DPReview Interview with Chuck Westfall of Canon USA

[canonic]

Why?? This camera was not a speed or video demon so why the heck not go to Sony for the sensor on it? You didn't even give it DPAF, so what possible reason for the Canon sensor?

The best reason of all – profit. Of course, I mean best from their perspective...but you don't really think Canon cares about your perspective, do you? :

Neither cares Canon about your perspective, too. It should care about OUR perspective!

 

[Loswr]

Why?? This camera was not a speed or video demon so why the heck not go to Sony for the sensor on it? You didn't even give it DPAF, so what possible reason for the Canon sensor?

The best reason of all – profit. Of course, I mean best from their perspective...but you don't really think Canon cares about your perspective, do you? :

Neither cares Canon about your perspective, too. It should care about OUR perspective!

Exactly - and they do. They spend ample money on market research to determine what customers are likely to buy. For example, Canon has had less low ISO DR than their competitors for years, yet they continue to lead the market. Canon just announced a 50 MP camera with the same DR as previous bodies. What does that suggest their market research shows regarding OUR perspective on DR?

 

[Sporgon]

Why?? This camera was not a speed or video demon so why the heck not go to Sony for the sensor on it? You didn't even give it DPAF, so what possible reason for the Canon sensor?

The best reason of all – profit. Of course, I mean best from their perspective...but you don't really think Canon cares about your perspective, do you? :

Neither cares Canon about your perspective, too. It should care about OUR perspective!

Exactly - and they do. They spend ample money on market research to determine what customers are likely to buy. For example, Canon has had less low ISO DR than their competitors for years, yet they continue to lead the market. Canon just announced a 50 MP camera with the same DR as previous bodies. What does that suggest their market research shows regarding OUR perspective on DR?

Without wanting to start a debate on the dreaded subject; my decision whether or not to buy a 5Ds (or r) is not remotely influenced by whether or not this camera has an Exmoresque sensor in it. I'm generally shooting at low ISO and I never want to move more than a stop either way of capture, and the latest Canon sensors eat that up.

I'm not suggesting that I don't want to see improvement in this area, it's just that at the moment the 'improvement' available doesn't mean anything to me.

 

[canonic]

Why?? This camera was not a speed or video demon so why the heck not go to Sony for the sensor on it? You didn't even give it DPAF, so what possible reason for the Canon sensor?

The best reason of all – profit. Of course, I mean best from their perspective...but you don't really think Canon cares about your perspective, do you? :

Neither cares Canon about your perspective, too. It should care about OUR perspective!

Exactly - and they do. They spend ample money on market research to determine what customers are likely to buy. For example, Canon has had less low ISO DR than their competitors for years, yet they continue to lead the market. Canon just announced a 50 MP camera with the same DR as previous bodies. What does that suggest their market research shows regarding OUR perspective on DR?

Market RESEARCH?!? They have had only ask the landscapers (one target group for this camera) what they need and they had the first answer: DR!
They have had only listen ... not even ask. This should be a landscape camera? Without improved DR? No way! Even the wedding photographers (another target group for this camera) are asking for more DR as for resolution.

They spend ample money on market research to determine what customers are likely to buy.

Better spend the money for sensor research ...

What does that suggest their market research shows regarding OUR perspective on DR?

This may suggest that they are wrong. But this is only speculation ... along whit your speculation about Market RESEARCH.

 

[Sporgon]

Why?? This camera was not a speed or video demon so why the heck not go to Sony for the sensor on it? You didn't even give it DPAF, so what possible reason for the Canon sensor?

The best reason of all – profit. Of course, I mean best from their perspective...but you don't really think Canon cares about your perspective, do you? :

Neither cares Canon about your perspective, too. It should care about OUR perspective!

Exactly - and they do. They spend ample money on market research to determine what customers are likely to buy. For example, Canon has had less low ISO DR than their competitors for years, yet they continue to lead the market. Canon just announced a 50 MP camera with the same DR as previous bodies. What does that suggest their market research shows regarding OUR perspective on DR?

