Why not us?

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 end

Archive 2012 · Why not us?

Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · Why not us?

The actual situation brings me to a question I would like to find an answer for.

In the past we (Canonians) got offered what we asked for. +/- a couple of things. But we bought, what Canon offered and so often complained about what the gear does not have.

We are in 2012 now and globalism works for us in few cases, but never before man had such a power to be listened to. Canon and Nikon are companies, that are very successful. Because of us! Here. Today. Should it not be the time, where we ask for what is possible and they should deliver it? They are nothing without all of us.So my question is easy. Why not merging THEM to what WE need?

I am a single man. Like me, there are millions of photographers outside. You are one of them!
Why not asking both of them and maybe Sony for a photographic all around gear, that fits our needs and makes (all of) them money?

What I wish:
A camera that has an superb AF, eye controlled, best IQ at any resolution from 21 up to 36million pixels, 6-8 FPS (would be enough for 95% of us imo), light, astounding safe (proved against water and dust), a great design for shooting all around. At an affordable price (about 1200-1500 $). They can cripple whatever they want for their consumer lines. And add whatever for "pros".

Lets just collect how many of us would purchase it.

What do you (YES, YOU!) think? And wish?

Ralph

Edited on Feb 08, 2012 at 06:46 PM · View previous versions

Feb 08, 2012 at 06:41 PM

retrofocus
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · Why not us?

I agree, just add a 100% viewfinder as a must.

Would be great if we could buy a Nikon D800 camera AND use the Canon lenses with it.....

Feb 08, 2012 at 06:44 PM

Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · Why not us?

Thank you. A 95-100% VF is part of my list, too, of course. I am talking about DSLR. That will be gone in 5 years. so long I would like to see most (or all) of what I shoot.
Yes, of course. When 3rd partys offer lenses for both, why not them accepting both. Their technicians should be able to match.

Feb 08, 2012 at 06:47 PM

chez
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · Why not us?

Why stop at $1200...I say I want it for $500.

Keep wishing.....

Feb 08, 2012 at 07:15 PM

GC5
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · Why not us?

Ralph Conway wrote:
So my question is easy. Why not merging THEM to what WE need?

Well it would be a clear antitrust violation for one...

Feb 08, 2012 at 07:31 PM

Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · Why not us?

chez wrote:
Why stop at $1200...I say I want it for $500.

Keep wishing.....

YES! But a cellphone is more expensive. I want a camera for my job.

Feb 08, 2012 at 07:46 PM

chez
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #7 · Why not us?

Ralph Conway wrote:
chez wrote:
Why stop at $1200...I say I want it for $500.

Keep wishing.....

YES! But a cellphone is more expensive. I want a camera for my job.

Well I want my cellphone to be $25.

Feb 08, 2012 at 07:50 PM

Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · Why not us?

GC5 wrote:
Ralph Conway wrote:
So my question is easy. Why not merging THEM to what WE need?

Well it would be a clear antitrust violation for one...

My english is not that good. What does it mean?
They already know what we want and speak to each other who does what next. Why not getting them under one hat? Ours? They are just companies. Without any existence cause and possibility to make money or grow without their customers (us). So why not letting them work together for us. It would be averadges advantadge.

Feb 08, 2012 at 07:51 PM

MintMar
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · Why not us?

Ralph Conway wrote:
What do you (YES, YOU!) think? And wish?
Ralph

What I think: In fact, apart from AF I don't have any significant complaints on Canon offerings (apart from clearly intentional crippling like 430EX not being able to turn the head 180deg both ways, or firmware cripples like 300D or 60D MFA), I'd be quite happy camper.

In today's world of AF lenses with short focus path, smaller viewfinders, "bright" focus screens without any optical focus assist like split circle or microprism collar I hold AF very important and a basic feature of a modern camera. If you take a look at Canon's classes of cameras, there isn't such a heavy gap between the flagship and the rest of the pack in any basic camera mechanisms as it is in AF. If we had shutter-segmented cameras as we have AF segmented, it would look like this:
1D: 30s - 1/8000s
5D: 12 - 1/2000
7D: 15 - 1/2500
xxD: 15 - 1/1800
xxxD: 10 - 1/1300
xxxxD: 5 - 1/800
Pretty ridiculous, right?

Would you buy a 5D which goes up to 1/2000?

While I understand the segmentation concept, I think it is quite unbalanced and set upon a way too important feature of today. Yes I know it's intentional and clever for the profit and shareholders and blahblah. But that doesn't imply that I am to like it.

The problem also is that I can't get my great AF (which I can very much use) without also paying for big (especially big!) and heavy body (which I don't like), for FPS I have no use for, for WR I have no real use for... So naturally I am somewhat sour about this intentionally huge AF gap (somewhat thinned by recent 7D).

What I wish: I wish for an EOS D700. EOS mount, Canon colors, Canon-style body+controls, everything else stays unchanged, for the price of Nikon D700. I'm not being unrealistic with requesting a Ferrari for a Toyota price, am I?

Feb 08, 2012 at 07:54 PM

Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · Why not us?

