Where does an 800 lb gorilla sit in a room with no mirrors?

[Guy Mancuso]

Reality check. My son just ordered a IPhone S plus. 12 MPX new camera in it.

I'm not sure I still buy the Sony as the step child anymore. A lot of Pros are making the switch and a lot of top guys are using them on a professional level. This new body jumped into a diffrent league and until you have one in your hands and own it, I'm not buying the old arguments. I still say this is the best in 35 file I have shot to date. End results are all that counts. No client ever gave a rats *** how we got there as long as it was good. These files are really good. It's my bottom line even if I have to tape a lens to a mount to get it to work I really don't care. I get paid to produce. How I get there means very little

My other bottom line I will most likely never buy a Canon or Nikon again as they are today. So there losing people too. I been spoon feed for 40 years Nikon/Canon. I'm moving on

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

Photography is not my primary occupation, but I do make a fair amount of money in image sales. Which camera you use is up to you, and I have used many.

It amuses me when attempts are made to dismiss one camera or another as "consumer" or "toys". Those criticisms are not valid because they are generalisations based on the individuals preferences. We all have preferences.

On the other hand, when a direction of travel looks pretty well established, like the replacement of OVF with EVF, then it is reasonable to ask why a major player like Canon is not on that train. What is their cunning plan? Do they have one?

It looks like a mistake from where I am sitting, but I expect it is not - it is reasonable to wait and see how things develop, so long as you don't wait too long, as Kodak did. Listen to market demand, and gauge your reaction.

In the meantime, my decision to go the E-mount route is not irreversible. For now, its a solution that works well - for me.
--

Edit: perhaps the qustion to ask should be "Why does an 800 lb gorilla sit in a room with no mirrors?"

 

[Hulyss Bowman]

On the other hand, when a direction of travel looks pretty well established, like the replacement of OVF with EVF, then it is reasonable to ask why a major player like Canon is not on that train. What is their cunning plan? Do they have one?

Canon and Nikon ?? such big company with international pro services, selling thousand and thousand of DSLR each years to Reuters and other national/international TV/Press agency ? With a + for canon because they are kind of deep into video too (RED users are cool but absolutely not legion ) ?

Do you seriously think such company do not have a plan and they will not react, sitting in their office while SONY is killing them ??

At first Nikon as an edge over Sony big time : Television. I never seen any advert on French TV about sony camera products (and, to be fair, about any Sony products). They only use forums, blogs and internet buzz. I watch sometimes English TV and it seems there is no Sony camera advert here either. Nikon ?? Full of advertising. Sony cameras such as A7 are niche market, especially at this price point...

I do not know how Canon is selling that much. A friend of me is working in a sort of digital supermarket, at the Phone and camera section. he is selling more canon / pentax camera than any Nikon or Sony. Sony devices, such as A7 and RX100 are very few sales because... it is expensive. Most humans do not have big money. Most humans do not have enough money to buy into Apple products. Most human select a product with care, especially when it cost some thousands Euro or dollars : In photo, they will select a professional tool with warranty and very long servicing period, solid as a rock and with good reputation. They will not venture into Sony apart if they are badly guided or have the funds (or are lured by the fantastic A900...).

I'm 37, I'm not rich at all and even when I have the bucks, I do not see how an A7 camera will help me making better photography, so, earning more money. I paid my D700 in 2012 brand new at a good price, it could have been a canon 5DMKII... it was the one I was able to test first so Nikon. Since then I rented and tested numerous cameras from Leica S to D810 and ... I have no envy into those tools, at all. I see improvements, yes, but nothing who can push me to buy into it. I've got a full fuji panoply XT-1, who have a better EVF than the A7r at least and was not impressed at all, it even broke my fun.

I'm more attracted by MF or even LF, bellow, tripods ...

In the other hand, if a brand like SIGMA come tomorrow with a FF foveon, even limited to ISO 100, I will buy into it because here we have somehow a real visual revolution.

Also, in the Art section, if some ppl go to Paris Photo Fair, you'll see that collectors value more film prints than digital prints. So you see ? Film still make money, and big money, but not in commercial photography.

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

Do you seriously think such company do not have a plan and they will not react, sitting in their office while SONY is killing them ??

Obviously not, because I answered the rhetorical question I posed, and which you quote, Hulyss, thus:

It looks like a mistake from where I am sitting, but I expect it is not - it is reasonable to wait and see how things develop, so long as you don't wait too long

But who really knows?

 

[Hulyss Bowman]

Obviously not, because I answered the rhetorical question I posed, and which you quote, Hulyss, thus:



But who really knows?