Market RESEARCH?!? They have had only ask the landscapers (one target group for this camera) what they need and they had the first answer: DR!
They have had only listen ... not even ask. This should be a landscape camera? Without improved DR? No way! Even the wedding photographers (another target group for this camera) are asking for more DR as for resolution.

They spend ample money on market research to determine what customers are likely to buy.

Better spend the money for sensor research ...

What does that suggest their market research shows regarding OUR perspective on DR?

This may suggest that they are wrong. But this is only speculation ... along whit your speculation about Market RESEARCH.

Yawn.

You have clearly never used a camera with the increased DR, or if you have you're another one who can't help chronically under exposing.

FYI there are very few genuine, dedicated landscape photographers, and of those that do use FF format occasionally as opposed to much larger, quite a few use Canon - still.

 

[msm]

Why?? This camera was not a speed or video demon so why the heck not go to Sony for the sensor on it? You didn't even give it DPAF, so what possible reason for the Canon sensor?

The best reason of all – profit. Of course, I mean best from their perspective...but you don't really think Canon cares about your perspective, do you? :

Neither cares Canon about your perspective, too. It should care about OUR perspective!

Exactly - and they do. They spend ample money on market research to determine what customers are likely to buy. For example, Canon has had less low ISO DR than their competitors for years, yet they continue to lead the market. Canon just announced a 50 MP camera with the same DR as previous bodies. What does that suggest their market research shows regarding OUR perspective on DR?

All it shows is that Canon chose to announce the camera as it is. As to why only Canon managers can tell, it could be what you say, or it could just as well be that they are not able to produce higher DR, it could be that Sony refuse to produce sensors to them to protect own sales, or maybe it could be that some manager in Canon has in house sensors as his personal pride.

Nor does it show that this is the best strategy for Canon, sometimes it is just best to produce the best product possible instead of trying to milk as much money as possible from as little as possible because that can backfire.

The optics are where Canon shines, and that is probably main reason why Canon still may have the largest market share. For us users, it would be better if Canon got out of the sensor business altogether. We just want the best product for our needs, and do not care who makes most money.

 

[heptagon]

All it shows is that Canon chose to announce the camera as it is. As to why only Canon managers can tell, it could be what you say, or it could just as well be that they are not able to produce higher DR, it could be that Sony refuse to produce sensors to them to protect own sales, or maybe it could be that some manager in Canon has in house sensors as his personal pride.

Nor does it show that this is the best strategy for Canon, sometimes it is just best to produce the best product possible instead of trying to milk as much money as possible from as little as possible because that can backfire.

The optics are where Canon shines, and that is probably main reason why Canon still may have the largest market share. For us users, it would be better if Canon got out of the sensor business altogether. We just want the best product for our needs, and do not care who makes most money.

My bet is on money, corporate politics and pride.

Using Sony sensors may prove a hassle on the engineering side. Maybe it is not very easy to "just" integrate a Sony sensor into a Canon body and make that work reliably. After all it would be a top line product. So making it work may present an heavy investment and several years of engineering in order to make it work as expected.

Then Sony will charge for the sensors. But how much? That's up to negotioation. If Canon has to buy Sony sensors at all costs it will have to pay a high price. If Canon on the other hand has their own "good enough" sensor line they can negotiate the price and wait until an agreement is reached. Sony can wait, too.

Having a sensor factory costs about the same if it runs at 0% capacity or 75% capacity. Maybe Canon is currently producing more sensors than they can sell. Thus reducing the number of Canon sensors sold directly cuts into their profit. It'd be better to sell a few cameras less.

Other than dynamic range the sensors that Canon makes are not bad. They are mostly on par or sometimes better than Sony sensors. Do you want to tell your engineers that all their hard work gets thrown out of the window? Maybe Canon is "just" negotiating about some patents with Sony or somebody else so they can use technology which enables a higher DR with technology Canon already has developed but cannot use.

The situation may be that Canon had the best sensor and took pride in that. Then they didn't want to hear that they got overtaken by a competitor. Still, there's technology like DPAF which is unique to Canon sensors and who cares about DR, anyhow! Then they heard the signals but it takes time to change course and Canon sensors get better (very little) every generation. Now they may actually be in negotioations with Sony but one or both of the companies play the waiting game. The problem doesn't hurt sales (yet), so the problem doesn't exist (yet).

After all, a 50MP sensor is a great step in the right direction, and I'll be curious how it compares to the 6D or the 6DII if that gets released. When the time comes to upgrade from the 6D I currently have, I'll look for the package that Nikon can deliver and decide wether it's worth changing systems - or - to invest in a landscaping camera with a landscaping lens from Nikon with a Sony sensor. But that time has not come yet.

 

[Neutral]

<...>
The optics are where Canon shines, and that is probably main reason why Canon still may have the largest market share. For us users, it would be better if Canon got out of the sensor business altogether. We just want the best product for our needs, and do not care who makes most money.

I am afraid that this could happen eventually.

Taking into account sensors innovations acceleration curve driven by other companies and processing and fabrications requirements to put those innovations in life I became very skeptical about Canon ability to keep up with this sensors technologies innovations race. Sensors are semiconductors companies businesses and that requires huge investments to implement new technologies/processes if company wants to manufacture that themselves. I think that in some future situation in sensor business will be the same as with processors business for PCs - only few companies with huge resources dedicated to that would be able to keep up with that race. In PCs market, there are only couple of major players - Intel and AMD. Where are all others now?

The only way to survive for Canon and similar companies in long run is to outsource things that they cannot do better than others. They can design their sensors and ask Samsung/Sony/Toshiba or Intel to manufacture them or use whatever best is available now. I would be excited if Canon would come to agreement with Aptina to use Aptina sensors and their technologies. Alternatively, the same for Sony or Samsung.
Canon is one of the best with the lenses and camera systems, which is traditional business in photography, but their current weakness now is in sensors technology/manufacturing area, which is totally different domain.

5Ds would be the perfect device if it would have the best sensor available now, which in turn would make 5Ds to be the best product on the market serving much wider range of potential buyers than it can do now with Canon sensor.

Sure that 5Ds will be selling very well even with Canon sensor but if that would be Sony or Aptina sensors with their latest sensors technologies then a lot of people (including me) would be attracted back to Canons from using other products like Sony a7R with Canon Lenses for hi-res still photos.

I am sure I am not the only one who started using a7R with Canon lenses having tired of waiting Canon hi-res body with up to date sensor tech. And as I mentioned in another post I was not disappointed with that combination and what’s more some canon lenses are MUCH more easier and MUCH more convenient to use on a7R body than on Canon body as Canon does not provide anything to assist with manual focusing and Sony does that very well (EVF and focus peaking).
Conceptually and practically for me Sony a7R is just digital back for my Canon lenses and this combination allows me to use the best from both sides (Canon lenses tech and Sony sensor tech). But I would be much happier if I could be able to use better integrated one single system like 5Ds

I have sad feeling about Canon decision to use their old tech sensor in 5Ds instead of using better sensors from other companies which can do that better than Canon (this is called outsourcing).
I had very high expectations for that camera but was disappointed at the end. If it possible to do product much better and make it superior then why to degrade the whole system quality/performance by putting mediocre component inside the system which is not up to the level of other system components.
By telling mediocre, I do not mean that this sensor is bad technically – it seems that is just using 7 years back sensors technology providing average performance, which could become the bottleneck for the whole system. Being systems designer/integrator for many years I do not consider this as the best approach for the system design, when product is intended to have life span for at least about 3-5 years from now or even more for many people and I never do such things myself. From general systems design/development prospective Canon approach seems to be not very optimal to say it mildly. In long run term in modern world, companies, which do not keep up with innovations race, put themselves at high risk in the future. We have seen many examples of that.

 

[Loswr]

Why?? This camera was not a speed or video demon so why the heck not go to Sony for the sensor on it? You didn't even give it DPAF, so what possible reason for the Canon sensor?

The best reason of all – profit. Of course, I mean best from their perspective...but you don't really think Canon cares about your perspective, do you? :

Neither cares Canon about your perspective, too. It should care about OUR perspective!

