posting. It might reinforce a troll vs fanboy image for websites like this. I want to assume that there’s a middle ground but am not sure what that is
It's the internet. Apart from banning people, there is not much that can be done about posters who want to score points over posters. I use a tit for tat strategy. It does not always work.
 

sdz

EOS RP
Sep 13, 2016
253
193
Pittsburgh, PA
Has Canon publicly stated their reasoning for dropping 1080p24 from the RP? Have you had personal communications with Canon execs where they’ve explained their rationale? I suspect the answer to both is no. Thus, your ascription of motivation to them is purely your speculative opinion. As if Canon execs sit in a boardroom formulating strategies to alienate their customers.


Far more likely, it’s a simple business decision. They put in 2160p24, no need for p24 at lower resolutions. Or, if people want 1080p24, they’ll have to buy the R to get it, meaning more revenue for Canon (unless they buy a competitor’s camera, but if product differentiation was their intent, I’m sure they ran projections based on their data to estimate net effect on profit of that decision).

The point is, there are logical business reasons for the decision. You aren’t happy with their decision, so you personally feel insulted and scorned. The thing is, no one else...and certainly not Canon, gives a damn how you feel. Nor do you get to determine how others should feel about it.

If you feel scorned, by all means unleash the full fury that Hell hath no fury like on them, and don’t buy any more Canon products. That’ll show ‘em. :rolleyes:

Ps. The ascription of any ‘emotional’ motivation – negative or positive – to a large corporation’s view of their customers is naïve at best. Canon didn’t omit 1080p24 from the RP out of disdain for customers any more than they included focus stacking in the RP because they love their customers with all their little corporate hearts. But then again, feeling personally insulted by a corporate business decision fits with the definition of puerile. Like when your mommy took your favorite toy away and you cried.
Still lost in space, I see.

There was no logical, business rational reason for the decision.

I did not ascribe an emotional motive to Canon.

I did not feel personally insulted by Canon's decision. I was annoyed by the company's thoughtlessness.

I'll end this conversation now. You are neither interesting, witty nor intelligent. I gain nothing from this discussion. So, have the last word.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,708
2,696
67
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
I understand your position

I wish some of these discussions wouldn’t escalate but it’s a free country.

I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these intense debates turn more casual people off from posting. It might reinforce a troll vs fanboy image for websites like this. I want to assume that there’s a middle ground but am not sure what that is
Well "tit for tat" is a bad strategy.

First, most often what happens is that people post using their id rather than their ego. They don't think through what they are saying and make assertions and demands that are self-centered, unrealistic and frequently not fact-based.

Long time participants call them out. Some of the long time participants have a tendency to seek out the weak and attack, but most simply are frustrated by hearing the same faulty and self-centered arguments over and over again.

Then, too often, in the next round, the original poster, instead of acknowledging their mistakes, decides to double down. That seldom works out well. Often the original comment was simply wrong and doubling down won't make it right. What does happen then is that others tend to join in, because the argument has now gotten absurd.

I follow a simple strategy that has worked for nearly a decade on this forum.

First, I try to think before I type. Second, I try to examine my own positions to see if I have some facts to back up what I am saying and make sure I express my opinions as just that, opinions. I still get flamed by people, but when that happens, I stand my ground using logic not insults.

At the same time, if someone makes a valid point that refutes my original premise, I find no dishonor in admitting that I was wrong. In fact, I try to make it a habit to acknowledge my own errors, if I have indeed made a mistake. I find it amazing that so few people on the internet ever seem to be able to admit they were wrong. People should try it once and awhile, it's amazingly effective.

Even the biggest attack dogs on this forum will back off if you engage them with logic and facts and ratchet down the rhetoric. But, trading insults or "tit for tat" never works and generally makes you look foolish to all the forum participants.

No one ever "wins" an argument on the internet. At the end of the day, all you can do is be satisfied that you have expressed your viewpoint in a rational way.

EDIT: re-reading this I realized I may be coming off as a bit pompous or preachy. Not my intent. And, I must admit that I am guilty sometimes of posting an insulting response when I get frustrated by the never-ending repetition of the talking points.
 
