Does Canon really deserve this?

[Loswr]

What about lenses?

...but the whole TS-E 17/4 or 840/5.6 argument is largely moot with mirrorless options these days. Why?

ADAPTERS!!

My point, in keeping with the context of this thread, was that there are areas of the spectrum of photography equipment where Canon lags behind other manufacturers, and areas in which they are ahead. One area in which they are generally superior is lenses (RT flashes is another). Some people – including some who apparently don't even own Canon gear – seem quite willing to bash Canon's sensors, but give no credit in areas where they are the innovative leader.

BTW, have you spent some time shooting handheld with your 600/4 and an adapter-mounted MILC? I have, and it's an ergonomic nightmare. If you find it comfortable, great. If you haven't tried it, you should do so before suggesting adapters and MILC's render unique lenses moot (not to mention AF issues, because you went on to do just that, and 'hope that maybe the 5th incarnation will solve the problems', which the first four apparently failed to do).

Do you enjoy emberrasing and belittling and degrading people? Honestly, dude.

This place would be FAR more peaceful if you would just leave people alone. Regardless of how wrong they may be.

And I think we all need to back the hell off of people, and stop antagonism.

I don't know if it is simply ignorance here, or whether it is just conveniently forgetting,

You go right on making the forum a more peaceful place and stopping the antagonism. Calling me ignorant or deceitful is a great effort toward those laudable ends. Honestly, dude.

 

[sanj]

But Neuro currently is much more than DR. Mirror less, MP, 7d2 sensor improvement and such are in the scanner.

What about lenses? Yesterday I went on a 5 mile hike with my 840mm f/5.6 combo (600/4 II + 1.4xIII), shooting flying raptors entirely handheld. After lunch, I shot a lighthouse, and on the narrow spit of land, only an ultrawide lens with shift could capture the full height with correct verticals, so I used my new TS-E 17/4. How's the competition doing on meeting those needs? Should I go to forums dedicated to other brands and complain about their lack of innovation in areas which matter to me?

I get that people want it all (and usually for free). But no single manufacturer offers it all. So, you have to make a choice...

• Keep wishing for one system to offer everything.
• Complain incessantly on the Internet.
• Pick the system that best meets their needs.

Regarding the first, my dad used to say wish in one hand and...well, you get the idea (or Google will fill in the rest). Regarding the second, that's certainly your prerogative, but hopefully you understand that doing so here is worse than useless. That leaves the third option as the most logical one, by far. Kind of sad that people are so illogical...

Don't get me wrong. I am in the Canon camp. Just have a Fuji XE2 for family/light travel as Canon does not offer something similar.

 

[slclick]

"But Neuro currently is much more than DR. Mirror less, MP, 7d2 sensor improvement and such are in the scanner."
WTF is this? It's like Nigerian phishing email syntax.

 

[RLPhoto]

So apart from the best lenses, flash system, ergonomics, service, reliability, etc, "What have Canon ever done for us?"

... and so the thread spirals towards the inevitable conclusion that immunizes Canon from critique for so long: You just need to pay $15k+ for their premium gear and you'll be just fine. And for the rest of their lineup: You can do beautiful shots with it. And the photogs of olden days did so with even much less gear. So what could be wrong? 'nuff said :-o

Not at all, some of the comments ridiculing some of the decisions by Canon are very well made, particularly on the software side where the holding back of basic 'features' is laughable. But Canon are not the only camera company that play that frustrating game of never quite seeming to get it completely right in one go, they all do it.

But much of the core criticism is just as laughable. For instance I don't buy into the 'crippling the RT system' meme, I think having just the 600 and the ST-E3-RT is fine, if I want AF assist I'll have a 600 on camera anyway, after all it is very rare that most people are in a dynamic flash situation and couldn't use any on camera light, even if they are bouncing it, and at $455 a lot of the time it is still way cheaper than the Nikon SB910 that doesn't even have radio functionality, plus if you want to mess up a perfectly good RT system buying crappy Chinese 'clones' to work with it then go for it. OR, point me to another camera manufacturer that makes their own radio controlled flash system, oh, you can't.......

