Don Haines said:
Yep, and the best in the world for what I like... Can't wait to see this years offerings.
Upvote
0
Where are Canons innovation?
- Thread starter Pitbullo
- Start date
Yep, and the best in the world for what I like... Can't wait to see this years offerings.
surapon
80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
Don Haines said:
+ 1000 for me too, Sir, Dear Mr. Haines.
" I would be willing to bet that a lot (most?) of the people on this site have more invested in lenses than in camera bodies "
Yes, I , my self will buy the good/ great Camera 21 in every 3-4 years, BUT, I will buy Great Lenses 1-3 Per Year.
Good night, Sir.
Surapon
Upvote
0
Sporgon said:
I totally agree with you. For me, as a MF shooter who started on film SLR and loved it, the 6D is a bit of a dream come true once the stock focussing screen is replaced. As you stated, the tonal graduation is lovely and the high ISO performance is ridiculously good. However, there is something that impresses a lot that isn't much discussed; the look of the high ISO noise. Unlike the 550D or the 7D, the noise doesn't actually look like "noise", but makes me more think of film grain. Even at 6400-12 800, where it starts being heavy, I actually don't find it ugly; it resemble the grain added in post in film shoot on digitals cameras more than "regular" noise.
Upvote
0
Who needs innovation when you can just stick with a good thing. Like having native lens options above 210mm...Well, seems like canon win that one. And RT flashes. And the best fast primes on the market....
I've got a sony A7, it's stunning, but funnily enough, I don't use it with sony lenses.
I've got a sony A7, it's stunning, but funnily enough, I don't use it with sony lenses.
Upvote
0
i find that when a lot of people talk about innovation, they dont actually mean innovation. they mean features they can brag about or toys and "gimmicks" they can play with , that dont actually much real value to the product. they gripe that company X doesnt have an innovative feature that company Y has. but if company X did what company Y did then its not innovation is it??
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
sanj said:
Certainly, at least for tech companies. But the point of the OP's thread was that Canon isn't innovating. Fastest frame rate in a dSLR. Most cross-type AF points with the widest spacing. Smallest dSLR. Supertele lenses that are >25% lighter than their predecessors. Dual pixel AF.
The issue isn't Canon not innovating, it's that people define innovation as developing only those products/features they personally want. I don't shoot video with a dSLR and when I'm using Live View, I'm not in a rush. By the logic of many people bashing Canon for not innovating, I should not call dual pixel AF an innovation, because it doesn't benefit me. But it is innovative, as even the OP has acknowledged.
Upvote
0
Pitbullo said:I was just wondering about where Canons innovation has gone? Sure, they put a touch screen on a dslr, but that is not really innovative. We´ve had this on smart phones for a long time (yes, they are caneras as well), but that is about it. WiFi? They have offered WiFi for a long time as well, but as an add on feature. Integrating it is more of an evolution, the same as with the touch screen.
The reason I ask this question, "where are the innovation" is because I recently bought my wife a Sony NEX-6, anf my poor 550D looked really really ancient next to it!! Dont get me wrong, I do enjoy shooting my canon, and I have solid lenses, but it really was a huge gap between the Canon and the Sony.
I do think that Canon produces very good, solid performing cameras, no doubt. The 5D3 and the 1DX really dont have true competition. They are not the best at everything, but as a whole, perhaps the best tools avaliable for the professionals. However, I´m not a professional, though quite enthustiastic
Where is Canons equivalent to the Sony A7/R or the Nikon DF? Where is the downloadable apps for the Camera, motion sensors etc.? The EOS M? Never tried it, but from what I understand, a good, solid performer (after the FW update), but not very innovative.
The thing is, the people at Canon are not stupid, I am sure they have all the technology in the world to make super innovative cameras (yes, even fix the DR-problem that really isn´t a problem), but why dont they show us, or just give us some hints? Where are Canon at the CES?
I am not the type that want the latest and greatest technology at the moment it is released. But, I am gonna upgrade my equipment in a couple of years. Hopefully I can stick to Canon and not feel I´m buying an old relic.
First off, check patent filings. Canon innovated almost 3200 times last year. Thats a lot of innovation, and from a patent count standpoint, Canon actually innovated more than Sony, and a hell of a lot more than Nikon.
