Is Canon now two generations behind Nikon?

[Chuck Alaimo]

Why has this made it to page 30?

Because there is an extremely high correlation between Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and frequency of internet postings.

Take some OCD, coupled with a matter of life and death, plus a lack of humour.... throw in some raging testosterone and keep the whole mixture simmering over a troll baited flame.... Add DR for seasoning.... and you get enough posts to choke the server.

Don Haines
Posts: 3084

And of those 3,084 posts, 3,083 have been cheerful, humorous, positive, constructive and/or peace-making. I'd say 3,084 were that way, but hey -- nobody's perfect.

I was going to ask Mitch if he is experiencing Deja Moo... (The feeling that you have seen this bull before)

Unfocused: 2044 Posts. The only reason for posting this is to start one of those quote within a quote within a quote sequences that can look pretty cool when they get to about 20-30 quotes. Time to have some fun, demonstrate the absurdity of this thread and maybe break the Internet!

Neuroanatomist: just a few posts, really.

What? No one else wants to play?

I spy something with my little eye...

I can't, I am on a self imposed exile for a week or so. But, intriguingly enough, I have a friend coming to stay who has a D800 (shame it isn't an 810 or E though) and a 24-70 so I am hoping to do some comparison images for my own piece of mind.

What better to make of such a thread than a kaleidoscope....

Good read to pass time... I wonder if the forum will eventually put a limit on how many levels you can quote, or run out of memory and crash...

Probably not—that's all just handled with CSS in your browser—but eventually it will probably get to the point where the innermost quoted message is only one character wide.

That would be fun!

Not a Kaleidoscope, and not an Aneurysm, it's a Squirrel!

Really?

thank god...this will surely get this thread closed. please, please, please, please.....>.<

How many generations is this ?

It does get to the point that someone will grab his camera and snap a picture of this extensive semi-natural phenomenon that best resembles the great piramids of Egypt in 2D representation (or not so sexy airial photography).

By the way... that is one fine squirrel!

It's funny how squirrels appear once there are enough nuts loose....

Did someone really just try to revive the topic on the pointless discussion it was about for 30 pages? This is kind of fight fire with fire.... stop the bullshit with.... I kinda prefer piramids and kaleidoscopes. However, my ultimate goal would be to actually make it look like a squirrel ;D

Let's not off topic too much otherwise the admin might lock it up. We are totally discussing on the topic. Canon two generations behind? Nah, wait till you see the dual pixel + dual sensitivity sensor is out. The patent regards to this is very interesting. This is the next gen. dual pixel sensor. They've managed to make the two half pixels having different FWC and sensitivity so it gives you high and low sensitivity at the same time without losing resolution. Just like human eye, rods and cones anyone? : I am personally looking forward to this solution and how it compares with Sony's exmor.

Canon two generations behind? No. Two generations ago, Canon was two generations ahead. It took Nikon that long to catch up.

Let's stay focused here people (says "unfocused") We are starting to annoy the trolls. Yes!

perhaps we need nested squirrels to kill this thread...

Aren't there some rules about squirrels on this forum, regardless of whether they have a nest or not?

Just Checking to see if this post makes the original one drop to 1-pixel wide.

Yeah! Even Jon is showing a sense of humor. There is still hope.

RLPhoto, were you upset that I put a Squirrel in your Kaleidoscope? Or that I didn't play by the standard rules of I Spy? (giving a hint before revealing the subject)

Still going? Even the squirrels are shaking their fists!

I think we may have completely swallowed the original post now. I don't even see it at all...

Wow...lol

 

[Canonicon]

Why has this made it to page 30?

Because there is an extremely high correlation between Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and frequency of internet postings.

Take some OCD, coupled with a matter of life and death, plus a lack of humour.... throw in some raging testosterone and keep the whole mixture simmering over a troll baited flame.... Add DR for seasoning.... and you get enough posts to choke the server.