Besides, if Canon don't make what you want then go buy it elsewhere, nobody ever forced anybody to buy or keep Canon gear and it holds its value very well so moving systems isn't that expensive even if you have been tied into it for years or have a big investment in it.

I just sold a ten year old lens for $900, I bought it new for $1,250, that is a $35 a year rental cost! Even the 1D I just sold at a depreciated $6,000 and very low shutter count cost me less than 30c an image, around a 1/3 the price of the film per image it replaced.

Despite peoples opinions I am not a Canon apologist, I'd like to think I am more of a realist, Canon can offer us what they do now because of what they have done in the past, and as a career decision to use Canon way back in the '70's before I knew what I was doing and again in the early 2000's when I moved to AF, I am generally happy with what they have offered me, though I do have some frustration about the lack of a 1Ds MkIII replacement. I have no doubt that if I had chosen Nikon on either or both of those occasions I'd be just as happy.

Canon make very good cameras that fit in with an even better system, if that isn't for you then buy a different brand, nobody cares, but if you can't create the images you want with the gear currently offered then don't look for the lack of this or that feature as the excuse, the reason for your failure is six inches behind the viewfinder.

I can't knock the RT system. It's unbelievably good that Nikon flash is pretty ugly to me now. And if I need those extra features, the YN transmitter has been very reliable for me, which I have to say I didn't expect.

AvTvM is just reaching on his criticism of canon flash. It's the best system hands down on the market.

 

[sanj]

"But Neuro currently is much more than DR. Mirror less, MP, 7d2 sensor improvement and such are in the scanner."
WTF is this? It's like Nigerian phishing email syntax.

Sorry no idea what that means.

 

[Woody]

I think there are 2 serious issues plaquing the Canon system:

a) sensor performance at low ISO

b) slow / inaccurate contrast based AF in their compact cameras e.g., G7X, EOS-M etc

Hopefully Canon can address these 2 problems.

 

[AvTvM]

I think there are 2 serious issues plaquing the Canon system:
a) sensor performance at low ISO
b) slow / inaccurate contrast based AF in their compact cameras e.g., G7X, EOS-M etc
Hopefully Canon can address these 2 problems.

These are just some of the symptoms. The underlying problem is, that Canon has not been willing to drive innovation full speed and/or has not been able to do so. They have switched to iterative small, purely marketing-driven steps. This has resulted in losing their towering technological dominance in digital cameras they had until about 2006, when many pros, semi-pros and enthusiasts bought their initial sets of canon digital slrs plus lenses plus flash. Today canon is an "ok" supplier and they still sell the most dslrs and they may be market leaders, but they are no longer the clear industry leader when it comes to digital imaging per se.

Canon is still an 800 pound gorilla, but it has gotten old, fat, tired, and complacent, unwilling to learn new tricks or to take any risks. They are now the supplier of choice to a) inexperienced brand believers shopping for a rebel plus kit lens (provided they still want to lug around any dslr) and b) professionals/semi pros with a large investment in the system who believe they need or really need cps service. But canon is loosing the most important segment fast: photo enthusiasts with some money to spend. They want the best cameras. Lenses and systems, they can afford. And they are doing their homework and know what those systems are. Unless one is bird/wildlife/outdoor sports oriented and into long tele lenses, it ai t canon these days. And it aint small iterations of clunky mirrorslappers.

 

[Synkka]

I think all companies should be subject to objective critiscm and Canon is no exception. I am with Canon as I feel they are the leader in lenses, AF, ergonomics. I feel that perhaps they are not the best at low ISO but aren't terrible by any means, but I predominately shoot at high ISO and I am extremely happy with that performance, and low ISO performs more than meets my needs.

I don't understand two major things about the current critiscm of Canon. Why sensor scores are being used as the only factor judging a camera system and secondly why this point of view seems to infiltrate every thread on the forum.