Second, adding a touch screen to a camera could be considered innovative. They did not innovate touch screens, but they have produced some innovative ways of accessing and managing camera settings and configuration.
Third, are you seriously forgetting all the innovations Canon has included in their most recent cameras? The 1D X alone is PACKED with innovation, several in the AF system, several more in their metering system, the way their meter and AF system is linked with a dedicated processor is innovative, they innovated with their new shutter and mirror assembly that broke the 12fps barrier, they innovated Dual Pixel AF.
Don't forget, photography is as much about the lens as it is about the sensor and the camera. Canon has even more innovations packed into their newest lenses, and they have a whole host of additional lens releases slated for 2014.
I think your being naive if you think that simply responding to your competitors is innovative. On the contrary, being a copy-cat "me too!" company is actually about the farthest thing from innovative as you can get. Nikon is actually not a very innovative company. Nikon is a company of alliances...they ally themselves with counterbodies like Sony, then buy and sometimes share their own technology in order to produce a product. Nikon does not have a cohesive approach to producing cameras...just look at their camera model naming scheme, and the only thing you'll see is schizophrenia. Nikon camera names are chaotic, confusing, and even potentially conflicting. Nikon, since they don't innovate critical technology, has some extra time to produce fancy little tidbits such as 24karat gold plated cameras, the Nikon Df, and a whole host of other random, one-off, and frequently quirky little devices that...for a SHORT time...make fans rave, but over the long run do NOTHING to make them a better company.
Canon, on the other hand, is most assuredly innovative. Canon, given their track record, doesn't give a flying rat's ass about "the competition." Canon rarely produces cameras that "directly" compete with anything their primary competition has to offer...which is why we don't often see things like a Canon SomethingD with 36mp, or a full frame mirrorless to "directly compete with" the Sony A7r. We probably WON'T see such things either. Canon is not a copycat "me too!" company. They are an innovative company. Canon, as it stands, is actually a company that really seems to listen to their customers, is diligent about filtering the noise from the critical customer demands, careful and conservative in their development, testing, and refinement of their products, and will deliver when they believe they have found a product that TRULY answers THEIR, CANON'S, CUSTOMER DEMANDS. Whatever Canon releases in the coming years, I highly doubt anything but the 1D X will have any "direct" competition from either Sony or Nikon. Whatever Canon releases, it will rather pointedly service Canon customer needs.
Canon hasn't stopped innovating. They just aren't rushing. (Oh, and they have no reason to "hype" by dropping pointless little rumorbombs all over the place to get peoples hopes up about technology that isn't ready yet.)
Upvote
0
jrista said:Pitbullo said:I was just wondering about where Canons innovation has gone? Sure, they put a touch screen on a dslr, but that is not really innovative. We´ve had this on smart phones for a long time (yes, they are caneras as well), but that is about it. WiFi? They have offered WiFi for a long time as well, but as an add on feature. Integrating it is more of an evolution, the same as with the touch screen.
The reason I ask this question, "where are the innovation" is because I recently bought my wife a Sony NEX-6, anf my poor 550D looked really really ancient next to it!! Dont get me wrong, I do enjoy shooting my canon, and I have solid lenses, but it really was a huge gap between the Canon and the Sony.
I do think that Canon produces very good, solid performing cameras, no doubt. The 5D3 and the 1DX really dont have true competition. They are not the best at everything, but as a whole, perhaps the best tools avaliable for the professionals. However, I´m not a professional, though quite enthustiastic
Where is Canons equivalent to the Sony A7/R or the Nikon DF? Where is the downloadable apps for the Camera, motion sensors etc.? The EOS M? Never tried it, but from what I understand, a good, solid performer (after the FW update), but not very innovative.
The thing is, the people at Canon are not stupid, I am sure they have all the technology in the world to make super innovative cameras (yes, even fix the DR-problem that really isn´t a problem), but why dont they show us, or just give us some hints? Where are Canon at the CES?
I am not the type that want the latest and greatest technology at the moment it is released. But, I am gonna upgrade my equipment in a couple of years. Hopefully I can stick to Canon and not feel I´m buying an old relic.
First off, check patent filings. Canon innovated almost 3200 times last year. Thats a lot of innovation, and from a patent count standpoint, Canon actually innovated more than Sony, and a hell of a lot more than Nikon.