Last edited:

CanonFanBoy

Real men single speed.
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,179
3,352
Irving, Texas
Still lost in space, I see.

There was no logical, business rational reason for the decision.

I did not ascribe an emotional motive to Canon.

I did not feel personally insulted by Canon's decision. I was annoyed by the company's thoughtlessness.

I'll end this conversation now. You are neither interesting, witty nor intelligent. I gain nothing from this discussion. So, have the last word.
I'm still insulted there is no longer a place for a film cartridge in modern Canons. Pure thoughtlessness. o_O
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
24,647
2,167
There was no logical, business rational reason for the decision.
I provided two, and there are others. If you can’t comprehend them, that’s your failing.

I did not ascribe an emotional motive to Canon.
Let’s revisit:
But, the fact that they removed that capacity reflects a disdain for its customers. Canon likely spent more money removing the capacity than they would have spent had they left it intact. That was an insult to its customers. It showed a scorn for those customers who needed or wanted that capacity.
You indicated Canon has a disdain for its customers and treated them with scorn. If you don’t believe that’s ascribing an emotional motivation to them, your metacognition is as poorly developed as your logical thinking.


I did not feel personally insulted by Canon's decision. I was annoyed by the company's thoughtlessness.
Clearly you did. You also stated to another member:
You should have felt insulted. That you were unaware of or unconcerned about this insult does not alter the fact that it was an insult.
Or are you actually claiming that you didn’t feel insulted that 1080p24 was removed but someone who had stated they don’t care about it should feel insulted? That’s asinine. But from you, asinine is no surprise.

I'll end this conversation now. You are neither interesting, witty nor intelligent. I gain nothing from this discussion. So, have the last word.
You’ve been the one continuing it. You were the one who initiated the insults (although your offensive posts were deleted). You have displayed a high level of rudeness coupled with a lack comprehension of facts and an inability to think logically. It’s good that you’re choosing to run away from a conversation to which you’ve added nothing but rancor and inanity.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,063
341
Vancouver, BC
Just realistic. Sorry, you don’t get to decide what is insulting, for anyone except yourself. Grow up.
A common theme amongst many anti-Canon trolls is the disbelief of the lack of outrage of others, especially when it comes to feature segmentation. In their minds, if Canon can do something, it is insulting if that isn't available in everything that us midrange and up (ie anything they would buy).
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
24,647
2,167
So all the agony over 24p is really about a camera that has it at higher resolutions, but not lower ones?

Really?
Apparently so. Apparently we should all feel insulted that Canon took away p24 from 1080 but provided 2160p24 instead. Or because they took away VGA output. Or because the EOS RP doesn’t make coffee. Words like pathetic and ridiculous come to mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
24,647
2,167
A common theme amongst many anti-Canon trolls is the disbelief of the lack of outrage of others, especially when it comes to feature segmentation. In their minds, if Canon can do something, it is insulting if that isn't available in everything that us midrange and up (ie anything they would buy).
I think it’s more basic than that. Some people simply believe that because they want something or feel a certain way, everyone else must want it or feel the same. It’s reflective of a very early stage of child emotional development.
 

sdz

EOS RP
Sep 13, 2016
253
193
Pittsburgh, PA
Well "tit for tat" is a bad strategy.

First, most often what happens is that people post using their id rather than their ego. They don't think through what they are saying and make assertions and demands that are self-centered, unrealistic and frequently not fact-based.

Long time participants call them out. Some of the long time participants have a tendency to seek out the weak and attack, but most simply are frustrated by hearing the same faulty and self-centered arguments over and over again.

Then, too often, in the next round, the original poster, instead of acknowledging their mistakes, decides to double down. That seldom works out well. Often the original comment was simply wrong and doubling down won't make it right. What does happen then is that others tend to join in, because the argument has now gotten absurd.

I follow a simple strategy that has worked for nearly a decade on this forum.

First, I try to think before I type. Second, I try to examine my own positions to see if I have some facts to back up what I am saying and make sure I express my opinions as just that, opinions. I still get flamed by people, but when that happens, I stand my ground using logic not insults.