My bad, I read too quickly

 

[Zlatko Batistich]

And, on a technical side, have they considered what the 220mb files that this new camera produces are going to be like to work with? My god, the memory cards alone.....And lets not forget how even now high end machines can struggle with photo processing. Imagine the computing power you will need on your desk to work with files of this size. I have also read an interesting article suggesting that with such a high MP count diffraction is going to raise its ugly head much earlier in the aperture range then normal. Like say, around f/4. I seriously don't think Canon has thought this thru all the way.

A non-issue. Unlike other manufacturers, Canon has for many years offered RAW files in 3 sizes: full, medium and small. So the problem of huge mb files was solved a long time ago.

Yes, but they ARE doing the same thing as everyone else, and they've been doing it for decades. In fact, I can't think of a single thing they've done recently that has already been done thousands of times before.

Actually Canon has done a lot of things that no one else is doing, though it goes unrecognized by those who only see mirrorless as innovation. Canon has an impressive list of innovative and unique products that are great tools for the photographers who need them. Only Canon offers anti-flicker reduction for fluorescent lighting. Only Canon offers a 17mm TSE. Only Canon offers a fisheye zoom. Only Canon offers an 11-24mm zoom. Only Canon offers DO lenses, smaller & lighter than their non-DO versions. Only Canon offers BR lenses (starting with the new 35/1.4). Only Canon has radio control built into their native flashes. Only Canon makes f/1.2 FF AF lenses. Canon currently makes the best 24-70/2.8 zoom, a workhorse lens for many photographers. Only Canon offers a 24-70/4 zoom with IS and Macro. I'm pretty sure only Canon offers a 200-400 f/4 telephoto zoom with a built-in teleconverter, a great tool for sports photographers. IMO, Canon still does ergonomics and menus better than anyone. And their repair service is usually among the best. So they're not exactly doing "the same thing as everyone else".

I too wish Canon would make a great mirrorless system. But let's give credit where credit is due.

 

[Stefan Steib]

It could be so easy for Canon:

Just use the EF Bajonett on a mirrorless with around 18mm flange or similar like a Sony. Get an AF extension tube that has exactly that to get to the 44mm of the EOS EF flange focal distance. If needed launch the newly patented TS adapter at the first day of the new camera. Just use the 50 Mpix 5Dsr chip at the beginning, just with no mirror, sell it expensive.
Make the body larger for Pros, with a big battery like a 1D xxxx, get downsampled 4k ->1080p video internally, with an external recorder like Shogun on 4:2:2. Give it a FAST W-LAN and an USB3 out so it can be used tethered.
Stabilisation can be done with the existing IS lenses, maybe later with the sensor. Give it an AMOLED Finder with 4k res. and enough brightness. Make it with 4xXLR mics and an interface to program it for industrial usage, Gimbals, serial shooting and make the body extremely rugged and capable of calibration for measurements.
Give it a pricetag of 5-6k $

I am sure this thing will sell like crazy.

Greetings from Germany
Stefan

 

[Wayne Fox]

No, I'm referring to the new 120 MP H size sensor prototype camera.
Also see here

A little confusion going on in a couple of threads talking about this. A few years ago canon announced they had developed a prototype 120mp APS sensor. They never really stated it was planned for any product. However this announcement is about an addition to the EOS system of a video and still camera using a "35mm" equivalent 120 mp sensor. Big difference between the two announcements and the sensor in this camera isn't the one from the prototype annoucement. But I'm interpreting that statement as meaning full framed.

What intrigues me is if they can do effective pixel binning. That would be a 40mp resolution file with possibly amazing low noise and certainly better DR.

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

My bad, I read too quickly

Am I Roger Moore, you Tony Curtis?

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

So long as I don't become obsolete, that's all I care about :clap:

 

[Jim DE]

Am I Roger Moore, you Tony Curtis?

Quintin I don't want to be either in that pic.....

 

[Jack]

Trying to stay on topic to the OPs original question:

Q: Why hasn't Canon forged ahead with mirror-less? A: They didn't have to, and probably still don't have to.

Q: Why is Sony forging ahead with mirror-less? A: Because they had to.

:clap: This ^^^ is spot on. I would only edit the first sentence to,

"Q: Why hasn't Canon or Nikon forged ahead with mirror-less? A: They didn't have to, and probably still don't have to."

I don't debate that for some applications, good EVF is valuable -- but to me it certainly isn't necessary. But then so is and neither is an optical VF -- they are different technologies each with their own benefits and shortcomings.