Second, adding a touch screen to a camera could be considered innovative. They did not innovate touch screens, but they have produced some innovative ways of accessing and managing camera settings and configuration.
Third, are you seriously forgetting all the innovations Canon has included in their most recent cameras? The 1D X alone is PACKED with innovation, several in the AF system, several more in their metering system, the way their meter and AF system is linked with a dedicated processor is innovative, they innovated with their new shutter and mirror assembly that broke the 12fps barrier, they innovated Dual Pixel AF.
Don't forget, photography is as much about the lens as it is about the sensor and the camera. Canon has even more innovations packed into their newest lenses, and they have a whole host of additional lens releases slated for 2014.
I think your being naive if you think that simply responding to your competitors is innovative. On the contrary, being a copy-cat "me too!" company is actually about the farthest thing from innovative as you can get. Nikon is actually not a very innovative company. Nikon is a company of alliances...they ally themselves with counterbodies like Sony, then buy and sometimes share their own technology in order to produce a product. Nikon does not have a cohesive approach to producing cameras...just look at their camera model naming scheme, and the only thing you'll see is schizophrenia. Nikon camera names are chaotic, confusing, and even potentially conflicting. Nikon, since they don't innovate critical technology, has some extra time to produce fancy little tidbits such as 24karat gold plated cameras, the Nikon Df, and a whole host of other random, one-off, and frequently quirky little devices that...for a SHORT time...make fans rave, but over the long run do NOTHING to make them a better company.
Canon, on the other hand, is most assuredly innovative. Canon, given their track record, doesn't give a flying rat's ass about "the competition." Canon rarely produces cameras that "directly" compete with anything their primary competition has to offer...which is why we don't often see things like a Canon SomethingD with 36mp, or a full frame mirrorless to "directly compete with" the Sony A7r. We probably WON'T see such things either. Canon is not a copycat "me too!" company. They are an innovative company. Canon, as it stands, is actually a company that really seems to listen to their customers, is diligent about filtering the noise from the critical customer demands, careful and conservative in their development, testing, and refinement of their products, and will deliver when they believe they have found a product that TRULY answers THEIR, CANON'S, CUSTOMER DEMANDS. Whatever Canon releases in the coming years, I highly doubt anything but the 1D X will have any "direct" competition from either Sony or Nikon. Whatever Canon releases, it will rather pointedly service Canon customer needs.
Canon hasn't stopped innovating. They just aren't rushing. (Oh, and they have no reason to "hype" by dropping pointless little rumorbombs all over the place to get peoples hopes up about technology that isn't ready yet.)
I am not denying that Canon is not innovating, they are, how else would they be market leader! They have an enormous R&D department, not only for photography, but also medical imaging (I use large Canon x-ray detectors at work, they are very good!). However they dont listen too much at customers. How many years did it take for them to implement Auto ISO in M-mode? Oh, and only in the 1DX, which cost way too much for most people. Do they even have spot metering linked to the chosen focus point? Fokus peaking? Zebra? Intervallometer? No!! They dont listen too much. They are a business, and in it to make money, and that they do well. Canon make a camera, not to be as good as it can be, but to fit a gap in the market. Reasonable, but not exciting. As you put it, "Canon, given their track record, doesn't give a flying rat's ass about "the competition." This is very arrogant, and is sure gonna cost them customers. We saw a little about this in the 50D -> 60D, more or less gimping the camera. In the 70D, they redeemd themself.
Comparing the old 550D with the rather new nex-6 is not fair, but how did the rebel series develop? Sensor, pretty much the same from 550D to 700D (minor tweaks). 550D -> 600D, added wireless flash control. 600D -> 650D, touch screen and articulated screen, also upped the AF (?), 650D -> 700D Changed the knob to go all the way around... Small steps, carefull evolution, nothing big. Though, they are entry level cameras, they could have done more, not keeping at a minimum all the time. But then again, as tools they are good, steady cameras. No denying!
As Neuroanatomist asked earlier, if I really find the Nikon DF innovative? Well, no, not innovative in the common sense, but it is a very bold move! Not regarding the Leicas (rangefinders), it is probably the second FF mirrorless camera with ICL (Sony A7/R as the first). Anyway, they are early on. It also has no video, which is bold, and it is ugly as hell! Would Canon launch this? No, they wouldn´t. But they also wouldn´t launch something like the Nikon 1 AW 1.