Critiscm is extremely useful if it's constructive, most of what I see on the forum these days is just complaints.

 

[Sella174]

I am of the opinion that the following post sums up the situation:

[..] my main concern is that the market for people who are not photographers (normal camera consumers) was very large. These are the people who generally bought P&S and rebels. Many are moving to Smart phones others are moving to mirror-less. If Canon losses completely to others in the mirror-less market or becomes a joke in the eyes of consumers. We all lose.

[..]

But in the lower end enthusiast cameras everyone is out innovating Canon/Nikon.

Canon is the top-dog in the "professional-class" arena - in terms of cameras, lenses and service. However, for us folks who are either mere enthusiasts or non-professional photographers (meaning photography forms part of our job, but is not primary) the current offerings from Canon are pretty poor when compared to FUJIFILM, Sony, Panasonic and Olympus (also possibly Pentax, maybe). For example, Canon doesn't support the EF-S system with real decent lenses; same reason why the EOS-M failed and will continue to fail. Canon's whole philosophy is based around their "professional" system, with everything else being incidental. This may have been a sound business approach in ca.2007, but not today.

Face it, Canon, the "Rebel" line is dead, so bury it ... along with the 70D and the (still-born) 7DII. As for the latter (the 7dII), it is a weather-sealed camera, but has no decent weather-sealed companion lens!? And why bring out the EF-S 24mm more than a year after the 100D, when it should have been an optional kit lens right from the start!?

We complain, we shout, we troll - but does Canon listen? Nope.

But as quoted above, without us average lot (and the soccer-moms) buying low- and mid-end Canon gear, who's gonna finance the top-end "pro" gear? (Question: how's the support from the video crowd for DSLR's these days? Was it really such a viable decision on the part of Canon to concentrate on them, instead of stills-only photographers?)

Any company who puts the shareholders above their consumers are ... :-X

As to the DR thing: I've always wondered whether people are factoring in the various "cooking" algorithms when making their determination.

 

[Synkka]

There certainly are plenty of mirrorless and software comments, and you are correct most threads start out ok and tend to get progressively worst.
It's hard for me to be objective about software as they mostly involve features I won't use, but I certainly understand why people want to untapped resources that are there. Fuji is very good at upgrading firmware on their cameras , but canon ensured f8 autofocus and that's a feature I wanted.
Now the mirrorless argument for me I don't get at the moment. The major sacrifices are af and ergonomics which are things I don't want to sacrifice. Now mirrorless will be the future but I haven't seen anything that makes me want to swap to a mirrorless as my primary camera. I have a fuji x100s which i like as my portable camera, but I wouldn't take it wildlife watching.
Now regarding criticism of Canon software and the mirrorless options to me they aren't even close to causing me to want to leave Canon, to others perhaps they are. Should those comments unnecessarily dominate many threads? I don't think so, and I find a lot of the out of place. But if they are constructive rather than complaints then good on them.

On the mirrorless option am I the only person who doesn't like smaller cameras in general?

 

[fragilesi]

Face it, Canon, the "Rebel" line is dead, so bury it ... along with the 70D and the (still-born) 7DII. As for the latter (the 7dII), it is a weather-sealed camera, but has no decent weather-sealed companion lens!?

Odd my 70D is working out just fine and when I wear that out I'll probably go for a 7DII - which seems to be getting a great reception . . . I think it might be you that isn't listening to what Canon's customers are actually saying.

 

[AvTvM]

On the mirrorless option am I the only person who doesn't like smaller cameras in general?

No definitely not. And there is plenty of Canon-DSLR-choice for all those, who like to hold chunky/beefy camera bodies in their large and strong hands. Plus one can add vertical grips to almost any Canon DSLR, making it even beefier and chunkier.

