Poll Added: Here's Why Canon Doesn't Need to Innovate, But it Should

[Isaacheus]

Re: Poll Added: Here's Why Canon Doesn't Need to Innovate, But it Does.

The canons are decent reliable cameras, but there are things they just cannot shoot compared to other options in class.

There is a very important distinction between 'things they just cannot shoot' and 'things I just cannot shoot with them'.

I'm not saying the former is never true, but for the most part when people state the former, what they really mean is the latter. This was Keith's point earlier in the thread.

Oh yes, and I don't want to imply that it is always the camera that is the limiting factor. For a number of shots I take, the camera doesn't make the difference, can't blame the camera for those bad shots.

For my uses, it's more the video features that the Canon just doesn't have the option for, namely the full frame 4k and 120 fps video.

For most of my stills, the differences in dynamic range between Sony and the 5dmk4 are not the deciding factor, just not enough in it. It's the functional features that get it there. Didn't think I'd be saying the Canon offering isn't as functional as the Sony really

 

[Jack Jian]

Perception is reality! This is a lesson that Canon will begin to learn the hard way without innovation. I see many more videos and write-ups about Canon not being able to measure up to other manufacturers' innovation and this will begin to stick and impact their bottom line.

I wish Canon would read your comment and start innovating rather than consulting the pro's on their needs.
Innovations I know are as below (not in order):

1. USM AF
2. 50mm F1.0
3. First affordable FF
4. IS (I think) & Hybrid IS
5. STM AF
6. DPAF
7. Eye Controlled AF
8. Practical Widest lens with L standard IQ & built
10. Now, they "Accidently" found tweaking the DPRAW to squeeze out extra stop of DR (and will eventually ISO noise performance as well), and in a matter of time when it's perfected, all Canon APSC and FF will be leading the pack with higher DR and ISO performance..LOL
11. The legendary Canon color science..(Don't tell me you can tweak any RAW to get the canon color, I'll , and every Canon shooters will roll their eyes!)
12. DO lens
13. 50MP DSLR
14. Dual Cross AF + 5 Dual Cross AF points on modern 5D lineup and 1Dx line up.
15. Air Sphere coating
16. Blue Spectrum reduction coating and a lot similar more
17. and a lot more, just browse through the patent news on CR and compared it to NR and SR (they have no news at all).

 

[alienman]

Canon is behind, way behind. Any gig that I do that involves video simply cannot be done with a Canon camera. Period. Full stop. Their $5500 "flagship` camera tops out at 120fps in hd. How 2010 of them.... Sony here I come....

I agree, I went the Panasonic route and got the gh5 and gh5s with a couple of metabones speedsters for my legacy canon glass. Focus peaking, zebras, DCI 4k, 4k 60p, just seemed to be a more logical decision than getting 1dxii to go along with my cinema camera. Hopefully canon knocks it out of the park with their full frame mirrorless. Im praying

And for you video guys out there I believe Panasonic just announced an 8k sensor for their mirrorless.

 

[slclick]

All this chatter takes me back to the OG debate how if film shooters of yesteryear could do what they do, it's not the camera if you can't do it with todays gear. Well, looking at the responses it does seem stills are satisfied and video folks are not. Glad I'm in the happy camp.

 

[9VIII]

Re: Here's Why Canon Doesn't Need to Innovate, But it Does.

I think the 6D Mark II bugged me. I have one, I use it, it's fine.

It should be better than "fine".

Actually I think the 6DII is just fine being "just fine".
I'm waiting for the price to drop, Full Frame bodies should be moving closer to entry level prices, the 6DII is doing what the 6DII should do, it's just overpriced right now. Anyone would LOVE to have a 6DII instead of an 80D.

Overall, Canon is pacing themselves just fine.
As FStoppers pointed out (amazingly for a popular blog), the only reason people perceive Sony as making rapid progress is because their products were borderline unusable before now, if Sony had been competitive with Canon this whole time the A7RIII would be nothing special.
It's inevitable that Canon will catch up to whatever sensor tech their competition comes up with, Sony has a limited time to actually leverage any advantage in that area (if they've ever actually had any real advantage, Canon's sensors have always been competitive in the ISO range where their cameras are used most).

Lenses, lenses, lenses.
"Glass is forever"
Canon is the best photographic equipment maker in the world and there is no sign of that changing any time soon.
Nikon is still #2 in this area but they won't be for long at the current pace.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, however much the move away from Canon is a surprising industry trend, it's downright shocking to see how quickly Nikon is failing. At the rate their business is shrinking there has to be two people leaving Nikon for every one person selling off their Canon gear.
Or more accurately, there's probably two Nikon shooters adopting Sony and neglecting Nikon for every one Canon shooter "jumping ship".
It's important to note that Sony's growth isn't industry growth, it's cannibalization within the industry and Canon is actually moving forward largely unscathed. The mirrorless market is still too confused to be attractive to the majority of customers, and as we've seen from the growth of EOS-M over the years, Canon's own offerings in that space are quite satisfactory to the average consumer.
The problem for Sony is their rapid growth cannot be maintained, as soon as enough tech enthusiasts have played with the latest fancy trinkets they'll move on to the next thing.

