What's Next From Canon?

Mikehit

EOS R6
Jul 28, 2015
3,345
551
fullstop said:
Canon being so "highly innovative" - why should their FF mirrorless cams not come with electronic global shutter?

they'd then have a true USP over Sony. 100% vibration-free, 100% silent (by default, unless user activates any painful electronic noise of their own poor taste and choice), very compact, no moving parts inside, very robust, very compact (by default, unless users put all sorts of grips, rigs or cages on it to make it as big as desired) and less expensive than Sony products. Canon wins, Sony loses. :)

Maybe because no-one has yet developed one that is viable for MFT/APS-C/FF ?
Why do you ask such dumb questions? It merely shows many of your critcisms arise out of ignorance of reality rather any informed comment.
 

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,163
1,506
fullstop said:
Canon being so "highly innovative" - why should their FF mirrorless cams not come with electronic global shutter?
Electronic global shutter has its drawbacks. In particular:

1. Heat generation (and dissipation).
2. Frame rate to shutter speed ratio for video.
3. Cost.
 

Mikehit

EOS R6
Jul 28, 2015
3,345
551
fullstop said:
i am sure that back in the day, when some smart folks invented the wheel, there were less smart folk standing around saying "what's it good for? why ould we not continue to just carry things on our backs and ride our oxen and horses to go places. those are good, proven mobility solutions.

That pretty much happened in Tibet.
Other areas caught onto the practical advantages of the wheel.
So yes, it did actually happen.

It is called recutio ab absurdum

Any more irrelevant analogies?
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,821
4,271
Back in the day, when the wheel was invented...there was that one guy standing there with his head trapped in his own personal alternate reality, thinking that he and only he knew how to make the best wheel despite being totally inept at actually building anything. In his private mental universe, he believed millions of his fellow cavemen would trade good hides and meat for the kind of wheel he wanted...but of course, he had no evidence to back up his fanciful imaginings. Then, when wheels finally became available, he refused to buy one because some were too big and others had 17% too few spokes. Because no one made his perfect wheel, apparently the poor sap ended up having to carry his belongings on his back until he was eaten by a sabertooth cat.
 

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
fullstop said:
i am sure that back in the day, when some smart folks invented the wheel, there were less smart folk standing around saying "what's it good for? why ould we not continue to just carry things on our backs and ride our oxen and horses to go places. those are good, proven mobility solutions. that darn newfangled wheel is just a fad, that will go away soon. a solution to a problem to be found. if god had wanted us to use wheels, we would have been born with them, instead of legs." yada yada ... let's just call them apologists! :)

and when the first photographs were taken all them portrait, landscape and still-life painters surely said: "not needed. we can do it way better!" ... :)

So now we have fantasy history to go along with fantasy camera designs and imaginary numbers.

Maybe it's time to lighten up. It's only been in the last few years that large high quality color photographic prints have been a practical and affordable possibility for non commercial purposes. For years, artists have used small photographs as an aid in creating lrealistic paintings. A book has been published that compares Norman Rockwell paintings to photographs he used in making them.
 

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,885
1,033
UK
www.flickr.com
Generalized Specialist said:
neuroanatomist said:
No doubt. But Canon isn't losing market share, so the 'many' people you talk to aren't really relevant.

Where Canon is padding their numbers to get to the roughly 50% marketshare is in their low end Costco/Best Buy kits. Canon is turning into the Kia of the camera world.

Go out anywhere touristy and there is a sea of teenagers with a Rebel (and to be fair, Nikon 3000 series bodies) and kit lenses hanging around their neck, THAT'S the majority of your 50% market right there.

So wait, some sales are more equal than others? What does it matter which cameras constitute the bulk of their sales? Are Leica more valid as a company to you for only selling high-end (or at least high-price) goods? Don't be a snob. Most people can't afford $2k+ FF cameras, and most people who can still wouldn't consider spending that. Lower end goods will always constitute the majority of most markets. Providing them is just good business.

And as others have pointed out, Canon *also* provides for the top end, so it's not clear what point you're making.

All that is clear from your later replies that you have some weird love for Sony (or maybe you're a sockpuppet). Fine, but if you believe your own rhetoric then that's just sad. Canon and Sony are both huge corporations trying to make as much money as possible. They have slightly different approaches, but pretending one is amazing and loves its customers and the other treats them with contempt shows a great deal of naivety.
 

scyrene

EOS R6
Dec 4, 2013
2,885
1,033
UK
www.flickr.com
fullstop said:
Woody said:
Generalized Specialist said:
Like I said, Canon is the new Kodak.

Are MILCs game-changing like film to digital sensors, or are they are merely another evolutionary step in the digital sensor era?

Doesn't matter what you say. Canon just needs to secure another year of 50% market share.

Going from analog/film photography to digital was the biggest step transferring imaging from 18th century tech into the 21st century. Similar to the control of fire for mankind.

