At least you have the choice of lenses with a Canon body. You can always put on one of those leica's when you want to, you don't really lose anything. But you can't AF with the Leica body, that makes it useless for most. Another ironic thing is the Leica DMR isn't even full frame.
I don't think anybody contests that Canon has the best bodies out there at the moment
Not that I don't agree Canon should put some more effort in their WA glass though! I'm sure they can do it, it's just a matter of wanting it (i.e. profitability).
I think Canon needs some scolding from on high based on the lenses they came out with at PMA. More EF-S junk and a product improved 85L and that's it.
I don't understand this one. I think Canon has made it clear that the ef-s format is here to stay and the 10-22, 60mm macro and this new offering look very nice. I can speak for the 10-22 and can say that it is one of my sharpest lenses. As for the 85L II, this lens has needed an upgrade so it will be a welcome addition once it's price settles down.
As to Guy looking out for pro's who supposedly need wide angle, I'm really confused as he is using a crop sensor, cobbled together camera and back which mask every wides' shortcomings. He can no longer speak for someone using full-frame and needing WA, IMHO.
Hrow wrote:
Me thinks that many people here have missed Guy's point.
They are also arguing that canon is a shareholder run company, hence they'll only do what the shareholders want. But generally what the shareholders want is to hear good stuff being talked about the company in the semi-pro forums. Telling people not to talk about the shortcomings is going *make sure* they don't address those shortcomings.
Guy's point is that the wide angle market is a big market and I think he's trying to make canon notice that *there is a problem*. The same goes for talking about the lack of simple mirror lock up access. If more people talk about the problem, the more chance it gets fixed.
How come if Canon is supposed to be the "be all to everyone single photographer" or risk the scorn of the world company, we arent holding any other firms to such standards ?
Come on Kodak, Come on Casio, wheres the "pro" tools ?
Canon's market (and a small one of its overall business at that) is point and shoot camera's, printers, entry level DSLR's and "pro" DSLR's that appeal to the sports, wildflie and wedding markets. Thats a plenty big slice of the photo pie for any company to bite off.
As I said before, You can fault Lecia just as easily for not having anything for the Sports Shooter as you can for Canon not having anything for a few elite pro's who need the very best of the best.
For most of us "pro's" who do lowely magazine work, even the 16-35 zoom is just fine image quality wise.
timparkin wrote:
But generally what the shareholders want is to hear good stuff being talked about the company in the semi-pro forums. .
I think the shareholders would prefer that everyone who's walking into BestBuy, Circuit City etc is leaving with a Canon printer, a Canon point and shoot, a Drebel etc
How many Drebels do they sell vs how many 1Ds mkII's ? Whats bringing in the biggest source of revenue ?
There are plenty of companies that specialize in very high end gear, and its excellent stuff, dont get me wrong, but if the consumer market wasnt the big profit maker, why wouldnt Phase One, Lecia etc all be the companies posting record profits ?
As it stands way too many companies that were making gear only true "pro's" needed have gone out of business in the past few years.
Just as most any working pro will tell you this market is getting harder on us every year, any company that depends on pro's is going to face the same problems
Brutus_B wrote:
How come if Canon is supposed to be the "be all to everyone single photographer" or risk the scorn of the world company, we arent holding any other firms to such standards ?
Come on Kodak, Come on Casio, wheres the "pro" tools ?
Canon's market (and a small one of its overall business at that) is point and shoot camera's, printers, entry level DSLR's and "pro" DSLR's that appeal to the sports, wildflie and wedding markets. Thats a plenty big slice of the photo pie for any company to bite off.
As I said before, You can fault Lecia just as easily for not having anything for the Sports Shooter as you can for Canon not having anything for a few elite pro's who need the very best of the best.
For most of us "pro's" who do lowely magazine work, even the 16-35 zoom is just fine image quality wise. ...Show more →
Exactly!
Canon will have quality wide angle lenses long before Leica or anyone else has a good sports/wildlife system. Look at the ENTIRE Canon system... autofocus, FF sensors, telephoto primes, IS, ETTL, zooms, TS lenses, macro. It is very strong... except for wides. Who else is this strong? Not Leica, Nikon, etc..
To say we're getting screwed because there are no new wide angle primes announced at this PMA is ridiculous. What did Leica announce at PMA?
Brutus_B wrote:
How come if Canon is supposed to be the "be all to everyone single photographer" or risk the scorn of the world company, we arent holding any other firms to such standards ?
I think the point is that they ARE so good at doing most things that just addressing one or two areas would mean canon could have all my money, as it is I have to use the 'non-canon non-nikon forum' to try to work out how to get good digital landscapes without getting a phase one back.
It's just sooo annoying that it's easily within their reach to do this and yet they don't. The only way they ever will is if people moan about it. Hence moan, moan, moan. Just think if we had a decent wide angle you'd have a stock answer to all those 'my corners look soft' posts. Just buy the Canon 21L f2 .. maybe one day.