Dont get me wrong, I do like my canon dslr, and as several people has pointed out, they are very very good at lenses. My 70-200 F4L IS is absolutely fantastic!!! In a couple of years, when I´m gonna change camera, I probably will stick with canon. My only reason to jump to Sony is to be able to share accessories/lenses with my wifes nex.
Upvote
0
GMCPhotographics
Canon Rumors Premium
neuroanatomist said:
Canon have had so many firsts over the years. Some of their features are still way ahead of the competition.
When I look at their camera and lens cataloge and then go and look at the competition...Canon's stuff is generally better and more advanced. I have an 85mm f1.2 II L...I love it, I have a TS-e 17L and it's amazing, I have a pair of 5DIII's and they are the best camera's I've ever used. I have a 400mm f2.8 L IS and it's an amazing lens, I have a 8-15mm L fisheye....it's brilliant.
Canon when they innovate generally get it right first time. Their AF system / mount is quite old now...but it's still state of the art. Other brands often come around to Canon's thinking over time. Canon were the first to go CMOS....everyone else was mad on CCD chips....but look at the market now.
Upvote
0
AE1Pguy said:
I love my 6d image quality but i came from a 7d and miss a few thing they had in the 7d. I do miss the extra physical buttons, layout, and the 1/8000s shutter speed. I don't really notice that big of a speed difference in the autofocus since i only use the center focus point anyway. I also didn't use the high speed burst mode because i like composing a image and don't do sports so the 6d is wonderful.
I would like it if they had better/competitive point and shoots and mirrorless cameras though.
Upvote
0
Pitbullo said:
So wait, Canon does not listen - that's why the 5d3 had pretty much everything 5d2 users were asking for? They can't take every suggested thing and just toss it in the camera - they take in thousands of pages of feedback, weigh what seems to be the majority, then try to squeeze other stuff in if it's financially feasible.
What you can arrogant I call wise. If you have a plan - In 2012 we release this, 2013 this, 2014 that, and 2015 this ---then ohh in 2013 nikon comes out with this ---does canon really say ohhh darn, they have a camera with feature A, we had planned on releasing a camera with feature A but a better feature A in 2015. Does Canon, gimp that camera by rushing it out the door in order to compete? Or do they release it when its ready, according to plan.
Let's say,one of the reasons the big MP body is that to have more than just big MP they need to get digic 7+, or 8+ ready - without that no one gets improvements in DR and overall IQ at base ISO's. They have the sensor, just waiting for the things around that sensor to take shape so it can be done right. Then Nikon pushes out the d800. Canon could just slap that new sensor in the old framework and have it not perform as they want just to answer the d800 - or, they could do as they are doing ---say screw the competition, keep working on the new processors, and the new glass and put out a new product on the timetable they have set when the product is ready. Which would ya rather have?
Upvote
0
When I read about people demanding every possible feature on a camera I can't help but to think about "the Homer"... a very tongue-in-cheek look at what happens when you let the user design without constraints....
And just like "The Homer", which has 3 horns "because you can't find the button when you are really angry", I think we need a camera with 3 sensors.... one for high megapixel, one for DR, and one for high ISO
And just like "The Homer", which has 3 horns "because you can't find the button when you are really angry", I think we need a camera with 3 sensors.... one for high megapixel, one for DR, and one for high ISO
Attachments
Upvote
0
Pitbullo said:jrista said:Pitbullo said:I was just wondering about where Canons innovation has gone? Sure, they put a touch screen on a dslr, but that is not really innovative. We´ve had this on smart phones for a long time (yes, they are caneras as well), but that is about it. WiFi? They have offered WiFi for a long time as well, but as an add on feature. Integrating it is more of an evolution, the same as with the touch screen.
The reason I ask this question, "where are the innovation" is because I recently bought my wife a Sony NEX-6, anf my poor 550D looked really really ancient next to it!! Dont get me wrong, I do enjoy shooting my canon, and I have solid lenses, but it really was a huge gap between the Canon and the Sony.