Getting rid of mechanically moving elements - basically the 19th/early 20th century stuff in imaging gear - is akin to mankind inventing the wheel. Finally we get "thru the lens" autofocus, auto-metering and wysiwg viewfinders without needing any of the follwing: no more clunky mirrors, submirrors, heavy prisms, dislocated AF-systems out of plane of focus of image.

Why is mirrorless an total win?

* vibration-free operation [as soon as mech shutters are finally eliminated]
* absolutely silent operation
* no more back-/front focus issues
* WYSIWIG viewfinder
* no lubricants/oil splatters [ (c) Nikon], no grit/abrasive particles from mech movement in camera settling on sensor
* easy to wheatherseal, robust, solid state cameras
* significantly lower manufacturing cost - 100% robotic assembly possible, much simpler calibration and QC
* potentially (!) lower cost of cameras - if we, the customers - stand up and don't allow manufacturers to just pocket all of the cost savings themselves / for shareholders
* significantly smaller & lighter cameras
* significantly smaller lenses in most commonly used focal length range [about 20 to 85 mm FL range] - if mount parameters [FFD, throat width] are chosen wisely and matched to image circle [i.e. not using mounts designed for APS-C for FF sensors]

plus a few more advantages that all make a difference every time we pick up a camera, lug it around and with potentially every image we take. :)

So you ARE AvTvM! Why bother creating a new account? At least I now know to mute you.
 

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
I wonder what the marginal curiousity curve looks like for rants about fantasy camera designs. Seems likely that it is asymtotic with zero for most people above a certain number, which will of course vary from person to person. Or maybe it actually hits zero eventually for most of us. More quickly for some than for others. All sorts of questions to explore. But most likely not an endless number.
 

Generalized Specialist

I'm New Here
Jan 1, 2016
24
1
Kit. said:
Generalized Specialist said:
Where Canon is padding their numbers to get to the roughly 50% marketshare is in their low end Costco/Best Buy kits. Canon is turning into the Kia of the camera world.
So, in your reality Kia owns 50% of automotive market?

You're right, Kia was a bad example. I used Kia as it also has a market built of low priced products that they want to flood the market with.

A more apt comparison would be GM. A couple of flagship products but the vast majority of what they market/sell is just badged engineered/share the parts bin soon to be forgotten 'meh' vehicles.
 

Orangutan

EOS 5D Mark IV
Sep 25, 2010
2,140
3
fullstop said:
Why is mirrorless an total win?

<snip>

All this sounds great. However, until it actually outperforms DSLR's for the full range of user needs, these things don't matter. Walking has a long list of advantages over mechanical transport, but there are important areas where walking simply doesn't outperform, so we still have mechanical transport.

I'll grant you that "some day" mirrorless will hit the mark for total parity, but it's not today, and probably not for at least a few more years.
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
Mikehit said:
fullstop said:
Canon being so "highly innovative" - why should their FF mirrorless cams not come with electronic global shutter?

they'd then have a true USP over Sony. 100% vibration-free, 100% silent (by default, unless user activates any painful electronic noise of their own poor taste and choice), very compact, no moving parts inside, very robust, very compact (by default, unless users put all sorts of grips, rigs or cages on it to make it as big as desired) and less expensive than Sony products. Canon wins, Sony loses. :)

Maybe because no-one has yet developed one that is viable for MFT/APS-C/FF ?

That is incorrect, but canon doesn’t use externally supplied sensors in its big cameras..
 

BillB

EOS R
May 11, 2017
1,393
659
Generalized Specialist said:
Kit. said:
Generalized Specialist said:
Where Canon is padding their numbers to get to the roughly 50% marketshare is in their low end Costco/Best Buy kits. Canon is turning into the Kia of the camera world.
So, in your reality Kia owns 50% of automotive market?

You're right, Kia was a bad example. I used Kia as it also has a market built of low priced products that they want to flood the market with.

A more apt comparison would be GM. A couple of flagship products but the vast majority of what they market/sell is just badged engineered/share the parts bin soon to be forgotten 'meh' vehicles.

Well, Sony has turned out some "meh" products too, some of which were FF mirrorless cameras that turned out to be little better than beta releases. Remember those? Sony tried to con people into thinking they were any good, and some of the internet buzzards helped them out.

If Canon has flagship products, what are your complaining about? You don't have to buy what you don't like.
 

Mr1Dx

EOS M6 Mark II
Feb 6, 2015
51
0
Orangutan said:
fullstop said:
Why is mirrorless an total win?

<snip>

All this sounds great. However, until it actually outperforms DSLR's for the full range of user needs, these things don't matter. Walking has a long list of advantages over mechanical transport, but there are important areas where walking simply doesn't outperform, so we still have mechanical transport.

I'll grant you that "some day" mirrorless will hit the mark for total parity, but it's not today, and probably not for at least a few more years.

3-4yrs ago, majority poeple I see on safari trips would carry 1dx/5dr/5d3 and 5d4 + 200-400, 500 and or 600mm.

What I saw in my last 2 trips in 2018, ratio seems to be 2:1 DSLR Vs mirrorless. All mirrorless users were Sony A7r III and A9 + native 100-400, native 70-200.

