The Sad Truth About Canon's Future?

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Canon and Sony are both well aware of the decline of photography. Both companies have moved in different directions in order to compensate. Sony produces sensors for automotive use, there are many image sensors in a new car, the number is being held back due to processor shortages but will soon explode. Canon has expanded into industrial and Medical fields areas where they can use many of their experts and patents. The future in photography seems to belong to cell phone usage and if there is some sort of a big breakthru that allows DSLR quality in a phone, that will be the final nail. So far, predictions of high quality DSLR competitive images from a phone have failed to happen, but we can now get images as good as some of the point and shoot cameras.

 

[jeffa4444]

Well, how can the RF 100-400 be a good lens, given the low cost and lack of red ring? Looks like @m4ndr4ke escaped the RF trap but fell into a different trap.

View attachment 208037

Actually for its price point, weight and portability not to mention "reasonable sharpness" its one of the best lenses Canon has produced for the RF mount it even sports a Nano USM motor and a control ring!

 

[neuroanatomist]

Actually for its price point, weight and portability not to mention "reasonable sharpness" its one of the best lenses Canon has produced for the RF mount it even sports a Nano USM motor and a control ring!

Actually, that was sarcasm. I own an RF 100-400. But thanks for playing.

 

[peters]

Do you know what several of them they told me? Lenses and price.

I am using Canon currently, but I can totaly agree!!! I stick to canon because the R5 is great for video AND photo, and because I have lots of EF lenses, that I am to lazy to sell.

If I had to restart right now, I would certainly start with sony. Sony does have better photo cameras (R7R V) and better video cameras (a7s III or fx30), but not the best allrounder/hybrid in my opinion. But lenses would tend me towards Sony.

A colleague ask for a recommendation; I recommended a Sony A7 III or IV with a 28-75 2,8 Tamron or 24-70 2,8 Sony as a general purpose reporter kit. For only 2200€ (or 3200€ for the 24-70 Gmaster)
I was thinking about Canon, but there is just NO comparison, especialy because of the lense selection. The option would have been a R6 and the RF 24-70 -> 5500€ in total, over than 2000€ more than the Sony kit - with less MP, worse AF, worse DR, worse video specs.... its just not an option in my opinion because of the expensive lense. And I dont like to recommend old glas, that is no longer available new, that has to be used with an adapter.

The fact they closed the RF mount for third party is a HUGE mistake in my opinion. The RF lenses are outstanding - but just to expensive. 2500€ for a 24-70? I cant justify this for a recommendation (unless you are a real, 100% and fulltime professional). Especialy not if sony got third party lenses for 1/5 the price that will get the job done.

If you are into photography the A7R IV or V will blow any canon out of the water in my opinion (I had it) and it will work with any lense. And the lense selection of new and third party lenses is great. Only in video it falls a bit short.

Canon may have the highest quality lenses in fullframe (including stellar and truly unique lenses like the 10-24mm f4 L or the 24-104mm F2,8), but the price is hard to justify, if you are not REALY commited to photography. And I think this (and sonys IMMENSE social media marketing) is why they fall short on beginners and younger photographers.


I like my R5, its a great allrounder and Canon offers outstanding lenses - but given the closed down RF mount and the high prices, I can TOTALY understand how beginners are not interested in Canon.

 

[peters]

The RF 15-30mm f/4.5-6.3 IS sells for $550, or if a prime will work the RF 16/2.8 is $280.

The 'trinity of consumer zooms covering 15-400mm' that I referred to comprises the RF 15-30 ($550), RF 24-105/4-7.1 ($400) and RF 100-400 ($600), totaling $1550. The 100-400 is currently at $50 discount from list price, so the set could run $1600. I actually bought the 100-400 from B&H during the rebates in Dec 2022 when it was selling for only $500.

you are correct with this lenses.
but lets be honest, the RF 24-105 is realy not cool, to say it friendly. I had it (only because of the light weight for a extensive 8 day hike where weight was super important) and its realy not an impressive lense at all. The f-stop is realy a problem to get ANY shot in bad light and also limits creative use of DOF. Its also badly build (which is ok, given the weight).
For 200$ more you can get the 28-75mm Tamron for Sony. Its not the same focal lenght, but I would recommend ANY beginner photographer this kind of lense, over the Canon. Its just incredible versatile and the f-stop is REALY great to have, its just no comparison. And there is nothing close for Canons RF mount to this.
And I personaly think this is a big gap for many beginner photogaphers who may start into semi-professional work. I would total recommend a Sony a7 IV with a 28-75 f2,8 Tarmon. The only Canon option is the RF 24-70 (or EF, but do people want to buy used lenses?) which is WAY to expensive for many people...... its an outstanding lense, but there is certainly a lack of options. Same goes for a good and affordable 70-200... I personaly think that the third-party lenses fill a very very important gap for sony, that Canon just doesnt close.