Don Haines
Posts: 3084

And of those 3,084 posts, 3,083 have been cheerful, humorous, positive, constructive and/or peace-making. I'd say 3,084 were that way, but hey -- nobody's perfect.

I was going to ask Mitch if he is experiencing Deja Moo... (The feeling that you have seen this bull before)

Unfocused: 2044 Posts. The only reason for posting this is to start one of those quote within a quote within a quote sequences that can look pretty cool when they get to about 20-30 quotes. Time to have some fun, demonstrate the absurdity of this thread and maybe break the Internet!

Neuroanatomist: just a few posts, really.

What? No one else wants to play?

I spy something with my little eye...

I can't, I am on a self imposed exile for a week or so. But, intriguingly enough, I have a friend coming to stay who has a D800 (shame it isn't an 810 or E though) and a 24-70 so I am hoping to do some comparison images for my own piece of mind.

What better to make of such a thread than a kaleidoscope....

Good read to pass time... I wonder if the forum will eventually put a limit on how many levels you can quote, or run out of memory and crash...

Probably not—that's all just handled with CSS in your browser—but eventually it will probably get to the point where the innermost quoted message is only one character wide.

That would be fun!

Not a Kaleidoscope, and not an Aneurysm, it's a Squirrel!

Really?

thank god...this will surely get this thread closed. please, please, please, please.....>.<

How many generations is this ?

It does get to the point that someone will grab his camera and snap a picture of this extensive semi-natural phenomenon that best resembles the great piramids of Egypt in 2D representation (or not so sexy airial photography).

By the way... that is one fine squirrel!

It's funny how squirrels appear once there are enough nuts loose....

Did someone really just try to revive the topic on the pointless discussion it was about for 30 pages? This is kind of fight fire with fire.... stop the bullshit with.... I kinda prefer piramids and kaleidoscopes. However, my ultimate goal would be to actually make it look like a squirrel ;D

Let's not off topic too much otherwise the admin might lock it up. We are totally discussing on the topic. Canon two generations behind? Nah, wait till you see the dual pixel + dual sensitivity sensor is out. The patent regards to this is very interesting. This is the next gen. dual pixel sensor. They've managed to make the two half pixels having different FWC and sensitivity so it gives you high and low sensitivity at the same time without losing resolution. Just like human eye, rods and cones anyone? : I am personally looking forward to this solution and how it compares with Sony's exmor.

Canon two generations behind? No. Two generations ago, Canon was two generations ahead. It took Nikon that long to catch up.

Let's stay focused here people (says "unfocused") We are starting to annoy the trolls. Yes!

perhaps we need nested squirrels to kill this thread...

Aren't there some rules about squirrels on this forum, regardless of whether they have a nest or not?

Just Checking to see if this post makes the original one drop to 1-pixel wide.

Yeah! Even Jon is showing a sense of humor. There is still hope.

RLPhoto, were you upset that I put a Squirrel in your Kaleidoscope? Or that I didn't play by the standard rules of I Spy? (giving a hint before revealing the subject)

Still going? Even the squirrels are shaking their fists!

I think we may have completely swallowed the original post now. I don't even see it at all...

Wow...lol

What post?

 

[Phenix205]

I think this thread has gone nuts

Every time in the last few days when I opened up CR's homepage I saw this thread in the headline. Never clicked in until today after finishing all reports, replying all emails, and returning all phone calls .... the darn thing was still hanging there. So I clicked in. Wow, 35 pages long. And this photo is just hilarious. It took some big balls to get these nuts on.

 

[DominoDude]

Indeedy, very nuts.
If anyone haven't seen it yet, here's the ultimate combination of videocamera, squirrels and nuts...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Awp7v1YIgps

(as seen on PetaPixel)

From the video it's obvious that neither Nikon, or Canon are the preferred choice if you are a squirrel. They want to go nuts over a GoPro.

