thw2 wrote:
Agreed. From a features point of view, Canon is seriously lagging. They can't even get some of their basics right, e.g. autofocus accuracy. If they do nothing to reverse the situation, many folks will have lost confidence in them. Then again, the same thing happened to Nikon 8 years ago... until the D3/D300/D700 were released.
Exactly. Competition is great, isn't it? Luckily for us all, Nikon finally woke up and is fighting back with a vengeance. And thanks to Nikon for pricing their superb new bodies so competitively, Canon is now forced to follow suit .... and they had better not have another AF issue!
thw2 wrote:
Agreed. From a features point of view, Canon is seriously lagging. They can't even get some of their basics right, e.g. autofocus accuracy. If they do nothing to reverse the situation, many folks will have lost confidence in them. Then again, the same thing happened to Nikon 8 years ago... until the D3/D300/D700 were released.
The autofocus problem is not something you can pick as a consistent problem with Canon.
Most of their cameras are fantastic and it was Autofocus superiority that won them such a huge segment of Nikons market in the first place.
Wouldn't be surpised in the slightest if the release price of the 5D mkII is above the D700, then the apologists will claim that the D700 was more expensive at release without stopping and thinking for a second that the only thing that matters is the price in the shops when I walk in with a charged credit card!
Marcus Watts wrote:
The autofocus problem is not something you can pick as a consistent problem with Canon.
Most of their cameras are fantastic and it was Autofocus superiority that won them such a huge segment of Nikons market in the first place.
I second that- one of the reasons for the AF problem was that the high frame rate was causing the submirror to be in the correct position. If the camera doesn't have a high fps, it wouldn't be a perceivable problem.
orangefirefish wrote:
one of the reasons for the AF problem was that the high frame rate was causing the submirror to be in the correct position. If the camera doesn't have a high fps, it wouldn't be a perceivable problem.
so the High Frame Rate was causing the submirror to be in the CORRECT position?
Marcus Watts wrote:
The autofocus problem is not something you can pick as a consistent problem with Canon.
Most of their cameras are fantastic and it was Autofocus superiority that won them such a huge segment of Nikons market in the first place.
It wasn't the auto focus superiority that won a huge segement of Nikons market, it was the low noise of the Canon sensor versus the Nikon sensor. That's changed since the D3 and the debacle of the iDMKIII.
Canon is probably uncomfortable with these specs considering the 1DsIII. But they are likely more uncomfortable with Sony and Nikon.
Of course, any Canon purchased is better for Canon than a Sony or Nikon purchase.
Depending on how the development of components progresses, we should never be surprised when lesser models temporarily leapfrog a "superior" model in some aspect.
One thing that is a surprise to me is that a consumer camera with DIGIC IV was released so soon after the professional cameras with DIGIC III. It may be that the DIGIC division suffered delays couldn't get version IV out before the 1-Series division had to roll out the Mark III's.
Or it could be that the DIGIC division beat a string of deadlines and had version IV ready earlier than anticipated.
Or it could be that Marketing demanded a jump in capabilities that could not be met by DIGIC III, so the DIGIC division worked overtime as well as the xxD and xD divisions to put out something beyond this point of the original Five Year Plan.
A bit of history: Canon was a year from releasing their intended king, the T-90 (manual focusing FD lens system), when Minolta released their ground-breaking autofocusing Maxxum 7. The Maxxum was a perfect example of a "disruptive technology" that threw everyone else's Five Year Plan into the toilet.
The Maxxum 7 instantly obsoleted the T-90. But there was no way Canon could back-build autofocusing into the T-90, nor was there a way they could start from scratch with an entirely new camera technology and put out a professional camera within a year.
Yet, they'd spent oodles of R&D money on the T-90 and had to recoup at least some of it. So they punted. They released the T-90 on schedule--obsolete though it was--and feverishly worked for the next two years on their first EOS camera.
Many people go on about what the other manufacturers have to offer and most compare this to a three year old camera that most most people agree is excellent and is still the yard stick to be compared against. Canon have not released the specs of the new camera or cameras and some people are complaining or saying that canon have the edge. Canon make excellent cameras and lenses and Nikon make excellent cameras and lenses. Sony are hot on their heels as are many other very established companies. Please do not vent your fury or lust for a certain company until one makes a body or batch or lenses that meets your needs. Canon meets mine. Nikon meets my friends and Olympus meets my Dads. None are better than the other and none will ever be. Choose a system that works for you and dont complain. If you have to switch then go, dont try and make me feel bad for your decision. I cannot wait for the new offerings, the tasters from Canon dont show snippets of the final offerings because if they did it would be no fun for THEM. Patience is a virtue. Learn it, see what is on offer, make a decision on what meets your needs.