I do think that Canon produces very good, solid performing cameras, no doubt. The 5D3 and the 1DX really dont have true competition. They are not the best at everything, but as a whole, perhaps the best tools avaliable for the professionals. However, I´m not a professional, though quite enthustiastic
Where is Canons equivalent to the Sony A7/R or the Nikon DF? Where is the downloadable apps for the Camera, motion sensors etc.? The EOS M? Never tried it, but from what I understand, a good, solid performer (after the FW update), but not very innovative.
The thing is, the people at Canon are not stupid, I am sure they have all the technology in the world to make super innovative cameras (yes, even fix the DR-problem that really isn´t a problem), but why dont they show us, or just give us some hints? Where are Canon at the CES?
I am not the type that want the latest and greatest technology at the moment it is released. But, I am gonna upgrade my equipment in a couple of years. Hopefully I can stick to Canon and not feel I´m buying an old relic.
First off, check patent filings. Canon innovated almost 3200 times last year. Thats a lot of innovation, and from a patent count standpoint, Canon actually innovated more than Sony, and a hell of a lot more than Nikon.
Second, adding a touch screen to a camera could be considered innovative. They did not innovate touch screens, but they have produced some innovative ways of accessing and managing camera settings and configuration.
Third, are you seriously forgetting all the innovations Canon has included in their most recent cameras? The 1D X alone is PACKED with innovation, several in the AF system, several more in their metering system, the way their meter and AF system is linked with a dedicated processor is innovative, they innovated with their new shutter and mirror assembly that broke the 12fps barrier, they innovated Dual Pixel AF.
Don't forget, photography is as much about the lens as it is about the sensor and the camera. Canon has even more innovations packed into their newest lenses, and they have a whole host of additional lens releases slated for 2014.
I think your being naive if you think that simply responding to your competitors is innovative. On the contrary, being a copy-cat "me too!" company is actually about the farthest thing from innovative as you can get. Nikon is actually not a very innovative company. Nikon is a company of alliances...they ally themselves with counterbodies like Sony, then buy and sometimes share their own technology in order to produce a product. Nikon does not have a cohesive approach to producing cameras...just look at their camera model naming scheme, and the only thing you'll see is schizophrenia. Nikon camera names are chaotic, confusing, and even potentially conflicting. Nikon, since they don't innovate critical technology, has some extra time to produce fancy little tidbits such as 24karat gold plated cameras, the Nikon Df, and a whole host of other random, one-off, and frequently quirky little devices that...for a SHORT time...make fans rave, but over the long run do NOTHING to make them a better company.
Canon, on the other hand, is most assuredly innovative. Canon, given their track record, doesn't give a flying rat's ass about "the competition." Canon rarely produces cameras that "directly" compete with anything their primary competition has to offer...which is why we don't often see things like a Canon SomethingD with 36mp, or a full frame mirrorless to "directly compete with" the Sony A7r. We probably WON'T see such things either. Canon is not a copycat "me too!" company. They are an innovative company. Canon, as it stands, is actually a company that really seems to listen to their customers, is diligent about filtering the noise from the critical customer demands, careful and conservative in their development, testing, and refinement of their products, and will deliver when they believe they have found a product that TRULY answers THEIR, CANON'S, CUSTOMER DEMANDS. Whatever Canon releases in the coming years, I highly doubt anything but the 1D X will have any "direct" competition from either Sony or Nikon. Whatever Canon releases, it will rather pointedly service Canon customer needs.
Canon hasn't stopped innovating. They just aren't rushing. (Oh, and they have no reason to "hype" by dropping pointless little rumorbombs all over the place to get peoples hopes up about technology that isn't ready yet.)
I am not denying that Canon is not innovating, they are, how else would they be market leader! They have an enormous R&D department, not only for photography, but also medical imaging (I use large Canon x-ray detectors at work, they are very good!).
The wording of your title and body seem to indicate otherwise, but perhapse I misread.
Pitbullo said:
Before I dive in and counter your statements, this is so fundamentally wrong, its laughable. You have to remember that it takes YEARS for a new camera to be developed. Today, people are screaming for more DR and more megapixels. Four years ago, five and six years ago...do you remember what people were most loudly screaming about? I mean, LOUDLY screaming about? FEWER MEGAPIXELS!! BETTER HIGH ISO!! BETTER AF SYSTEM!!
