What if Canon were no longer #1?

[3kramd5]

IBIS - why do you want this instead of in-lens stabilisation?

Because then every lens you use can benefit from optical stabilization at no added cost. All else being equal, why *wouldn’t* you?

Because all else *isn't* equal. IBIS is less effective at longer focal lengths, so I'd prefer in-lens IS.

However, if the question above didn't include 'instead of', I'd choose to have both...which is an option with systems other than Canon and Nikon.

Can you quantify that? I haven’t seen it done. I’ve seen people compare for example canon IS on with Sony IBIS off to canon IS off with Sony IBIS on, but there you still have too many variables. Say the former is demonstrated to be better. Is it because it was done in lens? Is it due to that lens specifically versus that body specifically (e.g. the actuation distance is tuned for wide FOV because those companies producing it have not long lenses*)? Is it because canon has been implementing it longer and is better at developing those algorithms?

If a truly conclusive test has been done I haven’t seen it. I agree with your final position: both is probably better than one or the other.

*This would suggest it’s better to keep in in lens so the implementation is specific.

 

[stevelee]

My G7X II has built in stabilization for both stills and video. My 6D2 appears to have it just for video, and it appears to work similarly to the software stabilization in FCP X. I find it interesting that it is turned off if you turn off stabilization on the lens, but works with non-stabilized lenses. I am unsurprised that it doesn’t work with lenses 800mm and up.

 

[bokehmon22]

EVF, IBIS, Eye AF. Nikon have in camera auto AF fine tune your camera lens. Sony isn't require to. I still have to buy software to fine tune my lens.

I don't do use videography professionally but I use some for vacation, family, and BTS. I wish Canon clean 4K file and IBIS would definitely help.

I'm fine with all Canon short comings for now, and I'm able to make images I want to make even with my 6D, but I have to spend >$3 again, I don't know if I would buy Canon body with each iteration of Sony camera keep on refining and have more compatibility with adapted lens while Canon keep offering lackluster update.

I only have 5 lens:2 L-lens (70-200 II 2.8, 24-70II 2.8 ) and a couple Tamron and Sigma Art lens.

EVF - you can only have EVF if you take the mirror out of the way and when you do that you have LiveView. Canon have patented a hybrid VF but this has not appeared yet.
IBIS - why do you want this instead of in-lens stabilisation? 'IBIS' seems to have become a bit of a mantra but I have not been sure why - if you want to use third party non-stabilised lenses this is pretty much a niche market.
Eye AF - by all accounts it was great when it worked but it was fraught with problems. I am pretty sure there is a reason Canon did not persist with it
Nikon have in camera auto AF fine tune your camera lens - and by all accounts is next to useless. Probably why Canon has not put it in their models yet but (if rumours are true) will have it in 7D3.

It sounded like you are making excuses for Canon instead of them giving us the option of what to do with it.

EVF on A9/A7RIII is good enough for me. Canon have alot of patented stuffs, but they haven't release it for whatever reasons. I'm only discussing what's available now. They already have EVF on their compact mirrorless camera, and 5 axis IBIS for video in 6D II, M5 as well as other camera.

-IBIS is good for non stabilized lens such as Sigma Art series, Canon 24-70 2.8, Canon 135. All great lens but IBIS would be beneficial for video and photography. If it doesn't appeal to you, you can turn it off. Canon IS lens such as 85 1.4 IS is more expensive than Sigma 85 1.4 Art. If the camera have IBIS, you would save some money.

I'm not sure why Canon withhold these features in their professional FF camera. Instead they release feature that are half bake like dual pixel and incremental upgrades like more AF point, more Mpx, a little more DR.

As someone who build their entire portfolio on Canon 6D and made alot of money off weddings with it, I am used to making more with less and know camera isn't everything. Still, it's disappointing to see Canon lackluster attempt at competing when they can make 5D IV so much better by having faster card slot, more codec choice for video, and features such as IBIS.

You may not like mirror-less, but there are growing group of young photographers who switches to using mirror-less FF for their needs. If Canon release a 5D-M FF camera even below their flagship camera models and continue making to refine EVF, IBIS, I'm sure they would sold a lot of camera and keep their loyal base happy.

 

[Deleted member 379512]

EVF, IBIS, Eye AF. Nikon have in camera auto AF fine tune your camera lens. Sony isn't require to. I still have to buy software to fine tune my lens.

I don't do use videography professionally but I use some for vacation, family, and BTS. I wish Canon clean 4K file and IBIS would definitely help.

I'm fine with all Canon short comings for now, and I'm able to make images I want to make even with my 6D, but I have to spend >$3 again, I don't know if I would buy Canon body with each iteration of Sony camera keep on refining and have more compatibility with adapted lens while Canon keep offering lackluster update.

