nads wrote:
Digital photography as a whole is primarily a consumer market. However as with most markets, as price increases consumer research prior to purchase also increases.
When was the last time you saw a professional photographer shooting film?
I guess Australia is very different from the rest of the world....
I haven't seen one for more than 5 years and Israel is not exactly the epicenter of the world....
nads wrote:
Unless buyers are doing their research by reading Pop Photo, odds are they will move to Nikon or Canon.
No. The majority of camera shoppers don't research at all. They're not like us. They're not hanging out on camera forums. They're not even reading reviews.
They go into a camera shop and take what they're sold. Right now, if you walk into a electronics shop and play dumb, you might be surprised to find they'll pushing Sony and Oly at you - and the entry DSLR level.
Sure canon has an advantage in ISO, but if you pit entry level DSLR kit lenses at 200 ISO against price, there's a very good chance you won't walk out with a Canon. Canon's entry level kit lens is famously crap, and the next level up isn't a vast improvement. In fact, for the market leader, Canon's cupboard is surprisingly unsatisfying at the value walkaround all-purpose zoom end.
Bear in mind the Sony Alpha is also available in shops that sell washing machines and TVs. Sony's distribution leaves Canon in the dust.
Whatever you buy starting out in DSLRs invariably invests you into that brand. I'll leave the evolution of the rest to you.
Of course, if Canon suddenly release a killer walkaround IS kit lens, at an exceptional price, or entry level body with IS and a killer kit lens, then all bets change.
Yakim Peled wrote:
I guess Australia is very different from the rest of the world....
I haven't seen one for more than 5 years and Israel is not exactly the epicenter of the world....
Wasn't in Australia. My friend is a successful international photojournalist and travel photographer who shoots primarily film (Nikon), and has only very recently started warming to digital.
She still has a much higher regard for film quality, especially for glossy mags and billboards.
I really don't know to be honest. She's the professional, I'll just have to take her word for it.
That said, she's also one of these Apple Mac people who've been actively making a living via a computer for well over ten years, but still don't understand file sizes, extensions and compression, let alone the filing system.
She was storing her images on Compact Flash cards until I set her straight. No kidding! She really didn't understand file sizes at all.
I don't know what it is about Macs, but they seem to keep you a newbie forever. I've couldn't tell you how many creatives who should've know better, have sent me uncompressed baby photos over the years...
Yakim Peled wrote:
I am a big Apple fan but in Israel Apple is more than twice the price of Windows. Due to budget considerations I have Windows…
Indeed.
Last time I was in Jerusalem I saw several shops in the Arab Quarter selling a wide assortment of Windows software at very reasonable prices. None of it was genuine, of course.
Well Canon might bring out an entry level EOS600D with built in IS (just to please P&S folk) ... one assumes they look at alternate technologies ... especially now Sony are after second place in the DSLR market.
I'm happy with IS in my lens (and my binoculars for that matter).
If you can convince a lot of people to want something and be willing to pay for it and you can profitably make it, then do it.
I personally don't need BIS.
Would it improve my keeper rate where applicable? Maybe, but not nearly as much as improved AF for what I shoot.
Would it improve yours? I don't care. Should I care? Hmm...
Is it a cool idea? Yes, definately.
Should Canon make it now? Probably not. Let's wait 18 more months to see how the technology proves itself. Let the other makers guinea pig it for a while. Give it time to reveal where it is going to fail. After that, work what is learned into an improved design and leap the entry level frog. If it proves itself there, then it can propogate through the product line to models where it makes sense.
Now what if in 18 mos, existing BIS systems prove to be limited in practical effectiveness and prove to be a durability and support liability, should it still be made because a market wants it, or should the LIS alternative be emphasized in conjunction with the realease of cleaner and higher ISO and upgraded AF?
The market wants in-body IS. If you read the user reviews on the Alpha, a majority will mention in-body IS as one of the main reasons they chose the Alpha.
If the market wants it, Canon will make it... even if it's useless. Canon is a company that's after profit.
I think there's another current post in the forum that talks about how the dust-cleaning system on the XTi has been tested and is pretty much useless. I hope not (since I have a XTi), but I wouldn't be surprised if it's true.
Stunnaz wrote:
The market wants in-body IS. If you read the user reviews on the Alpha, a majority will mention in-body IS as one of the main reasons they chose the Alpha.
If the market wants it, Canon will make it... even if it's useless. Canon is a company that's after profit.
I think there's another current post in the forum that talks about how the dust-cleaning system on the XTi has been tested and is pretty much useless. I hope not (since I have a XTi), but I wouldn't be surprised if it's true.
And how much of the market does Canon have vs Sony? A majority of Sony buyers makes up a small minority of Canon buyers. That tells me something right there.
Sony is one of the biggest players in this market right now, perhaps even more significant than Nikon. Yes, Sony doesn't have too big of a market share at this moment... but they started out with 0 a year ago. So far they're right on pace of their projection.
Stunnaz wrote:
The market wants in-body IS.
Not the Canon market. And as the current leader...that's what matters. Newcomers need to have such features and gimmicks to attract the remainder.
Stunnaz wrote:
If you read the user reviews on the Alpha, a majority will mention in-body IS as one of the main reasons they chose the Alpha.
Big deal. So less than 1% of the DSLR shooters cite that they bought an Alpha for body IS. Wow. Amazing. Canon better re-think its strategy before the they leave work today...and too bad that it's Saturday in Japan already.
And that article you posted isn't even worth noticing that they couldn't care enough to format the text properly. And I like Sony...it is a brand that I too have been very loyal to over the years, but I'm not buying one of their cameras...and certainly not because of body IS. Sorry.
Grant808 wrote:
Not the Canon market. And as the current leader...that's what matters. Newcomers need to have such features and gimmicks to attract the remainder
Please speak only for yourself if you don't want BIS and not for all Canon dSLR owners.
I certainly don't consider BIS a gimmick, and ABSOLUTELY want it.
Stunnaz is speaking for many photographers. If lens IS works better than BIS then that's what I want. Do I want a sensor flopping back and forth trying to keep up with the movement of a 400 or 500mm lens on a FF camera? I don't think so.
If some consumers wish to buy Sony's rebranded, pro-look, cameras then let them go ahead and buy them. I, for one, want nothing to do with Sony, KM, Olympus or the like. Did you ever notice how the second tier products, whether cars or cameras, always have to offer more "features" in order to compete with the really good products?
Instead of being armchair wannabe engineers why don't we let Canon decide which implementation of IS is going to actually work the best. Canon products actually perform.
I understand the pride of Canon users. I am also a Canon user and chose my camera based on the same reasonings that you guys did. I don't like Sony and I will never use their system.
However, here are 3 good reasons why Canon will add in-body-IS just because "Sony's doing it":
1. Sony started with 0 market share a year ago and within months grabbed 6% of the market share at the cost of Canon and Nikon to take 3rd place in the SLR market. Their goal is to reach 10% market share this year and they're on track.
2. Over 80% of SLR sales are cameras under $1,000.
3. One of the main differences between the Rebel XTi and Sony Alpha is in-body-IS.
It doesn't really matter if Peter, Jason and Patty don't like in-body-IS. We're looking at the grand scheme of things, not the opinions of a few individuals. If Sony is gaining market share, Canon will adjust to stop that. As a proud Canon owner, this is what you should expect and want your company to do.
I've said it before and I've said it again, Canon will not be putting a body based stabilizer in their SLRs. The 18-55 IS is in production and will be released with a new body at the end of the summer. I don't have any details about the body but the 18-55 IS and the 55-250 IS are confirmed.
... especially now Sony are after second place in the DSLR market.