The Canon ecosystem still has too many capabilities that no-one else has, it's like comparing the U.S. Military to any other army in the world. Sure, some countries are developing some neat new stuff, but in terms of operational capabilities no-one questions who the world leader is.

 

[privatebydesign]

I like opinion pieces when the people giving the opinion are intelligent and their points are well constructed and well communicated.

Sonder Creative are not that, Usman seems to spend most of his time pontificating in a sudo authoritative tone that is so obviously built on sand it is comical that anybody could find anything he says incisive or authoritative, the guy, his opinions, and the way he conveys them are a joke. Well he makes me laugh, just look back at any of his obviously flawed click bate videos.

So he is an architectural photographer, what have Canon done for him? Well they came out with the ground breaking and unmatched TS-E17, 8 years before Nikon even tried to counter it with a single rotation PC-E19. What else? Well the TS-E 50, 90 and 135 are all supremely high quality lenses. Don't want to talk about lenses? Well for architectural imaging Canon have the best and longest lived implementation of Live View, anybody here tried to use Nikon Live View? The differences in DR when exposure is optimized is minimal now. Canon still have the highest MP 135 format sensor. The 1DX MkII is unmatched in video capabilities from any manufacturer with that sensor size at twice the price. The flawed negativity just goes on and on, but 'I want illuminated buttons', 'I want two slots in my entry level camera', 'I want' 'I want'...

Now give me the choice of all that class leading lens and functionality and illuminated buttons and I'll take it, but give me the functionality with that lens choice without the buttons and I am still looking at Canon as a totally unmatched system for any architectural photographer not shooting larger format.

 

[Aaron D]

Yes Jack Jian! And a zoom fish-eye! And a 17 mm TSE years before Nikon's 19!

What do people want? glowing buttons?

 

[Isaacheus]

Re: Here's Why Canon Doesn't Need to Innovate, But it Does.

I think the 6D Mark II bugged me. I have one, I use it, it's fine.

It should be better than "fine".

Actually I think the 6DII is just fine being "just fine".
I'm waiting for the price to drop, Full Frame bodies should be moving closer to entry level prices, the 6DII is doing what the 6DII should do, it's just overpriced right now. Anyone would LOVE to have a 6DII instead of an 80D.

I think Canon gutted the 6dmk2 too thin for the price to be loved by all over the 80d. Not so much for what they didn't add (dual card slots, 4k etc - I can understand the reasons here even if I would have liked to have seen them added) but not having the new sensor tech that is present in the 80d, or even smaller items like all-1 codec, headphone jack, those are the parts that don't make sense to me considering they're present in the crop.

The camera is probably fine, when found for cheap, but it had the potential to really shine

 

[mistaspeedy]

I don't know how much it costs to open up a whole new sensor production line.
Wouldn't it have been a lot cheaper to just use the 1DX Mark II sensor in the 6D Mark II ?
Everything else could have remained the same as the current 6D mark II besides the video codec (which should at least match the 6D mark I).

 

[woodman411]

Re: Here's Why Canon Doesn't Need to Innovate, But it Does.

I think the 6D Mark II bugged me. I have one, I use it, it's fine.

It should be better than "fine".

Actually I think the 6DII is just fine being "just fine".
I'm waiting for the price to drop, Full Frame bodies should be moving closer to entry level prices, the 6DII is doing what the 6DII should do, it's just overpriced right now. Anyone would LOVE to have a 6DII instead of an 80D.

I think Canon gutted the 6dmk2 too thin for the price to be loved by all over the 80d. Not so much for what they didn't add (dual card slots, 4k etc - I can understand the reasons here even if I would have liked to have seen them added) but not having the new sensor tech that is present in the 80d, or even smaller items like all-1 codec, headphone jack, those are the parts that don't make sense to me considering they're present in the crop.

The camera is probably fine, when found for cheap, but it had the potential to really shine

If the 6d2 was to shine to everyone's expectations, the price would have been much higher. With the way it is, it allowed Canon to sell it at US $1350 less than 6 months after it was released.

 

[unfocused]

Re: Poll Added: Here's Why Canon Doesn't Need to Innovate, But it Does.

[stentorian referee voice] In this corner, wearing the black-and-white colors of truth and weighing in at 130 million points, we have Facts and Data. And in this corner, wearing the iridescent color of inconsistency and weighing in at some undefined amount of fluff, we have Anecdotes and Opinion. Let the bout begin!

The thing is...Canon has gained market share over the past few years. Don't let reality knock you on your ass with a hard uppercut.

