Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       5              13       14       end
  

Archive 2017 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation

  
 
dhphoto
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #1 · p.4 #1 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


alundeb wrote:
The other elephant in the room is of course #firstworldproblems. If we are concerned because camera reviewers and potential enthusiast buyers don't get exited by new cameras anymore, maybe we should think more about how our gear obsession may look in the eyes of non-photographers. We don't look cool and distinguished, we look stupid and selfish. Talking to myself first and foremost.


Yes, agreed and this is a gear forum where minute problems are magnified out of all proportion, it's important to remember that.

It just irritates me when people say Canon are somehow letting them down, if you don't like the new model of car/tv/laptop etc you go any buy something else, but Canon owners seem to think Canon owes them gear that directly competes on every level, well for the moment they don't, quite.

So go buy a Sony/Nikon whatever, personally I consider myself incredibly fortunate I don't still have to make my living using film and if a dslr lacks a feature I need I'll go buy something else but for now my 6 Canon dslrs and multiple lenses do everything that could be required of them



Sep 14, 2017 at 03:00 AM
Milan Hutera
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #2 · p.4 #2 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


"I challenge you to find anyone who has been more passionate about using and promoting your products in the general photography community than I am." "Yours sincerely, @tassiegrammer. Passionate Canon camera user & brand advocate."

Hard to take it seriously when his Twitter has 430 followers. I have 640 followers after I've blocked about 300 fake and suspicious accounts (terrorists, rapists, spammers, "eggheads" - no profile photos, you name it...), I have been using Canon since 2005's venerable 20D and would never ever proclaim myself "Canon promoter and brand advocate".

In spirit of these sentences, and as was pointed out by several users, almost everybody holds Canon to some crazy double standards. I remember when Nikon D800 came out, almost every wedding photographer was crying "what am I going to do with those huge 80mb files? I can only fit 200 photos on my memory card. Tis f***d up man...". Now this dude is crying because 30mpix isn't enough BECAUSE he's ENVIOUS of Nikon's 45mpix and Sony's 42mpix offerings.

While I love creating BIG files via pano stitches, the simple truth is, I don't *need* them at all. The last physical prints I did myself were a couple of A3+ prints for the exhibition and A3 photobook that featured (sometimes heavy cropped) sports photos. And what do you know, they both look great, originating from only 16mpix. I guess I should be envious too because the neighbor has bigger pee pee than I do...

He says the IQ of 5Ds/r is worse than 5DIII which is not true. He claims that every other manufacturer has had a touchscreen in their top level cameras for ages, which is again, not true. He claims that in many cases, the 6D performs FAR bettter than 6DII, which again, is not true. I could go on and on.

And all the whine about the sensors with incredible quality sensors - look no further than the blurred, noise infested (both color and luminance) eclipse photo posted on DPReview pushed 5 or 6 stops, claiming how amazing it is. Nuff said.

The Canon double standard is nothing surprising on DPreview. I'm pretty sure when it was sold to Amazon, Askey put a line into contract "Owner must bash Canon whenever possible because they didn't tell me about 1D3 and didn't invite me to the event."

I'm not saying Canon didn't screw up 6DII in many ways or didn't poorly implemented 4K into 5DIV. They need to realize we're getting back to the ways of the film days, where the "sensor" was exactly the same on entry level and pro bodies. And since the 40 - 50% increase on Canon pro gear (combined with the letargy of photo business, everybody is whining about the needing to reduce costs, not needing quality photos for their presentations and so...) it's very hard to lay down the cash to a half baked product like 6DII which I would've bought in a heartbeat if it had more AF coverage and slightly more current sensor tech. Now I'm waking in the middle of the night going back and forth if I should buy 5DIV, which costs the same as my brand new 1DIV did and has everything except good 4K (not needing it right now, but who knows) or spend the absurd amount of money on 1DxII which does everything well (including 4K).

And the praised (unsurprisingly on DPreview) A9? A camera that - only shoots 12 bit RAWS at 20fps (something Canon stopped using 10 years ago), has very limited weather and dust sealing, has very limited battery life compared to Pro Canon and Nikon, has questionable ergonomics, it's longest f2.8 lens appears to be 70-200, focuses visibly worse for video compared to Canon... yes... because it's great to have killer video when it can't keep up even for such mundane tasks as vlogging...



Sep 14, 2017 at 03:07 AM
Guest

Guest
p.4 #3 · p.4 #3 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


Uh, what an inflammatory thread... I'll just stick to one thing here:

dtolios wrote:
What I still cannot grasp is the fixation with a different mount should Canon opt for a FF MILC...
"oh Canon, I know it would hurt your EF lenses to go MILC" ... no FFS, NO. Either use a pass-through adapter ala EF-M->EF, or SIMPLY DON'T GO THIN BODY...

