Does Canon really deserve this?

[PVS]

It's like grafitti. You see them on the wall not because everybody's into grafitti but because very few are. Sometimes they're ugly, stupid and pointless while ither times they can be thought provoking raising questions on certain issues.
They don't represent the opinion of majority and can be offending but in other times can raise awareness on certain issues.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

I keep coming back to a certain point as it seems to be the touchstone for any company that tries to sell into the consumer marketplace.....

You made some very good and interesting points in your post.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Now for a dose of reality...

Canon has sold over 100 million EOS cameras and something like 130 million lenses.

Of that number, it was estimated that 120 million lenses were sold in kits with 96 million bodies.... in other words, 4 percent of the bodies sold are bought as lone items, and only 10 million lenses are sold outside of kits.
...

So which customer base will Canon really be working to please/increase? It is probably not the x-Thousands of customers who may buy a 1D(follow on). It will be the millions of people buying the entry level and intermediate products.

If a potential customer is considering spending mega-bucks on a 1D something and a few L lenses, they are most likely already commited to Canon and will probably not chose another manufacturer.

However, someone buying either their first camera or their first "serious" camera may indeed chose another manufactuer.

Camera systems are a lot like the drug trade... You want to get your customer hooked (investing in glass) in your product to the extent that switching systems is economically unattractive. You do that by targeting the new customers.

Some very sobering statistics that serve to remind us that the mass consumer market and buyers of Canon cameras is completely unlike the majority of the posters here that have at least one, if not two, non-kit lenses.

 

[Hillsilly]

For published fashion work I can see Fuji-blad will remain _the_ "go-to" system.

Interesting that you mention Fuji-blads - There is a very high chance that a Fuji medium format announcement is imminent. Supposedly styled similar to an X-Pro 1 and using the ubiquitous Sony 50mp sensor, it will go head to head with a Sony/Mamiya medium format, rangefinder styled camera. If rumors come to fruition, these two guys are going to rule landscape and travel photography.

 

[Loswr]

The thing is that Canon is now failing to capture people "stepping up" into real cameras. Thus it may be that the wave of Canon owners has surged and is now a swell moving towards shore.

It may be, or not. It's not like Canon is ignoring the MILC segment entirely. Granted, the M was basically a flop outside of Asia (at least until the fire sale), but the MILC market as a whole is fairly weak outside of Asia, and that was even more true when the M launched.

As for the EOS M in Asia, don't forget it was the #2 best seller in Japan, beating out models from established brands like Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji and only a few percentage points shy of Sony's top seller. Canon's Dual Pixel AF is tailor-made for MILC applications.

So before concluding that Canon has missed the wave, consider that on a global scale, the mirrorless wave is still quite small. Inexperienced surfers may catch it, but it's not yet going to lift profits high enough. Once that wave gets big enough, it may well be that the Big Kahuna will ride it to the top, perhaps knocking a few little surfers off their boards on the way up.

 

[ChristopherMarkPerez]

I agree. I think there's a shake-up taking place in the imaging marketplace and it's something creative people can take advantage of.

For me, if there was a camera who's size and weight was between the A6000 and A7r, had the A6000's RF-style EVF, and packed a 50mpixel FF or MF sensor it'd be "all over and turn out the lights, Gracie." I'm guessing that Sony will be the one to do it, too. Fuji won't be far behind at all, and, in fact, might take the lead on this.

May we live in interesting times.

For published fashion work I can see Fuji-blad will remain _the_ "go-to" system.

Interesting that you mention Fuji-blads - There is a very high chance that a Fuji medium format announcement is imminent. Supposedly styled similar to an X-Pro 1 and using the ubiquitous Sony 50mp sensor, it will go head to head with a Sony/Mamiya medium format, rangefinder styled camera. If rumors come to fruition, these two guys are going to rule landscape and travel photography.

 

[ChristopherMarkPerez]

Ah... but we're not dealing with corporate managers and business planners from Silicon Valley. We're dealing with large, conservative Japanese corporations. There's a difference. Long-term planning and deep deep investment over "start-up", "let's see of this flies" business thinking.