Ah yes, there you go again Neuro, injecting reality into a nice whiny thread.

I'm perplexed by all these people who complain about innovation. It's a camera. It's supposed to take pictures. The cheapest camera available today takes better pictures than were possible in the film era.

What is it that people think other cameras have that Canon doesn't?

Are Canon's perfect? No. But, for me they deliver day in and day out under a huge range of conditions. Any flaws are minor annoyances, not something to wring my hands over and fret about having my ego bruised because a Sony or a Nikon might have some singular feature that Canon doesn't.

People keep repeating this mantra that Canon is "behind" the competition, but that is only true if you equate minuscule differences between brands as making one "ahead" and one "behind," instead of just being marginally different.

 

[Don Haines]

Re: Here's Why Canon Doesn't Need to Innovate, But it Does.

I think the 6D Mark II bugged me. I have one, I use it, it's fine.

It should be better than "fine".

Actually I think the 6DII is just fine being "just fine".
I'm waiting for the price to drop, Full Frame bodies should be moving closer to entry level prices, the 6DII is doing what the 6DII should do, it's just overpriced right now. Anyone would LOVE to have a 6DII instead of an 80D.

The 6D2 IS a fine camera, and at high ISO is as good as just about any camera out there. Yes, it could have been made better, but at what cost? We don't know....

There is one thing that really puzzles me about the camera though.... it has Bluetooth, so why not support Bluetooth headphones? They don't have to go crazy and hit every feature of every headset, just a generic left and right channel....

 

[9VIII]

Re: Here's Why Canon Doesn't Need to Innovate, But it Does.

I think the 6D Mark II bugged me. I have one, I use it, it's fine.

It should be better than "fine".

Actually I think the 6DII is just fine being "just fine".
I'm waiting for the price to drop, Full Frame bodies should be moving closer to entry level prices, the 6DII is doing what the 6DII should do, it's just overpriced right now. Anyone would LOVE to have a 6DII instead of an 80D.

I think Canon gutted the 6dmk2 too thin for the price to be loved by all over the 80d. Not so much for what they didn't add (dual card slots, 4k etc - I can understand the reasons here even if I would have liked to have seen them added) but not having the new sensor tech that is present in the 80d, or even smaller items like all-1 codec, headphone jack, those are the parts that don't make sense to me considering they're present in the crop.

The camera is probably fine, when found for cheap, but it had the potential to really shine

Sometimes I wish Canon would get crushed by Sony or some other company, but it's just not happening.
However competitive the industry is it's still not nearly competitive enough.
It's hilarious that Nikon REMOVED dual card slots from the D7500, all the arguments about the D7200 being "professional" now die with it.
Everyone knows the Sony A6000 is a great little camera, I was actually looking forward to seeing what Sony would come up with to replace it, something with a better sensor and an updated (usable) interface that would compete in the same price range... and I'm still waiting, the A6300 and A6500 just got more and more expensive, the A6500 is almost the same price as the 7D2.

I'll just leave Sony alone and let them keep riding the Nikon fanboys who all seem too willing to shell out money just to spite Canon's long term domination.

 

[Quackator]

Imagine Canon would give us a mirrorless 5D MkIV.
Same body, same AF-performance, everything the same,
just an EVF instead of an optical finder, plus....

- Global shutter good for flash at any shutter speed.
- EVF that can load user defined overlays from memory cards in the field.
Layout templates, composition guides, multi image composing help lines.
From PNG files with transparency channel.

Would be enough wow for me to buy multiple units.

The stance about Canon not being good enough is mostly
heard from those who didn't buy. Those who would likely
not have bought anyway, no matter what the camera looks
like. A case of sour grapes.

In contrast to that, their owners agree that the 5D MkIV is
the best allround camera Canon has ever built so far.

Aside of my own photography and video business, I run two
large professional rental studios, with flash power in excess
of 100000 Ws. No hobbyists, only professional clients.

The 5D MkIV and the 5Ds/R are responsible for 80% of all
photography in our studios. Add a few Phase One, and the
occasional D810, one single Panasonic GH5 and one single
Fuji Gfx50. None of our clients has ever used a Sony for
studio still photography.

The picture is different in video. Canon is only responsible for
little over 50% of that in our studios. 20% is Sony, and
you can bet that within 20 minutes after starting to set up,
you can overhear one team member saying to the other how
bad Sony interface designs are. The rest of the video jobs
is RED, Panasonic, Blackmagic with no clear preference.

So, if at all, there's more room in the video field for development.
The 50% share of Canon is booked days and cameras on set. When
it comes to footage volume, our most productive clients are all
Canon 5D series. The bulk of footage being produced in our studios
is done on 5D MkIII, slowly shifting over to 5D MkIV.

