Sir_Loin Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
gdanmitchell wrote:
Some of us think that Canon is simply taking a different approach to developing and releasing a high end mirrorless camera — which makes sense if you think about the different situations of Sony and Canon in the high end* camera market.
Sony's introduction of their high quality mirrorless cameras was smart, even brilliant of them. They have apparently been trying to break into the high end camera market with a goal of becoming one of the top two companies — which likely means usurping Nikon. They had acquired technology from other companies (Minolta, Zeiss, for example) and applied their own technical prowess to produce a series of very competent DSLRs. Unfortunately for them, they didn't really go anywhere, despite their quality. With long-standing, trusted, reliable, high quality products from Canon and Nikon, both of whom have established reputations and customer bases, it wasn't enough for Sony to produce DSLRs that were just as good as Canon and Nikon or even just a bit better — this wasn't enough to differentiate them and get the attention of the market.
So, from Sony's point of view, moving fast on mirrorless technology was a way to get the market's attention — and they were right. That has certainly happened! (Fujifilm is following a similar path.) Because Sony's DSLRs weren't really moving all that fast, and because Sony's first goal was to get market penetration at the high end, there wasn't much to lose by decreasing attention on their DSLR products — and there was potentially a lot to gain by using mirrorless to differentiate themselves from Canon and Nikon. It didn't hurt at all that Sony produces their own sensors and could also push the initial A7r model on the basis of not just mirrorless design (about which some early buyers were actually neutral or reserving judgment) but also on the basis of a then-superior sensor with 50% more photo sites than the previous sensors from the competition plus excellent noise and DR performance.
Because Sony — at least in this market — was the "plucky outsider" rather than the lumbering insider (e.g. - not Canon or Nikon) this detour worked better for them than more DSLRs had, and because the products were marketed as being innovative, cutting edge technology (which, to a great extent, they are) they attracted the plentiful lovers of new stuff in the camera equipment world. This group — the "early adopter" types — tend to be more forgiving of certain rough edges as long as they get something innovative in return. And it worked. In exchange for getting the first full frame (innovative) mirrorless body (innovation) with a very good sensor (innovation), this kind of buyer was willing to deal with lens adapters (rough edge), slower or no autofocus (rough edge), certain issues with the camera files (rough edge), and so forth.
I think this was a brilliant Sony move, and perhaps just about the only one that would give them a decent foothold in the high end camera business.
What about Canon? Why didn't Canon "answer" Sony with a high end mirrorless camera? Is Canon incapable of innovation?
Canon (along with Nikon, though the situations are not identical) is in a very different place, and this affects their calendar for introducing a new and different product. Ask yourself two questions:
- If Canon came out with a new camera and it was only sort of semi-compatible with existing Canon lenses, would consumers be happy? For example, what if a long Canon zoom only AF'ed at short focal lengths on this new Canon camera? What if your existing Canon lenses required you to use adapters on the new camera?
- If Canon came out with a new camera and it used an entirely new lens mount system, rendering your existing lenses either incompatible or requiring the use of an adapter, how would the Canon market react in general?
Because Canon has a large base of consumers using their gear and invested in lenses and more, they cannot and should not introduce a Sony A7r style product on the same timeline. Sony's outsider status made that exactly the right decision for them, but Canon's situation would make that a tremendously dangerous choice, and they would risk not meeting customer expectations. (Keep in mind that Canon would not just be appealing to "bleeding edge" new adopters, but to customers who rely on the integration of the Canon system.)
Lenses and lens mounts present another complexity for a company like Canon. An easy solution would be to simply introduce a new mount designed for full frame mirrorless, with a shorter distance between the rear of the lens and the sensor and perhaps with a smaller mount diameter. However, things start to get complicated here. Would Canon also develop a new mount for cropped sensor mirrorless bodies — like the M mount? How would integration with older lenses be accomplished? Would it require adapters, and what effect would that have on the existing user base? Would the new mounts replace some older system — would EFS go away, for example? These are not trivial questions, and I suspect that Canon wants to have solid answers to them before their system comes out.
I'm certain that Canon is working hard on producing a high end mirrorless camera — and that it won't be an EOS M style camera when it comes. It will be something every bit as sophisticated as their high end DSLR systems, and it reliability and compatibility will be as well thought out — since a new Canon product that came without these things (even if it were identically as functional as the Sony A7r and A7rII)would tank.
Canon, like Sony, has made precisely (with a few glitches, no doubt) exactly the right decisions about how to best turn mirrorless into a successful product. For one company, a good mirrorless product was the wedge that differentiated them from their competition, and by and large it was executed quite well. For another company, when the products are released they must not only represent new technology, but they must have a higher state of integration and reliability than what the earlier company had to provide.
To be clear, I think both companies are on the right path — it is just that the paths cannot and should not be the same.
Dan
* When I write "high end," it is shorthand for everything from prosumer DSLR class cameras up through the most expensive 1-series cameras....Show more →
That's quite a post Dan! Thank you for your input. I'll be brief on a couple of thoughts I've had.
I would hazard a guess that if Canon are developing a full frame mirrorless camera, it's specification is going to have to be up there with its high end DSLRs because I agree with you, it'll bomb.
Regarding the lens mount, I personally think another variation of the EF mount would be a bad idea. OK, a mirrorless full frame camera gives more room for manoeuvre to develop more compact lenses capable of the image circle required for a full frame sensor. But the user base that have invested many ££££'s and $$$$'s in full frame lenses will feel a bit miffed that they have to buy more lenses to take advantage of a new system. I'm not a fan of adapters.
I'll stick my neck out on this one and say it'll have the standard EF mount.
|