Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.7 #7 · 7d AF vs 1-series AF in a new camera | |
eosfun wrote:
I believe this discussion on AF system in an enthusiast camera being the best or second best type needs some nuancing. Wordings like "crippling" a model "protecting" high end models etc. are not helpful in trying to understand business models and marketing from Canon or their competitors. Marketing and product management are much more complicated than the simplistic portraying of marketeers intentionally trying to frustrate customers by crippling camera models, stripping features. Marketing is not a client rip off system. Marketing is part of the formula to position a company as strong as possible in the market and make a company profitable. Any company, also Canon, does marketing from a point of view of their own assets and strengths, perceived customer demand, a vision on market development over time and, as a part of that vision on market development, anticipation on what the competition is expected to do. Canon has made some marketing mistakes lately that have their origins in a misperception of market development. Their vision on the pace of innovation was too conservative.
Based on the success of the last decade, Canon management thought their own pace of innovation and marketing recipe was good enough to dominate the SLR and compact market. Their success in the compact market was most important unlike a relatively low profit per unit multiplied by a mass volume. The DLSR market, much smaller (less than 5% of the compact volumes!), was important for brand image and relatively high margins per unit.
Now let’s focus on that SLR market, that’s what this forum is for isn’t it? Repeatedly slightly improved models have been good enough to create “upgraditis” among a loyal customer basis. Some new models have been strong enough to create new markets; 300D and successors: the D-SLR for everyone. Others have been strong enough to penetrate in markets that were closed for Canon until then; 1Ds as the Hasselblad killer. The full frame for everyone market was created by the 5D, a model important enough to drag lots of enthusiasts with hesitations to go digital and leave film behind. These models were ahead of the competition, but not because Canon wanted to be ahead of the competition, but because they had a good vision on the market and they did their proposition in the market right.
Today, there is still a deep misunderstanding in Canon product management on the developments in the market. I think it’s not just Canon that does underestimate the power of the revolution that is going on with iPhones, Ipads, Android devices , and dedicated specialist cameras like: action cams, helmet cameras, RC flying video camera etc. etc. People get used to a lower quality image and are “wowed” by the fact of new creative possibilities to overcome that lower quality. Mind that this was also true in the beginning of digital era, when film photographers rejected digital because it’s quality was not good enough, but an important share of early adaptors did accept some limitations of image quality because of other qualities of digital, like workflow speed or quality control over aspects that were not given in the classic film processing workflow (colour management, photoshop controls etc.) As quality conscious creative photographers here on the board, a lot of us seem to think that the most important next step of photographic innovation is to have 1D like AF in a 5D like camera. As you understand now, I think the market demands more dramatic innovations. Canon should have recognized that, but they were still in the drunkenness of their success when the next imaging revolution was born.
A differentiation in AF performance could be perfectly well acceptable if our D-SLR’s keep up with features from smartphones, tablets, specialist cameras etc. If Canon choses to neglect those developments I predict a dramatic loss of marketshare the next few years. And yes, their “classic” photo enthusiast models deserve the best available technology because that will make them stand out of the crowd as quality leader. That would also be important to keep the quality gap between gadget cameras and smartphones ad big as possible. However, unless Canon introduces some revolutionary new models that anticipate on those market developments where Apple, Samsung and others drive innovations today, the “imaging company” of Kyosei  will no longer be the dominating player in the market. That may sound like disappointment to some fanboys, but to me it does not effect my EOSfun at all I still like my 1Ds-es as creative tools. And in the meantime I use my Android Galaxy S2 more often that I would have thought a year ago. My facebook friends appreciate a good photo anyway, wether it’s shot with a DSLR or a phonecam. My business contacts or customers demand sometimes immediate illustrations, or photos with a high scoop factor. Sometimes that is good enough or better than a high res from RAW carefully processed picture from my 1DsmkIII’s. Since Canon has no acceptable solution for that kind of applications I have to deal with my Android phone. In the meantime I do not care about no 1D AF like system on a 5D at all  I just wished Canon brought models with better built in communications even if it was just a wireless connection to my phone. Now that would be EOSfun ...Show more →
I think you are correct, but I also think that a lot of this problem is not yet important to the 5D segment of the market. I'm not saying it doesn't need to evolve, but for now other than maybe GPS I'm not in the least bit interested in seeing the same connectivity options on my 5D III as my smartphone (at this point). I could careless about social networking, flickr or fancy art waco filters in my 5D III. I like playing around with that sort of stuff on the train when I'm bored and being able to shoot off a quick email with an attached image say, but out in the field it's not even on my radar.
I would prefer these things slowly filtered up through the lower ranks of the DSLR and if I ever feel it's important I'll buy a toy camera, but leave my main imaging tool free of frivolous crap. I want a tool with AF I can rely on 100%, speed and responsiveness, above all, just how I like my cars, powerful as hell, amazing brakes, great suspension and excellent seats with a bare minimum of crap other than AC and fast glass.
Now I agree Canon and Nikon probably don't get it and if they fail to evolve at the lower end intially it may have consequences right through the range later, but for now I won't settle for third rate AF when I'm spending $3K
|
And have thus set our sights on a very serviceable upgrade.
But of course. 
). What's the point of a low entry cost when the extras will kill you?