Updated Canon 2016 Roadmap
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Then why waste hundreds of posts arguing??neuroanatomist said:dilbert said:
Really, no one ever needs to look. :
Upvote
0
You can have the tiny size of the current "m" cameras, but you can't put a DSLR like user interface onto that small of a body.... you need the real estate of a larger body for the ergonomics.hkenneth said:
That raises the interesting possibility that a "prosumer" mirrorless would be in a body of similar size and with a similar user interface to an 80D.... but with some even more interesting possibilities..... like a 60FPS burst rate (take that 1DX2
) and a quality integrated EVF....
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
Sorry for the delayed reply ... and that I remain sceptical
My thinking goes like this:
A higher burst speed probably would have required more buffer and/or faster processing, which would have increased cost (and perhaps size).
Further, it is difficult to imagine that putting a faster burst speed on the M would have been of any real practical value with the AF like it is - so any costs or other disadvantages associated with increasing the burst speed would have been for nothing in practical terms.
DPAF might provide the answer to the AF problem - it seems to be clearly a step in the right direction. However, as I understand it, DPAF has proved very good for video AF in combination with STM lenses where you want smooth precise transitions. Does it (at least at this stage of its development) provide fast enough AF for stills photography (including for AF tracking) to be competitive with the PDAF on many DSLRs?
Also, Canon is on record as saying that DPAF sensors are more expensive to make, so related to the previous point, the question becomes would using a DPAF sensor provide a sufficient practical benefit to warrant the cost?
Certainly Canon has plenty of EVFs, but the question is whether they are good enough to be an attractive alternative to an OVF? I realise there is a great deal of subjectivity in answering that - some people are big fans of the functionality EVFs can offer - but I guess Canon is looking at what will appeal to a substantial portion of its target audience for the camera. For my own part, I am yet to use an EVF which I enjoyed as much as using an OVF
The effect of an EVF on battery life also needs to be considered. Some people will not hesitate to buy a bunch of batteries and carry them, so they may dismiss battery life as a serious problem. However, again I assume Canon has any eye on what it thinks its target audience for the camera cares about.
The question is not whether Canon has the tech to make a better mirrorless than the M, the question is whether Canon has the tech to make a mirrorless camera which can properly compete with its DSLRs with acceptable price and profitablity?
If the answer to that last question is no, I can see why it might make sense for Canon to make the M a different product - very much focused on the advantages mirrorless can deliver today (ie be small and light).
The only reason I can think of why Canon would deliberately want to "protect" its Rebel line from a Canon mirrorless camera is if Canon wants people to buy a camera which can use EF lenses natively ... so that if the user eventually decides to move to full frame, hopefully they will have acquired a few EF lenses already, which will encourage them to move to a Canon full frame rather than have to sell everything and start from scratch with a new brand. However, given the stats seems to suggest the bulk of Rebel buyers don't buy additional lenses, I don't know how much of an issue that is really in the big scheme of things.
So, I still think we will see a Canon mirrorless which is competitive with DSLRs when Canon can make one which is genuinely competitive and do it cost effectively. That day is presumably getting closer - and you never know, it might arrive with the M4. That said, I wouldn't be terribly surprised if the M system remains focused on being small and light, even if that means sacrificing performance, and when Canon makes a mirrorless camera which is competitive with a DSLR, it will be closer in size to an existing Rebel and use an EF-S mount. (I realise that would mean having a Canon mirrorless camera which is not part of the M ecosystem, but there is no reason it would have to bear the M moniker, and outside of the gear-obsessed denizens of forums like CR (I guess that would be people like us
), I think most buyers care about things like size/weight/AF/what lenses a camera can use, without caring at all about what technology is inside.)
