Jump to content

Will Canon EVER respond to competitors?


sandro
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest d5f8611fa423d0e628c016f9d5c93b47

Sandro: you don't have to spend a fortune to get wide angle on micro 4/3. I've got a d800, d5300 and gh2. I've grown to really love being able to use may tokina 11-16 with and without a speed booster on the gh2.

Now if metabones can make an adaptor that can shrink a full frame image down to m4/3 size then I could use my 14-24 as a 14-24 f1.4 (I'll ignore the 4k crop), a 20-35 f2, and a 28-50 f2.8.

That's why I'm wishing the a7s was apsc. Still that perfect camera is bound to come along shortly

 

Why would you want such fast apertures with the A7S? It's a low-light freak - it doesn't need them at all. Better to stop down, put your ISO up a bit and use the sweet spot of your lens.

 

If you want shallow DOF, the Speed Booster doesn't alter the DOF character of a lens at all. A 14-24 f1.4 for example will look exactly the same in terms of DOF on a FF camera as it would on an APS-C with a FF focal reducer. The Speed Booster just does exactly what it says on the tin - makes the image brighter.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a way this underlines my earlier question; why don't Panasonic make a video-only GH camera, with internal 10 bit 422 1080 prores? It could have built in ND filters, good low-light performance and superb DR with all the user friendliness of a standard GH camera.

 

I was thinking about how I should reply to your question.  I'm not really sure what to say.  I think such a model would have made sense a year or so ago.  But now they have the 4k GH4.  And they also have a 4k all in one for $800.  The GH3 currently sells for $1,000.  So where would you stick such a camera in the lineup?  What you describe has to be expensive to make.  No one has attempted it other than Black Magic... and we saw how that turned out.  Small sensor and a camera with tons of compromises selling for $1,000.  Granted Panasonic would have economies of scale and could spread their R&D costs over multiple camera bodies and lines.  But they would have to turn out a far more finished an polished product than Black Magic.  And have a m43 sensor.  That costs $$$.  Net net I think you would still end up with something that costs north of $1,000... substantially north.  And if it's north of $1,000 you start wandering into GH4 territory.

 

I really don't know.  Frankly before the announcement of the $800 4K wonder I was looking at a BMCC for $1,500ish.  I had psyched myself up to plunge head long into the world of grading and now I have to switch gears.  The idea of a very grade friendly prores file is intriguing but the wonderful detail that 4k gives you straight out of the camera is amazing.  As a consumer it really is the more appropriate camera for me... assuming the codec, DR, etc are all acceptable.

 

I just think most people in my position want a camera that gives good results right out of the camera.  They don't want to have to color correct or grade everything.  And for the pros why not just get the GH4?  It's an interesting idea.  But where does it fit in?

 

By the way who buys a GH3 now for $1,000?  I guess if you have a stable of m43 lenses and are into photography.  But if you are mostly going to use it as a video camera how does it make sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're talking about the FZ1000, you might want to curb your enthusiasm.  The DR is suspect.  High resolution like 4K is nice, but that's not the most important thing regarding IQ.

 

Should have read the next sentence...

 

As a consumer it really is the more appropriate camera for me... assuming the codec, DR, etc are all acceptable.

 

I'm waiting on Andrew's verdict.  Everything that has been said is with a big asterisk.  I need a full thorough review and more footage.  I didn't like what I saw with some highlights in the clouds in a couple of scenes but I kept my mouth shut.  I remeber the last time I questioned that in an early Sony FDR-AX100 thread.  I was called all sorts of names.  I have no desire for a repeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest d5f8611fa423d0e628c016f9d5c93b47

The idea of a very grade friendly prores file is intriguing but the wonderful detail that 4k gives you straight out of the camera is amazing.  As a consumer it really is the more appropriate camera for me... assuming the codec, DR, etc are all acceptable.

 

I just think most people in my position want a camera that gives good results right out of the camera.  They don't want to have to color correct or grade everything.  And for the pros why not just get the GH4?  It's an interesting idea.  But where does it fit in?

