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

[Deleted member 379512]

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.

I didn't mean to infer that canon should have satisfied every wished for feature in the 6d, just that at it's release price, it had a few things omitted from it that may have been expected considering what the 80d got. If it had 4k and dual cards, then a price increase from the initial 2000 would be reasonable yes.

I'm not sure I'd see canon discounting it by nearly half (I think that was the bundle deal, with a few hundred of extras thrown in?) as a good sign.

 

[Mikehit]

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

I didn't mean to infer that canon should have satisfied every wished for feature in the 6d, just that at it's release price, it had a few things omitted from it that may have been expected considering what the 80d got. If it had 4k and dual cards, then a price increase from the initial 2000 would be reasonable yes.

But if Canon are not going to give every wished-for feature they will by definition leave some out and you would still have people complaining.
What I don't really understand is that it was supposed to get things like 4K (and not even Sony make a 4k FF camera at this launch price) and conveniently for et that at this price they are getting FF compared to 80D. The 6D line was created to offer FF images albeit slimmed down on functionality. And the question then comes at what point do you add features, increase price and take it so close to the next model up that one or both lines suffer. Some call that 'protection of the higher model', I call it good product management and anyone who has been involved in sales or product development will understand that.

 

[Sabaki]

I have made, with intention, a decision not to be smart about Canon as a business.

Instead, I am a client/customer who buys their wares. If I spend $x.xx on a product that is outperformed by their competitors, I am not happy

If something is omitted on a product (AF assist), then I am not happy

I can only be unhappy for so long before I am tempted elsewhere.

I am unhappy about their bodies. The industry at large and my own minimal experience with other brands shows me that Canon is lagging.

I am extremely happy with their lenses, I feel pound for pound that Canon are the heavyweight champions here.

Peripherals: RT flash system is super but I am being guided to buy third party wares for other items like battery packs, flash brackets and timer remotes

Overall, I remain with both feet in the Canon camp but it needs to pull its finger out of its arse with their bodies

 

[Deleted member 379512]

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

I didn't mean to infer that canon should have satisfied every wished for feature in the 6d, just that at it's release price, it had a few things omitted from it that may have been expected considering what the 80d got. If it had 4k and dual cards, then a price increase from the initial 2000 would be reasonable yes.

But if Canon are not going to give every wished-for feature they will by definition leave some out and you would still have people complaining.
What I don't really understand is that it was supposed to get things like 4K (and not even Sony make a 4k FF camera at this launch price) and conveniently for et that at this price they are getting FF compared to 80D. The 6D line was created to offer FF images albeit slimmed down on functionality. And the question then comes at what point do you add features, increase price and take it so close to the next model up that one or both lines suffer. Some call that 'protection of the higher model', I call it good product management and anyone who has been involved in sales or product development will understand that.

And I think (most) people understand that working out where to place a product is part of produce management, just in this case, I feel canon got it wrong. Whether canon and anyone else feels the same way is still to be fully seen, but I get the feeling there is a not insignificant number that share the same feeling.

Personally, at the price it was announced, I was thinking it would be a ff 80d, giving up nothing to the 80d, but far enough back from the 5dmk4 to create space (af, 4k, dual cards etc being the major differences). At the end of the day, it meant I looked elsewhere, which happened to be away from canon bodies entirely. The nail in that coffin was that canon weren't putting out a sensor that gave better iq in all cases over their own crop sensor, no matter the competition in it's own class. To me, the whole point of ff is the better iq. But I think I've gone off thread a bit

 

[Hector1970]