But ... there is also a good number of people who'd prefer significantly smaller & lighter gear. As their first, second or third camera (system). These people are currently not well served by Canon (and Nikon alike). All they want, is to also get some decent choice from Canon. Including high-performance, fully capable, competent, reliable mirrorless cameras, including some with full-frame sensors inside. Yes, some of those machines are available from other manufacturers. But they don't have Canon user interface on them, which is something most Canon users hold in high esteem ... that's why this group keeps asking for Canon offerings that are ... small, light, and good. 8)

 

[Sella174]

On the mirrorless option am I the only person who doesn't like smaller cameras in general?

Now we're three.

Personally I think the mirrorless manufacturers made a mistake by equating the system with small size (in their marketing). However, for comparison, the FUJIFILM X-T1 is about the same size as the Asahi PENTAX S1a (of 1960's vintage) ... thus just perfect!

 

[ChristopherMarkPerez]

[Note to self: DON'T post anything when the glass of Belgium beer is already half empty. You'll not make sense to anyone, even if it sounds good to yourself. With apologies to everyone I confused in an earlier post]

Canon may not be feeling enough pain to change their line-up or product development. Not yet, at least. They're still selling millions and millions of cameras and lenses a year. So where's the motivation?

Looked at differently, what images can't a photographer make today with existing Canon product offerings? What, specifically, do photographers want Canon to make to help them solve their imaging challenges?

The bottom-end of the market has shifted to mobile/tablet gear.

The top-end of the market is likely overly saturated with a LOT of great pro-grade gear. There was a discussion here on CR about this, if memory serves.

We've all watched as the big agencies that bought the bulk of pro-grade equipment disappear or radically change their imaging approach.

What does that leave? Interested hobbyists? Soccer moms? NASCAR dads? People wanting to make a few photos while on vacation?

Under these conditions it seem inevitable to me that a traditional company with traditional photography "thinking" would struggle.

Does Canon really deserve this? Nothing personal, but... Yes! Canon is in business to make money from products that consumers buy. If Canon can't keep up with the shifting desires of consumers then they run the risk of being a much smaller company than they currently are.

 

[Sella174]

Face it, Canon, the "Rebel" line is dead, so bury it ... along with the 70D and the (still-born) 7DII. As for the latter (the 7dII), it is a weather-sealed camera, but has no decent weather-sealed companion lens!?

Odd my 70D is working out just fine and when I wear that out I'll probably go for a 7DII - which seems to be getting a great reception . . . I think it might be you that isn't listening to what Canon's customers are actually saying.

Technology has moved quite a distance since the previous decade and production cost have equally dropped. The question which answers my statement above, is why does Canon persist with a "crop-frame" line-up, especially since all their good lenses are "full-frame" stuff? They should just drop it and concentrate on "full-frame" exclusively: the 6D is a "Rebel", the 5D is the 70D, and the 1D is the equivalent of the new 7D. Only difference is in the size of the sensor and the price that is asked by Canon.

Also, anyone who today (or tomorrow) considers buying a "crop-frame" camera will also look seriously at the mirrorless offerings from other companies. Only in the "full-frame" segment is Canon still tops. So unless you have an investment in "full-frame" Canon lenses, which would make "upgrading" to a "full-frame" camera a financial no-brainer, Canon's "crop-frame" line-up offers very little to the enthusiast ... because if the enthusiast with a Canon "crop-frame" camera wants a decent lens, then a "full-frame" lens must be bought. This is very wasteful for the enthusiast - although great for the shareholders!

(Just to clarify, I am not saying that "crop-frame" is dead, just that Canon's versions thereof are well past their sell-by date.)

 

[AcutancePhotography]

On the mirrorless option am I the only person who doesn't like smaller cameras in general?

I wonder if the manufacturers of Mirrorless cameras will change their design and introduce false bulkiness to bring the size of their cameras back to what the customer is used to?

When it comes to designing a system that is to be used by humans, making it as small as possible may not always be the right design design. The size of the human hand/fingers has not evolved as fast as the size of electronics.

