Does Canon really deserve this?

[jocau]

For me Canon does deserve this negativity. I've owned multiple Canon printers in the past and the only 2 digital cameras I've owned so far are from Canon (PowerShot A40 and EOS 550D). So yes, I have a certain emotional bond with the brand Canon.

The problem for me is that I feel that Canon is resting on their laurels (probably because the fact that sales are still going strong). I have a feeling that there's hardly been any progress on the sensor side in 5(!) years or so. And still they think they have the best overall sensor (read it in a recent article on dpreview with one of the 'big guys' of Canon) while in fact they have been trailing behind the competition (Sony EXMOR) for multiple years.

This ignorance and arrogance sometimes drives me insane. My beloved Canon showing the complete wrong attitude. I've always thought that Canon is one of the most capable lens producers, although my number 1 is still Carl Zeiss (thanks to their micro-contrast).

At this point I'm sick of the poor focusing on my 550D and I'm also sick of the shadow banding that appears in the darkest regions of a photo (even when the DR in the scene is pretty limited and when the image is correctly exposed without lifting the shadows in post). I also don't have much faith left in Canon as a photography brand.

That means I'll switch to the Sony A9 next year (or the A7II if the A9 doesn't live up to its hype) and I'll buy the Sony (Zeiss) FE 55mm F/1.8 (which is said to be a mini-Otus). I'll use my lovely EF 70-200mm F/4L IS USM with the Metabones adapter.

To summarize: I feel that Canon is being too conservative, resting on their laurels and lagging behind the competition sensor-wise while still maintaining their "we are the best" mentality (probably driven by sales figures). And as much as I love Canon, I can't keep sticking my head in the sand forever...

 

[weixing]

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?

You're not alone. I simply don't think it's feasible to use larger supertelephoto lenses with tiny bodies effectively - so even if the future is mirrorless, it needs to come in a roughly DSLR-shaped body.

It's not the biggest body, for sure...but it is the closest thing to a DSLR-sized and shaped (ergonomically) mirrorless that I've seen thus far. I have to try it out to say for sure, but I would much rather use this with a giant supertelephoto than any other mirrorless. I still think it might be a little cramped...but, so was my Rebel, and I used that with the 100-400 all the time. Samsung is also readying it's own superteles for use with this body, and they seem to be just as large as Canon's.

This is to be welcomed.

Hi,
Samsung strength is always their hardware, but their biggest weakness is their software (firmware in this case).

Have a nice day.

 

[AvTvM]

Hi,
Samsung strength is always their hardware, but their biggest weakness is their software (firmware in this case).
Have a nice day.

could you be a bit more specific please - with regards to firmware-related issues of Samsung NX1?

Canon (and even more so Nikon) certainly got more than their fair share of software/firmware issues.
Especially Canon's inability and/or unwillingness to unlock and enable fairly basic and simple firmware features on their hardware (Cameras) is notorious. No focus peaking, no zebras, very poor Auto-ISO implementation in most of their DSLRs, no second curtain sync in their wireless ETTL protocol and many other software-/firmware related issues come to my mind. Just look at what Magic Lantern adds to Canon cameras that can be "hacked".

So before accepting any finger-pointing in the direction of other manufacturers, including Samsung - I'd really like to know very specifically what those issues may be in in what ways they are (even) worse than Canon's.

 

[Loswr]

There are nearly as many reasons people would choose the 6D over the 70D as there are people who make that choice. I could produce a list of reasons, but they're not my reasons...

But if you must have a reason, try this for starters...

Just as I thought: the primary reason for picking the 6D over the 70D is the "full-frame" sensor; and not the better AF, better frame-rate, etc. which the 6D hasn't got. Simply and only the bigger size of the sensor.

That's one reason, certainly. Perhaps image quality doesn't matter to you. It matters to me, as do better AF, frame rate, etc., which is why I own a 1D X.

They've already lost the mirrorless market ... almost everyone who wanted mirrorless has switched by now.

Really? If so, then consider that dSLRs continue to outsell MILCs by a very large margin, and extrapolate from that the implication for the future of MILCs.

And typewriters outsold computers ... until the mid-1980's.

Again, you completely miss my point. You're the one who asserted that almost everyone who wants mirrorless has switched. I didn't say I agreed with that statement, in fact I implied the opposite. I was merely attempting to facilitate your following your assertion to a logical conclusion, but apparently you are unable to do so.

 

[weixing]

Hi,
Samsung strength is always their hardware, but their biggest weakness is their software (firmware in this case).
Have a nice day.

could you be a bit more specific please - with regards to firmware-related issues of Samsung NX1?

