VX4321
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #19 · C50 came in pics and video added a mini review | |
Since my comments were dismissed as a joke, let’s look at the facts and see where the joke really is—and who it’s on.
Below is a short list of major issues with Canon’s latest cameras:
1 Sensor resolution in flagship models
Canon offers 24 MP in its flagship, compared to Sony’s 50 MP. Both cameras are overpriced, but since sensor cost is a major price driver, the R1 should realistically cost about half of the A1 II.
2 Autofocus performance
It took Canon more than a decade to achieve competitive AF performance. This delay was a major factor in the shrinking Canon user base—a trend that continues today.
3 LCD design
Canon still lacks a tilting, non-reflective LCD across its lineup, despite this being a long-standing and widely requested feature—well before the R3 was released.
4 Declining ergonomics and usability
Canon’s once-class-leading ergonomics are deteriorating rapidly. The menu system is impenetrable, confusing, and poorly documented. The manual exceeds 1,200 pages, and even Canon support struggles to explain many functions. This is not a “molehill.” Jarred Polin—who likely uses this equipment as much as I do—addresses similar issues in his recent C50 review.
5 Power management and thermal design
Poor power efficiency and thermal design severely limit video runtime and drain batteries quickly. The LP-E19 in the R1 is no longer impressive, and smaller batteries perform poorly in low temperatures. For example, the R3 records 120 fps video at −7 °C for only about eight minutes before triggering a temperature warning.
6 Video ergonomics
When the R1 is fitted with a top handle, users are forced to operate it with their right hand, as there is no left-side Start/Stop video button.
7 Unnecessary image crop
There is an inexplicable and unnecessary 1.07× crop in 16:9 and FHD modes.
8 Video stabilization
In-camera stabilization is weak, and digital stabilization introduces a large crop and noticeable loss of image quality.
9 Video quality limitations
Video quality in 4K open-gate and APS-C modes is disappointing.
To fully appreciate these issues, one should also remember Canon’s recent history. The release of the R5 C is a prime example: a camera whose battery didn’t support its own features, with hard-to-read video menus, rapid thermal shutdown, and limited usable runtime.
Side notes
• “Fluid Live View” is important for tracking fast subjects, but it is not the most critical issue. If AF performance is poor, no display feature can compensate.
• The current “Fluid Live View” is essentially a smoothly animated slideshow. While it reduced complaints, the core issue—true real-time viewing in mirrorless systems—remains unresolved. This problem is now partially masked by pre-capture features recently adopted by Canon and Sony, despite Olympus having implemented them years ago.
• Dynamic range and lossy RAW have been popular online topics. In practice, modern cameras show no meaningful DR limitations, and lossy vs. lossless RAW is largely a theoretical concern.
• I cannot comment on Sony’s customer support, but based on my long experience with Canon service, support quality often depends on the individual representative.
Regarding claims of “slow response to feedback” and “Canon doing what they can”:
1 The M50 shipped in 2012 with poor AF. Release of the R3 made the AF competitive—roughly a decade later.
2 Lens selection is polarized: either extremely expensive, oversized, and heavy lenses, or slow f/8–f/11 “exotic” options aimed at casual users. Mid-range telephoto zooms are slow, extend while zooming, and are impossible to balance.
3 Not a single high-end Canon lens includes an Arca-Swiss compatible foot—a trivial feature requested for decades. Yet we are told Canon is “listening.”
None of this is meant as bashing—some of these problems are fixable, but I got tired of waiting and hoping.
|