 

[sanj]

[Note to self: DON'T post anything when the glass of Belgium beer is already half empty. You'll not make sense to anyone, even if it sounds good to yourself. With apologies to everyone I confused in an earlier post]

Canon may not be feeling enough pain to change their line-up or product development. Not yet, at least. They're still selling millions and millions of cameras and lenses a year. So where's the motivation?

Looked at differently, what images can't a photographer make today with existing Canon product offerings? What, specifically, do photographers want Canon to make to help them solve their imaging challenges?

The bottom-end of the market has shifted to mobile/tablet gear.

The top-end of the market is likely overly saturated with a LOT of great pro-grade gear. There was a discussion here on CR about this, if memory serves.

We've all watched as the big agencies that bought the bulk of pro-grade equipment disappear or radically change their imaging approach.

What does that leave? Interested hobbyists? Soccer moms? NASCAR dads? People wanting to make a few photos while on vacation?

Under these conditions it seem inevitable to me that a traditional company with traditional photography "thinking" would struggle.

Does Canon really deserve this? Nothing personal, but... Yes! Canon is in business to make money from products that consumers buy. If Canon can't keep up with the shifting desires of consumers then they run the risk of being a much smaller company than they currently are.

I know!!

 

[Loswr]

Face it, Canon, the "Rebel" line is dead, so bury it ... along with the 70D and the (still-born) 7DII. As for the latter (the 7dII), it is a weather-sealed camera, but has no decent weather-sealed companion lens!?

Odd my 70D is working out just fine and when I wear that out I'll probably go for a 7DII - which seems to be getting a great reception . . . I think it might be you that isn't listening to what Canon's customers are actually saying.

That's one thing this forum certainly doesn't lack – people in a small minority who mistakenly believe that their opinions and needs represent those of the vast majority.

The size of the human hand/fingers has not evolved as fast as the size of electronics.

For many years, the trend in the mobile phone/device market was to get smaller and smaller. The current trend is the opposite - iPhone 6 Plus, for example.

 

[Don Haines]

As for the latter (the 7dII), it is a weather-sealed camera, but has no decent weather-sealed companion lens!?

I wish someone had told me this before I spent 4 hours on a hike in the rain with a 7D2 and the 100L lens attached...I just assumed that it was weather sealed.... the rubber ring on the lens mount tricked me! (SARCASM TAG) yet somehow it survived......

 

[Sporgon]

Face it, Canon, the "Rebel" line is dead, so bury it ... along with the 70D and the (still-born) 7DII. As for the latter (the 7dII), it is a weather-sealed camera, but has no decent weather-sealed companion lens!?

Odd my 70D is working out just fine and when I wear that out I'll probably go for a 7DII - which seems to be getting a great reception . . . I think it might be you that isn't listening to what Canon's customers are actually saying.

Technology has moved quite a distance since the previous decade and production cost have equally dropped. The question which answers my statement above, is why does Canon persist with a "crop-frame" line-up, especially since all their good lenses are "full-frame" stuff? They should just drop it and concentrate on "full-frame" exclusively: the 6D is a "Rebel", the 5D is the 70D, and the 1D is the equivalent of the new 7D. Only difference is in the size of the sensor and the price that is asked by Canon.

Also, anyone who today (or tomorrow) considers buying a "crop-frame" camera will also look seriously at the mirrorless offerings from other companies. Only in the "full-frame" segment is Canon still tops. So unless you have an investment in "full-frame" Canon lenses, which would make "upgrading" to a "full-frame" camera a financial no-brainer, Canon's "crop-frame" line-up offers very little to the enthusiast ... because if the enthusiast with a Canon "crop-frame" camera wants a decent lens, then a "full-frame" lens must be bought. This is very wasteful for the enthusiast - although great for the shareholders!

(Just to clarify, I am not saying that "crop-frame" is dead, just that Canon's versions thereof are well past their sell-by date.)

Hey Sella ! I thought you had sold up your Canon gear and moved to Fuji ? A Fujifilm XT-1 if I remember. A really neat little camera that has so much going for it - except it's not a FF 6D, with a crisp OVF.