*UPDATED* Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

[douglaurent]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

But that wouldn't help then, because Canon stole a lot of time from many photographers and filmmakers

That is verging on peurile.
They have stolen nothing - they just didn't give you what you wanted. WAAAAAAH!.
More exactly, they didn't give you what you thought was technically possible, but my guess is you know squat about the trade offs between technicalities and costing. All you're bothered about it 'me me me', and my guess is that if they did make a camera with all the features you wanted you would refuse to pay the cost it takes.

No, it's not about me. I own all the alternative products and simply use them. I am just analyzing the reality. Unfortunately we live in an age of globalization, super efficiency and pressure on everybody. Canon does put pressure on their factory workers, distributors etc etc to get results which they think is best for them. So consumers have the right to put the pressure on Canon and demand what's best for them. If it was the Mother Theresa foundation, I wouldn't demand anything.

 

[douglaurent]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Yes, I give the same justified criticism to all the other manufacturers as well.

Lol, I'm sure they give it as much credence as Canon. None. But if whining on the Internet makes you feel better, well, good for you.

Probably in 5 years Canon is ahead in everything again against Sony.

Canon is very far ahead of Sony now in what matters most to both Canon and Sony. Given their history, in five years, it's not unlikely that Sony's only contribution to the ILC market will be sensors used in other manufacturers' cameras.

It's just 5 lost years for Canon users if they offer the same features only that late.

And it's always interesting to read when forum users say that Canon does give a shit about social media, and will not recognize this rumor website and its discussions at all. This would imply whatever you write is irrelevant as well, and Canon is an ignorant company that doesn't properly do modern consumer research - which would prove the point that they are a bit behind.

 

[douglaurent]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

So which lenses of the list are completely unrealistic?

There are several lenses which I think are unlikely:

1. 14-24/2.8 IS - no other company makes such a lens.
2. 16-35/2.8 IS - no other company makes such a lens.
3. 12/2.8 IS - no other company makes such a lens, and the Laowa 12mm f/2.8 is very new.
4. 14/2.8 IS - no other company makes such a lens.
5. 18/2 IS - no other company makes such a lens. AFAIK, there is only one 18mm f/2 lens for m43, not even APS-C.
6. 20/1.4 IS - no other company makes such a lens.
7. 20/1.8 IS - no other company makes such a lens, and is very similar to the above.
8. 24/1.4 IS - no other company makes such a lens.
9. 24/1.8 IS - no other company makes such a lens, and is very similar to the above.
[Repeat 28 & 35mm]
10. 50/1.2 IS - no other company makes such a lens.
11. 85/1.2 IS - no other company makes such a lens.

No matter how realistic the lenses are, the more lenses are on the list, the less realistic it is. Canon's resources are limited, all the more so with decreasing sales, investing in R&D and manufacturing lines of >20 lenses could easily take over five years, by which time your least would change.

Making 15 lenses no other company ever made? Now, that's unrealistic.

In recent years, Canon did release 8 mirrorless system lenses that noone expected.
They did release these still unique lenses that nobody expected:

8-15/4 Fisheye
11-24/4
17/4 TiltShift
24/2.8 IS
28/2.8 IS
35/2 IS
200-540/4-5.6 IS

They also still have classics likthe 65/2.8 macro that are unparalleled to date.
Sigma and other manufacturers came up with lots of new lens specifications never seen before.

So please why shouldn't Canon be able to release new lenses whose specifications would make a lot of sense, and are definitely technically possible???

 

[douglaurent]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Making 15 lenses no other company ever made? Now, that's unrealistic.

Nonsense, Canon can easily do it. In addition to their known corporate goals of making profit, returning value to shareholders, and being environmentally conscious, they have a secret corporate goal of holding back technology so they can steal time from photographers. It's secret, but douglaurent knows all about it because he's bought some Canon gear and talked to a few people that rent that gear from him.

Right, a company that seems to sell only half as many cameras than a few years ago knows exactly what they are doing. They are just too good to fail!

And all the users who are standing in shooting situations since years and in the future, missing IS on a 24-70/2.8, carrying 2 cameras instead of 1 because they need to do photo and video at the same time, and having 100 other limitations - they all don't need to worry, because they know the japanese corporate gods have decided it in their own best interest! And of course there is no way to question it!

 

[Mikehit]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Right, a company that seems to sell only half as many cameras than a few years ago knows exactly what they are doing. They are just too good to fail!

Your logic really is incompetent. It is less a case of how many absolute sales but sales in relation to the total market for a specific product type. If Canon are to be faulted for not selling as many cameras as a few years ago, and Canon are selling more than others in a reducing market, then it means the others are even more at fault.