Exactly - and they do. They spend ample money on market research to determine what customers are likely to buy. For example, Canon has had less low ISO DR than their competitors for years, yet they continue to lead the market. Canon just announced a 50 MP camera with the same DR as previous bodies. What does that suggest their market research shows regarding OUR perspective on DR?

Market RESEARCH?!? They have had only ask the landscapers (one target group for this camera) what they need and they had the first answer: DR!
They have had only listen ... not even ask. This should be a landscape camera? Without improved DR? No way! Even the wedding photographers (another target group for this camera) are asking for more DR as for resolution.

They spend ample money on market research to determine what customers are likely to buy.

Better spend the money for sensor research ...

What does that suggest their market research shows regarding OUR perspective on DR?

This may suggest that they are wrong. But this is only speculation ... along whit your speculation about Market RESEARCH.

Yawn, indeed. Canon's goal is to return value to shareholders. One way to do that is by selling more dSLRs. They've consistently shown the ability to do that better than their competition, despite lower DxOMark BScores. Yet individuals on the Internet insist they know what Canon should do, better than Canon themselves. Those individuals do know better – for their own individual needs. As we've established, Canon doesn't care about individual needs.

I guarantee you that many landscape photographers will buy a 5Ds/5DsR.

 

[Loswr]

And what, the world revolves around what sells or doesn't sell in the USA?

The 6D is also the second-best selling FF dSLR at Amazon Germany.

The point is, for all that some people complain that the 6D is 'crippled', it's very popular for a FF camera, in large part because of its (relatively) low cost. I've done my share of complaining about the 6D's AF system, but as we know, Canon doesn't care what I think...

 

[kphoto99]

I don't agree with kphoto99. Purchases of Zeiss manual focus lenses are a drop in the ocean compared with AF, even the most expensive L ones.

I respectively disagree with you. I think that the people who once get the taste of Zeiss lenses continue to buy those lenses.
At the high end of lenses quantity sold matter, here Canon makes very large margins per lens to pay for the R&D costs, unlike in the high volume lines where few lost sales don't matter.

 

[Eldar]

I don't agree with kphoto99. Purchases of Zeiss manual focus lenses are a drop in the ocean compared with AF, even the most expensive L ones.

I respectively disagree with you. I think that the people who once get the taste of Zeiss lenses continue to buy those lenses.
At the high end of lenses quantity sold matter, here Canon makes very large margins per lens to pay for the R&D costs, unlike in the high volume lines where few lost sales don't matter.

I think you´re right, that those who get the Zeiss-Pox tend to buy more Zeiss lenses. I certainly have. But Sporgon is also right. The volume of Zeiss lenses are still very low, compared to Canon lenses. And most of the Zeiss lens users also have a healthy collection of L-series lenses. I certainly have.

But one of the reasons I have as many Zeiss lenses as I have is the lack of Canon alternatives in the focal lengths I have bought. If Canon had updated their 35/1.4L, 50/1.2L, 85 1.2L II and 135 2.0L, I probably would have been 100% Canon. Then I would have been a little less disappointed with the 5Ds also.

 

[zim]

The mirror mechanism in the 5Ds & 5Ds R is upgraded from the spring mechanism inside the Canon EOS 5D Mark III, this will help in reducing camera vibration while on a tripod.

I actually did laugh out loud at that one, so funny, you couldn't make that kind of stuff up.... Oh wait you can ;D

Sounds like a good improvement, why do you think its funny?

on a tripod, improvement over what?

 

[Boykinally]

Architectural and interior photographers also want more dynamic range. I was definitely a buyer for a 5Ds or the R. When I saw it has the same dynamic range as my 5D2 and three frame auto bracketing they lost my purchase. The 17tse and 24tse are they only reason I wouldn't switch to Nikon. I guess I will wait to see if they bring the DR up on the 5D4. Very disappointed in what this camera could've been in sensor technology.

 

[privatebydesign]

Architectural and interior photographers also want more dynamic range. I was definitely a buyer for a 5Ds or the R. When I saw it has the same dynamic range as my 5D2 and three frame auto bracketing they lost my purchase. The 17tse and 24tse are they only reason I wouldn't switch to Nikon. I guess I will wait to see if they bring the DR up on the 5D4. Very disappointed in what this camera could've been in sensor technology.

