Canon falling behind ??

Just a quick update, doing a bit more research on R&D.
According to the financials Canon has historically spent between 8 & 9 percent of income on R&D. The percentage has remained fairly constant however it dropped a small fraction this year.
The strength of the YEN had some effect on this as well. If you compare the numbers in YEN it does not look as bad as if you compare in Dollars.

Last, in Imaging Canon still outspends Nikon in R&D, from my quick look it appears to be about 10%. I take this as a positive.

I would guess the Nikon D800 has hurt Canon badly.....I am no expert on manufacturing or accounting but if they offered the same or better sensor in a Canon body AND managed to get their wide angle lenses on par with Nikon then (I believe) they would be far ahead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrw

Adaptors to use Nikon lenses on Canon bodies exist. One of the reasons I went with Canon EF mount in the first place is the ability to use other brands of lenses without optical adaptors as I had lots to start with. In WA I have Canon, Nikon, and Zeiss lenses (some rebranded for other manufacturers). Pick the best lenses to do the job that you can mount on your camera body and carry on. Don't worry about who made them.

---

That's true but I want an adapter to use a Sony (Nikon D800) sensor in my Canon body:)

It appears to me that Canon rely heavily on economies of scale and when they release a major update(certainly in their minds) like the 5Dmk3, there has to be a reasonable product life length.
On the surface other makers seem to be a little bit more reactive to other brands product developments and are releasing newer models quicker.
I don't think Canon are falling behind, they are committed to what they have got and unfortunately they are behind. Certainly in expectation and certainly at the 36MP standard.
And I think 36MP or better will be the standard. If Canon don't come to the party, more will leave. And what should be even more of a worry to us loyal Canonites is what is going to come after the D800. I have never gone to the other brand fan sites, but I think they might all be craving for what is going to come next as well.
If I had more commercial needs driving my photography passion I think I would have brought a D800 into the stable by now, just to keep up with the results that portrait shooters are getting with it.
I think the 70D is a sensational development at the price and the features(video) and the 1DX has sport and bird photographers satisfied.
But I am hopeful that the next Canon development is earth shatteringly good, but aimed towards portrait and landscape shooters, who have been left behind by the developments of other brands. I am hoping for around 40MP, low light and dynamic range field leading performance and to top it all off not a medium format price tag. With the D800 and the a7r at just over $3000, if Canon don't play in this price ball park, or near enough to it, I think the Mk2's from those brands will blow the socks off Canon.
You know it's funny. Funny like a dual edged sword, which isn't funny.
While I look to the stars and am so grateful for the quality of all my canon glass. I am also starting to feel a little trapped by the huge investment I have made in this glass. :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrw

4 Not up to 1,000,000 fps or better that I play with at work, but even 10 kfps is adequate for many things.

---

Let me know when it is take your son to work day, and I will show up with a beanie if need be. I will even spring for lunch :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by neuroanatomist

I was initially thinking along similar lines. However, the EOS M won't be FF, and it will almost certainly be much smaller...and size is the main reason I got the EOS M in the first place. Quick scaled comparison of the EOS M, Sony a7, and 5DIII:

While the a7 is certainly smaller than my 1D X, the EOS M + 22/2 fits in a small belt pouch. The a7 body is larger and over 0.5" thicker, and the 35/2.8 is also over 0.5" longer, making the total package a lot less portable.

Food for thought...

---

Good food.

I am really looking for that small form factor for "party shots" & Street types vs. foisting the 5dIII in someone's face, etc, etc. and you do the M great service with comparisons.

I wonder if the A7r might not be the compromise (which means it doesn't do anything best perhaps) could still use all the C-Glass, it would likely have a pancake at some time so it will reasonably small, and yet have the uber resolution to use the existing glass investment - how often would I really reach for the 5dIII???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busted Knuckles

Good food.

I am really looking for that small form factor for "party shots" & Street types vs. foisting the 5dIII in someone's face, etc, etc. and you do the M great service with comparisons.

I wonder if the A7r might not be the compromise (which means it doesn't do anything best perhaps) could still use all the C-Glass, it would likely have a pancake at some time so it will reasonably small, and yet have the uber resolution to use the existing glass investment - how often would I really reach for the 5dIII???

---

IMHO Sony's goal is NOT to sell you a full frame mirrorless to use when you want a small camera, their goal is to be beat Canon / Nikon's image quality and have that be your primary camera. Canon and Nikon treat mirrorless cameras as a nuisance that keep people from buying their expensive, and presumably highly profitable, pro level DSLRs, and it shows in their mirrorless product offerings.

I am sure I am in the minority with this, but 20 MP is just fine for me. I don't want enormous files that cause me to need even more storage capability and better computer(s) to process the files. I also don't want to have to buy better, read: more expensive, lenses required to get another 5% out of the 36 MP or 40 MP camera. I don't approach digital photography as an arms race. Good enough is good enough.

Dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrw

Another question to ask is whether rebuilding activities after tsunami has also put infrastructure costs under a different budget heading.

---

Canon's big lens plant was down for a while. They lost some lenses that were in transit as well. From what I read Canon's R&D department was at work and experienced no damage or delay. However Nikon was hit harder, I think they were down for a while. I thought this time frame would have been a good time for Canon to get ahead. Maybe they have a heart and slowed down to let Nikon keep up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kayaker72

The item that concerns me the most was this video on the 1DC and that people may think this is the future of still photography.

-----
I remember a thread a few years ago where Daniel Browning was talking about the benefit of mirrorless cameras. I remember him mentioning several benefits, but I only recall four: 1) increased fps as the mirror no longer limits; 2) Increased camera life as you remove number of shutter actuations as the common limit to a camera life; 3) You remove the slight vibration caused by the shutter actuation for those that want the sharpest of images, and 4) smaller camera bodies as you don't need the space for the mirror box/OVF.

Are there any others? .

---

I think frame grab is Canon's vision for the future. Canon was pushing frame grabs when the 1C came out. I read comments like video is just still photography with a fast frame rate. If we knew for sure Canon's vision of the future we might understand where they are going with R&D.

I can think of several other reasons for a mirrorless, but these items can be done with a normal DSLR as well if Canon would add a few things.

I do not know how you compose your landscapes and waterfalls, but if I am shooting off the tripod I almost never use the mirror. It is almost always in live mode with the mirror up. It is hard to bend over at odd angles and look through viewfinders. Live view works well for this but when you get at real odd angles it is even hard to see the screen. I wouldn't need a mirror at all for landscape work off a tripod. A flip screen would be very handy. High MP would be a welcomed benefit as well. A fast AF in live view would be welcomed to. It is not always easy to get my face to the viewfinder at the location I want to shoot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HDNitehawk

If we knew for sure Canon's vision of the future we might understand where they are going with R&D.

---

If the number one Camera company (or any company really) released their Future Technology Roadmap to the market place they would be destroying the company.

Kodak only announced their decision to exit film production, when Blind Freddy could see it, it was no surprise.

The way companies keep ahead of the competition is to surprise the market. The new sensor with the built-in AF system in the 70D is a good example. As a poor user its very frustrating that we don't know what to expect. We don't know if our next purchase will be right or wrong, we just have to live with our decisions.

The one big change to how Canon operates (and most other tech companies) is that new hardware is no longer released in the 1 Series. They appear in the Consumer or Semi-Pro range before moving into the Pro family. Canon cannot afford the years of in-house testing to ensure long term reliability that the Pro market demands. Most of all, Canon cannot afford to have a mass 1 Series recall.

What we do know we get from Canon is the best QI from the glass... just wish they would let the price drop in Aus.:(