Canon will have quality wide angle lenses long before Leica or anyone else has a good sports/wildlife system. Look at the ENTIRE Canon system... autofocus, FF sensors, telephoto primes, IS, ETTL, zooms, TS lenses, macro. It is very strong... except for wides. Who else is this strong? Not Leica, Nikon, etc..
To say we're getting screwed because there are no new wide angle primes announced at this PMA is ridiculous. What did Leica announce at PMA?
But Leica should have the digital M body at Photokina so they didn't need to have anything at PMA but Canon should have something better at Photokina than another EF-S and reworked L.
I think Canon has done extremely well with the AF system. I mean the speed of their AF on their series 1 cameras (of course dependent on the lens too) is just incredible. I also think there tele lens are the best in the world if you take into consideration AF, IS and optics. If you look at optics alone their lenses are not bad. However, i do agree that the wide angle has been the weakest group of lenses in their arsenal. I think what Guy was trying to point out is that they should focus (and i mean focus) some of their efforts on the wide angle market. Mark
Guy, in the long run, if Canon is so bad for Pro's then they will migrate to ... Leica?? or Nikon and Canon will lose market share and the problem will correct itself.
Your wishlist and what is going to sell a lot of product are two different lists. Canon will produce what makes them more money. In the long run will they lose pro photographers? Maybe, but how many non-pros need to buy 30Ds, 75-300 lenses, etc. to make up for the loss of a Pro who switched over? I bet not too many. Also, I have seen a lot of pro photographers using 20D bodies. Where do they fit in?
To put it in similar terms, I think the non-pro's got screwed more than the pros did. A 20D depreciated a lot very qickly with this announcement. My 1D2 didn't!....and thank God I am not a pro. Yippeee.
Paul
Paul
Guy Mancuso wrote:
You know Canon just screwed the pro’s again , no wide angle , no pro body but another version of a 1.6. The only thing that may and I mean may be good is the 85 1.2 but how much better optically is it from the old one. I am betting not much and the price is out there on a limb for no one to buy it at 2100.00 that is leica prices , what are they nuts. But the bottom line at the end of the day they did not even come close to solving the wide angle issue except throw another zoom at people . All the complaints and all the talk of wide angle issues and still we are left holding the bag. Frankly I am glad I switched , they really don’t deserve a dime from pro photographers and they sit there and scratch there head wondering why pro’s or advanced hobbyist are buying Zeiss and leica lenses.
Just my take on the whole PMA announcement from Canon
I honestly feel bad for you guy's , they solved none of there issues.
Okay i am sure i will get flamed but before you do , look at the big picture not just your needs. Also i like Canon a lot this is just sad to see what market they want to make money off of. That 85 1.2 should be 1500 and not a nickel more...Show more →
I'm very glad that Canon did not introduce a 50/1.2L, because that's what I really want, and I can't afford to invest in another L this spring!
The new 85L sounds great, but my 85/1.8 pays for its keep, and I'm afraid that my clients wouldn't pay enough more for shots done with the 1.2 to cover the price of the lens in any reasonable time. More power to those shooters who command the sales to justify the 1.2 - I hope to get there in time.
As for the dearth of great WA primes, I'm happy with the 24L and 35L on the 1Ds, and just don't do enough in the 15-20mm range to need better than the stuff I have. Looking around at my fellow pros in this area, I'd say there are far more who mainly shoot portraits than those who do high-end architecture and landscape work. Maybe that's another reason that the needs of (some) pros are given short shrift by Canon?
mark1958 wrote:
I think Canon has done extremely well with the AF system. I mean the speed of their AF on their series 1 cameras (of course dependent on the lens too) is just incredible. I also think there tele lens are the best in the world if you take into consideration AF, IS and optics. If you look at optics alone their lenses are not bad. However, i do agree that the wide angle has been the weakest group of lenses in their arsenal. I think what Guy was trying to point out is that they should focus (and i mean focus) some of their efforts on the wide angle market. Mark ...Show more →
Hmmm,
Just take a look at the Sig line of those who complain about Canon's Wide-angle. They usually have a couple of Canon wides .
Folks, it doesn't work ! Why would Canon invest the money to improve the wides while they can sell ?
The Forum noise won't reach them. Only money can.
Yes, we are getting screwed by Canon from both ends! The wide lenses for FF are lacking and the high-res body for teles is lacking as well. Why is Canon so clueless or just arrogant?
Damn, all my Canon gear is shit. Shit I tell ya. I'm going to throw it all away. I can't sell it because it's shit, and I couldn't live with myself for selling shit to an unsuspecting buyer. Shit!
Now that I got that off my chest...
Guy:
Looking at your lens lineup, it seems as if you have the wide end covered fairly well with your Leica glass. Why do you care what Canon does, or does not do at this point? I have no clue what Nikon, et al, have to offer in their lens lineups. I don't own their products. Why would I waste my time whining about Nikon not having a particular niche item? Aren't you happy with your system? If so, why come to the Canon board to gripe? Not enough posts on your DMR thread yet? Is that what it takes for you to justify your decisions?
.