Where did you see that, as in where are the DR comparison images that demonstrate that?

It seems to me Canon are being very conservative with the claims for these cameras, they often are, but they are saying whilst the DR is similar to the 5D MkIII there is less noise and more latitude in the shadows and highlights, who knows what that means, we don't.

Until we start actually seeing independent tests, hyperbole and emotional garbage is best left in the bin where it belongs.

 

[canonic]

<...>
The optics are where Canon shines, and that is probably main reason why Canon still may have the largest market share. For us users, it would be better if Canon got out of the sensor business altogether. We just want the best product for our needs, and do not care who makes most money.

I am afraid that this could happen eventually.

Taking into account sensors innovations acceleration curve driven by other companies and processing and fabrications requirements to put those innovations in life I became very skeptical about Canon ability to keep up with this sensors technologies innovations race. Sensors are semiconductors companies businesses and that requires huge investments to implement new technologies/processes if company wants to manufacture that themselves. I think that in some future situation in sensor business will be the same as with processors business for PCs - only few companies with huge resources dedicated to that would be able to keep up with that race. In PCs market, there are only couple of major players - Intel and AMD. Where are all others now?

The only way to survive for Canon and similar companies in long run is to outsource things that they cannot do better than others. They can design their sensors and ask Samsung/Sony/Toshiba or Intel to manufacture them or use whatever best is available now. I would be excited if Canon would come to agreement with Aptina to use Aptina sensors and their technologies. Alternatively, the same for Sony or Samsung.
Canon is one of the best with the lenses and camera systems, which is traditional business in photography, but their current weakness now is in sensors technology/manufacturing area, which is totally different domain.

5Ds would be the perfect device if it would have the best sensor available now, which in turn would make 5Ds to be the best product on the market serving much wider range of potential buyers than it can do now with Canon sensor.

Sure that 5Ds will be selling very well even with Canon sensor but if that would be Sony or Aptina sensors with their latest sensors technologies then a lot of people (including me) would be attracted back to Canons from using other products like Sony a7R with Canon Lenses for hi-res still photos.

I am sure I am not the only one who started using a7R with Canon lenses having tired of waiting Canon hi-res body with up to date sensor tech. And as I mentioned in another post I was not disappointed with that combination and what’s more some canon lenses are MUCH more easier and MUCH more convenient to use on a7R body than on Canon body as Canon does not provide anything to assist with manual focusing and Sony does that very well (EVF and focus peaking).
Conceptually and practically for me Sony a7R is just digital back for my Canon lenses and this combination allows me to use the best from both sides (Canon lenses tech and Sony sensor tech). But I would be much happier if I could be able to use better integrated one single system like 5Ds

I have sad feeling about Canon decision to use their old tech sensor in 5Ds instead of using better sensors from other companies which can do that better than Canon (this is called outsourcing).
I had very high expectations for that camera but was disappointed at the end. If it possible to do product much better and make it superior then why to degrade the whole system quality/performance by putting mediocre component inside the system which is not up to the level of other system components.
By telling mediocre, I do not mean that this sensor is bad technically – it seems that is just using 7 years back sensors technology providing average performance, which could become the bottleneck for the whole system. Being systems designer/integrator for many years I do not consider this as the best approach for the system design, when product is intended to have life span for at least about 3-5 years from now or even more for many people and I never do such things myself. From general systems design/development prospective Canon approach seems to be not very optimal to say it mildly. In long run term in modern world, companies, which do not keep up with innovations race, put themselves at high risk in the future. We have seen many examples of that.

+1
What adapter do you use for your Sony a7R?

 

[bholliman]

Tremendous resolution! No improvements in DR, no improvements on noise, no support for high precision manual focus, due to fixed focusing screen (they put it on the 6D and 7DII, but not on their flagships ), exposure metering is not following AF, no illuminated AF confirmation ... There are some more, but these were on top of my wish list. I got one out of six. :

Not including support of changeable focus screens is easily explained as a business decision.
If manual focus was easy on 5Ds then the likely hood of people buying MF Zeiss lenses is much larger instead of them buying AF lenses from Canon.
Most people who buy 6D and 7DII will not spend the money on MF Zeiss lenses so it is safe to allow them to change focusing screens.

