Really impressed with Canon these days.

[Phil Young]

Have to say, I think they have taken the right path with the business strategy. Their DSLR lineup is very impressive and each one very different from the lower/higher tier but what really impresses me is their cmpacts...

They now have 4 advanced compacts that are all different and cater to different needs.

What do you canon folk think?? Is the general vibe a positive one?

 

[woof woof]

Nupe. I only have one Canon compact and it's behind the times these days but generally I think that from reading the reviews and specs etc Canon seem to be a bit conservative these days with small incremental or to me irrelevant updates and changes and generally they don't seem to sexy and pushing things forward in any way that interests me. These days if we're talking cameras rather than lenses and other stuff I think that the sexiness comes from Sony, Olympus, Panasonic and... Fuji. If talking lenses I think that Sigma do seem to be pushing things a bit and others are bringing out interesting and some very high quality manual lenses, but Canon? I think they're resting on the laurels a bit. Maybe. Arguably. But certainly not exciting me and having me reaching for my credit card and if I was looking for a new bit of kit I can't think of anything that I'd want that has Canon written on it.

Edit... Actually I did spend on some Canon gear recently. I bought three FD lenses 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.8. They're ok but not as good as my Rokkors

 

[pingu666]

meh for me at the moment, but it does amuse me that I got 3 cameras which can out resolve anything canon produce

 

[architectfadi]

Nupe. I only have one Canon compact and it's behind the times these days but generally I think that from reading the reviews and specs etc Canon seem to be a bit conservative these days with small incremental or to me irrelevant updates and changes and generally they don't seem to sexy and pushing things forward in any way that interests me. These days if we're talking cameras rather than lenses and other stuff I think that the sexiness comes from Sony, Olympus, Panasonic and... Fuji. If talking lenses I think that Sigma do seem to be pushing things a bit and others are bringing out interesting and some very high quality manual lenses, but Canon? I think they're resting on the laurels a bit. Maybe. Arguably. But certainly not exciting me and having me reaching for my credit card and if I was looking for a new bit of kit I can't think of anything that I'd want that has Canon written on it.

Edit... Actually I did spend on some Canon gear recently. I bought three FD lenses 28mm f2.8, 50mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.8. They're ok but not as good as my Rokkors

I have to agree with this.

 

[Phil V]

Nupe. I only have one Canon compact and it's behind the times these days but generally I think that from reading the reviews and specs etc Canon seem to be a bit conservative these days with small incremental or to me irrelevant updates and changes and generally they don't seem to sexy and pushing things forward in any way that interests me. These days if we're talking cameras rather than lenses and other stuff I think that the sexiness comes from Sony, Olympus, Panasonic and... Fuji. If talking lenses I think that Sigma do seem to be pushing things a bit and others are bringing out interesting and some very high quality manual lenses, but Canon? I think they're resting on the laurels a bit. Maybe. Arguably. But certainly not exciting me and having me reaching for my credit card and if I was looking for a new bit of kit I can't think of anything that I'd want that has Canon written on it...

It's a rarity, but I completely agree with Alan here.

If I were to have a pile of cash to buy whatever I wanted, I'd probably dismiss Canon completely, I'd go Nikon Df as a DSLR, Fuji x100t as a chuck about compact, and if I felt a mirror less system necessary, probably Olympus (though I don't keep up with what's going on, because the concept doesn't appeal too much)

 

[rjbell]

To be honest both Canon and Nikon are boring me a little. I don't even bother reading the spec of new releases nowadays.

 

[petersmart]

B

meh for me at the moment, but it does amuse me that I got 3 cameras which can out resolve anything canon produce

But can YOU produce better pictures with them? - Emphasis on the YOU.
.

 

[petersmart]

Have to say, I think they have taken the right path with the business strategy. Their DSLR lineup is very impressive and each one very different from the lower/higher tier but what really impresses me is their cmpacts...

They now have 4 advanced compacts that are all different and cater to different needs.

What do you canon folk think?? Is the general vibe a positive one?

Frankly I don't care who produces what camera as long as the camera I own can do what I need - for me that is the important thing.
.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

To be honest both Canon and Nikon are boring me a little. I don't even bother reading the spec of new releases nowadays.

I would agree with that. Their high end cameras are certainly as good as any one could actually need, but they have no other appeal. People no longer measure quality and effectiveness by the pound or volume.

Both Canon and Nikon seem to believe that the recent changes are just about style and fashion, and that things will soon return to what they were before.
But the innovation has been more than skin deep and has necessarily involved every aspect of design and scientific advancement.
Sony have used the more scatter gun approach with a less single minded or surefooted range of products. While Fuji have concentrated their efforts in to the various "x" approaches.