Sony is investing heavily in sensor processes and driving the business hard to make sure their parts are the preferred pieces. This is very much like Samsung and LG in the LCD display market where they invested heavily in the manufacturing process and are now dominant in that market (where, interestingly, Sony refused to invest so as to not cannibalize it's Trinatron business).

... Looks to me like CaNikon are using the classic business gambit "let the upstarts and little guys go broke creating the market. Then, when the market matures, swoop in with better products at lower costs, crush the competitors and then buy whatever companies are left that have good internal tech". This happens in Silicon Valley every day...

 

[AcutancePhotography]

The idea that Canon can build the 1Dx but can't build a quality mirror-less defies reason.

As long as it is recognized that there is a huge difference between Canon can't build and Canon choosing not to build. I have not read anything that would indicate that Canon can't build a quality mirrorless system.

 

[AvTvM]

As long as it is recognized that there is a huge difference between Canon can't build and Canon choosing not to build. I have not read anything that would indicate that Canon can't build a quality mirrorless system.

Well, that's what probably most of us BELIEVE. But it can only be PROVEN by Canon themselves. ;D

Job is easier for Canon than for Sony, since they won't (have to) build 5-axis IBIS into tight mirrorless bodies.

 

[jrista]

The idea that Canon can build the 1Dx but can't build a quality mirror-less defies reason.

As long as it is recognized that there is a huge difference between Canon can't build and Canon choosing not to build. I have not read anything that would indicate that Canon can't build a quality mirrorless system.

I agree. It's a matter of finding what the marketplace wants. I believe there is a certain segment of the market that wants ever smaller and ever lighter....but I do not think that segment is indicative of the broader market that might be interested in mirrorless.


Personally, I won't give up the ergonomics of standard-sized DSLRs. I also don't really like EVFs, but over time, maybe they will reach a level where I'm satisfied with them. I don't want ultra small, I don't want ultra cramped, I don't want to have my configurable button options limited, I don't want my LCD screen to shrink, I don't want the vast majority of what "mirrorless" offers.


However...stuff an EVF or maybe a Hybrid VF that can operate optically or electronically in a DSLR body where the mirror can be locked up for electronic operation...and WOW. You've got me! (Why the hell hasn't any camera manufacturer figured that out yet?! I think Samsung is closeish with the NX1...but they still don't have the optical option...it's 100% purely electronic, albeit in a much better body design IMHO.)

 

[sanj]

The idea that Canon can build the 1Dx but can't build a quality mirror-less defies reason.

As long as it is recognized that there is a huge difference between Canon can't build and Canon choosing not to build. I have not read anything that would indicate that Canon can't build a quality mirrorless system.

I agree. It's a matter of finding what the marketplace wants. I believe there is a certain segment of the market that wants ever smaller and ever lighter....but I do not think that segment is indicative of the broader market that might be interested in mirrorless.


Personally, I won't give up the ergonomics of standard-sized DSLRs. I also don't really like EVFs, but over time, maybe they will reach a level where I'm satisfied with them. I don't want ultra small, I don't want ultra cramped, I don't want to have my configurable button options limited, I don't want my LCD screen to shrink, I don't want the vast majority of what "mirrorless" offers.


However...stuff an EVF or maybe a Hybrid VF that can operate optically or electronically in a DSLR body where the mirror can be locked up for electronic operation...and WOW. You've got me! (Why the hell hasn't any camera manufacturer figured that out yet?! I think Samsung is closeish with the NX1...but they still don't have the optical option...it's 100% purely electronic, albeit in a much better body design IMHO.)

Funi X100 has hybrid VF. And it is fantastic. But it is not a DSLR

 

[AvTvM]

Panasonic apparently just filed a patent in Japan for a new flash/accessory-shoe hybrid optical/electronic viewfinder.
http://photorumors.com/2014/11/24/panasonic-patented-an-external-hybrid-evf-and-ovf-viewfinder/

 

[sanj]

Panasonic apparently just filed a patent in Japan for a new flash/accessory-shoe hybrid optical/electronic viewfinder.
http://photorumors.com/2014/11/24/panasonic-patented-an-external-hybrid-evf-and-ovf-viewfinder/

All a matter of time.

 

[Don Haines]

The thing is that Canon is now failing to capture people "stepping up" into real cameras. Thus it may be that the wave of Canon owners has surged and is now a swell moving towards shore.

