docusync wrote:
All brands offer certain unique features that others do not have. It's also a cat and mouse game. If something is missing from your system today - it may well show up tomorrow, right after you sell your gear for peanuts.
You start out with a point I agree with. In fact I’ve made the same point frequently to argue against overly-exuberant switchers: Just because Brand B just came out with something that is better than your Brand A, don’t switch. The next iteration of your Brand A is almost certain to one-up that latest release from Brand B. It is a game of leap-frog.
But that’s not what is going on here, in my view.
In this case, the issue is precisely that this did NOT happen with the new Canon releases. Typically, in the normal course f things, we expect to see Canon “one-up” the previous versions of similar gear from other manufacturers — as I said in my little paraphrase above.
But this time, in at least some ways that are important to some of us (YMMV), Canon did not one-up anyone with their new releases. In some ways they have have equaled the previous releases by the competitors, but it some other ways they did not even quite meet the same standard.
For the record, I don’t disrespect anyone for deciding that sticking with Canon is their best choice. In earlier posts I even described some scenarios in which that sounds like a great approach. But for some of us in different situations, this moment serves to make it a good time to consider other options.