Sony and Fuji seen to be two sides of the same coin and both are using innovation to build a solid base both in terms of equipment lines and of customers who do not separate style and function but see them both as part of the same innovation process.

Nor should one forget the Leica Panasonic axis which has its own philosophy of quality and style coupled with exceptions qualities. that appeal to both specialist and and a select market place.

Of course canon and Nikon are still the major players in the field, but certainly less so than they were and their offerings, of more of the same, will not be attractive or strong enough to hold that place in what is the new technically aware, demanding and style concious world.

Both Nikon and canon have the style conciousness that could be attributed to the Dump of an elephant.

 

[rjbell]

I think the camera business is now a very different beast. It's now become very techie business's, and the big tech companies will push them both out of the market eventually.

 

[LCPete]

I don't look at other manufacturers as all my lenses are Canon and i only use a DSLR but I think that the new 7D is a great camera by the looks of the specs
It's the lenses that matter tho and Canon hasn't that long updated their super tele lenses all lighter sharper with 4 stop is
also the STM 55 - 250 is new and an excellent lens apparently
maybe its just me but for what I do, wildlife macro and zoo stuff Canon makes the right tools for the job I don't want sexy just reliable kit that does what I need
but I guess that I depends on what you photograph and I probably have a narrow viewpoint compared to most people

 

[woof woof]

No one needs a Lotus, a Ford Fiesta will do the job but is that all there is to it? No one needs sexy but we want it

 

[pingu666]

B


But can YOU produce better pictures with them? - Emphasis on the YOU.
.

if i can hold the camera stable then sure, and in the right setting for the sigma dp's to shine, they are lighter, smaller, cheaper and sharper, quiet shutter too. and i prefer how they render too.

sure for telephoto stuff canokia are still the best, but for say sub 200mm theres really strong compertion. and sigma lenses have been better anyways, so its really the supertelephoto and ultrawide area (14-24 from nikon is really good i think?) that they remain the best.

sensor wise sony just walked in and took over medium format (alot of people after that 645z), have the best aps-c and ff and 1" sensors, and best video sensor with a7s.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

No one needs a Lotus, a Ford Fiesta will do the job but is that all there is to it? No one needs sexy but we want it

At tht rate canon and nikons are dump trucks.

 

[woof woof]

At tht rate canon and nikons are dump trucks.

I can understand how Canon can be viewed as a mature system and a safe choice and I've no doubt they'll get a pro the shot but I'm an amateur and fun and enjoyment and the sheer joy of it matter as much and maybe more to me than just getting the shot and of course I wont get the sack if it all goes wrong.

I see Canon DSLR kit as workhorse kit but I don't see any passion in it.

 

[Phil V]

if i can hold the camera stable then sure, and in the right setting for the sigma dp's to shine, they are lighter, smaller, cheaper and sharper, quiet shutter too. and i prefer how they render too.

sure for telephoto stuff canokia are still the best, but for say sub 200mm theres really strong compertion. and sigma lenses have been better anyways, so its really the supertelephoto and ultrawide area (14-24 from nikon is really good i think?) that they remain the best.

sensor wise sony just walked in and took over medium format (alot of people after that 645z), have the best aps-c and ff and 1" sensors, and best video sensor with a7s.

I'm sorry
The Sigma DP's are a joke, they're a camera built for a niche that doesn't exist.
It makes them great for headline grabbing resolution, but useless for what I'd call 'general photography'.

 

[LCPete]

I can understand how Canon can be viewed as a mature system and a safe choice and I've no doubt they'll get a pro the shot but I'm an amateur and fun and enjoyment and the sheer joy of it matter as much and maybe more to me than just getting the shot and of course I wont get the sack if it all goes wrong.

I see Canon DSLR kit as workhorse kit but I don't see any passion in it.

Yes I see what you mean using the gear is part of the fun
I'm the other way round the passion for me tho is the subject I'm really into big cats especially and the gear helps me get the shots

 

[pingu666]

nah i get on fine with my sigma's
similer niche to leica's i think, actually the leica rep i met uses them
there not for everyone its true, but ive seen 5-6 posts of "i feel sad taking my 5d3out because its not as good"

you would arguably need sigma or zeiss glass to get close to dp quality anyways..

 

[rjbell]

sensor wise sony just walked in and took over medium format (alot of people after that 645z), have the best aps-c and ff and 1" sensors, and best video sensor with a7s.

Its a new kid in town. Samsung's new bsi aps-c is about to be the best on the market. Techradar also put the 1" sensors neck n neck

 

[woof woof]

I'm sorry
The Sigma DP's are a joke, they're a camera built for a niche that doesn't exist.
It makes them great for headline grabbing resolution, but useless for what I'd call 'general photography'.