 

 

GH4 4K to Ninja (2/Blade/Star) 1080p 10bit 422 ProRes is looking exceptionally tasty (see other thread). That way you don't need to shell out thousands for a Shogun that's much bigger than you want. With a Ninja you have the best of both worlds - 4K h264 straight out of camera, or ready to rock downsampled ProRes.

 

The person who invents a secure micro HDMI lock for the GH4 is going to be wealthy imo ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GH4 4K to Ninja (2/Blade/Star) 1080p 10bit 422 ProRes is looking exceptionally tasty (see other thread). That way you don't need to shell out thousands for a Shogun that's much bigger than you want. With a Ninja you have the best of both worlds - 4K h264 straight out of camera, or ready to rock downsampled ProRes.

The person who invents a secure micro HDMI lock for the GH4 is going to be wealthy imo ...


Please pardon my ignorance. So with the Ninja, you can record 4K from the GH4? Will it have a higher quality than internal 4K?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything that has been said is with a big asterisk. I need a full thorough review and more footage.


I'm sure it's a nice camera. I used the fz200 for travel videography and even some sports productions, and it was useful...but a "super zoom-small-sensor" isn't a camera on which I'd rely. The IQ is too lacking.

The long end of the lens got way too soft for my tastes, but it's all a trade off.

Of course, IQ is subjective. As you allude, keep in mind with these particular consumer cams the spec sheet looks more impressive than the delivered product.

I'd still consider buying one if these though. They work well enough for a lot of shots. There's good value in it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure it's a nice camera. I used the fz200 for travel videography and even some sports productions, and it was useful...but a "super zoom-small-sensor" isn't a camera on which I'd rely. The IQ is too lacking.

The long end of the lens got way too soft for my tastes, but it's all a trade off.
 

 

Yeah, I don't know what the deal is with the super zooms.  Frankly if they gave me something that was f/2.8 and had a zoom range of Full frame equivalent 20mm to 100mm in 4K I would be happy.  The long end of the lens is not something I see myself using very much particularly if it is soft.

 

 

I'd still consider buying one if these though. They work well enough for a lot of shots. There's good value in it.

 

Yeah, that is why I am considering it.  For me something like a GH4 would be perfect.  But once you add in the up front costs of getting a quality lens it actually becomes more expensive than a BMCC ef mount.   A BMCC isn't ideal for me for a bunch of obvious reasons.  But I considered it.  So I won't necessarily spend the money and get a camera that works in all situations.  But I can get a camera that works in a lot of situations.  I still have my T3i and 50mm 1.4.  It does a nice job with faces up close in low light.

 

I am not a pro earning money.  So I am very price sensitive.  I considered the BMCC because I could get it for 25% off the already reduced $1999 price.  I wonder if the GH4k will push it down in price even more.  Granted it comes with Resolve.

 

I guess I'll wait a couple of months and see where things shake out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good point all round really. Canon will have to respond eventually for exactly that reason... Why not do it NOW and sell some extra cameras?

 

Canon are disappointing their customers at the moment with the lack of change.

Hey Guys ,Check this out! 

 

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ratings/Landscape

 

Turn the filters on to compare canon cams with sony cams

 

You can see Canon is already way behind! 

The 1DX(the same sensor as 1DC) only get 11.8 stops of  Dynamic Range.It is differ from the 400d(which was released in 2006!) only by 0.8 stops!  

 

what canon did greatly improve in the recent 8 years ?I think mostly the Software and  phase detective auto focus??!

 

While Sony did improved GREATLY from 2006 to 2014. In 2006 ,first sony dslr A100(11.2EV)released, then today we see the a7(14.2EV) acheved a much higher score.

 

All this bring to a much strange question:WHY sony frustrated in DSLR businesses(only got 15% market share) but still trying to be the BEST.

While dslr king canon develop their  image  technology SLOWLY as a snail (obviously canon is not lack of money to do a better job)

 

IF this keep going on ,canon is NOT going to bring you a promising future!