Upvote
0
As someone who gets into arguments with dilbert from time to time, let me state the following.dilbert said:Eldar said:Then why waste hundreds of posts arguing??neuroanatomist said:dilbert said:
Really, no one ever needs to look. :
It is a pointless question. I kind of feel sorry for the guy as he obviously has a lot of issues going on inside his head if he feels that posts like his are warranted/useful. It's kind of like the bully at primary school that picks on kids because they are different or stupid. When we are kids we don't know any better and join in but as adults, we know that what we see is hiding something else going on inside the kid. The way he continues to behave in that fashion to me clearly means he needs help beyond what any of us here can provide. A bit sad really. The best we can do is ignore it (and most seem to.)
1) Most of the time I agree with him.
2) When I disagree with him, I wonder if what we are both trying to say is similar, but with the limitations of texting, sounds different. Both Dilbert and myself sometimes do an inadequate job of explaining our position.
3) Sometimes I definitely disagree with him, but it makes for an interesting discussion that I hope the both of us learn from.
4) I believe that sometimes he trolls.... but if you look at his posting history you will see that it is a fairly small proportion of his posts.
5) I think that the forum would be a poorer spot without him.
6) if he ever shows up at my door, I'm going to grab a couple of steaks for the Barbie and a couple of cold ones.
7) I wish he would post more of his images....
Upvote
0
To Don's post let me add:
I enjoy his posts too, when they aren't based on a cynical broad-brush view.
And while I am certainly guilty of engaging when it is perhaps unwarranted, I hope people similarly engage me. This site can be both entertaining and educational, and having ideas challenged is a fantastic way to learn.
I enjoy his posts too, when they aren't based on a cynical broad-brush view.
And while I am certainly guilty of engaging when it is perhaps unwarranted, I hope people similarly engage me. This site can be both entertaining and educational, and having ideas challenged is a fantastic way to learn.
Upvote
0
When Neuro/John is sharing his knowledge and skills, he is a very valuable poster and one I have learned a lot from. However, when we get 10 condescending, cynical, word-splitting and sandbox argumentative posts, every time Dilbert or any other Canon critical person dears to post something, that value is lost.3kramd5 said:
So John, I expect you read this. Stay on as Dr. Jeckyll and get rid of your Mr. Hyde. You are a valuable and appreciated poster when you do.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Eldar said:
I have no problem with Dilbert's posts that are critical of Canon, per se. I have a problem when his or others' posts are based on a complete disregard for facts, supported by boneheadedness. 'Canon is behind the MILC competition because they don't offer a 4K dSLR,' and when challenged with the existence of the 1D C, 'I wouldn't call that a dSLR.'
When a member posts an honest question or a reasonable and fact-based criticism, I endeavor to respond with a helpful and cogent reply. When a member is manifestly trolling or posts a ridiculous assertion and backs it up with incorrect information, and has a long history of doing so, I'll respond with ridicule and scorn, and do so unapologetically.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Give me a break!!!
Let's set the record straight here.
Everyone knows I've never hesitated to call Neuro out and stand up to him when I find him bullying. I've been particularly critical of him when he lashes out at those who have only a brief history of posting on this site. In fairness though, that is often times in response to a goofy statement from someone who has spent too much time on the internet repeating myths as though they were facts.
Neuro backs up his arguments with facts. He has repeatedly and patiently citied the realities of the market and Canon's position in that market, in response to plainly ignorant posts that use overarching statements to externalize and universalize people's individual preferences and biases.
A classic example being another forum participant who constantly insists that Canon is "stupid" because it does not produce the exact version of certain products that the individual wants for himself, with no regard to the realities of the marketplace which clearly show that his preferred product is not viable.
In sharp contrast, Dilbert's posts are noticeably deficient in facts and generally don't even have much basis in reality. He opines on things of which he clearly has no personal knowledge and then when confronted by persons who actually have some real life experience, he doubles down and shifts the facts, simultaneously distorting what others have said while shuffling his own statements. In Dilbert's world there are no facts, only ill-informed opinions.
Now, Dilbert comes and writes some self-serving little treatise on how he is so misunderstood and Neuro is such a poor pathetic person. So GIVE ME A BREAK!!!