Please can you point me to your posts on Sony and Nikon sites with your criticisms of them?

And all the users who are standing in shooting situations since years and in the future, missing IS on a 24-70/2.8, carrying 2 cameras instead of 1 because they need to do photo and video at the same time, and having 100 other limitations - they all don't need to worry, because they know the japanese corporate gods have decided it in their own best interest! And of course there is no way to question it!

So if you need to shoot video and photo at the same time why are you using Canon? Why not use Sony or Nikon? Or Panasonic or Olympus?

 

[Mikehit]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

So consumers have the right to put the pressure on Canon and demand what's best for them.

I agree. But your comments go further - you then posit that Canon are incompetent because they don't give you what you say you need. My (and others' ) comments are that they are not incompetent, just that your priorities are not the same Canon's priorities which they have worked out based on a knowledge of the market.

You really do sound like the annoying oik in the playground who throws a punch (criticising Canon) then goes running behind the skirts of the teacher (in this case, a more reasonable standpoint) when someone calls you out.

 

[Diko]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Sorry if in the previous 14 pages someone already has pointed out the answer to:

Why on the poll there was EOS 90 as an option to 2017 when it's not even on the bloody roadmap for this year?

And why would anyone choose 24-70 f2.8 instead of the CANON second version of it? Does it has macro (like Canon mk1 version, which is/was awesome btw)?

OK nobody willing to answer?

 

[scyrene]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Let's continue to drive straight off the roadmap.

'Opinion' doesn't connote factual basis.

I never said it did.

Erm... you said this, but perhaps I misinterpret it?

It's not an opinion if it stands opposed to fact.

Opinion is belief.

No. In my opinion, they're closely related, but not the same.

I found some material that asserted that opinion was reflexive, that it was "self-report or attitudinal statement." I.e., it's personal or values-related, whereas belief is a holding of factual truth.

One can believe anything

This is true, and has caused many problems in the world.

I'm saying an opinion can live in the area between known-true and unknown, but it's not the same as belief -- it's more an attitude or value about a belief than the belief itself. Here's an example of my distinction: consider a physician speaking to a patient.

Belief: "Medication A performed best in the clinical trials." This is a belief because it's a holding of fact. Even if it's false, it's still a belief.

Opinion: "Medication A is the best treatment for your condition." This is a value statement about a belief, not the belief itself.

Why this matters: once an opinion has been shown to be based on falsehood, it no longer deserves deference we often try to give to values, attitudes and self-reports. (Some would argue the same of false beliefs, but that's a different conversation.)

Thanks for the entertaining discussion; and for those interested, here are a few URLs.

http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/teaching/co300man/pop12d.cfm

http://www.auburn.edu/academic/education/reading_genie/Fact-opinion.html

All I can say is, our native speaker intuition doesn't agree; that's okay, it's the case for most things. I see what you're driving at, but I think perhaps you are trying to introduce a distinction that you see as useful, but I still don't buy that it's there at present (or rather, I don't see it as the mainstream English usage). Anyway, we need a succinct term for 'former belief subsequently shown to be untrue that is still held', because facts don't seem to bother many people's opinions (this forum is littered with good examples...).

Anyway, not to worry

 

[Loswr]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Right, a company that seems to sell only half as many cameras than a few years ago knows exactly what they are doing. They are just too good to fail!

When there wasn't a microwave in almost every home in the developed world, microwave sales grew rapidly. Now, they've flattened out. The ILC market is doing that now. The fact that Canon is selling fewer cameras than some years back is a result of extrinsic factors. The fact that they are gaining market share in this flattening market demonstrates that they know quite well what they are doing, and they are making the right choices. Since you're advocating they change their successful approach, your recommendations are clearly useless.

And all the users who are standing in shooting situations since years and in the future, missing IS on a 24-70/2.8, carrying 2 cameras instead of 1 because they need to do photo and video at the same time, and having 100 other limitations - they all don't need to worry, because they know the japanese corporate gods have decided it in their own best interest!

Canon has decided to act in their own best interest. Why does that surprise you? They don't care about your interests, except insofar as your purchasing their products. Which you continue to do (and as I've stated, they neither know nor care about your claims that you might have bought more). If people have to buy two cameras instead of one, and Canon doesn't have to spend the R&D money to add 100 other features, they're clearly making the right choice...for them. Their increasing market share is merely confirmation that they know more about what is appealing to buyers than their competitors...and they clearly know more than you.

 

[Orangutan]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Let's continue to drive straight off the roadmap.

'Opinion' doesn't connote factual basis.

I never said it did.