Canon have done well out of me over the years.
I currently have the 5D IV, 5DSR and 7DII.
I've an extensive lens collection from 11mm out to 600mm.
The lens I never complain about.
They all perform really well and exceed my talents as a photographer.
The cameras I do feel Canon have been conservative.
I loved my 5DIII until it went for an unplanned swim.
The 5D IV is a very capable replacement and a very solid camera but in the end not noticeably very better than the version III.
The 5DSR and 7DII (which I believe have a similar sensor) I felt were always not as good as they should be.
I think Canon tried to cram too many pixels on the sensor too early to be the first to get to 50MP.
For someone like me I've reached the end of the road with Canon cameras.
The last camera left that I might purchase is the 1DXII but I find that size camera just too big (fine for wildlife/sport but not for general use.
I think Canon have left it late entering the full frame mirrorless market. It's now what I am waiting for. Canon have had the technology and know-how for a number of years (as they can do APS-C mirrorless).
It now has to be a really good first model.
The frame rate of the Sony's is impressive and can't be matches by mirrored camera.
Sony are starting to bring out better and better lens.
Canon trade alot off the visibility they have at sporting events like Olympics and World Cups.
If the professionals are using them then ordinary punters believe they are the best.
You can see here alot of high end users are starting to grumble a little at Canons new models.
The 6DII for me was a poor move by Canon as it reinforces the idea they are not interested in innovating in cameras but just having incremental improvements.
While its not exactly similar companies like Nokia also seemed to be doing very well while not innovating and it took a while but they became obsolete - even though they had very solid phones with a good battery life. Canon lens keep Canon in the game even if they didn't innovate at all but only for so long.
For the brand perception amongst new buyers Canon needs to get good reviews in magazines and on the web for their new cameras. Once people perceive Nikon or Sony to be better it would be difficult to change minds again.
Anyway for me Canon bring out a great mirrorless full frame camera that bests everything else out there.

 

[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....

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.

I have the 6D2 and the 7D2. One tends to get used indoors or at night, and the other outdoors or in daylight. Both are great cameras. The combination of robustness/AF of the 7D2 and the low cost/high ISO performance of the 6D2 makes a great pair.

 

[Neutron_K]

IMO, many people have problems defining innovation properly these days.

 

[BeenThere]

The EOS 5D Mark III has been a workhorse for a long time. The EOS 5D Mark IV with its perceived gimped 4K and general feeling that the camera wasn’t a big improvement over the EOS 5D Mark III has caused people some pause.

I've owned the 5DmkII, III and IV.

I don't do video.

But the mkIII is by far the camera I've cursed at more than all others combined. The one thing that bugged me with that camera was the metering that was incredibly inconsistent. Same circumstances, take 3 handheld shots and end up with 2 underexposed, and one overexposed. None ever remotely right. Sure, you can recover something in post using RAW (not that much) and you learn to bracket a few exposures if it's important enough, but the ratio of keepers with that camera was a real horror story.

I did talk to canon staff on a number of occasions about this as it bugged me so much I ended up using the mkII more than the mkIII. I do think mine might be one of the worse examples on that aspect, but while they never went as far as admitting the problem was with the camera (I guess they lawyers forbid that), they clearly knew there was an issue. Also while talking to one of their less technically challenged staff at an event I had a few other owners of a mkIII around me confirm they too had some metering issues. Most there complained about systematic underexposure - which is relatively easy to correct for. But if it starts to go all over the place you simply can't use it for anything where you need a "good enough" result from the first exposure.

I did sell it back to a pro level store when I bought the mkIV - I simply could not in good conscience sell it to somebody who would want to use it without warranty. The mkIV is more than ok (same old me, same lenses, similar situations, far more keepers), as was the mkII. But a 5DmkIII: no thanks, worst camera I ever owned by far. Glad to never have to use one again.

I think your 5D iii needed repair. I don’t see any exposure issues with my copy. I also own the Mk II and don’t see much difference in exposure behavior.

 

[snoke]

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

The iPhone wasn't based around the needs of the professional phone user.

Because there's no such thing?

Wrong. Before iPhone, professional phone user own Blackberry.

 

[snoke]

Once people perceive Nikon or Sony to be better it would be difficult to change minds again.

Nikon D850 announce August 2017.
Now February 2018. Still no USA stock.
Nikon need Canon factory

In Japan, https://www.mapcamera.com/ say Nikon D850 sell best in all 2017, next Sony A7R III.
Only 1 store.

Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Camera-Photo-DSLR-Cameras/zgbs/photo/3017941
Nikon: 1 (D3300) ,3 (D3400), 4(D3400), 5(D3400),7(D850 - stock?), 10 (D750)
Canon: 2 (T6), 6 (T6), 8 (T6), 9 (5DIV)

UK Amazon:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Digital-SLR-Cameras/zgbs/electronics/14335821
Canon: 1 (1300D), 3 (750D), 6 (200D), 7 (1300D)
Nikon: 2 (D3400), 4 (D5300), 5 (D7500), 8 (D5600), 10 (D3300)

 

[The Fat Fish]

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

Spot on. I saved up in preparation for the 6DII and now there's no way I'd get one. I also don't think the 5DIV is worth the money costing as much as the D850 and A7RIII. Where does this leave me? Not buying Canon.

I am one consumer but I won't be alone in this.

Fair enough. But out of interest, what feature of the D850 and A7r3 will enable you to take better pictures or make your photography easier.

95% of my photos are shot at ISO100 so base ISO is hugely important for me. I also do a lot of video work and couldn't get on with the 5DIV implementation. The crop forced me to change lenses too frequently and the MJPEG codec is pre-historic. I wouldn't mind a 500mbs codec if the quality difference was noticeable but the 100mbps A6300 footage looks far better and has less of a crop.

For me the benchmark for a £3200 camera is the A7RIII and D850. That's two brands offering very similar spec sheets (and great cameras) for that price. The 5DIV is also that price and in comparison is more of a £2200 camera.

The 5DIV is good but I don't want to play Canon's premium pricing game for non-premium spec lists.

 

[RGF]

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

It seems like the “I switched from canon to _____” confessions are tallying up day by day.

[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.

Ford and Chevy have more market share than BMW, Mercedes or Porsche. Does not mean that they are better, just more mainstream.

 

[rrcphoto]

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

It seems like the “I switched from canon to _____” confessions are tallying up day by day.

[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.

Ford and Chevy have more market share than BMW, Mercedes or Porsche. Does not mean that they are better, just more mainstream.

Canon sells to all markets.

it doesn't mean they aren't better either. selling to all markets causes some of the angst few have and repeatedly mention.

the fact is, the same amount of people every year, in a declining market - for the last three years are buying Canon equipment - and their mount marketshare is growing faster than all of mirrorless combined.

that's a successful combination no matter which way you want to try to minimize it.

 

[RayValdez360]

There are way too many pure photographers and hobbyists here for them understand whats wrong with Canon. It's nice and all that their cameras dont break but there are more things wrong that DR and shadow recover compared to other companies. We need more features that makes our jobs easier if you are a professional or videographer.

 

[3dit0r]

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.

Hm, I do know what you’re saying and sort of partly agree, but with the caveat that while the 1Dxii 1.3 crop is pretty much fine, the 5Div crop of 1.7 is getting a bit unworkable once you consider you can’t use Canon EF-S lenses on it, so no much in the way of wide angles are easily achievable.

Also, not all serious projects are confined to S35, even in the film days 70mm was used for certain productions. I will be making a narrative short soon and it would have been nice and more practical if my full-frame primes were effectively the same (or similar) fov in video mode as they are in stills, especially since the Sigma 1.8 zooms don’t play nice with DPAF.

 

[rrcphoto]

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.

Hm, I do know what you’re saying and sort of partly agree, but with the caveat that while the 1Dxii 1.3 crop is pretty much fine, the 5Div crop of 1.7 is getting a bit unworkable once you consider you can’t use Canon EF-S lenses on it, so no much in the way of wide angles are easily achievable.

sigma says hi. samyang says helllo.

considering EF-S doesn't have cini lenses, and they have APS-C cini lenses...

1.3 crop is in the middle and you can't get UWA with 1.3 crop and you can't use APS-C lenses on it.

 

[Talys]

It seems like the “I switched from canon to _____” confessions are tallying up day by day.