 

[Click]

;D ;D ;D

 

[jrista]

....
I think if Nikon stopped wasting time and money on things like the Df

I'd write the Df off as a gamble that didn't work. They've been reading internet forums, talking to folks, etc, that don't want video, want an old style camera (look at the retro designs in the mirrorless segment) and thought they'd see if there was any substance there. Unfortunately they found out that there wasn't and that Internet posts are worth $0.

Well, I don't think they researched well enough. A proper market survey would ask real photographers not only whether they wanted a still-only, retro-styled body, but HOW the body was designed. The true disaster of the Df is it's hideous control system. There are certainly people out there who want a retro-styled body...but Nikon botched that by making it difficult to function. A body can look retro, and still be easy to use.

That's what I mean about Nikon management...I just don't think they are thorough and meticulous and forward-thinking enough to handle the creation of a product like the Df that might actually appeal to the masses that would, say, really love a Leica retro style camera but simply cannot afford one. It can't just look a certain way...it needs to be built a certain way, it needs to be usable such that it doesn't frustrate the user, etc.

I've never honestly gotten the feeling that Nikon thinks that deeply about their products. I've never gotten the feeling that they test their prototype products (which the Df should have been at some point) to make sure they are functional, to figure out the flaws in the design, to revisit the drawing board when necessary and make the required changes. Canon definitely does that. I think that's part of the reason it can take so long for a new Canon camera to come out...Canon does their due diligence BEFORE releasing their products. Nikon...I've always gotten the feeling that they rush their products out...and, based on the market statistics, I think that is to their detriment. They have less market share, and it's falling faster than Canon's. Is that because their cameras suck? Clearly not. I think it's because Nikon is not managed as well.

If Nikon made a variant of the D8x0 with an EF mount for lenses, I wonder how many *that* would sell?

I bet it would sell a ton. I'd buy one.

 

[Lawliet]

I bet it would sell a ton. I'd buy one.

Considering the number of A7r+Metabones-"kits" our local dealers sell, resp. the related preorder lists - quite plausible.

 

[Aglet]

The reality is that if any company made a camera system that was better than everyone else at everything, they would have the entire market...

I doubt it. There'd still be a pile of people claiming how their old brand X was still better than the superior brand Y in some unmeasureable metric, or it would cost to much to switch, or... something.

 

[wickidwombat]

wow death by over quoting.

Nice work guys :

 

[ChristopherMarkPerez]

I can hear it now. The argument painters from the late 19th century must've had over which was the better brush and over who could mix their paints better than anyone else. Fights break out. Flame wars rage. Paintings remain un-started. Models stand there completely nude and catching a cold. Scorched earth. Shock and awe. Over tools of the trade.

Or not.

I agree with Don, with a slight modification: If working photographers, editors, and clients could see a clear difference between imaging systems, don't you think people would make a move? After-all, their livelihood (ie: food on the table, big fancy car, and roof over their heads) would depend on the most successful outcome, right? The differences would be obvious, right?

Here's a challenge to anyone who feel they know their stuff:
Meet me at a local brasserie. I'll bring the stack of prints. You bring your deep knowledge of "how things really are." As I share my prints you tell me which camera and which lens made which image. Your reward is I buy you a beer for each correct answer. If you're as good as you think you are, you're going to get very very drunk indeed. If you guess wrong I won't burden you with the horrors of seeing me pissed to the tits.

Anyone who knows me knows that I've been running this challenge for years and not one single person has taken me up on the offer. So step right up. Be brave. Be the first. Come on. Be a strong person. You can do it.

After reading so many comments about how one system is suddenly so brilliant and another is falling so far behind a person might come to think that all those Wise Guys would really know what they're talking about.

The reality is that if any company made a camera system that was better than everyone else at everything, they would have the entire market...

I doubt it. There'd still be a pile of people claiming how their old brand X was still better than the superior brand Y in some unmeasureable metric, or it would cost to much to switch, or... something.