Oooh what an arrogant statement that could be... especially when considering the image quality that these cameras are capable of producing but the important bit is that you wrote "I'd call" and that's the key in that it's a personal choice and even an artistic choice. You obviously don't see the point of the DP's but some do and they do seem to have a following and even with passion, a passion that the DP fans probably don't feel for Canon DSLR's.

Re a niche that doesn't exist. There's no denying that DP's sell but in what numbers I can't say, they do have their fans and Sigma still make them so I assume that they're not a complete and unmitigated financial disaster otherwise I assume that Sigma wouldn't bother and would just either charge a lot more for them (if they still wanted the technology under their banner) or just sell the technology on.

 

[twist]

Oooh what an arrogant statement that could be... especially when considering the image quality that these cameras are capable of producing but the important bit is that you wrote "I'd call" and that's the key in that it's a personal choice and even an artistic choice. You obviously don't see the point of the DP's but some do and they do seem to have a following and even with passion, a passion that the DP fans probably don't feel for Canon DSLR's.

Re a niche that doesn't exist. There's no denying that DP's sell but in what numbers I can't say, they do have their fans and Sigma still make them so I assume that they're not a complete and unmitigated financial disaster otherwise I assume that Sigma wouldn't bother and would just either charge a lot more for them (if they still wanted the technology under their banner) or just sell the technology on.

From what Ive seen the IQ is staggering for such a little camera, however, its everything else that makes me/others avoid it...... AF, ISO, Battery life, Buffer, File type, the list goes on. Perhaps thats why he said its not a general photography camera.

 

[Phil V]

Oooh what an arrogant statement that could be... especially when considering the image quality that these cameras are capable of producing but the important bit is that you wrote "I'd call" and that's the key in that it's a personal choice and even an artistic choice. You obviously don't see the point of the DP's but some do and they do seem to have a following and even with passion, a passion that the DP fans probably don't feel for Canon DSLR's.

Re a niche that doesn't exist. There's no denying that DP's sell but in what numbers I can't say, they do have their fans and Sigma still make them so I assume that they're not a complete and unmitigated financial disaster otherwise I assume that Sigma wouldn't bother and would just either charge a lot more for them (if they still wanted the technology under their banner) or just sell the technology on.

You've stretched a lot out of that?

If I'd said 'what's considered' would you have accepted it as a straight sentence?

The point is they're only any good for photographing still things in good light. Which is about 5% of all my photos. I'm guessing there's nothing special about me, so it makes them useless to most people.

 

[odd jim]

No one needs a Lotus, a Ford Fiesta will do the job but is that all there is to it? No one needs sexy but we want it

Well, it depends what job you want it to do? A Lotus (of any model) is far more capable in every way than a Ford Fiesta.

 

[odd jim]

if i can hold the camera stable then sure, and in the right setting for the sigma dp's to shine, they are lighter, smaller, cheaper and sharper, quiet shutter too. and i prefer how they render too.

sure for telephoto stuff canokia are still the best, but for say sub 200mm theres really strong compertion. and sigma lenses have been better anyways, so its really the supertelephoto and ultrawide area (14-24 from nikon is really good i think?) that they remain the best.

sensor wise sony just walked in and took over medium format (alot of people after that 645z), have the best aps-c and ff and 1" sensors, and best video sensor with a7s.

Sigma DPs are only good for a static subject at base ISOs. Otherwise they're utterly useless. Its like having a beautiful car you cant take out of 1st gear.

 

[pingu666]

naw you can raise the iso abit, can do 3200-6400 in black and white, that looks really good, and you can manualy prefocus, and its fine for small focus movements in af modes

sure its not the camera for tracking a redbulled toddler at 10pm , but its fine for alot of stuff... and there so small and light and easy to use one handed, so tend to have one round my neck, then a77 with a ultrawide or telephoto lens on a sling.

and the picture quality is amazing. you need a a7r or d800/d810 to beat it, plus great lens... none of those are cheap...

 

[buckas]

Reading through this thread

As long as the camera in my hand can do everything I want it to when I want it to in any conditions and produce the results I need to do my job then I couldn't care what make it is or whether it's ahead of the times or behind - it is so unrelevent!

 

[Canon Bob]

Reading through this thread

As long as the camera in my hand can do everything I want it to when I want it to in any conditions and produce the results I need to do my job then I couldn't care what make it is or whether it's ahead of the times or behind - it is so unrelevent!

Your common sense approach has become a little bit 'old hat' Drew. The kit should also be capable of doing things that you don't want to do....read a few more threads and get back into 21st century.