Pitbullo said:
Those are all customer requests...but are they the MOST DEMANDED customer requests? I hear people asking for Auto ISO only after they hear that Nikon has it. And then, it is only a few people who really consistently ask for it. Intervalometer? If you say that word to any random but sufficient sampling of photographers, most will go: "Intervawat?"As for focus peaking and zebras...they aren't that useful in a DSLR, where you spend the vast majority of your time looking through an OPTICAL view finder. They might be interesting little features that get some limited use for live view junkies...but overall, they are FAR from the most significant customer demand that Canon MUST respond to.
There are a few critically important things that are truly critical to Canon's core, loyalist customers. Canon's most important group of customers is not the average Rebel buyer...no. Canon's most important group of customers are the pros, semi-pros, and hard core avid enthusiasts who regularly spend thousands of dollars on their most coveted products...the 1D series, the 5D series, L-series lenses. Overall image quality is one of the single most important factors that Canon MUST address. Focus peaking/Zeebras in live view? Sorry, that just DOES NOT make the cut when you have much bigger fish to fry...such as designing a radical new AF unit that completely trounces anything Canon, or for that matter any of their competitors, has ever released. Auto ISO? Doesn't matter a whit when you have to invest immense amounts of money designing a sensor and readout system that can offer the cleanest and highest native high ISO settings at 14fps. (Auto ISO also doesn't matter a wit when a significant amount of pro photographers just don't care about it...they either use full manual because they insist on total control, or they simply go Av/Tv and forget the rest.)
Canon isn't arrogant. It is not arrogant to not care about the competition, and instead listen to and actually address the most vocal outcry of YOUR OWN customers. It is BETTER to listen to your customers and deliver what they demand, and that is exactly what Canon did. There were three primary demands from Canon's customers regarding the 1D and 5D lines (the two lines that are really the most important for Canon):
1. Stop increasing megapixels without making them better.
2. Improve high ISO performance by A LOT.
3. Release an AF system that does not have the problems the 1D III had & put a MUCH better AF system in the 5D III.
Sports and action photographers, who probably make up the single largest segment of loyal Canon customers, were extremely clear about their demand for a better AF system (especially after the fiasco with the 1D III AF system) and much better high ISO performance. Sports photogs, which includes Olympics photogs, are a MASSIVE group, and account for a significant amount of revenue for Canon's photography division. They care less about megapixels, and far more about having lots of clean, low noise frames per second at high ISO. Canon delivered EXACTLY what that large, vocal group demanded.
Wedding/portrait photographers make up another significant segment of loyal Canon customers. The 5D and 5D II have been staples for wedding photographers for years. The single biggest complaint from them? The AF system. The 5D II 9pt AF system, while not "bad", was FAR from as capable as necessary for wedding and portrait photographers. So it is no surprise that Canon put the 61pt AF system in the 5D III. Again, Canon delivered EXACTLY what a very vocal and profitable group of customers demanded.
Neither of those three critical improvements were cheap to achieve, either. Canon has a large R&D budget, but it gets spread around. They develop medical imaging, printing, CMOS fabrication and other optical technologies in addition to photography. They don't have their full R&D budget to dedicate solely to photography improvements every year. I think Canon responded very well to their customers, all things considered, with the 1D X and 5D III. The 6D, while it doesn't compete directly with the D600, is certainly no slouch either. The 6D demonstrated one even FURTHER improvement in high ISO performance, as it has some of the cleanest, lowest noise high ISO output I've seen (it has practically zero color noise, and very low luma noise, once you get to ISO 1600 and beyond.)
So sorry, but Canon most certainly DOES listen to their customers. They just don't have the option of actually RESPONDING to EVERY SINGLE customer demand. Rebel and xxD buyers are at the bottom of the list, and rightly so. Those are consumer-level products, and in the grand scheme of things, they really don't matter. That doesn't make Canon arrogant, it simply makes them business savvy. They put their money where it TRULY matters.
Pitbullo said:
I think the 60D was a mistake, but contrary to your opinion...they actually WERE listening to their customers. One of the frequent requests from consumers is for lighter weight entry level bodies. The Rebel series and xxD line are not pro-level lines, they are consumer lines. The 60D's use of a plastic body was an attempt to respond to customer demand for a lighter weight body. Canon DOES listen to their customers. Problem is, the most vocal group, and the loudest demand, changes over time. It seems clear, given the outcry about the 60D's loss of a metal body, that Canon listened to the wrong group. They did indeed "correct" the mistake with the 70D, and brought in more semi-pro features from the 7D to make it a more viable product again. But that doesn't mean Canon wasn't listening. They DO listen...but it can be difficult to filter the noise from the legitimate needs. The demand for smaller, lighter DSLRs from consumers has not stopped, by any means. Canon is STILL responding to that demand...just look at the SL1. It's the smallest and lightest DSLR on the market right now.
