New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]

[KyleSTL]

You also seem to think that the original 1Ds DSLR was un-innovative. It was the first FF DSLR!

Unfortunately incorrect -

Contax N Digital - July 2000
Kodak DCS Pro 14n - Sept 2002
Canon 1Ds - Sept 2002
Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n - Feb 2004
Kodak DCS Pro SLR/c - Mar 2004
Canon 1Ds Mark II - Sept 2004
Canon 5D - August 2005
Canon 1Ds Mark III - Aug 2007
Nikon D3 - Aug 2007
Nikon D700 - Jul 2008
Sony DSLR-A900 - Sept 2008

If you were to say the first FF DSLR by a company that is still in business, or the first FF DSLR that was commerically viable then you would be correct (Contax was a total flop, and Kodak didn't survive long either, despite adopting cameras with both Nikon and Canon lens mounts).

 

[jrista]

You also seem to think that the original 1Ds DSLR was un-innovative. It was the first FF DSLR!

Unfortunately incorrect -

Contax N Digital - July 2000
Kodak DCS Pro 14n - Sept 2002
Canon 1Ds - Sept 2002
Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n - Feb 2004
Kodak DCS Pro SLR/c - Mar 2004
Canon 1Ds Mark II - Sept 2004
Canon 5D - August 2005
Canon 1Ds Mark III - Aug 2007
Nikon D3 - Aug 2007
Nikon D700 - Jul 2008
Sony DSLR-A900 - Sept 2008

If you were to say the first FF DSLR by a company that is still in business, or the first FF DSLR that was commerically viable then you would be correct (Contax was a total flop, and Kodak didn't survive long either, despite adopting cameras with both Nikon and Canon lens mounts).

Well, the Contax was a CCD camera, and I wast talking about the first CMOS FF. As for the Kodak, seems it was released the same time as the 1Ds, so maybe it's a tie...except that Canon was wildly successful.

 

[Loswr]

You also seem to think that the original 1Ds DSLR was un-innovative. It was the first FF DSLR!

Unfortunately incorrect -

Contax N Digital - July 2000
Kodak DCS Pro 14n - Sept 2002
Canon 1Ds - Sept 2002

If you were to say the first FF DSLR by a company that is still in business, or the first FF DSLR that was commerically viable then you would be correct (Contax was a total flop, and Kodak didn't survive long either, despite adopting cameras with both Nikon and Canon lens mounts).

Try this: "The 1Ds was the first CMOS FF dSLR."

I suppose you could say the Kodak DCS Pro 14n was the first, because it was announced before the 1Ds. But the 1Ds was available shortly after it was announced, whereas Kodak announced it early but it wasn't actually available until the middle of the following year. That sort of tactic - announcing a product, then a long delay, then some retailers start taking preorders, then another long delay - is a dirty trick that Canon would never play.

 

[Loswr]

Did I forget my <sarcasm> tag again? :-X

 

[jrista]

Did I forget my <sarcasm> tag again? :-X

You did indeed.

 

[eml58]

That sort of tactic - announcing a product, then a long delay, then some retailers start taking preorders, then another long delay - is a dirty trick that Canon would never play.

Ha Ha Ha No Never, at least not this month, yet.

 

[CarlTN]

Regardless of what Canon is doing, there are other companies that most photogs have bought into that do the same thing or worse i.e. apple and most continue to buy in. Bleeding out tech, coming out with things later than others, charging 50-200% more than the competitors for the same or less hardware, disabling compatibilities unnecessarily, withholding bs features from one model only to help create product separation for the next model. To me, canon isn't even as guilty as they are (if they do happen to be guilty of any of those things). Bottom line, they are not alone if they are trying to make a profit through these measures. If you're going to blast canon for it, you might see if you can head over to all the other forums for the other companies you have purchased products from to do the same thing.

Can we all please just recognize that none of these companies are non-profits with YOUR specific desires/needs at the forefront of their business decisions? Go out and take some pictures please.