 

[AlanF]

If you are into photography the A7R IV or V will blow any canon out of the water in my opinion (I had it) and it will work with any lense. And the lense selection of new and third party lenses is great. Only in video it falls a bit short.

The A7Riv or Rv will blow any Canon out of the water? Maybe for your needs, but not mine. The iv and v have appallingly long readout times of about 100ms for awful rolling shutter, only up to 10 fps, and the Canon R5 with its far better AF and speed blows them out of the water for bird and nature photography where action is concerned and other activities, and Canon has a better selection of long zoom telephoto lenses.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I like my R5, its a great allrounder and Canon offers outstanding lenses - but given the closed down RF mount and the high prices, I can TOTALY understand how beginners are not interested in Canon.

Canon’s best-selling cameras are entry-level. The average cost of a camera shipped in 2023 was ~$700, which means most of them were entry level, and Canon sold nearly 50% of all cameras sold last year.

While you may understand, from your personal perspective, why a beginner might not be interested in Canon, the data show that Canon is TOTALLY popular with beginners.

As I keep telling people, you’re entitled to your own opinion but not to your own facts.

 

[neuroanatomist]

I personaly think that the third-party lenses fill a very very important gap for sony, that Canon just doesnt close.

It’s a gap Canon is choosing not to close. They could allow 3rd party AF lenses. They could price lenses lower. They could launch a true middle tier of lenses (e.g., non-L constant aperture zooms, non-L f/1.4 primes). They haven’t. Yet they continue to dominate the market.

In general, I agree with your points…from a consumer perspective, more lens choice is good, cheaper lenses are good, etc. But I also recognize that Canon’s goals and consumers’ goals aren’t the same thing, and I understand that as a business Canon will implement the strategy that best achieves their goals.

It’s evident from the market share data that locking out 3rd party AF lenses was a tempest in a forum teapot, not the horrible terribly very bad decision a small number of people claimed it to be.

 

[neuroanatomist]

If you are into photography the A7R IV or V will blow any canon out of the water in my opinion (I had it) and it will work with any lense. And the lense selection of new and third party lenses is great.

Will it work with a 24-105/2.8? A 100-300/2.8? Those are my two most commonly-used lenses. (Yes, there’s a 10+ year old Sigma 120-300/2.8, heavier and with inferior IQ, and that lens need not apply.)

 

[ugameus]

Will it work with a 24-105/2.8? A 100-300/2.8? Those are my two most commonly-used lenses. (Yes, there’s a 10+ year old Sigma 120-300/2.8, heavier and with inferior IQ, and that lens need not apply.)

... or a 100mm/2.8 1:1.4 macro with spherical aberration control? a 180mm 1:1 macro that can take a 2x teleconverter? (currently, my two most used lenses)

 

[koenkooi]

... or a 100mm/2.8 1:1.4 macro with spherical aberration control? a 180mm 1:1 macro that can take a 2x teleconverter? (currently, my two most used lenses)

How is the 180L with the 2x? It’s something I have been thinking about, but I’m hesitant to spend the €500 on something I can only find 10 year old forum posts on.

 

[Del Paso]

How is the 180L with the 2x? It’s something I have been thinking about, but I’m hesitant to spend the €500 on something I can only find 10 year old forum posts on.

Don't, I've tested and rejected this option. Anyway: No test, no buy!
But the 1,4 Extender works fine with it, the only trouble being the lack of OIS!

 

[koenkooi]

Don't, I've tested and rejected this option. Anyway: No test, no buy!
But the 1,4 Extender works fine with it, the only trouble being the lack of OIS!

That's what I guessed, I'll refrain from buying EF extenders Since the R5II is coming later than I expected, I've bought an R7 to complement my R8, so that is kinda like a 2x extender already, 24MP vs 82MP.

 

[Kit.]

For 200$ more you can get the 28-75mm Tamron for Sony. Its not the same focal lenght, but I would recommend ANY beginner photographer this kind of lense,

These days, I would not recommend as a walkaround zoom to a beginner photographer a FF lens that cannot cover 24mm. Definitely not "for 200$ more".

 

[FabFR]

I don't even think you realize you just provided an example of why Canon is not going to be fine. Canon destroyed Nikon on the sidelines and never lost its lead from them. Now Sony TOOK Nikon's spot at #2 and has been gaining share from Canon - based exclusively on ILC sales. So I'm here waiving a red flag to draw attention to Canon losing out on some younger photographers that aspire to be professionals because they can't afford Canon RF lenses.