WHY ? WHAT IS THE BENEFIT?

To adapt old lenses? That is so petty ppl...if the body goes smaller, and you don't need an adapter, you will force the lenses to get bigger - pretty much "building-in" the length of the adapter or "mirror-box" that is removed. This distance between the lens and the
...Show more
Unless you are speaking of Samyang and other MF-only manufacturers that are offering the same designs in any available mount, this is not true. Most of Samyangs are really DSLR designs "padded" to compensate for the flange distance, but even that manufacturer started having dedicated mirrorless lenses designed with a smaller flange distance in mind. As do all the bona fide producers - but the physics of the required actual aperture opening size kicks in with the normal lenses and moreso with the telephotos, anyway. However, look at the Sony 12-24/4 - it's literally half the size of the comparable Canon and Sigma (DSLR) designs while being at least as good optically (none of the field curvature / distortion issues of the Sigma, nor the CA / edge sharpness falloff of the Canon at the widest setting). Most of the Sony E f/1.8 ~ f/2 primes (including the full frame ones) have 49mm filter threads which are smaller than the comparable DSLR lenses, even though they are mostly new (and intricate) designs inside.
The AF Samyangs for the FE mount are also the smaller - look at the size comparison, let's say, between the 14mm AF (mirrorless) and MF (actually DSLR) lenses: the mirrorless one is 85.5 x 97.5 mm, the (factory-)adapted MF DSLR one is 87 x 122.1 mm. The weight saving is not as noticeable - 505 grams vs 570 - but at least part of this is due to the AF motor, aperture actuator and other electronic parts in the AF lens (the dumb one has none of that). The figures are courtesy of B&H.

Edited by Guest on Sep 14, 2017 at 08:27 AM · View previous versions



Sep 14, 2017 at 06:14 AM
MayaTlab
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #4 · p.4 #4 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


Milan Hutera wrote:
A9? A camera that - only shoots 12 bit RAWS at 20fps (something Canon stopped using 10 years ago)


I just want to point out that I'd be very happy if like Nikon, Canon allowed me to only use 12bit raw files. On most Canon cameras, bar the 5DIV and 1DXII, and maybe the 80D & Co (I'm not sure), the extra 2bits are wasted at all ISO values, and even on the ones mentioned, above ISO 400 or so, the benefits are non-existent.

Since I like to do Wifi real-time transfer of raw files to the computer during some rather relaxed shoots, it would diminish slightly the transfer time .

Even better, I'd love to see cameras automatically switch from 14bits to 12bits above a certain ISO threshold when it stops being relevant to IQ (so basically, on a camera like the 6DII, at all ISO values).

Also, most if not all mirrorless cameras switch to 12bits (for read-out speed reasons I believe). Canon's EF-M cameras do that as well.



Sep 14, 2017 at 08:20 AM
charlyw
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #5 · p.4 #5 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


MayaTlab wrote:
On most Canon cameras, bar the 5DIV and 1DXII, and maybe the 80D & Co (I'm not sure), the extra 2bits are wasted at all ISO values,


That is a common misconception as the inevitable photon shot noise would be impacted and capturing only 12 bit would make the likelihood of posterization at all ISO and all brightnesses higher. So to run your A/D conversion at 14 bit isn't governed by the need for the dynamic range but the best possible representation of the analog signal. So no, it's not a waste!



Sep 14, 2017 at 08:28 AM
MayaTlab
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #6 · p.4 #6 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


charlyw wrote:
That is a common misconception as the inevitable photon shot noise would be impacted and capturing only 12 bit would make the likelihood of posterization at all ISO and all brightnesses higher. So to run your A/D conversion at 14 bit isn't governed by the need for the dynamic range but the best possible representation of the analog signal. So no, it's not a waste!


Raw data is linear.



Sep 14, 2017 at 08:46 AM
dreamlander
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #7 · p.4 #7 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


I can agree there has not been a lot of "innovation", but they still might make the most reliable and properly weather sealed cameras out there. This does mean a lot to some of us. From what I hear the Sonys and Fujis can be allergic to water.
But If Canon can give me a mirrorless 5DsrII with IBIS, take my money!
A lot of what the op's posted article says is objectively wrong. They say in many ways the 5DIII out performs the 5Dsr? Huh? In what way is that? If the writer truly believes that, they have NO business writing this article or owning a 5Dsr for that matter.



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:00 AM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #8 · p.4 #8 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


rscheffler wrote:
I don't see how hardware based companies will survive in the face of major software driven changes on platforms they don't participate. At least not in their current forms. Until now the effects unique to large sensor camera systems insulated them to a degree from smartphone encroachment.

I do believe hardware driven photography will be around for some time, but it will become increasingly niche and costly.