Yes, mirrorless still have room to improve in future. At this moment 2018, I simply do not see what DSLR can do that Sony a7r III/A9 can't. The 100% silent shooting on my A9 is something I'll treasure it on my safari trip.

My old 1dx now retired and she enjoys staying home.
 

3kramd5

EOS R6
Mar 2, 2012
3,084
405
Mr1Dx said:
At this moment 2018, I simply do not see what DSLR can do that Sony a7r III/A9 can't.

*Show you through the lens without you having to look at an illuminated screen (and without the camera having to exercize all the readout electronics, image processing pipe, and aforementioned screen). Sometimes the screen is better, but not always (e.g. extended use)
*Use purpose-built sensors for metering and focus acquisition rather than sensors designed and filtered for image capture with color reproduction. Sometimes on-sensor is better, but not always.

I have a rental a7riii coming in this weekend. It should be fun to compare it to the A7Rii (although I sold that quite a while ago, I expect I’ll be able to remember the frustrations and identify improvements).
 

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,163
1,506
Generalized Specialist said:
A more apt comparison would be GM.
So, one of the most advanced players (if not the most advanced player) when it comes to self-driving cars?

Generalized Specialist said:
A couple of flagship products but the vast majority of what they market/sell is just badged engineered/share the parts bin soon to be forgotten 'meh' vehicles.
Is it bad if I use a car as a workhorse and not as a penis extender?
 

fullstop

EOS R
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
Orangutan said:
fullstop said:
Why is mirrorless an total win?
<snip>

All this sounds great. However, until it actually outperforms DSLR's for the full range of user needs, these things don't matter.

that's were I see things differently. Yes, currently available mirrorless cameras today are not yet "solid state" with all the benefits i listed. But the latest "top-level" FF mirrorless camera - Sony A9 - objectively outperforms Canon EOS 1DX-II and Nikon D5 in a number of areas [e.g. sensor/resolution, 20 fps continuous shooting, eye tracking AF, etc.] and is in no aspect objectively behind those top level DSLRs - except shot reach per battery charge.

Everything else is subjective preferences - which are perfectly fine to have, but not "objectively worse", eg some people prefer OVFs over a WYSIWIG EVF without blackout. Some people - mainly those who frequently use large lenses - prefer a chunkier grip/bigger camera. Some people also love to hear a good, solid, mechanical mirrorslap and shutter actuation. But - personal preferences. Nothing to do with "outperform".
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
fullstop said:
that's were I see things differently. Yes, currently available mirrorless cameras today are not yet "solid state" with all the benefits i listed. But the latest "top-level" FF mirrorless camera - Sony A9 - objectively outperforms Canon EOS 1DX-II and Nikon D5 in a number of areas [e.g. sensor/resolution, 20 fps continuous shooting, eye tracking AF, etc.] and is in no aspect objectively behind those top level DSLRs - except shot reach per battery charge.

Everything else is subjective preferences - which are perfectly fine to have, but not "objectively worse", eg some people prefer OVFs over a WYSIWIG EVF without blackout. Some people - mainly those who frequently use large lenses - prefer a chunkier grip/bigger camera. Some people also love to hear a good, solid, mechanical mirrorslap and shutter actuation. But - personal preferences. Nothing to do with "outperform".

I seem recall that the A9 electronic shutter that is mandatory to shoot faster than 5 fps is a clear step back for some things that are not subjective -- I've heard that panning can lead to a jello effect and stadium/arena lighting can lead to nasty unfixable banding in some shots.

True? Has anyone used the A9 and can comment on that? I remember Jared Polin putting something out that screamed 'we have a problem here' that was pretty hotly debated. I wasn't sure how that landed.

- A
 

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,163
1,506
fullstop said:
that's were I see things differently. Yes, currently available mirrorless cameras today are not yet "solid state" with all the benefits i listed. But the latest "top-level" FF mirrorless camera - Sony A9 - objectively outperforms Canon EOS 1DX-II and Nikon D5 in a number of areas [e.g. sensor/resolution, 20 fps continuous shooting, eye tracking AF, etc.] and is in no aspect objectively behind those top level DSLRs - except shot reach per battery charge.
How about startup time, for example?
 

fullstop

EOS R
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
153
Ok yes, agreed - still some "rough edges" remaining. But essentially we have reached "full parity" between DSLRs and mirrorless cameras.

Problem today is not "technical", but "marketing". Lots of DSLRs for sale but only limited choice of mirrorless cameras, especially only 4 brands of APS-C mirrorless ILCs - Canon, Fujifilm, Leica, Sony (or missing someone?) and only 2 brands for FF-sensored [Leica, Sony].

That sucks. At least subjectively for me. And maybe for a few others too. LOL.
 

ahsanford

Particular Member
Aug 16, 2012
8,617
1,642
fullstop said:
Ok yes, agreed - still some "rough edges" remaining. But essentially we have reached "full parity" between DSLRs and mirrorless cameras.

Let me know when 'full parity' gets to double digit percentages of the 1DX2/D5-level userbase.

- A