Remember there is always a rule of surviving:not to advance is to go back! ^_^

 

If canon really want to respond to competitors,them should try very very hard ,and act fast ASAP ,before it is too LATE!(ummm, it is a little bit late actually~) :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This talk of Canon failing has been going on for years, but it just doesn't hold up in reality. They're still the most popular camera manufacturer because they get a lot right, they just don't market to the margins because they don't need to. At least not yet.

 

As far as I'm concerned DXO has nothing to do with the quality of a camera. I find their abstract scores to mean nothing when it comes to actually using equipment in real life. Their criteria aren't aesthetic criteria, they're chart-based scientific criteria, and the tests tell me little about how equipment will perform in production under pressure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this bring to a much strange question:WHY sony frustrated in DSLR businesses(only got 15% market share) but still trying to be the BEST.

While dslr king canon develop their  image  technology SLOWLY as a snail (obviously canon is not lack of money to do a better job)

 

That's nothing strange, it's just basic business dynamics. The DXOMark scores are irrelevant, they're mere nerdytainment. 

 

Sony retreating from the dSLR market made perfect sense, and was the logical decision to make in their position at the time. Olympus did it, too, for more or less the same reason, and the fact that Pentax haven't done so yet may still become a fatal mistake, despite the recent Ricoh acquisition. They're not different enough yet, and dSLR's are sunset technology to begin with. They will have to differentiate themselves enough soon, or join the classic brands of camera history. They don't have the market might of Canikon to lean against.

 

Canon don't respond to each move by the perceived competition, because they don't have to. Sony are trying to innovate aggressively because they have to, and because it makes sense in their situation. Unlike Canon, they're not the market leader who benefits from the status quo on the market. Until the world around them changes enough and forces them to change their course, too. 

Meanwhile, if you're not happy with the pace Canon is moving, simply choose another product. Simple as that. 

 

Nevertheless, I think it's premature to assume that Canon have totally lost their mojo and are now only concentrating on milking the mainstream market for as long as they can. They still have enough resources to do their own r&d behind the scenes, and all the DXOMark scores put aside, some of their non-mainstream products aren't that bad, nor are they doing too bad in their niche, either.

 

Canon might still become a crumbling giant for sure, depending on the efforts of their upper management but again, I think it's a bit too early to tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

iPhone 5s - 120fps test 

 

 

 

now you know why we cant have good things...this is the new competition of CANON....mobile phone cameras.

 

by an excellent filmaker by the way. Bill newsinger

 

 

Beautiful. It makes me want to get the iPhone 6 as a C-cam. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Guys ,Check this out! 

 

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Ratings/Landscape

 

Turn the filters on to compare canon cams with sony cams

 

You can see Canon is already way behind! 

The 1DX(the same sensor as 1DC) only get 11.8 stops of  Dynamic Range.It is differ from the 400d(which was released in 2006!) only by 0.8 stops!  

 

 

I agree with everyone else.  Dxo is just nerd pron that doesn't have any impact on purchasing decisions for real people.  If someone gave me a choice between a free Canon 1DC vs a free BMCC I would take the Canon 1DC in a heartbeat.  So would most people.

 

 


 

what canon did greatly improve in the recent 8 years ?I think mostly the Software and  phase detective auto focus??!

 

While Sony did improved GREATLY from 2006 to 2014. In 2006 ,first sony dslr A100(11.2EV)released, then today we see the a7(14.2EV) acheved a much higher score.

 

The original non video 5D came out in 2006.  You seriously don't see a difference between the original 5D and hte 5D mark III?

 

 


 

All this bring to a much strange question:WHY sony frustrated in DSLR businesses(only got 15% market share) but still trying to be the BEST.