[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.

Ford and Chevy have more market share than BMW, Mercedes or Porsche. Does not mean that they are better, just more mainstream.

But Ford and Chevy do have better pickup trucks, and they have better cars under $10,000. ;D

It's funny: I actually have owned a Ford (Thunderbird SC), a Chevy (two Corvettes), and a Mercedes (an AMG).

The AMG is the only 6-figure car I have ever purchased, and what a piece of garbage it was. I've never had so many problems with a car in my life, including my first vehicle, which was a second-hand Chrysler LeBaron. Other than the amazing look the AMG had, a gorgeous interior, and the ability to suck gas like nobody's business the AMG was best at nothing other than time in the dealership for warranty repairs (over 3 months in 3 years).

There are way too many pure photographers and hobbyists here for them understand whats wrong with Canon. It's nice and all that their cameras dont break but there are more things wrong that DR and shadow recover compared to other companies. We need more features that makes our jobs easier if you are a professional or videographer.

Well, as a hobbyist "pure photographer", I will certainly give you that Canon's DSLRs leave a lot to be desired for videographers. But really, doesn't every DSLR? And, if a lot of pure photographers and photography hobbyists can't "understand what's wrong with Canon", and that's their customer/fan base, perhaps... there's nothing wrong with Canon ;D

I think there are some professional photographers that would disagree that DSLRs, and Canon DSLRs, are the tool of choice, though. I mean, just look at NBC

 

[3dit0r]

For what it’s worth, my 2p is that I think Canon is getting it mostly right, but could also use some solid innovation in a few areas.

Really, in terms of DSLR, I think they’re pretty damn good. There are little things like the above-mentioned 4K crop in the 5Dmkiv, not to mention lack of focus peaking, zebras, etc., which, frankly, were a balls-up and probably lost them countless customers to other brands. That’s not even a question of innovation, they have the tech, that’s just some bizarre perceived need to ‘protect’ their video-centric cinema eos line. Sony also have a video-centric line, they sell tons of both types of camera, Canon could learn from that marketing strategy. Different markets which don’t need protecting from each other.

The biggest area for innovation is obvious: mirrorless. I’ve used a lot of mirrorless cameras, I’m surprised Canon are so late to the serious game. They still have time, but it needs to happen and soon and be great. Actually I think EF mount would be great, but then they could do with a line of EF lenses suited to mirrorless (e.g., an ‘L Junior’ series; a bit like Nikon’s 1.8 primes - fast enough, half the size and weight of the 1.4/1.2Ls, weather sealed, quiet, fast AF suited to stills and video, no focus by wire). They’d have time to develop these properly if the mirrorless were EF mount as everyone could use the wide range of EF lenses in the meantime. Stop holding back and put in the features competitors have but make it Canon colour science and build quality, but lighter weight.

 

[rikstir]

I bought a 5DMKIV this year and I'm happy with it but I'm heavily invested in Canon lenses. I also don't shoot for a living any longer so I'm not as concerned with staying on the cutting edge of camera tech. If I was starting from scratch the Nikon D850 would be very tempting. A former colleague of mine who has shot Canon for over 20 years just switched entirely to Sony. I think Canon and Nikon both should be concerned. Canon is going to need a FF mirrorless that can jump ahead of Sony if they don't want to lose more marketshare.

 

[3dit0r]

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.

Hm, I do know what you’re saying and sort of partly agree, but with the caveat that while the 1Dxii 1.3 crop is pretty much fine, the 5Div crop of 1.7 is getting a bit unworkable once you consider you can’t use Canon EF-S lenses on it, so no much in the way of wide angles are easily achievable.

sigma says hi. samyang says helllo.

considering EF-S doesn't have cini lenses, and they have APS-C cini lenses...

1.3 crop is in the middle and you can't get UWA with 1.3 crop and you can't use APS-C lenses on it.

Neither Sigma nor Samsung say hello if you want reliable DPAF, which is one of the best things about Canon’s video right now.