I only have 5 lens:2 L-lens (70-200 II 2.8, 24-70II 2.8 ) and a couple Tamron and Sigma Art lens.

EVF - you can only have EVF if you take the mirror out of the way and when you do that you have LiveView. Canon have patented a hybrid VF but this has not appeared yet.
IBIS - why do you want this instead of in-lens stabilisation? 'IBIS' seems to have become a bit of a mantra but I have not been sure why - if you want to use third party non-stabilised lenses this is pretty much a niche market.
Eye AF - by all accounts it was great when it worked but it was fraught with problems. I am pretty sure there is a reason Canon did not persist with it
Nikon have in camera auto AF fine tune your camera lens - and by all accounts is next to useless. Probably why Canon has not put it in their models yet but (if rumours are true) will have it in 7D3.

It sounded like you are making excuses for Canon instead of them giving us the option of what to do with it.

EVF on A9/A7RIII is good enough for me. Canon have alot of patented stuffs, but they haven't release it for whatever reasons. I'm only discussing what's available now. They already have EVF on their compact mirrorless camera, and 5 axis IBIS for video in 6D II, M5 as well as other camera.

-IBIS is good for non stabilized lens such as Sigma Art series, Canon 24-70 2.8, Canon 135. All great lens but IBIS would be beneficial for video and photography. If it doesn't appeal to you, you can turn it off. Canon IS lens such as 85 1.4 IS is more expensive than Sigma 85 1.4 Art. If the camera have IBIS, you would save some money.

I'm not sure why Canon withhold these features in their professional FF camera. Instead they release feature that are half bake like dual pixel and incremental upgrades like more AF point, more Mpx, a little more DR.

As someone who build their entire portfolio on Canon 6D and made alot of money off weddings with it, I am used to making more with less and know camera isn't everything. Still, it's disappointing to see Canon lackluster attempt at competing when they can make 5D IV so much better by having faster card slot, more codec choice for video, and features such as IBIS.

You may not like mirror-less, but there are growing group of young photographers who switches to using mirror-less FF for their needs. If Canon release a 5D-M FF camera even below their flagship camera models and continue making to refine EVF, IBIS, I'm sure they would sold a lot of camera and keep their loyal base happy.

I'm not sure the 6dmk2 has Ibis, I believe it's just an electronic stability system, much like one can do in post through final cut pro.

Useful yes, but just software.

 

[Rocky]

Who care who is #1. You buy the camera that you like( want) and keep it as long as it is doing what you want.

 

[dak723]

I'm not sure why Canon withhold these features in their professional FF camera. Instead they release feature that are half bake like dual pixel and incremental upgrades like more AF point, more Mpx, a little more DR.

As usual, people assume that Canon can just do whatever they want and are thus holding back all this technology. Since Canon's professional FF cameras are (so far) not mirrorless, looking for mirrorless features such as an EVF is unrealistic.

I believe someone looked this up, but I have no way of knowing if it is true, but they have no IBIS patents. Can't withhold something that you have no way of producing if you don't have a patent for it. Instead they have gone the in-lens stabilization route. That is the reality - not that they are holding anything back, as you believe.

As is typical of the Canon basher, things they do have, such as dual pixel, as considered half-baked, or somehow not innovative.

Are Canon cameras perfect? Of course not. My guess is that most consumers of high-end FF cameras are not particularly interested in most of the things you believe should be added. I guess time will tell.

 

[Don Haines]

EVF, IBIS, Eye AF. Nikon have in camera auto AF fine tune your camera lens. Sony isn't require to. I still have to buy software to fine tune my lens.

I don't do use videography professionally but I use some for vacation, family, and BTS. I wish Canon clean 4K file and IBIS would definitely help.

I'm fine with all Canon short comings for now, and I'm able to make images I want to make even with my 6D, but I have to spend >$3 again, I don't know if I would buy Canon body with each iteration of Sony camera keep on refining and have more compatibility with adapted lens while Canon keep offering lackluster update.

I only have 5 lens:2 L-lens (70-200 II 2.8, 24-70II 2.8 ) and a couple Tamron and Sigma Art lens.

EVF - you can only have EVF if you take the mirror out of the way and when you do that you have LiveView. Canon have patented a hybrid VF but this has not appeared yet.
IBIS - why do you want this instead of in-lens stabilisation? 'IBIS' seems to have become a bit of a mantra but I have not been sure why - if you want to use third party non-stabilised lenses this is pretty much a niche market.
Eye AF - by all accounts it was great when it worked but it was fraught with problems. I am pretty sure there is a reason Canon did not persist with it
Nikon have in camera auto AF fine tune your camera lens - and by all accounts is next to useless. Probably why Canon has not put it in their models yet but (if rumours are true) will have it in 7D3.

It sounded like you are making excuses for Canon instead of them giving us the option of what to do with it.