Dilbert is misunderstood because he constantly shifts his arguments to new territory whenever his previous points have been disproved. He is a classic goal-post mover and subject-changer. Despite the many preposterous positions he has taken, he has NEVER admitted he is wrong.
Yes, once in a rare while Dilbert may make a correct statement. And, in fact, you all know that I have frequently acknowledged that and even come to his support at times. (Only, of course, to have the little cubicle inhabiting troll bite my hand)
I have tried to deal with him patiently, hoping to seem improvement in his behavior. Yet, it often seems that for every step toward the light, he immediately retreats two steps backward under the bridge. He simply enjoys trolling and stirring things up with outrageous statements.
Of late, he has sought to create a persona of being a truth-teller persecuted for seeing the world differently than others. Don't be hoodwinked by his self-pitying.
Ultimately, it comes down to this: Neuro can be persuaded to engage in an intelligent debate involving legitimate, but informed, differences of opinion. Dilbert frustrates so many people (it is not just Neuro, it is many of us who have been longstanding participants) because he follows no rules of engagement or even logic. He makes clear statements that are factually incorrect and then a few posts later revises those statements to claim he was simply misunderstood.
The problem with troll like that is that it is simply impossible to ever engage in a rational discussion because of their ever-shifting versions of reality.
Let's set the record straight here.
Everyone knows I've never hesitated to call Neuro out and stand up to him when I find him bullying. I've been particularly critical of him when he lashes out at those who have only a brief history of posting on this site. In fairness though, that is often times in response to a goofy statement from someone who has spent too much time on the internet repeating myths as though they were facts.
Neuro backs up his arguments with facts. He has repeatedly and patiently citied the realities of the market and Canon's position in that market, in response to plainly ignorant posts that use overarching statements to externalize and universalize people's individual preferences and biases.
A classic example being another forum participant who constantly insists that Canon is "stupid" because it does not produce the exact version of certain products that the individual wants for himself, with no regard to the realities of the marketplace which clearly show that his preferred product is not viable.
In sharp contrast, Dilbert's posts are noticeably deficient in facts and generally don't even have much basis in reality. He opines on things of which he clearly has no personal knowledge and then when confronted by persons who actually have some real life experience, he doubles down and shifts the facts, simultaneously distorting what others have said while shuffling his own statements. In Dilbert's world there are no facts, only ill-informed opinions.
Now, Dilbert comes and writes some self-serving little treatise on how he is so misunderstood and Neuro is such a poor pathetic person. So GIVE ME A BREAK!!!
Dilbert is misunderstood because he constantly shifts his arguments to new territory whenever his previous points have been disproved. He is a classic goal-post mover and subject-changer. Despite the many preposterous positions he has taken, he has NEVER admitted he is wrong.
Yes, once in a rare while Dilbert may make a correct statement. And, in fact, you all know that I have frequently acknowledged that and even come to his support at times. (Only, of course, to have the little cubicle inhabiting troll bite my hand)
I have tried to deal with him patiently, hoping to seem improvement in his behavior. Yet, it often seems that for every step toward the light, he immediately retreats two steps backward under the bridge. He simply enjoys trolling and stirring things up with outrageous statements.
Of late, he has sought to create a persona of being a truth-teller persecuted for seeing the world differently than others. Don't be hoodwinked by his self-pitying.
Ultimately, it comes down to this: Neuro can be persuaded to engage in an intelligent debate involving legitimate, but informed, differences of opinion. Dilbert frustrates so many people (it is not just Neuro, it is many of us who have been longstanding participants) because he follows no rules of engagement or even logic. He makes clear statements that are factually incorrect and then a few posts later revises those statements to claim he was simply misunderstood.
The problem with troll like that is that it is simply impossible to ever engage in a rational discussion because of their ever-shifting versions of reality.
Upvote
0
I think, he is even suggested people to look alternatives if DR is important. His views are against trashing down cameras like 1dx and 7d2 for lack of base ISO DR. Now guardians of D(p)R also spoken about how less important base iso dr for d5 and suggested age old ETTR approach. Actually that is what Neuro is preaching all along.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