While dslr king canon develop their  image  technology SLOWLY as a snail (obviously canon is not lack of money to do a better job)

 

 

Well you obviously aren't a photogher.  DSLRs are for photographers.  Yes some of us use them for video but as I've stated over and over again I've never met anyone in real life who uses their DSLR for video.  I have seen people with DSLRs and a nice L lens hanging around their necks whip out an iphone and make a video.  I mean I've seen them do it with the DSLR in front of them bolted onto a tripod!

 

Sony is not going to win the DSLR war with stills.  Canon and to a lesser degree Nikon have way too much infrustructure in place.  DSLRs are a mature product.  Even a lowly Canon rebel is more camera than the average person needs.  The average person is simpy not going to notice the quality difference between a $300 Canon Rebel and a Nikon D800.

 

What the average person sees is professionals using Canons and to a lesser degree Nikons.  And the pros use those cameras because every accersory known to man is made for Canons.  You can rent Canon lenses anywhere.  You can get a Canon serviced anywhere.  Not so with Sony.  If you were a pro traveling a lot would you rather have the Canon safety net or a pretty DXO chart?  As someone who has published pictures from a 3 megapixel camera back in the day I can tell you getting the shot is far more important than a DXO chart.  Crazy megapixels and dynamic range come into play in really high end pro shoots but for chunk of commerical and editorial work the image out of a Canon Rebel gets the job done... build quality is another matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Yes some of us use them for video but as I've stated over and over again I've never met anyone in real life who uses their DSLR for video.  I have seen people with DSLRs and a nice L lens hanging around their necks whip out an iphone and make a video.  I mean I've seen them do it with the DSLR in front of them bolted onto a tripod!

 

Yes I'd have to agree. Most consumers would take one look at the jello infested out-of-focus video they get from a DSLR and never do it again.

 

When autofocus and 5-axis stabilizers are in every one it may be different.

 

For budding film-makers however, it's ideal cos it's cheap and you can earn the craft.

 

Trouble is, people learning the craft now get so obsessed with tech they don't learn it. Buts that's another story...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I am sometimes dissatisfied with pretty much all the cameras on the market.

 

The Canon DSLRs lack video features and outside of Magic Lantern, don't exactly excite me for image quality, 1D C aside.

 

Blackmagic I feel have let us down as much as they have tried to revolutionise the market.

 

Nikon are hardcore photography traditionalists and don't 'get' video. They had a stab with the D800. Since then, they've gone backwards.

 

Panasonic are great but the lack of full frame sensor is not.

 

Olympus have a gem in terms of the 5 axis stabilisation but can't even be arsed to add 24p.

 

Fuji are clueless for video... truly the worst of all, yet great on the stills side. Frustrating, as I need both.

 

Sony push the technology to the absolute limits and often for very aggressive prices as well but there's always something which spoils it. Be it the potential rolling shutter disaster on the A7S and lack of internal 4K codec or the terrible ergonomics / lack of ND on the FS100... Every Sony camera I have used I have ended up selling, A7R being the next in a long line of discarded models, while the same cannot be said for my Canon stuff.

 

Canon's strengths is in the colour science and lenses.

 

I just wish they would push the price / performance barrier far more and surprise us occasionally with some in ya face innovation!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, probably will be a beefed-up 70D, so I wouldn't count on it.

 

Also still think the 7D is aimed as more of a sports stillscamera than a hybrid videocam.

I think the 550D at the same time really was great for anybody also looking into video.

I'm kinda waiting for them to come with something like that again...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

For video in 2014 Canon's answer is their existing fleet of DSLRs like the 60D and 5D Mark III and judging by the number of people still shooting with them, do they really need a 'video orientated 7D at Photokina'? I'd say not.

 

I saw a 60D shooter on the streets a few days ago, big expensive rig, shitty 60D. I almost took him aside and had words :)

 

But to be honest the competitors are as much to blame... all of them have dropped the ball in some way. Panasonic with their smaller sensors, Blackmagic with their delays and bugs, Sony with their quirks, and so on...

 

If you want a Super 35mm camera for cheap... the only thing that is better than the 60D but with the same kind of features is the D5300. Pretty sad state of affairs really!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...