It may be, or not. It's not like Canon is ignoring the MILC segment entirely. Granted, the M was basically a flop outside of Asia (at least until the fire sale), but the MILC market as a whole is fairly weak outside of Asia, and that was even more true when the M launched.

As for the EOS M in Asia, don't forget it was the #2 best seller in Japan, beating out models from established brands like Olympus, Panasonic and Fuji and only a few percentage points shy of Sony's top seller. Canon's Dual Pixel AF is tailor-made for MILC applications.

So before concluding that Canon has missed the wave, consider that on a global scale, the mirrorless wave is still quite small. Inexperienced surfers may catch it, but it's not yet going to lift profits high enough. Once that wave gets big enough, it may well be that the Big Kahuna will ride it to the top, perhaps knocking a few little surfers off their boards on the way up.

Agreed,
Looks to me like CaNikon are using the classic business gambit "let the upstarts and little guys go broke creating the market. Then, when the market matures, swoop in with better products at lower costs, crush the competitors and then buy whatever companies are left that have good internal tech". This happens in Silicon Valley every day. Of course this strategy can backfire with tragic consequences. The idea that Canon can build the 1Dx but can't build a quality mirror-less defies reason.

I tend to agree with this too.

To my way of thinking, mirrorless cameras have two huge flaws. One is that the AF system is terrible, and the other is that the EVFs are terrible.... or at least it was in the past....

DPAF seems like it was designed for the EOS-M. I do not believe in coincidences, but I do believe that research and development projects often take far longer than planned... I think that the EOS-M was designed to be sold with DPAF and now that it is out, I expect to see a new EOS-M variant which has it.... this will be the king of mirrorless AF unless there is a significant surprise from someone else.... this also gets rid of one of the two flaws holding mirrorless cameras back.

The other flaw is the EVFs.... and they are getting better, faster and higher resolution. Some of the latest ones are starting to rival the optical viewfinders... They may not be superior, but they are certainly good enough for the masses....

So let's say Canon comes out with an EOS-M with DPAF and an optional high quality EVF.... it will probably sell well... and there goes the "mirrorless will never be accepted" crowd.....

 

[jrista]

Panasonic apparently just filed a patent in Japan for a new flash/accessory-shoe hybrid optical/electronic viewfinder.
http://photorumors.com/2014/11/24/panasonic-patented-an-external-hybrid-evf-and-ovf-viewfinder/

If it's hotshoe, it is not TTL. When I talk about an OVF, I mean your standard through-the-lens requires-a-slapping-mirror kind of OVF. I would rather have an EVF than an external optical viewfinder that did not give me an exact TTL image.


There were rumors earlier this year that Canon was working on some kind of Hybrid VF. None of that has materialized...but I really want something that truly works either way...standard DSLR mirrorslapper OVF, or EVF in mirror lockup mode.

 

[AvTvM]

I would be fairly happy with a compact, but high-grade hybrid optical/electronic viewfinder as per the Panasonic patent. Via electronic data exchange with camera body and lens it "knows" actual focal length and focus distance settings and will automatically zoom to show an exactly matching frame and provide parallax-correction.

In the Fuji X-Pro1 implementation I believe it is even possible to also show a wider image [if the optical viewfinder is engaged] than the image projected to the sensor - which can be of advantage in some situations (e.g. street photography) - one of the advantages of many (good) range finder cameras like Leica M. Not possible in mirrorslappers. Not possible with purely electronic viewfinders which can only display the very image that the sensor sees.

Unfortunately NON-TTL optical viewfinders used by Canon in recent years - e.g. the ones in Powershot G-series cameras ... have been abysmal, cheap and utterly primitve. Not so the Fuji Hybrid viewfinders.

They just need an update to the latest / highest grade LCD viewfinder panels + associated electronics ... for even less lag, more resolution, better color, etc.

In short: I'd choose a compact, FF-sensored Sony A9 with such a hybrid viewfinder any day over a fat old Canon mirrorslapper.

 

[RLPhoto]

I believe Canon owns the pro market, simply by observation. How many photos have you ever seen of sporting events, for the past decade (including recently) where any brand other than Canon utterly dominated? Canon owns the pro market.