Mind you, these are professionals. Zebra, waveform display?
That's what external monitors are good for. Follow focus on the
thumbwheel of a Zhiyun Crane 2 (for example) without the need
for an external FF with onboard tools? Only from Canon, nobody
else. 4k, cine-log? RED cameras. Most videos play out over the
web or tv sets with 1080p anyway. Why bother with the data ballast
of 4k video, then? Zooming in post? Frame better in the beginning.
De-shake? No, stabilize your camera.

The most common woes:
-Flimsy standard cable plugs. Give us a dock with XLR, SDI et al.
And mil-grade cable locks.
-External monitoring. Give us wireless zero lag external monitoring
simultaneaously to multiple devices.

Being able to load composition template overlays with alpha channel
transparency from PNG files in the field would add very welcome
green screen and program design capabilities.

Summing it all up, Canon looks much better from the perspective of
it's users than it does from the perspective of people living in the internet.

 

[Quackator]

And while we are at it: Looking over the "I have switched to...." threads,
the majority seems to switch from a lower tier (or maximum middle class)
Canon body with an assortment of consumer grade zooms to yet another
body of the same class from Sony, Fuji, Nikon for performance, or to
Olympus/Panasonic for weight and size reasons.

And then they complain that their new camera isn't performing like
a Canon 5 or 1 series camera. Buying better glass and/or upgrading
their camera would have served them much better.

Disco kids wake up to the fact that nobody else has such a sophisticated
native radio flash system. They have to buy 3rd party Godox.
Their AF isn't as good also, if they didn't switch to Leica SL or Sony A9.
Skin tones, yada, yada.....

Yes, it is more than the sum of it's parts.

 

[Talys]

Re: Here's Why Canon Doesn't Need to Innovate, But it Does.

I think the 6D Mark II bugged me. I have one, I use it, it's fine.

It should be better than "fine".

Actually I think the 6DII is just fine being "just fine".
I'm waiting for the price to drop, Full Frame bodies should be moving closer to entry level prices, the 6DII is doing what the 6DII should do, it's just overpriced right now. Anyone would LOVE to have a 6DII instead of an 80D.

The 6D2 IS a fine camera, and at high ISO is as good as just about any camera out there. Yes, it could have been made better, but at what cost? We don't know....

There is one thing that really puzzles me about the camera though.... it has Bluetooth, so why not support Bluetooth headphones? They don't have to go crazy and hit every feature of every headset, just a generic left and right channel....

I have both a 6D2, and an 80D. I think they're both great cameras!

For a variety of reasons, I would rather own both a 6D2 and an 80D, than just one 40-50 megapixel full frame camera (or a 5D4). Having a second body the ability to have a crop OVF is just a huge benefit to me, and the 80D is fantastic for macro product photography.

As my cameras do pretty much everything I need them to do, I'm happy with Canon. The last thing I really, really wanted out of a camera was fully articulating screen on a full frame camera, which 6D2 provided.

 

[ethanz]

May I ask what the need is for full frame 4K? I don't find the crop in the 1d to be a terrible thing.

 

[mb66energy]

After waiting for the "right" full frame DSL(R) and after checking out with 5D classic if full frame is important to me I found out that full frame is not too important for me. While the 5D classic outperforms all APS-C bodies up to 18MPix sensor line the SL2 / 200D has very similar overall IQ compared to the 5D classic at least if downsampled to the same MPix count.
But SL2 has increased DR (~ 2 stops) which helps a lot in many contralight situations, the great freely positionable screen, a very reliable and fast DPAF which helps me in a lot of situations where the sun in the frame is too bright or the camera has to be positioned above / below the head.

This tiny, light, flexible and relatively cheap camera with great IQ is innovative enough for me and ... a medium sized set of prime lenses with two zooms kept me from thinking about switching to another system.

Truly innovative would be a mirrorless camera where you can change the sensor-cpu-subgroup yourself. Ergonomics stay, sensors go. And if a high res, low-res-high-iso, monochrome sensor were available and upgraded while the "body frame" and the lenses stay the same - this would be photographers heaven for me (from the tech perspective).

 

[9VIII]

May I ask what the need is for full frame 4K? I don't find the crop in the 1d to be a terrible thing.

Some people have old lenses for 35mm wide film, and it lets you keep a consistent look between 35mm film and the digital cameras.
It's a known quantity for movie producers, thus so many people loved the 5DMkII for its full frame 1080p recording when it came out.

 

[Jack Jian]

May I ask what the need is for full frame 4K? I don't find the crop in the 1d to be a terrible thing.

It's required only by Internet forum "video makers", all [or majority] serious project outside the Internet forum uses S35 format which is very close to APS-C crop, because of which Canon apply a similar crop to 5D IV and 1Dx II (targeting real video makers). Pros knows and appreciate it with no complains, but Internet forum pros rattles like a half empty vessel with a marble in it.