I think your misinterpreting a lot of things from Canon, and unfairly judging their reactions to what customers want. You also fail to properly rank the requests that crop up on internet forms with more vocal and critical requests from very large bodies of Canon's key revenue-generating customer groups. Fancy firmware features for live view, and things like Auto ISO, are trivial fluff in the grand scheme of things. It is unsurprising that Canon does not dedicate a lot of resources to those features, because they aren't really what will keep their important customers happy and returning for more. Sorry if that brushes off the low-end consumer, but the low-end consumer isn't what Canon's photography division is really about.
Pitbullo said:
Your still talking about entry-level stuff. The entry-level doesn't really matter all that much. Consumers are fickle, they jump ship, then jump back on the ship, on a moments whim. Satisfying the consumer is an endless and generally fruitless endeavor. It is NOT surprising that Canon just keeps plugging away with what's working. Why shouldn't they?
I mean, seriously...would you rather Canon actually be like Nikon from a business standpoint? Nikon has struggles for years. They are barely innovative, they can't seem to get all their ducks in a row, they have had consistent problems maintaining supply chain and actually keeping product on the shelves, they often dedicate considerable resources to developing things that DO NOT actually make them much money in the long run (i.e. a $12,000 24 karat gold plated DSLR with real lizard-skin grip...I mean, seriously? It's an INTERESTING product, but it is a complete and total WASTE of time, effort, and money!!) Nikon is a flagging company...they don't seem to have consistent direction. They PACK in as many features as they possibly can because they MUST in order to get the sales they do, and yet, on more than a few occasions, packing in the features caused them problems. Nikon has had numerous problems listening to their customers as well. Ergonomically, Nikon bodies have gone through a couple changes that resulted in some significant backlash, not the least of which were some of the recent button and dial changes on the D800 and other newer Nikon cameras.
Nikon doesn't make a fraction of the revenue Canon does on their photography division. That doesn't bode well for future Nikon innovation. As it stands, the bulk of the innovation in Nikon's most recent camera bodies came from other companies, like Sony. That is a precarious position to be in...relying on other companies so much. If any one of them faltered or failed, Nikon could be dragged right down with them.
Canon, on the other hand, is a business run like a business. Yes, they are in it to make money. That is a GOOD thing. It means they will still be here in ten years. It means they will continue to have revenue to innovate, which means in the long run, they will continue to be able to respond to their customer's key demands.
Pitbullo said:
The problem with the Df is not that it's an intriguing and interesting little camera. Nikon has no problem with intriguing and interesting. Like I said, 24karat Gold Plated Lizard Skin DSLR.
The problem with the Df, is Nikon didn't put in the proper effort. It doesn't sell not because it's got a "retro" design. It doesn't sell because it probably has one of THE WORST control designs on the face of the planet. Stacked dials? Seriously? That's about the most useless control mechanism I can think of. Nikon rushed the Df to market. Again, probably because they felt they had to, in order to attract more interest in a niche line, because...well a) that's what they do, and b) they are having a hard time selling things like the D800 (it's total sales volume is a fraction of the 5D III.) If Canon put their mind to releasing a retro-styled DSLR, I would bet good money that not only would they do it, they would do it right, do it on their own time table, and when it finally hit the shelves, it would sell well. Why? Because it wouldn't be impossible to control, and people would know that it had that Canon guarantee of quality behind it. It would have been thoroughly and properly tested and field vetted before it hit the streets. It would have Canon's superb and superior customer service backing it up.
Will Canon do it? Well, probably not. I'm sure some people are demanding it, but again...Canon responds to the most critical demands first and foremost, and they only have so much money to spend on R&D.