Cavet emptor - sporting events aren't exactly the whole pro market. They're more the low investment/low income potential segment, the kind of assignment you'd get at a paper after mastering the press conference coverage.
Go into commercial or at least editorial photography and every member, including the gofers, of your crew outearns the average sports shooter by a good margin. Here Canon was dominant; today you have a good idea about who has long term sponsorship contract.

No, sports are not the whole pro market, but they are a HUGE segment of the pro market. Weddings, portraiture, food and product photography, photojournalism, etc. are certainly parts of the pro market. Wedding photographers seem enamored by Nikon's latest offerings. They loved the 5D III, but the D750 seems to be the hot thing in that segment right now. I know a number of portrait photographers who seem to prefer Pentax (it seems to be a size thing in particular...smaller bodies, smaller lenses.) It seems as though studio photographers who frequently look to MFD have been looking to Nikon's D800 more often lately (although who knows, now that Exmors are in MFDs, they will probably go back...either way, Canon doesn't exactly have a product for them right now, nothing that competes with current competitor offerings anyway.)


Canon has a massive presence in the pro photography world, no doubt. However the pro world does not seem as locked into Canon as they used to be. At the very least, they have diversified.

A FF 645 Sony Exmor MFD would be killer. It would be even more killer if they made it affordable.

 

[Actionpix]

I use Canon since around 1985. I sticked long with my A-1's. Just before the digital race began I bought an EOS-30. All the time before I waited for the camera's technical getting reliable enough to use. (For me now lighting, autofocus etc. are good enough to stop doing stuff manual, although I will keep watching and correct when necessary.) With the EOS-30 came a new mount so I bought new lenses too. So now I have a 400mm 2.8 with excellent optical performance and a new type of mount. BUT,.. No camera with a sensor that can resolve the resolution the lens offers. And that is going on for 10 years now. I can use the lens on a 7DII and have 20MP and don't feel the resolving power of the camera is better than that of the lens, so the camera would be unnecessary high resolving. Blowing that sensor up to FF would give 50MP. Where is that cam? (Or even more MP.) Ok. Before I did not complain about new cameras not coming. But when you produce 12K lenses you ought to offer camera's with it to defend the price. I now am stuck with 1K lens resolving power.

 

[jrista]

I believe Canon owns the pro market, simply by observation. How many photos have you ever seen of sporting events, for the past decade (including recently) where any brand other than Canon utterly dominated? Canon owns the pro market.

Cavet emptor - sporting events aren't exactly the whole pro market. They're more the low investment/low income potential segment, the kind of assignment you'd get at a paper after mastering the press conference coverage.
Go into commercial or at least editorial photography and every member, including the gofers, of your crew outearns the average sports shooter by a good margin. Here Canon was dominant; today you have a good idea about who has long term sponsorship contract.

No, sports are not the whole pro market, but they are a HUGE segment of the pro market. Weddings, portraiture, food and product photography, photojournalism, etc. are certainly parts of the pro market. Wedding photographers seem enamored by Nikon's latest offerings. They loved the 5D III, but the D750 seems to be the hot thing in that segment right now. I know a number of portrait photographers who seem to prefer Pentax (it seems to be a size thing in particular...smaller bodies, smaller lenses.) It seems as though studio photographers who frequently look to MFD have been looking to Nikon's D800 more often lately (although who knows, now that Exmors are in MFDs, they will probably go back...either way, Canon doesn't exactly have a product for them right now, nothing that competes with current competitor offerings anyway.)


Canon has a massive presence in the pro photography world, no doubt. However the pro world does not seem as locked into Canon as they used to be. At the very least, they have diversified.

A FF 645 Sony Exmor MFD would be killer. It would be even more killer if they made it affordable.

I agree, although I think the Pentax offering is pretty nice.

 

[AvTvM]

If MF, then I'd also want it mirrorless. Rather than a cubic -blad-style mirrorslapper. That rumor about a Sony 50MP MF in a Mamiya 7 style body would be along my preferences. Zero slapping, zero vibration, zero noise. And more compact.

http://photorumors.com/2014/10/24/more-details-on-the-rumored-sonyzeiss-and-mamiya-medium-format-digital-rangefinder-cameras/