Canon (and even more so Nikon) certainly got more than their fair share of software/firmware issues.
Especially Canon's inability and/or unwillingness to unlock and enable fairly basic and simple firmware features on their hardware (Cameras) is notorious. No focus peaking, no zebras, very poor Auto-ISO implementation in most of their DSLRs, no second curtain sync in their wireless ETTL protocol and many other software-/firmware related issues come to my mind. Just look at what Magic Lantern adds to Canon cameras that can be "hacked".

So before accepting any finger-pointing in the direction of other manufacturers, including Samsung - I'd really like to know very specifically what those issues may be in in what ways they are (even) worse than Canon's.

Hi,
I'm not saying this camera got software issue... I'm saying that base on using their current and past products, in general, the software (or firmware) is always Samsung weakest side... they had no problem making good hardware, but always mess up on the software side.

Have a nice day.

 

[Synkka]

Regarding the nx1 I think it looks amazing and some great technological advances. I think it will sell appallingly bad much like the sigma cameras.
But I see the benefit to the market, you often need companies outside of the major players to be the innovators.
How canon responds will be interesting but I highly doubt they will stray from their current model as their business is successful and they aren't forced to take risks. But I also don't think they need to take risks they have a broad range of products to suit most people's requirements, yes they don't have a high end mirrorless camera but that is a small fraction of the market currently. I doubt Canon is ignoring it completely but more likely working out when the best point to enter that market will be.

 

[Maui5150]

There's no such thing as "losing" the mirrorless market. Every year, people buy new cameras, so there are constant opportunities to sell new cameras. It's not as if the market closes its doors at some point. Canon will have plenty of opportunities to sell mirrorless system cameras if they want to.

As for the video crowd, Canon seems to be doing very well in video. I photograph weddings and at most weddings there are 1 or 2 videographers. Nearly every videographer I've seen in the past 5 years has been a Canon user, usually with several Canon bodies and a bag full of Canon lenses (sometimes some 3rd party lenses too). At some weddings, there are so many Canon DSLRs that it's common for wedding guests to ask the videographers to take still photos of them (not realizing they are shooting video). So, as far as I can see, videographers are heavily into Canon. I have yet to see a wedding videographer using Nikon or Sony.

I would echo that, as well as go to almost any MAJOR sports even and what do you see... all those white long lenses..

Oh? Those are Sony on Alphas? LOL

 

[Maui5150]

I can see great reasons to go either way... For cost, you can't beat crop.... for quality you can't beat FF....

You make it seem like there is no trade off.

6D vs 7D MK II

They are basically the same cost.

Yes you can get cheaper crop cameras, but what is the true cost of a crop? Image noise at high iso? That is a cost isn't... A cost to the IQ

Just playing some semantics with you.

I think a better way of putting it. Each camera has a defined set of features and suitable applications. Depending on your budget, there are compromises one must make to find the best suitable fit given their willingness to spend or their own internal justification.

 

[Maui5150]

I don't know about any lag. When the 5D2 appeared, I started seeing videographers using it at every wedding. More recently, I see them using everything from the Rebel (xxxD series) to the 70D to the 5D3.

They don't need the 7D2 to run ML *today*. They're already using other Canon bodies, so there's no urgency to add a 7D2. Getting a 5D3 just for video is a lot of money, and yet I see a lot of videographers doing exactly that, usually coupled with other Canon bodies.

Sure you can get a GH4 or something else, but that's not what I see them getting. In recent years, I've seen exactly one videographer shooting with Panasonic gear. All the rest were using Canon. The video crowd that I see is not rushing away from Canon. Instead, they are nearly all using Canon.

This and then some.

5D MK III does nice video, but I also picked up a T5i specifically as a backup and sometimes a crop sensor, at least to my eyes, plays a little more nicely with movement and shake.

In terms of video. Most video cameras are better than DSLRs in terms or recording video, dealing with stabilization and especially AF...

BUT...

Most video cameras are limited in GLASS. You have mainly one lens, etc, and the reason so many go to a DSLR over a standalone video is they can use their great glass and get different perspectives from Ultra wide to zoomed in.

There are always trade offs.

As far as 4K goes, I have still been just shooting in HD and not looking forward to 4K in terms of editing, transitions, processing and burning. Producing an hour plus HD video can be time consuming as it is

 

[Maui5150]

Insulting post removed by moderator

 

[sanj]

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.

Do I detect a hint of jealousy there?

;D No. I have always liked Fuji, right from my days as a teenager using an old Fujica ST701, and I think the XT-1 system is quite appealing. But; I don't feel that the slimmer body is worth trading the OVF for, or losing the full frame. And, as has been pointed out here on CR many times, to achieve the equivalent in lens speed on these crop systems is actually very expensive, more so than FF. Add these factors to the reduced versatility and no, the system isn't for me.