Upvote
0
Pitbullo said:
Well, have fun with Sony. Sony makes a lot of products...but since the late 1980's when I first started using Sony products, I have to say, I've never been as impressed with Sony anything as I have been with other brands. Some aspects of Sony technologies intrigue me, but their final end products always seem lacking and lackluster. The A7r, for example, while an intriguing product with a great sensor (an aspect of the technology) just doesn't seem to impress "overall". I seriously considered getting one myself, but the whole package just isn't there...not on the same level as a Canon. I would honestly rather get an EOS-M, and have a well thought out full package, than get the A7r..."just for it's sensor". I'd be frustrated with all the rest...all the time.
Upvote
0
This is a point so important that it is staggering! There are not a lot of companies out there producing large quantities of imaging sensors that could go into DSLR's... What happens if Sony fails, or at the least, gets rid of the portion of it's business that makes the sensors for Nikon? Hopefully, someone will buy that division and the production will continue, but if it doesn't, Nikon will be out of business until someone else can set up a production line and get up to speed... a process that will take years....jrista said:
Upvote
0
Don Haines said:
I think Nikon could probably fabricate their own sensors. They used to in years past. Their management thought it would be more profitable to stop investing money in their own fabrication, and buy their sensors and the like third party. I don't think that decision really changed the fundamentals for Nikon.
I don't think sensor IQ has been nearly as much of a boon for Nikon as it should have been...and I think the reason why is Nikon doesn't have nearly the production pipeline consistency and quality that Canon does. I never noticed it when I was first in the market for a camera...I was only looking at the low end, comparing Canon and Nikon entry level bodies. But in recent years, I've been completely baffled by Nikon's model naming scheme. It doesn't make any sense, which to me indicates some more fundamental underlying issue at Nikon that is giving rise to the naming issue.
Additionally, Nikon seems to expend a lot of effort on things that really aren't going to change their status quo. The Df is one of those things. I understand the mentality behind it...Nikon management probably feels the need to set themselves apart on a product by product basis, and the Df is an intriguing release in that it is supposedly "stills only focused". But the Df still demonstrates the same underlying attention-deficit that Nikon's naming scheme does...it was rushed onto the market, and clearly demonstrates a major debacle on the control front.
We can't forget all the misshaps with recent camera releases as well. Poor ergonomics and bad choices for button placements. The yellow-green LCD issue with the D800. The AF point issues with the D800. The oil spots issue with the D600. The choice to RENAME the "bugfix" for the D600 issue by calling the camera the D6100. Not to mention the customer support nightmare that it was for Nikon users who actually encountered these issues, and ended up getting the runaround for a couple months before Nikon support SLOWLY started to SPORADICALLY acknowledge the issue actually did exist, and finally start fixing it (which still often took multiple round trips, on the customers dime for shipping cost).
Alliances or no, Nikon has some other kind of fundamental issue internally that is the core of their problem. They demonstrate a kind of corporate schizophrenia, like different parts of the company have different voices telling them to do odd things...
Upvote
0
jrista said:
I think they could too, but it takes time to ramp up to speed, plus, who actually owns the design for the sensor???
What happens if a Chinese company decides to get into DSLR's and gets their financial hands on Sony? Poof! They now have sensors and a fabrication facility... and with this, away goes the Nikon supply.
A lot of camera components are fairly easy to manufacture and there are numerous facilities around the world that you can contract out to fairly easily, but the two killers are large sensors (lots of competition for p/s fabrication) and large optical elements. That's probably why Canon keeps it's fluorite lens facility "close to home"
And back to the topic about where are Canon's innovations... you have to look at lenses... fluorite glass, nano-coatings, lightweight materials, focusing motors and algorithms, diffractive optics, and slip-in teleconverters. You can't tell the difference between a series one and a series two "big white" by looking at them from the outside, but pick them up and use them.... lighter, faster and better focusing, stellar image quality... it had to come from somewhere.
And going back to camera bodies, look at the Digic chips.... go back to the not so distant past and pick up a 5D2 with it's Digic4 processor. Then we went to dual Digic4 (2X faster), the Digic5 (6X faster), then Digic5+ (17X faster), and the 1DX with dual Digic5+ (34X faster). With 34 times the computing power of a 5D2, you can bet that there has been a lot of work and innovation on the processing algorithms, and what is to come? Digic 6 is out in p/s cameras and I would not be surprised to see dual Digic6 in the rumoured 7D2... will it have the computing power to track and focus on that bird in flight, recognizing which part of the image is the bird and which part to ignore?
Upvote
0