Erm... you said this, but perhaps I misinterpret it?

It's not an opinion if it stands opposed to fact.

This is precisely the distinction I'm making: an opinion need not be supported by fact, but it cannot be counterfactual. I.e., an opinion can be valid when facts are unknown or ambiguous. It's not a valid opinion if it's provably false.

You may be overthinking it, or I haven't explained well. It's really pretty simple: just about any opinion is valid so long as it's not provably false. Unlike Neuro, I do not believe the word "opinion" extends to the Earth being flat since that's provably false. It can extend to whether aliens have visited the Earth in modern times because that's not provably false, no matter how unlikely it may be or how weak the evidence.

Anyway, not to worry

Not worrying, just enjoying a nice discussion. ;D

 

[ahsanford]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Right, a company that seems to sell only half as many cameras than a few years ago knows exactly what they are doing. They are just too good to fail!

You are blaming Canon exclusively for what is pillaging the entire industry right now, so that's a silly thing to say.

You understand that in a shrinking market like you describe, you never gamble on bleeding edge and reach for spruce-goose like passion products -- you focus on fundamentals, value, and execution.

An (for example) EF 24-70 f/2L IS USM sort of 'we did it!' lens would devour resources to develop, cost a boatload to design and build, and ultimately only serve a sliver of the market. It would take Canon into Otus territory, where the market is rather tiny. That's hardly going to resurrect the market or rock the competitive market share.

Far wiser would be to modernize your staple products, proliferate your proprietary tech as widely across your portfolio as possible, and keep your core users happy. And that's exactly what Canon is doing.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Sorry if in the previous 14 pages someone already has pointed out the answer to:

Why on the poll there was EOS 90 as an option to 2017 when it's not even on the bloody roadmap for this year?

And why would anyone choose 24-70 f2.8 instead of the CANON second version of it? Does it has macro (like Canon mk1 version, which is/was awesome btw)?

OK nobody willing to answer?

I didn't understand you, that's why I didn't respond. But I shall try:

• 
  If by 'EOS 90' you meant a 90D camera body, I would encourage a review of the attached from Northlight. Product lifecycles change (they appear to be slowing due to contraction of the market), but the XXD line appears to -- at least in the last two versions -- have a three year cycle, which would put the 90D as a late 2018 / early 2019 sort of product.
  
  
• Your 24-70 f/2.8 comment lost me, as neither version of the 24-70 f/2.8L has a great macro mode. I think you may be getting your 24-70 lenses mixed up -- the 24-70 f/4L IS is the one with the great max magnification:
  
  24-70 f/2.8L II: 0.21x Max mag
  24-70 f/2.8L (I / Original): 0.29x Max mag
  24-70 f/4L IS: 0.70x Max mag
  
  But please clarify what you are asking and I'm sure the good folks here will have much to say!
  
  

- A

 

[AvTvM]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

yes, market saturation as well as macro-economic conditions are external parameters. but stils imaging industry has not been handling it well. canon and nikon as market share leaders have been acting way too conservative. they continued to pump out tiny-sensor digital compact cameras (powershot and coolpix) like crazy, when it was clear that people were not interested to buy them any longer. they continue to pump out marginally improved iterations of their dslrs, when it is clear that most potential buyets alteady have a mirrorslapper plus kit lens(es) sitting mostly unused in drawers. no wonder that unit sales are declining rapidly.

had canon (and nikon) initiated the transition to smaller, fully capable, connected (!) and less expensive (sub €/$ 1000) mirrorless cameras, both interchangeable lens camera systems and larger-sensor fixed lens compacts (1", APS-C, FF) systems sooner, like starting in 2013 when challenger Sony launched such products (esp. A7, A6000 and RX series) then overall unit sales of dedicated cameras would likely (!) not be in such continued steep decline.

instead, nikon solely came up with limited-capabilty, non-connected Nikon 1 series and is not even capable to offer their announced DL cameras in late 2016. canons only offering consisted of not-connected EOS M system with capabilities below their entry level DSLRs (no Viewfinder, more lag, less capable AF systems, etc.) and a few 1" powershots at way too high prices.

as customers we have every right to pont out these facts (!) and to questiln the wisdom if canon's (and Nikons) product strategies. they need to come up with way more interesting and capable products at highly affordable proce points (basically 299 / 499 / 999 / 1999 ) if they want us to buy them.

continued failure to do so will lead to their collapse. nikon first, since they are fully dependent on selling enough cameras to survive. relative market share is a very secondary concern now and not even a "consolation prize" in this game. as simple as that.

thats my non-counterfactual opinion, my belief and my creed as far as the state of affairs in (stills) imaging market at the end if 2016 is concerned.