Dearest friend, have you personally ever tried EVF?

 

[Sella174]

That's one reason, certainly. Perhaps image quality doesn't matter to you. It matters to me, as do better AF, frame rate, etc., which is why I own a 1D X.

We are discussing why anyone would choose the 6D over the 70D, so throwing the best DSLR ever into the mix is out of bounds.

I was merely attempting to facilitate your following your assertion to a logical conclusion, but apparently you are unable to do so.

But I did.

 

[Loswr]

That's one reason, certainly. Perhaps image quality doesn't matter to you. It matters to me, as do better AF, frame rate, etc., which is why I own a 1D X.

We are discussing why anyone would choose the 6D over the 70D, so throwing the best DSLR ever into the mix is out of bounds.

The reasons are obvious. I gave one, there are others.

I was merely attempting to facilitate your following your assertion to a logical conclusion, but apparently you are unable to do so.

But I did.

Sure you did – typewriters were your logical conclusion. :

 

[Sporgon]

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.

Do I detect a hint of jealousy there?

;D No. I have always liked Fuji, right from my days as a teenager using an old Fujica ST701, and I think the XT-1 system is quite appealing. But; I don't feel that the slimmer body is worth trading the OVF for, or losing the full frame. And, as has been pointed out here on CR many times, to achieve the equivalent in lens speed on these crop systems is actually very expensive, more so than FF. Add these factors to the reduced versatility and no, the system isn't for me.

Dearest friend, have you personally ever tried EVF?

Yes, of course, the XT-1 which I understand is probably the best out there at the moment. I thought in my previous post I had made it clear that I have considered the Fuji system.

What can I say ? Call be 'old fashioned' but I like to be able to optically see through the lens in real time, at least on a decent system. I don't think I am alone in this. I can see that EVFs like the one on the Fuji have great appeal to many; indeed most people are going to find it better than a dim, small pentamirror with slow 'kit' lens on a Rebel, but even then people keep buying cheap dslrs, probably because as it is a mature, simple system it is also cheap to produce and buy.

I perceived a lag, maybe that is just my imagination. The very large size doesn't do it for me, but the ability to reduce the viewfinder size is neat. Then there is the power useage; I want a battery to last as long as possible. In fact I have recently ditched by iphone and got a simple Nokia with a keypad because I am sick of having to charge the iphone every day. Just been to Poland for four days; never had to charge the phone or the camera !

I think we are going to see a FF dslr from Canon which will have interchangeable finders, like in the old days of top end slrs, except now one will be a normal pentaprism, and will be used in the conventional way, and another will be an EVF. You then lock the mirror up and away you go, using the Dual Pixel AF system direct off the sensor for focus. Use it for stills or video, it's up to you. By having the head as a sliding fit from the rear it could incorporate physical plug connections, which would probably needed to do this.

Then those that say Canon isn't innovative will have to find some other area to whinge about.

 

[Loswr]

Then those that say Canon isn't innovative will have to find some other area to whinge about.

I doubt that will be a problem, those folks can be very innovative themselves when coming up with new ways to bash Canon. :

 

[RGF]

I browse this website quite often since 2012. I have never seen so many negative comments about Canon these days in comparison with before.
Does Canon really not satisfying its customers lately or is it that there are new members in the forum who like to put down Canon in comparison with other companies?

It is fun to complain - and to do it on line without having look the other person in the eye, is even more fun. I can get nastier than I would in person :

Bottom line - no but human nature is lash out.

 

[sanj]

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.

Do I detect a hint of jealousy there?

;D No. I have always liked Fuji, right from my days as a teenager using an old Fujica ST701, and I think the XT-1 system is quite appealing. But; I don't feel that the slimmer body is worth trading the OVF for, or losing the full frame. And, as has been pointed out here on CR many times, to achieve the equivalent in lens speed on these crop systems is actually very expensive, more so than FF. Add these factors to the reduced versatility and no, the system isn't for me.

Dearest friend, have you personally ever tried EVF?

Yes, of course, the XT-1 which I understand is probably the best out there at the moment. I thought in my previous post I had made it clear that I have considered the Fuji system.

What can I say ? Call be 'old fashioned' but I like to be able to optically see through the lens in real time, at least on a decent system. I don't think I am alone in this. I can see that EVFs like the one on the Fuji have great appeal to many; indeed most people are going to find it better than a dim, small pentamirror with slow 'kit' lens on a Rebel, but even then people keep buying cheap dslrs, probably because as it is a mature, simple system it is also cheap to produce and buy.

I perceived a lag, maybe that is just my imagination. The very large size doesn't do it for me, but the ability to reduce the viewfinder size is neat. Then there is the power useage; I want a battery to last as long as possible. In fact I have recently ditched by iphone and got a simple Nokia with a keypad because I am sick of having to charge the iphone every day. Just been to Poland for four days; never had to charge the phone or the camera !