 

[Khalai]

I can hear it now. The argument painters from the late 19th century must've had over which was the better brush and over who could mix their paints better than anyone else. Fights break out. Flame wars rage. Paintings remain un-started. Models stand there completely nude and catching a cold. Scorched earth. Shock and awe. Over tools of the trade.

Or not.

I agree with Don, with a slight modification: If working photographers, editors, and clients could see a clear difference between imaging systems, don't you think people would make a move? After-all, their livelihood (ie: food on the table, big fancy car, and roof over their heads) would depend on the most successful outcome, right? The differences would be obvious, right?

Here's a challenge to anyone who feel they know their stuff:
Meet me at a local brasserie. I'll bring the stack of prints. You bring your deep knowledge of "how things really are." As I share my prints you tell me which camera and which lens made which image. Your reward is I buy you a beer for each correct answer. If you're as good as you think you are, you're going to get very very drunk indeed. If you guess wrong I won't burden you with the horrors of seeing me pissed to the tits.

Anyone who knows me knows that I've been running this challenge for years and not one single person has taken me up on the offer. So step right up. Be brave. Be the first. Come on. Be a strong person. You can do it.

After reading so many comments about how one system is suddenly so brilliant and another is falling so far behind a person might come to think that all those Wise Guys would really know what they're talking about.

The reality is that if any company made a camera system that was better than everyone else at everything, they would have the entire market...

I doubt it. There'd still be a pile of people claiming how their old brand X was still better than the superior brand Y in some unmeasureable metric, or it would cost to much to switch, or... something.

<really bad joke> Every print with a greenish tint is automatically a Nikon shot? </really bad joke>

Sorry, couldn't resist

 

[ChristopherMarkPerez]

LOL! I love it. ;D

Reminds me of the assumptions people used to make about the color cast lens coatings imparted back in the Old Film Days.

<really bad joke> Every print with a greenish tint is automatically a Nikon shot? </really bad joke>

Sorry, couldn't resist

 

[ChristopherMarkPerez]

Well played, sir. Very well played, indeed.

I can hear it now. The argument painters from the late 19th century must've had over which was the better brush and over who could mix their paints better than anyone else. Fights break out. Flame wars rage.

By late 19th century that fight was settled, and with neo-Classicism they were busy flame festing photographers instead, and insisting daguerreotypes weren't an art form, that photographers were mere "device operators" (perhaps one of the causes for Pictorialism in Photography..., see Russian Pictorialism for instance), that oil paints had more dynamic range than silver halide, while the ergonomics of zibeline brushes were vastly superior to the ergonomics of a Susse Freres camera, to which the photographers retorted with the injury potential of said brushes (see Renoir's reumatoid arthritis) and that the lenses in then daguerreotype cameras had a je ne sais quois potential that could only be achieved by a severely miopic artist. This of course was all moot, since gelatin dry plates were vastly superior to daguerreotypes, to the dismay of famous daguerreotypistes who insisted coating copper plates with silver iodide was the pinnacle of technical excellence and no further development was needed, to which the competition counter-retorted with their vastly improved sliding boxes focusing system.... Victorian society was ablaze, threats uttered in continental Europe and across the Atlantic, with then famous troll, George Eastman, saying "i'll put you all in a box, a brown box"

 

[Old Sarge]

LOL! I love it. ;D

Reminds me of the assumptions people used to make about the color cast lens coatings imparted back in the Old Film Days.

<really bad joke> Every print with a greenish tint is automatically a Nikon shot? </really bad joke>

Sorry, couldn't resist

Reminds me of my high school days. I worked for a camera store in San Pedro, California. Friday nights (the night we stayed open until 9 p.m.) the boss would send me to the donut shop for donuts while he started a big pot of coffee. A group of older men (they were older to me then, now they would be young middle age men) would gather with cameras, prints, lenses, etc. And one of the subjects, on many nights, was lens coatings and their effect. It was much like this forum but more congenial. BTW, in the group would be Leica, Nikon, Canon, Exakta, and larger camera factions. And, much like I do on this forum, I kept silent in the face of all that wisdom but was proud to be there.