And most of all, stop moaning.
There is more to life than gear.
Look around to what is important to you and revel in it. If its camera gear.....then get a life.
thw2 wrote:
Agreed. From a features point of view, Canon is seriously lagging. They can't even get some of their basics right, e.g. autofocus accuracy. If they do nothing to reverse the situation, many folks will have lost confidence in them. Then again, the same thing happened to Nikon 8 years ago... until the D3/D300/D700 were released.
That was 1 year to one month ago.
@ dcmiller:
I do not think so. The 5D successor can not fail against Nikons D700/D3. The new sony will be relaesed under Nikons D700s price and it will have doubble resolution. Nikon uses their sensor. So they will have to offertheir D4 much below their D3 price. I see not how that should work.
Look around to what is important to you and revel in it. If its camera gear.....then get a life.
Ken
Seriously, you have nothing better to do than go on a gear forum and dive into a rumor thread to preach to people about how it's not the gear? Tired much? Pedantic much? If you don't believe in it, don't visit it. Like a church.
thw2 wrote:
Actually, this is NOT unprecedented. Canon did a similar move with the D30. Read what Phil Askey said here:
"Canon really did made life difficult for themselves, they knew full well that they would be judged on success of the D30, they know how important the digital photography market has become and how a camera like the D30 could affect their reputation.
An all Canon body, exposure system, electronics and imaging sensor plus the decision to use CMOS for the first time in a high resolution digital camera was a tough enough task, but to do all that at a price which would undercut the competition?"
I think Canon has reached a similar point in history again with the release of the 5D replacement. Now, whether they'll stand up to the challenge or sink back into the comforts of their past successes (by releasing a 50D body with FF sensor) will surely make or break their reputation forever....Show more →
No. They are not dump. The 50D is just an intro to where it will lead. That cameras IQ overcome all competitors gear. D300 is blown of, D700/D3 is old fashioned again (concerning IQ) 5D2 at that sensor technologie will be NO 1 in IQ compared to all available cameras. And affordable. And 1D will follow.
For those who didn't read into it... Sony have stated effectively they're the only ones who will use the 24mp sensor (exlusively for the Alpha). Add to that, the sensor is a 12bit DAC sensor, and with Sony's comparitively poor ISO performance (relative to the current market) this won't be a the one that all pro's go out and buy... Personally I don't see it as a big threat.
Ken Clacher wrote:
Many people go on about what the other manufacturers have to offer and most compare this to a three year old camera that most most people agree is excellent and is still the yard stick to be compared against. Canon have not released the specs of the new camera or cameras and some people are complaining or saying that canon have the edge. Canon make excellent cameras and lenses and Nikon make excellent cameras and lenses. Sony are hot on their heels as are many other very established companies. Please do not vent your fury or lust for a certain company until one makes a body or batch or lenses that meets your needs. Canon meets mine. Nikon meets my friends and Olympus meets my Dads. None are better than the other and none will ever be. Choose a system that works for you and dont complain. If you have to switch then go, dont try and make me feel bad for your decision. I cannot wait for the new offerings, the tasters from Canon dont show snippets of the final offerings because if they did it would be no fun for THEM. Patience is a virtue. Learn it, see what is on offer, make a decision on what meets your needs.
+10
And most of all, stop moaning.
There is more to life than gear.
Look around to what is important to you and revel in it. If its camera gear.....then get a life.
Kagetsu wrote:
For those who didn't read into it... Sony have stated effectively they're the only ones who will use the 24mp sensor (exlusively for the Alpha). Add to that, the sensor is a 12bit DAC sensor, and with Sony's comparitively poor ISO performance (relative to the current market) this won't be a the one that all pro's go out and buy... Personally I don't see it as a big threat.
Maybe this is the cause why Canon still does not have a 20+ camera?
Kagetsu wrote:
For those who didn't read into it... Sony have stated effectively they're the only ones who will use the 24mp sensor (exlusively for the Alpha). Add to that, the sensor is a 12bit DAC sensor, and with Sony's comparitively poor ISO performance (relative to the current market) this won't be a the one that all pro's go out and buy... Personally I don't see it as a big threat.
It actually baffles me that Sony would release such a camera aimed at the pro market, especially when so few pros shoot Sony, and their lenses aren't exactly the cream of the crop. To me it seems like marketing suicide, unless they are pricing it for the prosumer.