As for DR, IQ, pixel-count resolutions, lens selections et al, NONE of that is what makes a good image. The eye behind the image is the master of that realm. And if one has that eye they can make a great image with 100 year-old technology; and conversely if one doesn't have that eye, no amount of current technology is going to help them make a great image.

 

[Hulyss Bowman]

Am I Roger Moore, you Tony Curtis?

This is a typical Tony Curtis question :grin:

 

[Quentin_Bargate]

Quintin I don't want to be either in that pic.....

1970's classic... Just look at those clothes, couldn't buy them today (at least I hope not...)

 

[f/otographer]

I imagine that if you got rid of all the product discussions and focused on art this place would be a ghost town ... as it is easier to have an unsubstantiated
expert opinion on a piece of plastic than it is to perfect one's vision and achieve the same. And I am a hack so I tend not to discuss either any more than necessary.

Perhaps getting Guy Tal, Huyless, Chris, Marc, Guy and Jack to lead us into deeper discussions concerning life, perception, reality and art might give us
a better subforum than all of the divergent got my new chip ephemerata that reigns supreme at the moment.

I would imagine if you did indeed get rid of most of the product discussion on a forum that is set up to discuss those products then the result would most likely be a ghost town, so I am not sure how that plays into this discussion. My original query is a photography product question posted on a website that deals primarily with photography products. It only takes one look at the way the forums are set up to see that. If anything my question is a little more in depth then something along the lines of "Hey guys, which bag is best for the new 5D?". I would very much like to know what peoples opinions are as to Canon being absent from the mirrorless market. And so far there has been some very interesting responses.

Having said that, there is no reason that gear talk cant go hand in hand with what you refer to as 'deeper discussions'. After all being a photographer implies that you have to be a gear head on at least some level since it is the gear that lets us create. But why wait for Guy, or Huyless or Chris or Jack to pole us out to these deeper waters. If the chip new chip ephemerata has got you down then please feel free to come up with some interesting discussions yourself. Or (best advice for all of us, myself included) just go shoot more.

 

[f/otographer]

It amuses me when attempts are made to dismiss one camera or another as "consumer" or "toys". Those criticisms are not valid because they are generalisations based on the individuals preferences. We all have preferences.

Qentin, I wholeheartedly agree. As if by casting the disparaging lable of 'consumer' onto a camera it will then somehow be incapable of producing professional results and those using it are not real photographers who are part of the professional elite. Nothing could be sillier.

Also repeated when these discussions come up is the 'ergonomics' of a particular brand. I keep hearing that Sonys ergonomics are no good. What does that mean exactly? Is there a standardized, universal layout for the ergonomics of a camera that is carved in stone and Sony is somehow just refusing to play ball with it? That's weird, because my a7 with battery grip attached is ergonomic heaven. Well, for me anyway...and aren't ergonomics really a very personal thing? Lets see, its got a grip to hold, a shutter button in the right spot and all the control buttons I need fall to hand quite nicely. Hmmmm...So this setup might not work for some people, doesn't mean they aren't 'good'.

Something else that is brought quite a lot is the size issue with mirrorless. You know, once you add a battery grip and a big lens then the size advantage over a DSLR is lost.

Mirrorless cameras were not designed JUST to make a smaller camera. There are many advantages to removing the mirror from a traditional DSLR, size being only ONE of them. Ease of production (less parts), cheaper to manufacture (less parts), direct sensor read EVF, smaller size.....these are all advantages. People believe that if a camera is mirrorless then is must be small or the purpose of it has been defeated. Again this is just silly. With my a7 (and most other mirrorless) I have the option to make my camera very small and portable. Or if it needs to beef up for the job at hand with battery grip and long lenses then it can do that to. But the camera by itself and and a small prime attached is less size and weight then most DSLR's by a good bit.

Case in point. I have a young friend of mine who I have influenced in using old film lenses on his Canon cameras. I went over to trade some lenses with him the other day and he let me fool around with his 5D. My a7, with battery grip, adapter and FDn prime lens is lighter, thinner and handles better (in my opinion) then his 5D by itself with a Canon 50 prime attached. There was a noticeable heft when I picked up his camera. I say this not to disparage the 5D or DSLR's in general but I enjoy the lack of bulk with the gear I shoot. I just believe that many people are a little silly in believing that a mirrorless camera must be smaller then a DSLR to be effective.

 

[JonPB]

I'm surprised that nobody has contradicted the original premise. Canon has released a serious mirrorless camera: the C500. I think this (along with other products and research announcements) shows that Canon believes motion picture to be the long-term growth industry for high margin products, not still photography.