I just happened to read this: http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/computational-photography-iphone-8-iphone-x-camera-levoy-1.4287470

"What we think of as a [smartphone] camera is largely a collection of software algorithms that expands with each passing year."

"While the underlying techniques behind many of these features
...Show more
alundeb wrote:
I think the large sensors we use for highest quality or lowest light today, at some point will be replaced by an array of small sensors with individual lenses. Software algorithms will be essential, in everything from complex zoom and focus control, to merging images and get around parallax errors. That could be called innovation.


Yes, that's exactly what the L16 camera does (as you may know). While pixel level sharpness is similar to a smartphone, when you take its up to 80MP final output and downscale it to half or a quarter, its images look fine to my eyes. I can only imagine this line of development will continue to be refined, become increasingly software driven and increasingly commonplace.



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:09 AM
charlyw
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #9 · p.4 #9 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


MayaTlab wrote:
Raw data is linear.


How I love armchair developers who single out one specification from a complex system...



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:10 AM
Mikehit
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #10 · p.4 #10 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


Ferrophot wrote:
I really wanted a camera that was 2018 up to date, but it isn't,


What does that even mean?
It sounds like a nice soundbite but what do you personally need from a '2018 camera' and in what way is Canon not delivering it?




Sep 14, 2017 at 09:20 AM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #11 · p.4 #11 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


Milan Hutera wrote:
And the praised (unsurprisingly on DPreview) A9? A camera that - only shoots 12 bit RAWS at 20fps (something Canon stopped using 10 years ago), has very limited weather and dust sealing, has very limited battery life compared to Pro Canon and Nikon, has questionable ergonomics, it's longest f2.8 lens appears to be 70-200, focuses visibly worse for video compared to Canon... yes... because it's great to have killer video when it can't keep up even for such mundane tasks as vlogging...


This is all somewhat true but at the core, when I used an a9 with 100-400 alongside my 1DXII with 200-400 to shoot indoor American football, it was essentially a draw in respect to the end results. Both were able to follow typical football action and provided me with sequences in which all or the vast majority of images were properly focused.

The a9 is not a perfect camera, by far. But at its core, despite 12 bits and visible sensor readout artifacts of high motion objects (swinging golf club as an example), it held its own against the best Canon DSLR (and I imagine would be similar against the D5). As for battery life, I averaged about 1300 images per battery/game and had one outdoor event where I did over 2500 on one battery. I don't think it's an issue any longer.

Anyway, my point is not to play up the a9. Rather, just to state from my point of view, Sony's mirrorless technology is now pretty much on-par with Canon's best DSLR offering. Each has strengths and weaknesses that will appeal and discourage each of us somewhat differently. Bottom line, IMO, is that Canon has maybe a year or so before truly falling behind in respect to technical specifications relevant to sports/action photography.



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:20 AM
Milan Hutera
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #12 · p.4 #12 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


MayaTlab wrote:
I just want to point out that I'd be very happy if like Nikon, Canon allowed me to only use 12bit raw files. On most Canon cameras, bar the 5DIV and 1DXII, and maybe the 80D & Co (I'm not sure), the extra 2bits are wasted at all ISO values, and even on the ones mentioned, above ISO 400 or so, the benefits are non-existent.

Since I like to do Wifi real-time transfer of raw files to the computer during some rather relaxed shoots, it would diminish slightly the transfer time .

Even better, I'd love to see cameras automatically switch
...Show more



Like I said I started out with 20D which had 12 bit RAWs, then went to 40D which was the first of xxD series to have 14 bit RAWs and appart from the 2/3 ISO sensitivity reduction on 40D, it blew the 20D out of water for RAW quality. And my "current" 1DIV again destroys 40D at any sensitivity, despite having the same size photocells. I would never ever go back to 12bit RAWs, even at high ISOs. And yet on Sony, it's a *feature*. Much like any defficiency on iPhones...



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:22 AM
charlyw
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #13 · p.4 #13 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


rscheffler wrote:
. Bottom line, IMO, is that Canon has maybe a year or so before truly falling behind in respect to technical specifications relevant to sports/action photography.


What a load of... Sorry, the A9 might have caught up but where should the big advantage come from? Out of thin air? And even with all the advances Sony has made they barely made caught up (or not, for example when panning fast action in bright light such as at a motorsports event the A9 basically can do no more than 3 fps) they are lagging behind by decades in the more important area of lenses. What good is a one trick sports pony if you haven't got the lenses to boot with...



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:26 AM
molson
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #14 · p.4 #14 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


I didn't read the entire article, just enough to understand that the author is suffering from some sort of "victim" complex...

He seems to think that Sony is an innovative company, so I guess his definition of "innovative" seems to mean "copying from Olympus/Samsung/Canon", as I can't think of any Sony camera feature that wasn't borrowed from someone else.