MintMar wrote:
Ralph Conway wrote:
What do you (YES, YOU!) think? And wish?
Ralph

What I think: In fact, apart from AF I don't have any significant complaints on Canon offerings (apart from clearly intentional crippling like 430EX not being able to turn the head 180deg both ways, or firmware cripples like 300D or 60D MFA), I'd be quite happy camper.

In today's world of AF lenses with short focus path, smaller viewfinders, "bright" focus screens without any optical focus assist like split circle or microprism collar I hold AF very important and a basic feature of a modern camera. If you take a look at Canon's classes of cameras, there isn't such a heavy gap between the flagship and the rest of the pack in any basic camera mechanisms as it is in AF. If we had shutter-segmented cameras as we have AF segmented, it would look like this:
1D: 30s - 1/8000s
5D: 12 - 1/2000
7D: 15 - 1/2500
xxD: 15 - 1/1800
xxxD: 10 - 1/1300
xxxxD: 5 - 1/800
Pretty ridiculous, right?

Would you buy a 5D which goes up to 1/2000?

That is not the point. A Ferari would be an Leica equal. Something not needed but to give some stupid people the feeling, they have reached something and need to show it to people. I was talking about the averadge camera to MAKE something: Photographic art. Something you can do with few, but where more gives you more freedom and flexibility. Nobody on this world gets that in driving Ferraris.

So if I understand you right, you ask for a general Canon (wich?) with better AF than 5D II at a Nikon D700 price. That is what we already have cheaper (without FF. But who needs FF?) D7.
Imo the D700 should not have cost more than € 1000-1.500 instead of double: Last generation sensor put in a "pro" features body to make sales somehow. No innovation, not matching established standards and giving a lot of features that where not payable before. This is way of marketing, but not of creative product development.

The actual D700 price here is same than the new D800 one (in €).

Feb 08, 2012 at 08:34 PM

GC5
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · Why not us?

Ralph Conway wrote:
GC5 wrote:
Ralph Conway wrote:
So my question is easy. Why not merging THEM to what WE need?

Well it would be a clear antitrust violation for one...

My english is not that good. What does it mean?
They already know what we want and speak to each other who does what next. Why not getting them under one hat? Ours? They are just companies. Without any existence cause and possibility to make money or grow without their customers (us). So why not letting them work together for us. It would be averadges advantadge.

They do not speak to each other about their future business plans or products. If they are, the EU and US department of justice will soon be prosecuting competition cases against them. In neither Europe nor the US (or most other places for that matter) are companies permitted to cooperatively plan their business strategies. It is intended to prevent monopolies harmful to consumers. That is, by the by, exactly what you have proposed. Once Canon and Nikon have gotten together to "give us what we want" they will have effectively cornered the market. "What we want" will not have an affordable price because Canon and Nikon - in controlling the market - will not have any incentive to give it to us.

Feb 08, 2012 at 08:41 PM

Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · Why not us?

GC5 wrote:
Ralph Conway wrote:
GC5 wrote:
Ralph Conway wrote:
So my question is easy. Why not merging THEM to what WE need?

Well it would be a clear antitrust violation for one...

My english is not that good. What does it mean?
They already know what we want and speak to each other who does what next. Why not getting them under one hat? Ours? They are just companies. Without any existence cause and possibility to make money or grow without their customers (us). So why not letting them work together for us. It would be averadges advantadge.

They do not speak to each other about their future business plans or products. If they are, the EU and US department of justice will soon be prosecuting competition cases against them. In neither Europe nor the US (or most other places for that matter) are companies permitted to cooperatively plan their business strategies. It is intended to prevent monopolies harmful to consumers. That is, by the by, exactly what you have proposed. Once Canon and Nikon have gotten together to "give us what we want" they will have effectively cornered the market. "What we want" will not have an affordable price because Canon and Nikon - in controlling the market - will not have any incentive to give it to us.

Hoo! This thread was and still is not planed to become a olitical one by me. When they talk to each other believe me they will not tell that to the US or EU anty monopol controll. But I guess, what you say is not correct anyway. EU and US departments are payed and controlled by concerns. All energy, Oil, food, traffic health and insurance companies exchange and balance their activities. What do you think why all gas companies encrease their prices the same day without any cause? Why are all supermarkets equal? Why does it happen that Nikon offers a new flagship (not so called yet) with nearly same features at an equal price? It will need a couple of month before Canon offers a comparable product against D800. But I am sure they have known about D800 since month. D4 could be sold (like D800) for about 800$ to 1000 with profit. You really believe they do not talk and decide about prices? Not me. And everybody knows: No law can do anything against it (or is willing to).

But lets come back. It does not matter if they work together or somebody else makes it reality. What is it, what you wish for a generall "all happy" camera?

Edited on Feb 08, 2012 at 09:01 PM · View previous versions

Feb 08, 2012 at 08:53 PM

MintMar
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · Why not us?

Ralph Conway wrote:
MintMar wrote:
Ralph Conway wrote:
What do you (YES, YOU!) think? And wish?
Ralph

What I think: In fact, apart from AF I don't have any significant complaints on Canon offerings (apart from clearly intentional crippling like 430EX not being able to turn the head 180deg both ways, or firmware cripples like 300D or 60D MFA), I'd be quite happy camper.

