gdanmitchell
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: Canon departure thoughts | |
arbitrage wrote:
Why are people so underwhelmed by the R5II? What else did people expect it to have?
It isn’t that I expected that the R5ii would be anything other than what was announced at this point. It was pretty clear what was coming. So this ins’t a sort of immediate disappointment following this week’s announcement. I’ve had these thoughts for some time, and nothing here changed them.
- - -
dorian wrote:
I should also mention that switching is a huge decision for me as I make very little money. Many on this board can buy and switch gear as though money is no object, but I am not in that camp. Or on that planet. Or able to see that universe. I cannot afford to take this decision lightly; hence the discussion and desire for input.
I can afford a complete new system (from Canon or someone else) since I’ve anticipated that I would get one at some point — from Canon if what I like appeared or from one of the competitors producing gear that might now be a bit more in line with my needs and expectations.
But like you I do not take switching lightly. The last thing close to a switch that I did was more than two decades ago when I moved from film to Canon digital. (I did add a Fujifilm -C system to augment that perhaps a dozen or so years ago, but that wasn’t a “switch” per se.)
And it is pretty clear from the responses that you aren’t the only one considering this. (It is equally clear that there are other folks who are quite pleased with Canon’s direction, and they deserve tuo be heard, too.)
BTW, what would I do if I had already bought in to the R5? I’d keep it and my new RF lenses and go on using Canon. What if I was already invested in RF lenses and still had something like the original AR? I’d certainly consider the R5ii. The cameras are still fine tools. But for those of us who haven’t bought into the R system at this point, the decision is a bit bigger than that.
- - -
johnvanr wrote:
dorian wrote:
Because I think other brands will allow me to get more of what I want.
johnvanr wrote:
If you’re confident of getting the images you want with any kit, why do you care so much about what different brands offer? It should all be fine for you.
But good luck to you and thank you for sharing your thoughts. I left Canon for Olympus for my bird photography a few years ago and ‘forgot’ to announce my decision. Smiley face goes here…
You’re contradicting yourself, but I understand where you’re coming from. I want 100mp, but it’s not actually going to improve my photography. I may still get 100mp one day, though.
It isn’t quite that simple. At some point, almost everyone arrives at a point where they would like to or need to replace equipment. At that point, you look at the options and evaluate them against your needs and the costs/benefits. (See my comment above for a bit of explanation.)
Switching brands isn’t likely to make the quality of your photography (e.g. your vision, etc.) change much at all. But when it comes time to purchase new gear — in the normal scheme of things, not because one is pursuing some ephemeral Best Gear dream — it can sometimes make sense to look beyond the brand you use, depending on your specific circumstance.
—-
johnvanr wrote:
I don’t think Canon is leaving anyone out to dry, but rather that they are the Toyota of the camera world. They offer cameras that do the job without many issues. The R1 is for pro sports and journalism shooters who need top speed, reliability and high speed access but no redundant resolution which only slows them down. The R5II is for anybody who wants a top-not h camera that can cover everything from wildlife, to landscape to events, etc., etc. I believe this is why Canon will remain the market leader.
Sure, you don’t get the highest resolution, but if you’re a landscape shooter and you’re not satisfied with 45mp, the Fuji GF line is your solution. If you want to crop your bird images from 60mp instead of 45mp, the A1, at a higher price point is your answer. All three top brands offer stellar lenses, but Nikon offers the more compelling selection. Why do we expect each brand to cover every segment in the same way?
I think your analogy to Toyota is not bad at all. Canon generally produces a pretty wide range of solid stuff that meets a wind range of needs. It is generally well designed and reliable, and they have a fine service networked to back it up.
Of course, a Toyota isn’t always the answer! ;-) (I”ve had a few, and I still have one. But I also have a Tesla…)
To the point about GFX, I’d say you are partially right, but for me that part you didn’t mention still holds me back. I’ve tried GFX cameras and lenses and they do many things very well. Unfortunately, while the Fujifilm lenses for the GFX system are excellent, they don’t (yet?) provide the kinds of coverage that many of us rely on in our landscape work, specifically when it comes to longer focal lengths. (I rely on FLs from 16-400mm for that, and I use longer lenses much more often than wide.) Yes, you can adapt longer lenses to GFX, but it’s not the same. (I’ve considered it, and I still might. The EF 100-400 with the baffle removed is said to do pretty well with a few caveats.)
That’s what inclines me toward Sony. When Sony mirrorless first came out, I wasn’t willing to leave a mature system of lenses and bodies (including that fine 5DsR) for a system that originally relied a lot on adapting (mostly Canon) lenses, and which had some significant issues with things like AF. But in the years since then Sony’s lens line-up has become essentially as mature as Canon’s, and their cameras are arguably at least as good and perhaps more capable.
We’ll see… As I wrote, I’m not in a hurry…
—-
artsupreme wrote:
I don't know if people are getting upset but they are surely getting disappointed, and they are switching brands because they are done waiting on Canon.
I think that’s a reasonable way to describe the reaction some of us have. I was quite encouraged over the past year or two that there would be a R5”sr” with perhaps a 80MP sensor. Canon certainly dropped a lot of hints about such a thing. That’s why put any switch plans on hold, even though I continued to ponder, research, and keep my options open.
But there’s nothing to suggest that anything higher than 45MP is coming now. (There’s a good argument to be made that if you are already invested in RF lenses and you are good with 45MP and you like the other features of the R5 bodies that they are still a fine choice for you. Same applies to the R1.)
- - -
rscheffler wrote:
Have you actually used all three brands on which to base an informed decision, or just basing this all on what others claim (which may or may not be biased)e.
I think it is a misconception that you must use all of the brands before making a decision. You certainly want to know a whole lot about them, but you can’t really “know” the full suitability of any system just by using it for a few days or weeks. (I learned that lesson when i first augmented my Canon system with a smaller Fujifilm system years ago. I struggled with it at first, and I began to wonder if I had made a mistake in acquiring it. But after a few months of heavy use I learned it as well as I knew my Canon system and its use became intuitive.)
In some ways it may be better to take a look at friends and colleagues who use various brands for more intensively than we might during a short test run. While I have briefly used the GFX system, I have good friends and excellent photographers who use it, and we’ve had some serious discussions about what it does well and where it is week and how that may align with my needs I have a bunch of friends/colleagues who use Sony to do work similar to what I do, and the same applies there. I have several who use Nikon.
- - -
to be continued… still editing.
|