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:28 AM
MayaTlab
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #15 · p.4 #15 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


Milan Hutera wrote:


Like I said I started out with 20D which had 12 bit RAWs, then went to 40D which was the first of xxD series to have 14 bit RAWs and appart from the 2/3 ISO sensitivity reduction on 40D, it blew the 20D out of water for RAW quality. And my "current" 1DIV again destroys 40D at any sensitivity, despite having the same size photocells. I would never ever go back to 12bit RAWs, even at high ISOs. And yet on Sony, it's a *feature*. Much like any defficiency on iPhones...


I'm not denying that it "blew out of water" your previous camera for raw quality, but it isn't related to its bit depth.

You can test it anytime on any Nikon camera that provides the option for 12 or 14 bit raw files. I did on my ex-D700 .



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:29 AM
Mikehit
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #16 · p.4 #16 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


retrofocus wrote:
Quite funny that I mostly hear this line of argumentation currently from Canon users. That''s like saying in 2005 that an APS-C sensor with 3 MP is sufficient and most wouldn't benefit from more resolution (aehm, actually we were there and heard this line of defense and even more recently). I fully disagree with this - I believe there is a lot where technology can and will further improve - in the sensor itself with properties like DR, resolution, Lytro technology to register DoF information within the taken image, curved vs. linear sensors, improved backlit properties etc etc. In body
...Show more

Your analogy is facile in the extreme - I don't recall anyone ever saying 3MP is enough.
But I think DA photo is correct - digital technology is pretty mature but that does not mean there is not room for improvement. When cameras went from 8MP to 10MP to 12 and 15 MP each increase brought genuine improvements but now, going from 24 to 30MP or from 30 to 45 offers far less advantage especially in this day and age where most photos never even see a printer and end up as 8-bit images on websites. We are getting to the point where we were with film where the difference between bodies is the functionality not the sensor and all those things you mention are about functionality not things that substantially affect image quality.

As an example Canon has already explored Lytro technology (no other DSLR has - another thing that disproves their lack of innovation) but if they go one step further and create a genuine advancement there, will that cause hordes to switch from Nikon to Canon - I very much doubt it.






Sep 14, 2017 at 09:33 AM
MayaTlab
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #17 · p.4 #17 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


charlyw wrote:
How I love armchair developers who single out one specification from a complex system...


I guess that being able to love yourself is a valuable character trait at times.




Sep 14, 2017 at 09:33 AM
charlyw
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #18 · p.4 #18 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


molson wrote:
I didn't read the entire article, just enough to understand that the author is suffering from some sort of "victim" complex...

He seems to think that Sony is an innovative company, so I guess his definition of "innovative" seems to mean "copying from Olympus/Samsung/Canon", as I can't think of any Sony camera feature that wasn't borrowed from someone else.



And I can think of quite a few recent innovations that Canon brought to the system, such as flicker synchronization or dual pixel AF...



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:41 AM
retrofocus
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #19 · p.4 #19 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


Mikehit wrote:
Your analogy is facile in the extreme - I don't recall anyone ever saying 3MP is enough.
But I think DA photo is correct - digital technology is pretty mature but that does not mean there is not room for improvement. When cameras went from 8MP to 10MP to 12 and 15 MP each increase brought genuine improvements but now, going from 24 to 30MP or from 30 to 45 offers far less advantage especially in this day and age where most photos never even see a printer and end up as 8-bit images on websites. We are getting to the
...Show more

The reasoning with "this resolution is sufficient" was well heard all the time going back to low res cameras - and it sounds like you try to do the same here again - I can tell you that higher resolution will be always welcome as part of innovation. Even Canon realized it finally - much too late but anyway - with the 5Ds(R).

Would be very interested to see where Canon has explored or applied(?) Lytro technology - do you have a link?



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:44 AM
Milan Hutera
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #20 · p.4 #20 · Article posted on Dpreview re: Canons lack of innovation


MayaTlab wrote:
I'm not denying that it "blew out of water" your previous camera for raw quality, but it isn't related to its bit depth.

You can test it anytime on any Nikon camera that provides the option for 12 or 14 bit raw files. I did on my ex-D700 .


Why would I do that? Canon switched to 14 bit 10 years ago and posts the specs using only this setting. Since we're quoting DPreview so much here, here are the numbers from their reviews:
1DxII - RAW+Jpg - 240 shots
D5 - 14 bit RAW+Jpg - 95 shots
D5 - 12 bit RAW+Jpg - 164 shots

You might think the 14 bit is unecessary at high ISO (I do not). Bottom line is. Canon provides only one RAW setting, that doesn't hamper the performance of the camera in any way (no reduced framerates, no reduced buffer....) compared to direct competition and provides you with more data to work with.



Sep 14, 2017 at 09:47 AM
1       2       3      
4
       5              13       14       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3      
4
       5              13       14       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.