Recently there were some rumors about a new EOS 7D Mk III coming soon. Discussions about its rumored features and properties were based on the pros and cons of technology. Such approaches are nice, but also uncertain. After all, the details of the implementation determine if, and to what degree, the guesswork and (often: implied) assumptions about the technology are true in the final product.
It is a much more secure approach to start with the user of the product and his perception. Then uncertainties about implementation and the engineering decisions are not relevant. On a forum like this, it even makes sense to put the interest of the customer (the user) at number one when discussing the supposed features for a new product.
I talk a lot with other photographers when I am at airshows or when meeting one when on ‘safari’ for birds. A few years ago I already noticed that there are Canon owners that are quite critical about their brand. That surprised me then, because I had a different image of Canon.
And recently I got the impression that this sentiment of being unhappy with Canon is growing.
I have tried to find how this feeling can exist, in particular for those using the more expensive Canon gear.
Although not perfect, when the original 7D and the 7D Mk II came out, they were the best there was for action photography in cropped (APS-C) cameras. But the 7D Mk II no longer is the best cropped action camera: now there is the Nikon D500.
The general idea seems to be that Canon does not do its utmost for its customers. I have noticed that quite a few people feel that Canon does not WANT to deliver what they COULD for a given price.
By comparison, Nikon is then often described as the brand that aims to build the most capable camera for a given budget. As one guy described it: “Canon is ruled by sales managers, Nikon still gives some influence to technicians with a heart for the camera.”
I got the impression that the changing attitude among the owners of Canon equipment towards Canon is due to this negative perception about Canon’s efforts. In particular quite some action photographers with the 7D and 7D Mark II that I have met seem to be increasingly ‘unhappy’ with Canon.
But what I think is even more remarkable, is that this summer I heard 3 people express roughly the same idea. These guys (2 with a 7D, 1 with a 7D Mk II – one of them also had a 5D Mk III) feel that their interest as a customer is not a primary concern for Canon any more. They all three described roughly the same way they were going to act upon this feeling: when the new 7D Mk III proves to be at least (…) equal to the D500, they will get the 7D Mark III. But if not, they will sell their Canon gear and get the Nikon D500 with 2 or 3 lenses…………..
To be clear; this were people that did not know each other. It was even in 2 different countries.
The first time, I thought such a bold plan was an emotional expression of discontent (the grass always seems greener at the other side of the fence). When in early summer I heard this reasoning for the second time, I replied that you would need deep pockets to actually buy all new. The answer I got: “Canon keeps its value on the second hand market, so I can sell it quite well”. And he added that expenses for travel and lodgings near airshows or nature reservations cost hundreds up to thousands of euros each year. Over a period of, say, 8 years, about as much money flows to travelling and lodging as to the gear. “I will just take my loss and spend my money where they make an effort to give me the equipment that I want”.
These are people with Canon equipment who invest a lot of time and money in action photography. They want the prospect that they keep access to the best camera there is available for cropped action photographers. Because that is why they once chose for Canon equipment.
As a consequence of the time they spent and the money they paid, action photographers have pretty high standards. They want the best results: a high percentage of optimal images.
I hear too many Canon owners mention the Nikon D500 as the (far) better choice for action photography than the 7D Mk II. The new 7D Mk III will be a test case for their faith in Canon for disappointed people like the three guys I mentioned. But there may well be more that feel this way.
I am under the impression that this feeling/perception explains why many Canon owners in ‘the action photography scene’ are anxiously awaiting the new 7D Mark III. And therefore on this forum their perception is a relevant consideration when assessing what the new 7D Mark III should deliver.
From what I have seen and heard, the new 7D Mark III is hoped to have these properties:
- a camera body with an image quality at least as good as, but perhaps even a bit better than, Nikon’s D500 where detail, Dynamic Range and Noise are concerned, but hopefully a bit better – hoping that the improvement from the 80D’s sensor continues significantly;
- a camera with an improved Autofocus system that is fast yet accurate and with little spread – to be able to accurately select the subject to focus on;
- a camera with an Autofocus system with improved tracking of a subject, in particular when fast moving, moving erratically and also when the color is brownish/greenish – resulting in more ‘keepers’ when shooting in bursts.
These are not extreme wishes. And just to avoid some improper suggestions: nobody of the people I spoke wants a 1DX Mk II for the price of a ‘mere’ 7D Mk II. But they do want Canon to deliver the best of what is technically feasible within this sensor size (APS-C) and price range.
Their simple yet valid reasoning: if another brand can make a substantial leap in quality where it counts, Canon as market leader also can put that level of improvement in their most expensive APS-C body.
Or will Canon just follow the competition and/or add nice-to-have features while not addressing the really important issues?
I feel that such a path by Canon would be a mistake because by doing so, Canon would not allow these ambitious action photographers access to the best cropped camera technology that is feasible.