In today's world of AF lenses with short focus path, smaller viewfinders, "bright" focus screens without any optical focus assist like split circle or microprism collar I hold AF very important and a basic feature of a modern camera. If you take a look at Canon's classes of cameras, there isn't such a heavy gap between the flagship and the rest of the pack in any basic camera mechanisms as it is in AF. If we had shutter-segmented cameras as we have AF segmented, it would look like this:
1D: 30s - 1/8000s
5D: 12 - 1/2000
7D: 15 - 1/2500
xxD: 15 - 1/1800
xxxD: 10 - 1/1300
xxxxD: 5 - 1/800
Pretty ridiculous, right?

Would you buy a 5D which goes up to 1/2000?

That is not the point. A Ferari would be an Leica equal. Something not needed but to give some stupid people the feeling, they have reached something and need to show it to people. I was talking about the averadge camera to MAKE something: Photographic art. Something you can do with few, but where more gives you more freedom and flexibility. Nobody on this world gets that in driving Ferraris.

So if I understand you right, you ask for a general Canon (wich?) with better AF than 5D II at a Nikon D700 price. That is what we already have cheaper (without FF. But who needs FF?) D7.

Almost right, but not quite what I think. I wish for a small(er)-body lowres Canon with 1D AF. Say, 5D classic with flash, 1x MP FF sensor made by latest technology. 7D as such ain't gonna cut it. Too small pixels, too cropped.

Also small-bodied low-FPS thin-WR 1D3 as-is could work for me. I'm now at 1D3, it's fine apart from size and weight, I don't shoot continuous, and I don't shoot while walking in the rain.

But I do like the AF (I have a high serial number 1D3). Peripheral high precision crosses that work very well with fast primes.

Feb 08, 2012 at 08:53 PM

loosh
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · Why not us?

To think that Canon doesn't know what photographers want is crazy. But there is a difference in giving customers what they want, and running a successful business. As a customer, if you don't like the products a company comes out with, you have the choice of not buying them. Canon owes you nothing more than the products and service you purchase from them.

Feb 08, 2012 at 09:00 PM

Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · Why not us?

@ MintMar:
Thxs.

@ loosh:
I did not say that. I am pretty shure that they (both) know what photographers want. They are the most succesfull camera producers WW. My idea is just to tell them: lets share our interests. If you do not, we will say NO! If you say YES, you will have much more profit and we will have the benefit.

So what is your favourite camera about? (Not your dream or want to have, but what you need and think should be possible within a given price range).

Feb 08, 2012 at 09:05 PM

AJSJones
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #16 · Why not us?

Ralph Conway wrote:
The actual situation brings me to a question I would like to find an answer for.

In the past we (Canonians) got offered what we asked for. +/- a couple of things. But we bought, what Canon offered and so often complained about what the gear does not have.

We are in 2012 now and globalism works for us in few cases, but never before man had such a power to be listened to. Canon and Nikon are companies, that are very successful. Because of us! Here. Today. Should it not be the time, where we ask for what is possible and they should deliver it? They are nothing without all of us.So my question is easy. Why not merging THEM to what WE need?

I am a single man. Like me, there are millions of photographers outside. You are one of them!
Why not asking both of them and maybe Sony for a photographic all around gear, that fits our needs and makes (all of) them money?

What I wish:
A camera that has an superb AF, eye controlled, best IQ at any resolution from 21 up to 36million pixels, 6-8 FPS (would be enough for 95% of us imo), light, astounding safe (proved against water and dust), a great design for shooting all around. At an affordable price (about 1200-1500 $). They can cripple whatever they want for their consumer lines. And add whatever for "pros".

Lets just collect how many of us would purchase it.

What do you (YES, YOU!) think? And wish?

Ralph

I think we here at FM represent a small fraction of the market(s) that Canon serves, so it is not surprising that they don't give posters here EXACTLY what they want

Feb 08, 2012 at 09:09 PM

loosh
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · Why not us?

If Canon responded to everybody's interest, they would need to make hundreds of different camera models, or one impossible one.

Feb 08, 2012 at 09:15 PM

Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · Why not us?

:-) exactly. For Nikon it was that D800. Why not same for Canon?

Feb 08, 2012 at 09:19 PM

John_T
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #19 · Why not us?

Ralph, think you need to direct your wishes more specifically, maybe toward CPS, if you want to be effective and get feedback. Addressing CANON is addressing 54% business imaging solutions, 12% industry and 38% consumer imaging of which EOS is maybe 10%. It's really the EOS division, if there is such a thing, that needs to be given the input. No point addressing God for things when St. Peter holds the keys for admission.

I don't know, but maybe CPS is the assigned channel for Canon pro and prosumer products intelligence, so maybe we should be chewing their ears off. Gotta feeling those guys need a shaking up anyway.

Feb 08, 2012 at 09:48 PM

Ralph Conway
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · Why not us?

As far I see, CPS here in germany does not really has an other function, then calibrate unhappy users L lenses for free within warranty.

Feb 08, 2012 at 09:57 PM

1 2 end
FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end