At the same time, if someone makes a valid point that refutes my original premise, I find no dishonor in admitting that I was wrong. In fact, I try to make it a habit to acknowledge my own errors, if I have indeed made a mistake. I find it amazing that so few people on the internet ever seem to be able to admit they were wrong. People should try it once and awhile, it's amazingly effective.

Even the biggest attack dogs on this forum will back off if you engage them with logic and facts and ratchet down the rhetoric. But, trading insults or "tit for tat" never works and generally makes you look foolish to all the forum participants.

No one ever "wins" an argument on the internet. At the end of the day, all you can do is be satisfied that you have expressed your viewpoint in a rational way.
Tit for tat is a superb strategy, or so say the game theorists who study this matter.

I am thoughtful to a fault. And I feel no need to admit that I was wrong because, well, I was not wrong.

No one ever "wins" an argument on the internet. At the end of the day, all you can do is be satisfied that you have expressed your viewpoint in a rational way.
This. By the way, the tit for tat strategy is not meant to win arguments. It is meant to end conflict. I use it because I see more than my share of Clavins who want to set me straight about something. I have nothing to gain by debating fools.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,708
2,696
67
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
Tit for tat is a superb strategy, or so say the game theorists who study this matter.

I am thoughtful to a fault. And I feel no need to admit that I was wrong because, well, I was not wrong.



This. By the way, the tit for tat strategy is not meant to win arguments. It is meant to end conflict. I use it because I see more than my share of Clavins who want to set me straight about something. I have nothing to gain by debating fools.
Yeah, it seems to be working out really well for you.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Michael Clark

sdz

EOS RP
Sep 13, 2016
253
193
Pittsburgh, PA
A common theme amongst many anti-Canon trolls is the disbelief of the lack of outrage of others, especially when it comes to feature segmentation. In their minds, if Canon can do something, it is insulting if that isn't available in everything that us midrange and up (ie anything they would buy).
Your claim would make sense with respect to what I wrote if I had demanded outrageous performance capabilities in a modestly priced camera. I criticized Canon for dropping support for a capacity that one would expect to find for no discernable reason.
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
Apparently so. Apparently we should all feel insulted that Canon took away p24 from 1080 but provided 2160p24 instead. Or because they took away VGA output. Or because the EOS RP doesn’t make coffee. Words like pathetic and ridiculous come to mind.
I’m still hurt that they took away the 22MP sensor from 5Diii when releasing the 5Div.
 

unfocused

EOS-1D X Mark III
Jul 20, 2010
5,708
2,696
67
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
...My biggest concern is that I realize that my current L lenses are about to be coal mines: ancient history. Has anyone started a serious conversation about this?...
There were a number of conversations about this, both before and shortly after the R mount was announced. I think a lot of people are less concerned about this now that the adapters have been released and we've found they work remarkably well.

For me, I will continue to buy EF lenses so long as I am using both DSLRs and mirrorless. If I ever switch to exclusively mirrorless I will then gradually replace EF lenses with R lenses, but for the foreseeable future, I see no real advantage to R lenses, unless they produce something that I really want and can't get as an EF lens.

I did purchase the R 24-105 f4 zoom (actually, there was a very good deal with the combination) and I wanted to try the native lens. Also, since this is my most used lens, I felt it would be more convenient to have it in an R mount for the R and keep the EF mount for my DSLRs. But, I'm not itching to buy any other R mount lenses and will simply wait and see what Canon releases in the next few years as far as both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras before making any major lens purchases.

I continue to think that Canon made a mistake in not producing an adapter to allow R lenses to be used on DSLRs. My personal opinion is that R mount lenses won't really take off so long as people are using both mirrorless and DSLRs side by side and an R adapter for DSLRs would have allowed them to further promote the interchangeability of the system. However I'm not Canon.

Bottom line: I don't think anyone should worry about their EF lenses suddenly going obsolete. Perhaps in the future, Canon will introduce some features that take advantage of the new R mount that can't be done with an EF lens, but even in that case, it's not going to suddenly make the EF lenses quit working, or work less well than they do today.