 

[Mikehit]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

There also comes a point that a company has to decide whether it is worth even trying to break into a market.

Smartphones are not merely 'connected cameras' - they are phones as well and this seems to be the point you and douglaurent are missing. Nearly everyone carries a phone nowadays and that will not change - and that is the challenge (not the connectivity) and that is why smartphones have an advantage over cameras. If someone has in their pocket a phone with a built camera that is what is killing the lower-end camera market; in fact of people I know for whom the smartphone is their camera, few use it to post directly to social networking and most have it to show the picture to friends and relatives later in the day.
So Canon and Nikon decision is not 'do we want to make a connected camera' but 'do we want to make camera phones'. The answer is clearly 'no', if you think about what would need to go into a camera to make this possible - processors, microphone, speaker, antenna etc etc. Then you add the other advantages of smartphone - web browsing, music storage etc. How far do you want cameras to go?
DSLRs according to some are already oversized now you want to put a phone in there. And that is not allowing for signal degradation and radio frequency interference because of all the electronic circuitry in close proximity...

But I would say CaNikon do not need to make cameraphones - their wifi connectivity means the camera can use the phone (which the person has with them anyway) to link to social network sites if that is what the user wants to do.

 

[AvTvM]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

...
in fact of people I know for whom the smartphone is their camera, few use it to post directly to social networking and most have it to show the picture to friends and relatives later in the day.

seems like you don't know enough people under the age of 50 ;D

Canon does not need to build camera-phones. We would already be HAPPY if Canon would manage to offer *SIMPLE and WORKING* WiFi connectivity in all of their cameras without pesky limitations and laborious setup shenanigans to go through ... in late 2016!

 

[Mikehit]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Canon does not need to build camera-phones. We would already be HAPPY if Canon would manage to offer *SIMPLE and WORKING* WiFi connectivity in all of their cameras without pesky limitations and laborious setup shenanigans to go through ... in late 2016!

Are you talking wifi connectivity or internet connectivity? So the question is how do you connect to the internet - direct or via a wifi network and the latter can be a wifi connection to your camera and cameras can already connect to wifi.
You said previously

had canon (and nikon) initiated the transition to smaller, fully capable, connected (!) and less expensive (sub €/$ 1000) mirrorless cameras, both interchangeable lens camera systems and larger-sensor fixed lens compacts (1", APS-C, FF) systems sooner, like starting in 2013 when challenger Sony launched such products (esp. A7, A6000 and RX series) then overall unit sales of dedicated cameras would likely (!) not be in such continued steep decline.

So I am not sure what it is you are saying. The only 'connected' camera without 'pesky limitations and laborious setup shenanigans to go through' is one that has internet connectivity. Can the Sony do this?

And to top it off, you use Sony as an example as to how improved connectivity will save the ILC market. Remind me what proportion of sales Sony has...

 

[AvTvM]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

just look at the extremely poor WiFi implementation in all of Canon's [and Nikons] current cameras. It just sucks. And no, I am not talking "internet connection", just plain and simple direct WiFi connectivity. To a smartphone, tablet or notebook. Plus decent App for remote control including full featured intervalometer.

 

[Mikehit]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

No camera IME has particularly good wifi connectivity (I have tried Canon, Olympus, Panasonic and I have seen plenty enough complaints about Fuji and Sony on the poor connection) which suggests to me that there are challenges installing wifi into cameras. If it was as easy as you seem to be implying it would not be an issue. Unless of course you can advise Canon and all the others on how to do it.
Again, you seem to be aiming your shots at Canon when it is the industry as a whole that has a problem inpmplementing the technology.

 

[AvTvM]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

Don't you worry: i do call out Canon and I do call out the entire imaging industry. But Canon gets most of my flak, because
1. I am their customer
2. they are self proclaimd "industry leader".
that fully justifies use of a tougher yardstick on Canon.

 

[Mikehit]

Re: Here's an Updated 2017 Canon Roadmap

They are the market leader on taking pictures, not on wifi technology.
But you are making the same mistake as douglaurent - pointing out the functionality you would like, and when you don't get it using your needs as a barometer to blame Canon for the ills of the camera industry as a whole, as if your needs are universal.
Well guess what, me and a host of others don't give a crap about posting to social media as soon as we take the picture. My guess is canon's priorities are more in tune with ours than yours.
Nor do many professionals. In fact, if forums were to be believed, a professional would be negligent if they posted an image without maximal post processing on a laptop (using the power of the in-camera engine??? Pfft!).

Improved connectivity will come, I have no doubt. But it is all about priorities.