I think we are going to see a FF dslr from Canon which will have interchangeable finders, like in the old days of top end slrs, except now one will be a normal pentaprism, and will be used in the conventional way, and another will be an EVF. You then lock the mirror up and away you go, using the Dual Pixel AF system direct off the sensor for focus. Use it for stills or video, it's up to you. By having the head as a sliding fit from the rear it could incorporate physical plug connections, which would probably needed to do this.

Then those that say Canon isn't innovative will have to find some other area to whinge about.

Thanks so much for replying. I personally find the advantages of EVF overpowering the disadvantages in such a carry around camera. But want my optical on the 1dx.

 

[Sella174]

That's one reason, certainly. Perhaps image quality doesn't matter to you. It matters to me, as do better AF, frame rate, etc., which is why I own a 1D X.

We are discussing why anyone would choose the 6D over the 70D, so throwing the best DSLR ever into the mix is out of bounds.

The reasons are obvious. I gave one, there are others.

[sarcasm]So the conclusion is that a "full-frame" camera with a mediocre, entry-level AF system trumps a "crop-frame" camera with a terrific, state-of-the-art AF system. Got it.[/sarcasm]

I was merely attempting to facilitate your following your assertion to a logical conclusion, but apparently you are unable to do so.

But I did.

Sure you did – typewriters were your logical conclusion. :

The moral of the story (regarding typewriters) is that one year you are on top of the world, selling thousands upon thousands of units, and the next year you sell nothing, and the year after that you file for bankruptcy. Good sales today doesn't necessarily mean good sales tomorrow.

 

[fragilesi]

So, are you really suggesting that Canon should duplicate development efforts and costs just to produce a set of crop L-series equivalent across the range to justify crop cameras? That would add so much to the development, production and inventory costs that they would end up costing much closer to the full-frame variants than you seem to expect.

Obviously you cannot read properly, so let me quote myself:

They (meaning Canon) should just drop it (meaning "crop-frame") and concentrate on "full-frame" exclusively.

Fair enough, slipped up there.

Like you maybe I didn't think it through

But you really didn't answer the more serious points that I made.

 

[Sella174]

But you really didn't answer the more serious points that I made.

Serious points, right. OK, here goes ...

I am not saying that the 70D and the 7DII are bad cameras. I am also not saying that these particular cameras are non-innovative on the whole. What I am saying is that in my opinion, for Canon, the "crop-frame" sensor DSLR is something that no longer has any place in their line-up. The reason for this is that the camera market has shrunk considerable and therefore it will not be possible to continue supporting two form-factors indefinitely. Many on this forum, you included, have pointed out the increase in cost per product should Canon decide to actually support "crop-frame" cameras with more (actual or equivalent) L-grade lenses. This is quite true and should be a primary reason for Canon picking a form-factor and dropping the other. The obvious choice would be "full-frame", due to all the best lenses being "full-frame" already.

For the future, once Canon eventually rolls out a "full-frame" camera with an equivalent 20MP "crop-frame" sensor, something like the now rumoured 50MP sensor, then "crop-frame" will be truly dead. Ignoring the cost, ask yourself why would anyone use a 20MP "crop-frame" camera and "full-frame" lenses, when they can rather use a 50MP "full-frame" camera with those same "full-frame" lenses? (Everything else being equal, e.g. AF speed, frame rate, etc., of course.)

As to the cost argument, well ... the really low-end, entry-level market as per ca.2008 has gone over to whatever imaging-enable device is the current fad. This means that the current (ca.2015) entry-level market is from the start a more advanced photographer, basically the mid-level "prosumers" of the previous decade. Yes, cameras will be more expensive for the entry-level models, but the purchasers thereof have for the most part already gone through everything their imaging-enabled phone can deliver and they want more right out of the (camera) box and are/should be willing to pay for it. IMO, for Canon, that is "full-frame" cameras ... with or without mirrors.

Coupled with the above reasoning regarding the cost factor, electronics (should) become cheaper and more capable every year. If not, then whosoever is in charge is definitely doing something wrong. I concede that any particular line of technology always somewhere "hits the wall" and can go no further, but if that happens, then the people in charge should start looking for alternatives or concentrate on something else within the confines of that technology. In the case of Canon and their sensors, for example, if they cannot increase the DR of their current designs, then start figuring out a cheaper manufacturing process (or even an algorithm for fixing dead photo-sites through extrapolation). Anything to keep with the spirit of electronics: more for less. (No, I am not saying I want a 6D for the price of a 700D.)

I think that adequately answers the points you made in your post.