Remember Canon's first priority is to maximize profits, if you look at Canon's decisions through this lens then most decisions make sense.

Of course you´re right and that is what pisses me off. And, unfortunately we as customers, in most cases, let them bully us into their corner, where they lock us up and suck us dry. This time my disappointment was just too much and I´m preparing to exit.

Focusing Screens in Taiwan will make an S-screen that will give us that functionality. But it is a nerv wrecking operation to change the focusing screens and it must be done on a bench with tools and good light, ref. how it´s done on the 5DIII. And you have to be able to change them, preferably when you´re in the field, if you want to use lenses slower than f2.8. So I can still get it, but it will be a lot of hassle involved. I would not be surprised though, if the 5Ds will require that you go in from the viewer side to get it out, meaning it will be impossible to change outside of a CPS shop.

How many of you shoot macro with the 100 f2.8L IS Macro? How many use manual focus in doing so? I suppose quite a few. In a sunny and high contrast situation, it is a lot easier to focus that lens manually with an Ec-S focusing screen, than using live view. I would have loved to use a capable 5Ds for that.

Another good use of a high precision focusing screen is when shooting portraits with very shallow depth of field, like with an 85 f1.2L II or 135 f2.0. Why do Canon provide manual focus override with most of their lenses, if you are unable to see that you actually got That eye in focus? I would have loved to use a capable 5Ds for that.

So Canon´s protective attitude, fuelled by their fright of letting any other company make money by allowing customers to use other lenses their own and their view on how to maximize profit, ended in my case in not buying the 5Ds and also not buying the 11-24. And I doubt I will buy any more Canon lenses. I will also stop recommending Canon to people asking for advice. A drop in their ocean, but it might be that I´m not the only one.

The reason that the new 5Ds and r don't have interchangeable focusing screens is because they are fundamentally a 5DIII with different sensor and mirror mechanics. I don't believe Canon intends to produce these in quantities anything like approaching 5DIII numbers, so there isn't really much new tooling.

(Conversely the reason the 6D does have interchangeable screens is because it uses many 5DII components).

+1 This makes perfect sense. Undoubtedly, the market for a high megapixel camera is pretty limited. Most photographers not shooting product, studio or landscape will want a more versatile body with better high ISO performance, smaller files and faster FPS. If they can use many 5DIII parts it will limit their incremental tooling and manufacturing expenses on what is essentially a niche product.

Hopefully, the 5DIV does have interchangeable screens! We will see later this year.

 

[bholliman]

The mirror mechanism in the 5Ds & 5Ds R is upgraded from the spring mechanism inside the Canon EOS 5D Mark III, this will help in reducing camera vibration while on a tripod.

I actually did laugh out loud at that one, so funny, you couldn't make that kind of stuff up.... Oh wait you can ;D

Sounds like a good improvement, why do you think its funny?

on a tripod, improvement over what?

Sorry, missed the "...on a tripod" part. Off a tripod, reduced mirror vibration is a good thing of course!

With some, less-stable, tripods it would be helpful. I always use mirror lock-up on my lightweight travel tripod since mirror slap vibration is noticeable for longer exposures.

 

[Lee Jay]

The mirror mechanism in the 5Ds & 5Ds R is upgraded from the spring mechanism inside the Canon EOS 5D Mark III, this will help in reducing camera vibration while on a tripod.

I actually did laugh out loud at that one, so funny, you couldn't make that kind of stuff up.... Oh wait you can ;D

Sounds like a good improvement, why do you think its funny?

on a tripod, improvement over what?

You think mirror slap doesn't affect images in a tripod? Most tripods aren't close to stiff enough to make any difference with high frequency vibrations.

 

[Boykinally]

Well if it had better dynamic range why would Chuck Westfall say it was the same as the 5D3 then? Duh.