Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: Canon falling behind ??

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #13
    Super Moderator Kayaker72's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    5,768
    First off...love the Fat Boy Slim reference....

    Quote Originally Posted by Raid View Post
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by HDNitehawk View Post
    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.

    Quote Originally Posted by Busted Knuckles View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Kayaker72; 10-18-2013 at 01:47 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •