Canon falling behind ??

[Dave Throgmartin]

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

[Busted Knuckles]

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

[Kayaker72]

First off...love the Fat Boy Slim reference....

As I understand it the reason for Canon's new body delays had been the new sensor mass production facilities.

Sent from my XT905 using Tapatalk

I think everyone here hopes you are right Raid. It would be great to see a new sensor in a 7DII in in 2014 with the same technology moving into the 5DIV and 1DX II in 2015.

I just see a pattern developing from Canon where video is the focus. Will still photography benefit enough from this focus to keep up? I guess we will see.

I doubt any companies are making money on mirrorless, but I think mirrorless is the future. I think they will replace the conventional mirrored DSLR eventually. The idea of the mirror was to give you the view through the lens, eventually the technology will take us to a point that you can do that digitally through a viewfinder. For sure we are several years away from this happening though, many hurdles to overcome. AF and battery power I think would be the biggest things to overcome.

I am concerned about the video trend too. I don't mind some overlap as I do occasionally switch to video mode at family functions. But 99% of my use is for still photography. 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 certainly understand the concept of trying to grab a frame of a video and using it as a still and certainly their images looked good. The obvious issue is resolution, but I've also read that there are significant differences in how you optimize an image for video vs still photography. The concept I could most easily understand from what I read and thus remember is that with video you actually want a certain amount of motion blur at all times. Going from sharp image to sharp image actually makes the video look a little choppy. Of course, with still photography, you usually want the sharpest image you can get. These two can not co-exist. I am not sure if these boil down to the camera hardware, but it certainly impacts the style promoted in the video.

So, I am hoping that the "Cinema" series are optimized for video and that the still series, such as the 1DX and 5DIII, etc, remains optimized for stills with the availability of video. For that reason, I was actually happy that the "C" series was introduced. At least Canon has the structure to split the two.

Oh just stop myself.....

I am really interested in mirrorless technology, afterall the mirror has been around for a long, long time. just about as long as the keyboard..... w/ the dual pixel, etc tech the focusing need is rapidly going if not gone. I don't know if the focusing speed on the 70d is "maxed out" or moderated for future enhancements - either way some more CPU power is all that is needed and Moore's law on that has yet to fail.

And yes, I will give Canon until the spring to come out w/ a M2 otherwise there is an A7 in my future.

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? Hopefully this doesn't make me "old" but I've never been too into the mirrorless concept because I am only slightly interested in any of those benefits. I am probably most interested in #1 and #4. But #1 creates additional issue (file storage, memory card size, transfer rates, etc). And I already have a tough time selecting between photos. #4, sure you can make a camera smaller, but very soon the lens becomes the primary bulk of the camera, not the body. Even on the current EOS-M, those two lenses are what drive the "bulk" of the camera, not the body.

Maybe I am missing something on the mirrorless market. I'd love to hear from the rest of you. But as of now, I see it as a niche whose primary benefits are for mid-size/rangefinder camera bodies between pocketable cameras and dSLRs such as Sony just released. As others have pointed out, that could really hurt Canon's consumer level line, so I get why they haven't raced into the field yet. Granted, I think they should evolve the consumer line to include the M.

[HDNitehawk]

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.

[Raid]

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.

[Kayaker72]

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.

I am shooting from a tripod more and more. I use live view if I have my 10 stop filter on as live view can focus through a 10 stop ND filter whereas the conventional phase detect AF can not. I typically prefer composing a shot through the OVF, when possible, I just like that experience better. I agree there are angles where a flip screen would be handy, but I seriously doubt one ever makes it to the 1D bodies, where the highest premium is put on construction, weather sealing and durability.

Eventually, it would be nice if Canon had some sort of line up like the following:

• P&S
• APS-C
  
  • Mirrorless
    
    • EOS-M low end version (priced with rebel)
    • EOS-M high end version (priced with XXD)
    
    
  • Rebel-Low end
  • Rebel-High end
  • XXD
  • 7DXX
  
  
• FF
  
  • Mirrorless
    
    • Rangefinder style (priced with 6Dx)
    
    
  • 6Dxx
  • 5Dxx
  • 1DX-x
  
  
• Cinema series
• MF
  
  • ??

I intentionally omitted the long rumored "High MP" 3D/4D, whatever it is going to be. I can see them splitting the 1D series with one version aimed at landscape/fashion photographers (high MP) and the other aimed at sport/wildlife photographers (current 1DX). Or, I could just as easily seem them not splitting the series, trying to find common ground with the 1DX and offering MF to those that want extremely high resolution.

So, in that lineup, I've added a high end version of the APS-C EOS-M and a Rangefinder FF mirrorless, and subtracted 2 different versions of the rebel (there are currently 4) and the 60D/60Da. Eventually consolidate the two EOS-M's and two Rebels into 3.

Anyways, that is just me. Overall, the future may be mirrorless. I personally suspect if it is it will be cost driven and not so much due to benefits to the photographer. I, of one, would miss the OVF.

[HDNitehawk]

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.

[Joel Eade]

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.

[Steve U]

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.

[HDNitehawk]

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.