Do you really think Canon doesn't observe any aspects of the market ?

They are fighting against Sony to have the first place for mirrorless market, but Canon still has about a half of the global market.
So I don't think it's time to panic !
However Sony works hard to enter professionnal photo market (photo agencies, and TV channels for video) and they succeed ! I think their prices are very well studied to cut Canon's legs, the priority is at now to grow market shares and not making a lot of profit at the moment... but in the future, when the "trap" is closed !

I don't think buying Canon is a trap for anyone. Everybody knows, when buying a Canon body, the truth about the lens offer at T-time, the prices, and the performances ! Everybody is free to accept or not.
I personnally don't like Sony bodies because of "philosophy", ergonomics... but I admit their lens offer is good. However it's not because a couple of Canon customers need a RF 40 that doesn't exists, that no one can shoot Canon with the present lens offer ! Ok, many of the RF lenses are expensive, but Sony ones are too ! The price argument for Sony is only based on the fact that third party lens manufacturers exist, not because Sony propose cheap lenses !

When I look back in the DSLR years, I've heard very often that Canon users didn't want to use third-party lenses (Sigma or Tamron), because there often were bugs. Maybe it's not really different nowadays.
For Sony, having the third-party lenses is great for customers, but not for Sony : ok they sell bodies, but do they really sell enough Sony lenses ? Maybe not !
Sony didn't have any other solution to enter market at the begining, they needed a large lenses offer, so they opened their mount to third-parties. Now Sony has a large optical offer, but I don't think they sell so much Sony lenses as they want. Sony bodies are not cheap too, the only advantage is that Sigma exists !

 

[neuroanatomist]

Do you really think Canon doesn't observe any aspects of the market ?

Evidently some people on this forum do believe that. They’ve been ‘waving red flags’ and predicting doom for Canon for years, because they think they know more about making and selling cameras than the company that has led the market for >20 years.

 

[YuengLinger]

I think "the youth market" is pretty happy with smartphones.

Did we define "youth market" in this thread?

My daughter is thrilled with her R50. To me, this is conclusive evidence that Canon has re-conquered the "youth market" once again!

At the other end of the spectrum, the retirement crowd not yet in assisted living, Olympus rules because of size and weight. It must, because (nearly) ALL members of my former (now disbanded) camera club switched to Micro 4/3rds!

Poor Canon, they have to work with what's left in between, the market with customers who have a spare $7,500 to get started with a good FF and a couple of lenses.

I do hope Canon maintains its repair services!

 

[ugameus]

How is the 180L with the 2x? It’s something I have been thinking about, but I’m hesitant to spend the €500 on something I can only find 10 year old forum posts on.

It is incredibly OK with the 2x but it is there to be used. I prefer 1.4x.

 

[neuroanatomist]

... a 180mm 1:1 macro that can take a 2x teleconverter

I’m pretty sure you could use your very own EF 180L on a Sony body, with or without a TC, with a Metabones or similar adapter. Same goes for any EF lens, AFAIK.

 

[Del Paso]

you are correct with this lenses.
but lets be honest, the RF 24-105 is realy not cool, to say it friendly. I had it (only because of the light weight for a extensive 8 day hike where weight was super important) and its realy not an impressive lense at all. The f-stop is realy a problem to get ANY shot in bad light and also limits creative use of DOF. Its also badly build (which is ok, given the weight).
For 200$ more you can get the 28-75mm Tamron for Sony. Its not the same focal lenght, but I would recommend ANY beginner photographer this kind of lense, over the Canon. Its just incredible versatile and the f-stop is REALY great to have, its just no comparison. And there is nothing close for Canons RF mount to this.
And I personaly think this is a big gap for many beginner photogaphers who may start into semi-professional work. I would total recommend a Sony a7 IV with a 28-75 f2,8 Tarmon. The only Canon option is the RF 24-70 (or EF, but do people want to buy used lenses?) which is WAY to expensive for many people...... its an outstanding lense, but there is certainly a lack of options. Same goes for a good and affordable 70-200... I personaly think that the third-party lenses fill a very very important gap for sony, that Canon just doesnt close.

Say what you want or think about Sony bodies, you will never convince me to buy (again) such unergonomic crap. Panasonic, Leica, Fuji GFX, Nikon? Why not.
But never again a Sony. I was p....d after not even 2 weeks. Third party lenses? Cheaper, but Canon RFs are simply better. Why should I buy a plasticky Tamron???