In conclusion:
For many (action) photographers, the new Canon 7D Mark III may be a test by which to measure Canon‘s commitment to action photographers in the APS-C segment.
It is a much more secure approach to start with the user of the product and his perception. Then uncertainties about implementation and the engineering decisions are not relevant. On a forum like this, it even makes sense to put the interest of the customer (the user) at number one when discussing the supposed features for a new product.
I talk a lot with other photographers when I am at airshows or when meeting one when on ‘safari’ for birds. A few years ago I already noticed that there are Canon owners that are quite critical about their brand. That surprised me then, because I had a different image of Canon.
And recently I got the impression that this sentiment of being unhappy with Canon is growing.
I have tried to find how this feeling can exist, in particular for those using the more expensive Canon gear.
Although not perfect, when the original 7D and the 7D Mk II came out, they were the best there was for action photography in cropped (APS-C) cameras. But the 7D Mk II no longer is the best cropped action camera: now there is the Nikon D500.
The general idea seems to be that Canon does not do its utmost for its customers. I have noticed that quite a few people feel that Canon does not WANT to deliver what they COULD for a given price.
By comparison, Nikon is then often described as the brand that aims to build the most capable camera for a given budget. As one guy described it: “Canon is ruled by sales managers, Nikon still gives some influence to technicians with a heart for the camera.”
I got the impression that the changing attitude among the owners of Canon equipment towards Canon is due to this negative perception about Canon’s efforts. In particular quite some action photographers with the 7D and 7D Mark II that I have met seem to be increasingly ‘unhappy’ with Canon.
But what I think is even more remarkable, is that this summer I heard 3 people express roughly the same idea. These guys (2 with a 7D, 1 with a 7D Mk II – one of them also had a 5D Mk III) feel that their interest as a customer is not a primary concern for Canon any more. They all three described roughly the same way they were going to act upon this feeling: when the new 7D Mk III proves to be at least (…) equal to the D500, they will get the 7D Mark III. But if not, they will sell their Canon gear and get the Nikon D500 with 2 or 3 lenses…………..
To be clear; this were people that did not know each other. It was even in 2 different countries.
The first time, I thought such a bold plan was an emotional expression of discontent (the grass always seems greener at the other side of the fence). When in early summer I heard this reasoning for the second time, I replied that you would need deep pockets to actually buy all new. The answer I got: “Canon keeps its value on the second hand market, so I can sell it quite well”. And he added that expenses for travel and lodgings near airshows or nature reservations cost hundreds up to thousands of euros each year. Over a period of, say, 8 years, about as much money flows to travelling and lodging as to the gear. “I will just take my loss and spend my money where they make an effort to give me the equipment that I want”.
These are people with Canon equipment who invest a lot of time and money in action photography. They want the prospect that they keep access to the best camera there is available for cropped action photographers. Because that is why they once chose for Canon equipment.
As a consequence of the time they spent and the money they paid, action photographers have pretty high standards. They want the best results: a high percentage of optimal images.
I hear too many Canon owners mention the Nikon D500 as the (far) better choice for action photography than the 7D Mk II. The new 7D Mk III will be a test case for their faith in Canon for disappointed people like the three guys I mentioned. But there may well be more that feel this way.
I am under the impression that this feeling/perception explains why many Canon owners in ‘the action photography scene’ are anxiously awaiting the new 7D Mark III. And therefore on this forum their perception is a relevant consideration when assessing what the new 7D Mark III should deliver.
From what I have seen and heard, the new 7D Mark III is hoped to have these properties:
- a camera body with an image quality at least as good as, but perhaps even a bit better than, Nikon’s D500 where detail, Dynamic Range and Noise are concerned, but hopefully a bit better – hoping that the improvement from the 80D’s sensor continues significantly;
- a camera with an improved Autofocus system that is fast yet accurate and with little spread – to be able to accurately select the subject to focus on;
- a camera with an Autofocus system with improved tracking of a subject, in particular when fast moving, moving erratically and also when the color is brownish/greenish – resulting in more ‘keepers’ when shooting in bursts.
These are not extreme wishes. And just to avoid some improper suggestions: nobody of the people I spoke wants a 1DX Mk II for the price of a ‘mere’ 7D Mk II. But they do want Canon to deliver the best of what is technically feasible within this sensor size (APS-C) and price range.
Their simple yet valid reasoning: if another brand can make a substantial leap in quality where it counts, Canon as market leader also can put that level of improvement in their most expensive APS-C body.
Or will Canon just follow the competition and/or add nice-to-have features while not addressing the really important issues?
I feel that such a path by Canon would be a mistake because by doing so, Canon would not allow these ambitious action photographers access to the best cropped camera technology that is feasible.
In conclusion:
For many (action) photographers, the new Canon 7D Mark III may be a test by which to measure Canon‘s commitment to action photographers in the APS-C segment.