What can Canon be thinking?

[jax_rox]

10 hours ago, The Chris said:

The flip side of that coin is they're squeezing customers that have already paid a lot of money for a camera that's intentionally crippled, for the express purpose of screwing people over with an "upgrade" that should have been included in the first place, since the hardware already has the capability. Sony shouldn't be applauded in any way for charging extra to unlock features that should have been included with the camera when bought new. Just my opinion. 

Instead you'd rather have to pay an extra $8k to 'unlock' 4k with a new camera purchase?? Do you also harbour the same feelings for RED, with their Epic/Scarlett pricing? 

Who are you to say that such features 'should have been included with the camera when bought new'?

6 hours ago, jgharding said:

You can spot a modern pro/am Sony shot a mile off most of the time, especially if it has people in it, because the colour is so thin and anaemic.

Anaemic colour is the fault of the people operating and colour grading, not the camera itself. If you do some research, learn the curve, and expose correctly, you'll find you have no troubles. It's like any other camera. If you pick up a RED, or even an Alexa and assume things about it, you'll very quickly end up with noisy images, or crushed DR.

6 hours ago, jgharding said:

Also the Sony menus and build quality are a pain and they depreciate quicker than Pokemon cards.

The RX10 ii lost a third of it's value in a few months, long enough for me to realise it took ages to match to Canon, still didn't look as nice and I couldn't bring myself to put the shots in an edit. I got an XC10 instead.

Sony menus are a PITA. I disagree about depreciation though (unless you're talking about those Pokemon cards that have appreciated??  ). Sure, if we're talking consumer division. But FS7,FS5,F5/55 etc. have not seen the agressive Sony depreciation - mostly because cameras like the consumers and even the F3 were depreciated by Sony themselves - bringing out newer models to stay competitive and forcing down the price of the previous model.

It may annoy some, but it seems to work, at least to some extent. Certainly better than the lethargic Canon IMO. Compare current models 5DmkIII vs A7rII. Even previous models - 5DmkII vs A7r or A7s. It's no contest, really, in terms of features. You still don't even get proper 1080p out of a 5DIII. Meanwhile, you get internal 4k on the Sony.

Say what you will about colour etc etc. But let's not forget that the average consumer cares about what the salesperson tells them in terms of features, not about which has the better colour rendition. And you've now got three players in Fuji, Sony and Panasonic pushing each other that weren't even a factor beforehand.

Canon's main benefit at the moment is still their glass ecosystem, but no company can rest on their laurels and fail to innovate and expect to keep their crown, especially in today's day and age with the rapid pace of technology.

[Ed_David]

Careful about brand loyalty or you'll start sounding like Red fan bois

Sony's menu system sucks.  Yep I paid $3k or whatever it was to upgrade the f3 to slog - I think I paid it twice.

The Canon C300 is made like a cheap plastic rag doll, and that thing cost like $20k in the day.

The FS7 is tinker-toys level material - but the thing is like $9k right, when the f5 is like $15k

they all take shortcuts.

They have weird cycles of releasing the product at different times.

And in the end, yes the sony image is kind of weird looking vs canon with nice blacks.

but really at the end of the day, how much of a difference is there between the c300ii and sony fs7 line?

Below I graded quickly - but last 2 are c300 and f55 - pretty much the same.  digital bolex is better color, but has noise issues and can't go past 200 asa.  so pick a camera, find its strengths and weaknesses and that's it, who cares.

THEY ALL SUCK    Even the Alexa sucks.  And the phantom sucks.  

 

[mat33]

Amazing how well the Digital Bolex team nailed the colour science given their modest resources compared to much larger competitors.

[jax_rox]

1 hour ago, Ed_David said:

THEY ALL SUCK    Even the Alexa sucks.  And the phantom sucks.  

If only I could find a Producer who wouldn't laugh when I say 'let's shoot film'.....  

[gelaxstudio]

 

On 2016/7/24 at 5:05 AM, tomsemiterrific said:

 I don't disagree with any of these comments. In fact, what you say is obvious on its face. My point was and still is whatever they are thinking it's not about making money. I think that is a serious mistake. It seems there's a HUGE part of the market they are totally snubbing. 

There are many who would be completely satisfied with the status quo of a model...most even. But for those, for instance, would like some added features for the C100 Mk II, but simply could never dream of owning a C300 mk II--and such people are likely to jump to Sony for want of a few simple features.

I know what they've been thinking. In the light of their sales  trajectory the past years what I wonder is why they keep thinking it.

Dude，you can get a Fuji X-T2 instead！ Dpreview has posted the 1dxII review ，the sharpness is low and skintone is terrible！

Check it out by youself~ https://***URL removed***/reviews/canon-eos-1d-x-mark-ii/13

On 2016/7/26 at 8:17 AM, The Chris said:

Nikon is a different story IMO. 

Nikon does give users some useful tools like flat profile、zebras and smooth aperture control ect

More importantly，unlike the poor canon 1DXII，Nikon use H264 codec for their 4K cameras，and 4K HDMI output is also available too ~

[padam]

I like the argument about which camera brand is better when in fact it's been laid out that they all have their marketing strategies and other different methods of milking the customers.

And they won't care what happens in the forums, they care more about global sales and maybe each other (for instance the C100II would not have received price drops if the FS5 was not released and so on...)

Yes Pro features codecs etc. will eventually come down to a lower level. But much later than people expect.

[tomsemiterrific]

10 hours ago, padam said:

 

Yes Pro features codecs etc. will eventually come down to a lower level. But much later than people expect.

I agree--we see that by hindsight. Canon seems like "wait and see, and then act IF necessary." But I'll have to say I was shocked at the amount of the price drop on the C300 mk II. I guess the FS7 has taken its toll on sales---but it shouldn't. IMO the C300 MKII is light years better with colors and skin tones to die for.

[IronFilm]

 

On 7/27/2016 at 11:21 AM, jax_rox said:

Say what you will about colour etc etc. But let's not forget that the average consumer cares about what the salesperson tells them in terms of features, not about which has the better colour rendition. And you've now got three players in Fuji, Sony and Panasonic pushing each other that weren't even a factor beforehand.

 

Plus a fourth...  Nikon. Who now have a FX and DX 4K DSLR. Fingers crossed the D5600/D3400 will get 4K too!

 

On 7/27/2016 at 11:21 AM, jax_rox said:

Canon's main benefit at the moment is still their glass ecosystem, but no company can rest on their laurels and fail to innovate and expect to keep their crown, especially in today's day and age with the rapid pace of technology.

Well.... Nikon have a 100 MILLION lenses! Not counting the millions more made by third party manufacturers. 

http://nikonrumors.com/2016/07/27/nikon-produced-100-million-nikkor-lenses.aspx/

 

On 7/29/2016 at 7:20 PM, gelaxstudio said:

Nikon does give users some useful tools like flat profile、zebras and smooth aperture control ect

More importantly，unlike the poor canon 1DXII，Nikon use H264 codec for their 4K cameras，and 4K HDMI output is also available too ~