Interesting perspective you have. To compare Canon to Apple though, is rather silly, don't you think? And if your main complaint with Apple has to do with the products they make, or the lack of control you as a consumer have over their products, or them as a company in general...well that's amusing!

I think you completely missed my point.

I don't care whether these companies are doing it or not. What I was saying was that people should stop saying companies are horrible simply because they aren't tailoring their business decisions to that specific consumer's specific need as a consumer.

You are right. It is silly which is exactly the view I thought I expressed.

I thought you were likening Canon to Apple, in a backhanded way. If that was incorrect, then I stand corrected.

 

[CarlTN]

Regardless of what Canon is doing, there are other companies that most photogs have bought into that do the same thing or worse i.e. apple and most continue to buy in. Bleeding out tech, coming out with things later than others, charging 50-200% more than the competitors for the same or less hardware, disabling compatibilities unnecessarily, withholding bs features from one model only to help create product separation for the next model. To me, canon isn't even as guilty as they are (if they do happen to be guilty of any of those things). Bottom line, they are not alone if they are trying to make a profit through these measures. If you're going to blast canon for it, you might see if you can head over to all the other forums for the other companies you have purchased products from to do the same thing.

Can we all please just recognize that none of these companies are non-profits with YOUR specific desires/needs at the forefront of their business decisions? Go out and take some pictures please.

Interesting perspective you have. To compare Canon to Apple though, is rather silly, don't you think? And if your main complaint with Apple has to do with the products they make, or the lack of control you as a consumer have over their products, or them as a company in general...well that's amusing!

I think you completely missed my point.

I don't care whether these companies are doing it or not. What I was saying was that people should stop saying companies are horrible simply because they aren't tailoring their business decisions to that specific consumer's specific need as a consumer.

You are right. It is silly which is exactly the view I thought I expressed.

Actually I don't find it silly. As absurd as it is (yes, I do acknowledge it's absurdity in a way) look at the new iPhone 5c & the "new" EOS Rebel SL1/Kiss X7 in White. I always thought that crippling just comes as is with a lower price tag... Now it comes, but with style! ;D ;D ;D

The last time I checked both companies were STILL quite everything else but NON-profit 8)
So then they have tailored the design according to the true needs of the majority of consumers.

[sarcasm] Now my dream will come true and I will probably get the ORANGE 1DXs for Christmas 2014.

I know - I am the only person on this forum to actually ask for better ISO & DR in the same body... I have to admit quite unnecessary features indeed. [/sarcasm]

My point was, Canon is not comparable to Apple. They aren't remotely as big, bloated, touchy feely, or hypocritical. Canon makes serious products (mostly...ok not all of them are!) for serious enthusiasts and professionals. Apple makes overpriced crap for idiots, and became the world's largest company for a brief time, doing it. Last time I checked, Canon wasn't sitting on 150 billion dollars cash, because they like to hide it overseas to avoid paying taxes on it. Maybe Canon is hording a half billion in cash somewhere...but that's a far cry from 150 billion! And Canon don't farm out their production to Chinese companies employing the "work camp" methodology, approaching slave labor (while pretending everything is just fine and mostly somehow "assembled" in America). I'm sure Canon's plants (outside Japan) don't exactly pay high wages, but still it's not REMOTELY the same. And Canon don't inject themselves into politics in quite the way Apple does. That's where the hypocrisy comes in...Oh and Canon's founders probably weren't nearly as much of a complete ***hole as Steve Jobs was.

 

[Roo]

But patent attorneys need research-based claims to file on, so clearly Canon is spending a lot of money on R&D.

I was at a Canon presentation tonight and the video they showed said they spend 10% of global revenues on R&D. They also quoted global revenue at us$45.6 billion.

 

[Eldar]

But patent attorneys need research-based claims to file on, so clearly Canon is spending a lot of money on R&D.

I was at a Canon presentation tonight and the video they showed said they spend 10% of global revenues on R&D. They also quoted global revenue at us$45.6 billion.

That is a Significant R&D budget, regardless of which company or business you compare it to!

 

[Diko]

But patent attorneys need research-based claims to file on, so clearly Canon is spending a lot of money on R&D.

I was at a Canon presentation tonight and the video they showed said they spend 10% of global revenues on R&D. They also quoted global revenue at us$45.6 billion.

That is a Significant R&D budget, regardless of which company or business you compare it to!

Now someone's talkin' digits.

I guess it could be true (trying to turn off that "everybody lies" mode for a brief moment). Than definitely I must agree with Eldar.

Having in mind that HP back in the days invested about 14% then they went down to 3-4% (if I recall it correctly) and now after the crisis they turned it back to 8%.

 

[AvTvM]

I was at a Canon presentation tonight and the video they showed said they spend 10% of global revenues on R&D. They also quoted global revenue at us$45.6 billion.

Interesting. Did they say, how much of it was spent on video and cinema stuff?

1DC, C100, C300, C500 ... within a year or so, and a constant flow of cine lenses and video-optimization throughout the entire lineup of cameras and lenses ... must gobble up huge amounts of R&D spending.
Leaving not enough for stills cameras and development of fully competitive, hi-res, high DR image sensors.
Not to mention my desired "A7R killer" FF MILC.

 

[Don Haines]

I was at a Canon presentation tonight and the video they showed said they spend 10% of global revenues on R&D. They also quoted global revenue at us$45.6 billion.

Interesting. Did they say, how much of it was spent on video and cinema stuff?

1DC, C100, C300, C500 ... within a year or so, and a constant flow of cine lenses and video-optimization throughout the entire lineup of cameras and lenses ... must gobble up huge amounts of R&D spending.
Leaving not enough for stills cameras and development of fully competitive, hi-res, high DR image sensors.
Not to mention my desired "A7R killer" FF MILC.

What you see entering the market place now is based on R+D decisions made 5 or more years ago. Some of those decisions will only impact video, some will only impact stills, but many will impact both. Look at Dual-pixel... the benefits for video are obvious with the first of the new cameras, but watch the impact that it has on stills when it gets rolling.... you jump from 63 (or less) focus points to millions.... that has to have an impact on ability to track objects! you can autofocus well beyonf F5.6..... and watch what happens to dynamic range.... This is the technology that your A7R killer will be based on and it was developed with video in mind

 

[Roo]

I was at a Canon presentation tonight and the video they showed said they spend 10% of global revenues on R&D. They also quoted global revenue at us$45.6 billion.

Interesting. Did they say, how much of it was spent on video and cinema stuff?

1DC, C100, C300, C500 ... within a year or so, and a constant flow of cine lenses and video-optimization throughout the entire lineup of cameras and lenses ... must gobble up huge amounts of R&D spending.
Leaving not enough for stills cameras and development of fully competitive, hi-res, high DR image sensors.
Not to mention my desired "A7R killer" FF MILC.

If you really think that's all they did with their R&D you need to get out more. : Video and cinema is just one part of the whole imaging business and it takes more than a year to bring much of that stuff to market. This year they have also brought out the 100D, 700D and 70D plus new or updated lenses. They have also brought out new printers and other imaging equipment... Sorry that you feel so badly that they don't work to your immediate wants and you have to spend so much time griping about it.

I saw a shortened an updated version of the vid below.

Canon's 70-Year Imaging History - A Tradition of Innovation

 

[simonxu11]

I was at a Canon presentation tonight and the video they showed said they spend 10% of global revenues on R&D. They also quoted global revenue at us$45.6 billion.

Interesting. Did they say, how much of it was spent on video and cinema stuff?

1DC, C100, C300, C500 ... within a year or so, and a constant flow of cine lenses and video-optimization throughout the entire lineup of cameras and lenses ... must gobble up huge amounts of R&D spending.
Leaving not enough for stills cameras and development of fully competitive, hi-res, high DR image sensors.
Not to mention my desired "A7R killer" FF MILC.

If you really think that's all they did with their R&D you need to get out more. : Video and cinema is just one part of the whole imaging business and it takes more than a year to bring much of that stuff to market. This year they have also brought out the 100D, 700D and 70D plus new or updated lenses. They have also brought out new printers and other imaging equipment... Sorry that you feel so badly that they don't work to your immediate wants and you have to spend so much time griping about it.

I saw a shortened an updated version of the vid below.

Canon's 70-Year Imaging History - A Tradition of Innovation

The video's title--A Tradition of Innovation

What an innovation THE 700D ;D ;D

 

[AvTvM]

The video's title--A Tradition of Innovation

What an innovation THE 700D ;D ;D

Yes! Very innovative, Canon! From its very innovative start 71 years ago as unlicensed copycat maker of german camera designs ... all the way to 2013 with their greatest innovative triumph ever ... the Canon Digital Kiss ... all in white! ;D

Canon does not need a long, boring video showing off their "tradition of innovation". One picture tells the story:

(c) Tom Fishburne (c) http://tomfishburne.com/2012/10/cannibalize.html

 

[privatebydesign]

Canon are not in business to keep you guys happy, they are in business to keep their shareholders happy. Start thinking like that.

The stand alone stills camera market is getting smaller every year, the bread and butter money makers for both Canon and Nikon are losing sales, the P&S market is in terminal decline and the traditional core money maker, entry level DSLR's, is getting reduced sales year on year. Nikon and Sony (who's camera division loses fortunes every year) are throwing out every conceivable combination of what forum fools say they want, but when a company makes it the forumistas find enough reasons to "wait for the MkII", or "I'd get it if it was half that price".

Canon is taking a different approach and is repositioning in another camera market, Cine, a lot of time and effort has gone into the Cine range and that will be what supports our L addiction, be very thankful that the EF mount was used on the Cine cameras, without it I suspect "our" lens R&D would be a fraction of what it is. We are becoming the poor cousin, almost every lens release from here on out will be video orientated, STM not USM, slower but with IS etc etc, that is the new paradigm, get used to it or buy a Sony before they go bankrupt.

 

[AvTvM]

Canon are not in business to keep you guys happy, they are in business to keep their shareholders happy. Start thinking like that.

Actually it is exactly the other way round. At least for companies that want to be successful.

IF Canon wants to stay in business with me, they better think about what I want and how they keep ME happy. Otherwise I won't continue to buy from them. And the same goes for all their other customers too .. each single one of them. If they don't make 'em happy, they won 't have anything to make their shareholders happy down the line.

CUSTOMERS always come FIRST. 8)

http://imgc.allpostersimages.com/images/P-473-488-90/60/6004/IADB100Z/posters/david-sipress-i-have-just-one-more-question-will-it-make-me-happy-new-yorker-cartoon.jpg

 

[Random Orbits]

CUSTOMERS always come FIRST. 8)

That's right: CUSTOMERS come first. Customer does not.

 

[Loswr]

Canon are not in business to keep you guys happy, they are in business to keep their shareholders happy. Start thinking like that.

Actually it is exactly the other way round. At least for companies that want to be successful.

IF Canon wants to stay in business with me, they better think about what I want and how they keep ME happy. Otherwise I won't continue to buy from them. And the same goes for all their other customers too .. each single one of them. If they don't make 'em happy, they won 't have anything to make their shareholders happy down the line.

CUSTOMERS always come FIRST.

Not exactly. CustomerS come first. In aggregate. Canon needs to keep a majority of the user base 'happy', or at least buying - that is one way to deliver value to shareholders. They've clearly demonstrated the ability to do that. If your particular wants/needs coincide with those of the majority, well and good. If not, as is clearly the case for you, then Canon doesn't really give a CRAP about YOU.