 

[Loswr]

Here's a challenge to anyone who feel they know their stuff:
Meet me at a local brasserie. I'll bring the stack of prints. You bring your deep knowledge of "how things really are." As I share my prints you tell me which camera and which lens made which image.

"All right. Where is the Exmor? The battle of wits has begun. It ends when you decide and we both mount and frame, and find out who is right... and who is dead."

"But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of man who would put the Exmor into his own print or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would put the Exmor into his own print, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the print in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the print in front of me."

"You've made your decision then?"

"Not remotely. Because Exmor comes from Sony, as everyone knows, and Sony is entirely peopled with marketeers, and marketeers are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me, so I can clearly not choose the print in front of you."

"Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."

 

[Sporgon]

Here's a challenge to anyone who feel they know their stuff:
Meet me at a local brasserie. I'll bring the stack of prints. You bring your deep knowledge of "how things really are." As I share my prints you tell me which camera and which lens made which image.

"All right. Where is the Exmor? The battle of wits has begun. It ends when you decide and we both mount and frame, and find out who is right... and who is dead."

"But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of man who would put the Exmor into his own print or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would put the Exmor into his own print, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the print in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the print in front of me."

"You've made your decision then?"

"Not remotely. Because Exmor comes from Sony, as everyone knows, and Sony is entirely peopled with marketeers, and marketeers are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me, so I can clearly not choose the print in front of you."

"Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."

;D. ;D

And when your opponent lies vanquished on the floor, you Neuro will be accused have having used Exmor in both your prints...........

 

[dtaylor]

Here's a challenge to anyone who feel they know their stuff:
Meet me at a local brasserie. I'll bring the stack of prints. You bring your deep knowledge of "how things really are." As I share my prints you tell me which camera and which lens made which image.

"All right. Where is the Exmor? The battle of wits has begun. It ends when you decide and we both mount and frame, and find out who is right... and who is dead."

"But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of you: are you the sort of man who would put the Exmor into his own print or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would put the Exmor into his own print, because he would know that only a great fool would reach for what he was given. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the print in front of you. But you must have known I was not a great fool, you would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the print in front of me."

"You've made your decision then?"

"Not remotely. Because Exmor comes from Sony, as everyone knows, and Sony is entirely peopled with marketeers, and marketeers are used to having people not trust them, as you are not trusted by me, so I can clearly not choose the print in front of you."

"Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."

I haven't checked this thread since my last post. Decided to go ahead and see what was on the last page. Thank you Neuro, I needed the laughs ;D

"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The most famous is "Never get involved in a lens debate in Asia." But only slightly less well known is this: "Never go in against a Sony when shadows are on the line! Ahahahaha, ahahahaha, ahahaha" -- thud

"Who are you?"

"I am no photographer to be trifled with, that is all you ever need know."

"To think -- all that time it was your print that was Exmor."

"They were both Canon. I spent the last few years building up an exposure technique immune to shadow noise." ;D

 

[privatebydesign]

Doesn't quoting the Princess Bride invoke Godwin's Law?

 

[RLPhoto]

LOL! I love it. ;D

Reminds me of the assumptions people used to make about the color cast lens coatings imparted back in the Old Film Days.

<really bad joke> Every print with a greenish tint is automatically a Nikon shot? </really bad joke>

Sorry, couldn't resist

I find it funny this challenge come from someone preaching about how a 50mp sensor will somehow resolve more detail with crap lenses when no one will tell the difference in print. Hilarious! XD

 

[dtaylor]

Doesn't quoting the Princess Bride invoke Godwin's Law?

They were Nazis, Dude?

Oh, come on, they were threatening an underexposure test! Are we gonna split hairs here? Am I wrong? ;D