Looking at Canon's history of products, it strikes me that they have released technical innovations in the 5 series, polished them up for the 1 series, then watered down all of those features for the consumer market. Canon has steadily and successfully maintained a halo strategy. I think, though, that the market is shrinking at both ends for Canon -- cell phones and cheap cameras at the low end, eroding value of professional photography at the high end -- making its halo strategy untenable in the long term.

Sony, on the other hand, has always specialized in making electronics smaller and cheaper, with an occasional top-end line of products that seems to be more "because we could" than to enhance the sales of lesser products. Sony's cameras over the last several years have embodied this tradition of making popular products by combining fantastic engineering with relatively inexpensive components. I think that Sony's raw compression is analogous to the slightly high but still barely noticeable noise floor on mid-range integrated amplifiers: it matters a lot to a few people, who avoid it entirely, but is overlooked by quite a few people who buy, use, and enjoy the product at a price point that was previously unthinkable for a product of the same overall quality.

I also note that motion picture capture is a major emphasis for Sony, too. That's where the cash cow is, not because consumers are demanding it but because film studios have basically neglected sub-$1MM or even sub-$10MM productions, combined with the rise of internet video, has created a huge market for low- and mid-budget motion picture companies. Those are professionals who are pleased as punch to only have to spend five figures per camera rig, lenses included, which makes even Leica photographers look downright cheap. What I wonder is why we haven't seen a halo-strategy lineup of video cameras from $20,000 to $500 from Canon. I suppose because that market is so rich, and the competition so minimal, that there's no need at this point. And why would a company spend millions on R&D and competition in the saturated and shrinking still photography market when the video market is so ripe?

The good thing (in my opinion) about a video-centric market is that the lenses will once again shift toward rendering rather than LP/PH measurements, most of which will serve quite well for stills. The bad thing is that the cameras themselves will continue to move away from the simple ergonomics that I prefer. Still, I suspect I could be quite happy shooting with today's cameras for quite some time; I just hope the video cameras that replace them use the same batteries.

Just my $0.02. Cheers,
Jon

 

[Tim]

I've got a few nephews and nieces to go mate - trying to pass on the photography bug to extended family now that I have set my daughters up - still I'll keep in you mind...if you are sure you can put up with the lousy EVF ? At 4K+ though you might have to shout a beer or two.

Thanks Uncle Peter.
I have been known to pay in that good ol Aussie currency of a slab of beer in the past.

 

[dandrewk]

Perhaps it's just me, but it sure seems a lot of DSLR folk don't hesitate with snippy little rejoinders ("toy camera" "cheap components" etc.), the main "argument" being that Sony, being the huge electronic conglomerate, doesn't make cameras for "serious" photographers. IOW, Sony users don't really care about important features and are willing/ready to pay ridiculous prices for sub-standard gear. What's the purpose of this aside to inflame the discussion? Troll bait maybe?

This thread was about Canon and it's inability to adjust to market demands. It's not an attack on the camera, nor its user base. I have sincere respect for Canon and hope it continues to be a market leader. But, and it's just IMHO, they won't be a market leader if they stick with their current course.

It makes it a bit hard to read threads like this (and elsewhere). While it would be great if some here could engage in serious discussion about the subject without resorting to condescending, and ultimately insulting statements. But I guess this is still the world wide web.

I think it's best I just ignore this subject, and instead focus on threads where photography is discussed.

 

[Vivek]

Perhaps it's just me, but it sure seems a lot of DSLR folk don't hesitate with snippy little rejoinders ("toy camera" "cheap components" etc.), the main "argument" being that Sony, being the huge electronic conglomerate, doesn't make cameras for "serious" photographers. IOW, Sony users don't really care about important features and are willing/ready to pay ridiculous prices for sub-standard gear. What's the purpose of this aside to inflame the discussion? Troll bait maybe?

This thread was about Canon and it's inability to adjust to market demands. It's not an attack on the camera, nor its user base. I have sincere respect for Canon and hope it continues to be a market leader. But, and it's just IMHO, they won't be a market leader if they stick with their current course.

It makes it a bit hard to read threads like this (and elsewhere). While it would be great if some here could engage in serious discussion about the subject without resorting to condescending, and ultimately insulting statements. But I guess this is still the world wide web.

I think it's best I just ignore this subject, and instead focus on threads where photography is discussed.

+1

Some of the posters lost any semblence of respect by spewing utter crap and summarily dismissing photos taken with Sony cams.