EVF on A9/A7RIII is good enough for me. Canon have alot of patented stuffs, but they haven't release it for whatever reasons. I'm only discussing what's available now. They already have EVF on their compact mirrorless camera, and 5 axis IBIS for video in 6D II, M5 as well as other camera.

-IBIS is good for non stabilized lens such as Sigma Art series, Canon 24-70 2.8, Canon 135. All great lens but IBIS would be beneficial for video and photography. If it doesn't appeal to you, you can turn it off. Canon IS lens such as 85 1.4 IS is more expensive than Sigma 85 1.4 Art. If the camera have IBIS, you would save some money.

I'm not sure why Canon withhold these features in their professional FF camera. Instead they release feature that are half bake like dual pixel and incremental upgrades like more AF point, more Mpx, a little more DR.

As someone who build their entire portfolio on Canon 6D and made alot of money off weddings with it, I am used to making more with less and know camera isn't everything. Still, it's disappointing to see Canon lackluster attempt at competing when they can make 5D IV so much better by having faster card slot, more codec choice for video, and features such as IBIS.

You may not like mirror-less, but there are growing group of young photographers who switches to using mirror-less FF for their needs. If Canon release a 5D-M FF camera even below their flagship camera models and continue making to refine EVF, IBIS, I'm sure they would sold a lot of camera and keep their loyal base happy.

I'm not sure the 6dmk2 has Ibis, I believe it's just an electronic stability system, much like one can do in post through final cut pro.

Useful yes, but just software.

The 6D2 does not have IBIS.

What it does have, is a video mode where the image captured is slightly larger than 2K and cropped to 2K to "fit over the previous frame". This is the same as shooting in 2.7K and using post-production to crop to 2K while aligning frames to eliminate jitter. It seems to work fairly well.... not quite as good as post-production, but WAY!!!!!!! more convenient.

 

[Loswr]

Canon IS lens such as 85 1.4 IS is more expensive than Sigma 85 1.4 Art. If the camera have IBIS, you would save some money.

The corollary is that means less money for Canon. Perhaps their choice makes more sense in that light.

You may not like mirror-less, but there are growing group of young photographers who switches to using mirror-less FF for their needs. If Canon release a 5D-M FF camera even below their flagship camera models and continue making to refine EVF, IBIS, I'm sure they would sold a lot of camera and keep their loyal base happy.

They released an APS-C MILC and fairly quickly rose to #2 on the overall MILC market. Face it – the only reason Sony sells more FF MILCs is that Canon doesn't make one – yet. Given their manifestly successful performance in the ILC market, odds are that Canon will release a FF MILC exactly when it will benefit them the most...and no sooner.

 

[Don Haines]

Canon IS lens such as 85 1.4 IS is more expensive than Sigma 85 1.4 Art. If the camera have IBIS, you would save some money.

???????

Are you really suggesting that Canon should have designed it's lenses and bodies for an IBIS system, despite the fact that they use mirrored systems without it? Perhaps they should ignore all the compatibility of legacy products?

 

[Dylan777]

Canon IS lens such as 85 1.4 IS is more expensive than Sigma 85 1.4 Art. If the camera have IBIS, you would save some money.

The corollary is that means less money for Canon. Perhaps their choice makes more sense in that light.

You may not like mirror-less, but there are growing group of young photographers who switches to using mirror-less FF for their needs. If Canon release a 5D-M FF camera even below their flagship camera models and continue making to refine EVF, IBIS, I'm sure they would sold a lot of camera and keep their loyal base happy.

They released an APS-C MILC and fairly quickly rose to #2 on the overall MILC market. Face it – the only reason Sony sells more FF MILCs is that Canon doesn't make one – yet. Given their manifestly successful performance in the ILC market, odds are that Canon will release a FF MILC exactly when it will benefit them the most...and no sooner.

With featutres in M1and M3 Canon already good enough for #2...Welcome to Canon world :

 

[bokehmon22]

Canon IS lens such as 85 1.4 IS is more expensive than Sigma 85 1.4 Art. If the camera have IBIS, you would save some money.

The corollary is that means less money for Canon. Perhaps their choice makes more sense in that light.

You may not like mirror-less, but there are growing group of young photographers who switches to using mirror-less FF for their needs. If Canon release a 5D-M FF camera even below their flagship camera models and continue making to refine EVF, IBIS, I'm sure they would sold a lot of camera and keep their loyal base happy.

They released an APS-C MILC and fairly quickly rose to #2 on the overall MILC market. Face it – the only reason Sony sells more FF MILCs is that Canon doesn't make one – yet. Given their manifestly successful performance in the ILC market, odds are that Canon will release a FF MILC exactly when it will benefit them the most...and no sooner.

Of course their decision is to maximize their profit by omiting certain features, but it doesn't make it right to us as a consumer. Why are you defending them on that point? I don't own Canon stock so I don't care about their income.

I wouldn't be surprised if they sold more FF mirrorless camera than Sony if they make one. I don't disagree with you. They know if they gave us everything we want like mirrorless D850, that would be more camera than most of us ever needs. Even the Canon 5D IV is all I need as a wedding photographer. It's on sale right now for $2200.

If Canon ever release a mirrorless camera, I wouldn't expect much based on features from 5D IV and 6D II releases. It would be just another iteration update like most phone are nowadays - a little more MPx, a little more Dynamic range, a little more FPS.

 

[Loswr]

Of course their decision is to maximize their profit by omiting certain features, but it doesn't make it right to us as a consumer. Why are you defending them on that point? I don't own Canon stock so I don't care about their income.

Toyota sells cars. Odds are they'll sell many cars next year and remain among the most popular car makes. Am I defending Toyota?

Apparently, you believe stating facts and drawing logical conclusions constitutes 'defense'. I suppose that makes sense – if you're on the offense against Canon, facts supporting them will seem defensive. They're just facts, I suggest you get over it. Or not...I don't really care.

 

[Mikehit]

Of course their decision is to maximize their profit by omiting certain features,

So what exactly do they have in their technological armoury that they are omitting?
You use of words like 'omit' and 'defending' to justify your position are approaching pathetic. If you want any credence please state what you think Canon is capable of with their current technology then argue about why they may or may not be omitting it. Otherwise it smacks of a kid at Christmas screaming 'WAAAH! I want I and they won't give it to me'.

 

[3kramd5]

Of course their decision is to maximize their profit by omiting certain features,

So what exactly do they have in their technological armoury that they are omitting?

Probably a lot, but nobody outside Canon really knows. If they’re like other technology companies, they probably have dozens of capabilities in undisclosed/non-productized IP for every patent applied for.

They are also very conservative and tend to slow roll things rather than rushing functionality to market (for better or worse) - witness the late activation of DPAF in the cinema cams.

 

[Deleted member 379512]

Of course their decision is to maximize their profit by omiting certain features,

So what exactly do they have in their technological armoury that they are omitting?
You use of words like 'omit' and 'defending' to justify your position are approaching pathetic. If you want any credence please state what you think Canon is capable of with their current technology then argue about why they may or may not be omitting it. Otherwise it smacks of a kid at Christmas screaming 'WAAAH! I want I and they won't give it to me'.


but it doesn't make it right to us as a consumer. Why are you defending them on that point? I don't own Canon stock so I don't care about their income.

I wouldn't be surprised if they sold more FF mirrorless camera than Sony if they make one. I don't disagree with you. They know if they gave us everything we want like mirrorless D850, that would be more camera than most of us ever needs. Even the Canon 5D IV is all I need as a wedding photographer. It's on sale right now for $2200.

If Canon ever release a mirrorless camera, I wouldn't expect much based on features from 5D IV and 6D II releases. It would be just another iteration update like most phone are nowadays - a little more MPx, a little more Dynamic range, a little more FPS.

[/quote]

I think the quotes have gotten mixed up, but the apparent omission for most people is the 6dmk2 sensor being the older tech (or lower dynamic range than the other recently released models), the removal of All-i video compression in that camera, and peaking being available in the point and shoots but not in the higher end dlsr models. I'm sure there are others, but those do stand out a bit

 

[Loswr]

...peaking being available in the point and shoots but not in the higher end dlsr models. I'm sure there are others, but those do stand out a bit

Yeah, my EOS M and even my PowerShot S100 have in-camera HDR, but they omitted it from my 1D X. What greedy, camera-nerfing bastards, omiting such a critical feature.

 

[midluk]

...peaking being available in the point and shoots but not in the higher end dlsr models. I'm sure there are others, but those do stand out a bit

Yeah, my EOS M and even my PowerShot S100 have in-camera HDR, but they omitted it from my 1D X. What greedy, camera-nerfing bastards, omiting such a critical feature.

And even the 1300D has a food mode, but they didn't put that into the 5D4.

 

[dafrank]

Wouldn't matter to me one bit. Not sure why it matters to anyone - as long as Canon stays in business and does well enough to continue to put out products. And it f they didn't - then I will get a photo equipment camera from some other company if and when my stuff no longer works. Already have one Olympus to go along with my one Canon camera. The fact that people root for companies as if they were sports teams competing against one another is so ludicrous that I want to yell "Grow up" every time I see the various trolls and fanboy comments that dominate the internet.

+1

 

[Cory]

Not #1 to who?

 

[Loswr]

With featutres in M1and M3 Canon already good enough for #2...Welcome to Canon world :

Welcome to the real world. It's the place most people live, although that 'most' clearly excludes some CR forum members. :