Bob

 

[Cagey75]

I must have missed something? The new Canon dslrs I know of seem to be just upgrades of what they had already, much like Nikon's ... :/

 

[Phil Young]

I must have missed something? The new Canon dslrs I know of seem to be just upgrades of what they had already, much like Nikon's ... :/

It's not so much the upgrades as such, but the fact that they have something for everyone, including their premium compact range.

 

[Cagey75]

I'm out of the loop on the compact front, but getting that itch for one again, with Christmas incoming Not had one since the x100s last year. Had the X10 and the Rx100 before that. Just never made good use of them so sold all on. Will check out the new line ups

 

[woof woof]

You've stretched a lot out of that?

If I'd said 'what's considered' would you have accepted it as a straight sentence?

The point is they're only any good for photographing still things in good light. Which is about 5% of all my photos. I'm guessing there's nothing special about me, so it makes them useless to most people.

It's your certainty and dismissiveness that I find so staggering.

As for stretching a lot of your statement, I think I was very brief. There's the basis of a book there and if not a book then certainly a case study in a professional journal.

 

[woof woof]

Well, it depends what job you want it to do? A Lotus (of any model) is far more capable in every way than a Ford Fiesta.

Eh? Er... No. I ran an Elan SE for over 100K miles and then an Elise and they're wonderful cars but if you want to carry more than two people a Fiesta wins every single time and the same is doubtless true of cameras. If you want the abilities a Canon DSLR offers then they're tickerty boo but they lost my interest years ago and like looking back at a failed relationship... I just don't know what I saw in them now well I do, but I'm not going there again

 

[Jayst84]

It's not so much the upgrades as such, but the fact that they have something for everyone, including their premium compact range.

Couldn't care less if they make something for everyone, or only make one camera. They made a camera, and a couple of lenses and flashes which I find easy to use, that produce decent enough results for me to get paid for the next few years - that's all I'm bothered about. It would be handy if they didn't go bust in the near future as well, just so I don't have to get used to a different system when the time comes to replace gear. Other than that, I don't care how rich their CEO becomes, or how many other people buy compact cameras made by them.

Some updated and reasonably priced primes wouldn't have gone amiss, but it doesn't matter to me that I buy a Sigma lens instead of a Canon one.

 

[AndyHayball]

As a Canon guy I'm pretty jealous of all the improvements that Nikon are releasing each year. You could argue they are minor but at least they are pushing forward. Canon are pretty stuck.

Why can't they use the same Sony sensors that Nikon use, giving us the same DR. That is one thing I don't get. Canon DSLR's are far behind Nikon in that respect. I'd rather sacrifice FPS and features for a better image.

I'm confident it will happen, maybe the 5D Mark 4 will improve the DR, we will see.

 

[AchimT]

Unfortunately such topics often lead to some less desirable niggling and arguing. So I apologize for this posting, and precede it with the note that it is meant as purely factual, not in any way brand-related, although of course it is about brands. But I'll leave the brands out of the posting, to avoid arguments about brands. With this posting I want to say that getting the right gear can be important, even for hobby photographers.

I had a DSLR, a simple model, but still a step forward from Compacts. But I was disappointed by the image quality. Sometimes the colors were not realistic, sometimes details disappeared, the metering seemed to always favour the wrong portions of the image, dark spots were too dark, bright spots lacked detail and had the wrong color, once a friend explained to me that the metering was off because there was a sand road in the picture which reflected the sun and threw the metering off - I had not even seen that in the seeker, because the viewfinder didn't display 100% of the image.

Then I started researching and learnt - also with the help of a friend - a lot about digital photography, and also a few things I had forgotten since my analog SLR days. And then I went out and researched for cameras offering more dynamics, offering greater bit depth, offering the technical aspects which would allow me to recover detail from blown highlights and darker spots, whose viewfinder would show me 100% of the image, and so on.

In the end I found that camera, and bought it, and I am very happy I bought that camera and not another one (ok, I bought another one, but the same family, that's another story) because it has the ability to give me good pictures to work with, good pictures taken under the light conditions I like to take pictures in. With a camera which does not have these abilities, those images might still look nice, but colors might not be all there, details might be lost, and the colors might long wrong here and there. But with the camera I have now, all this is not the case.

So, while I don't want to talk about a brand, I would like to say that even for hobbyists like myself, it can be an important decision which camera to buy. And of course, which lens. It is true, usually it is the photographer who causes the problems, but then again, sometimes it's the camera, and getting the right camera for the purpose can make a difference. For a hobbyist, it's only for the fun, and hence maybe not that crucial. But it's still nice if the camera gives you the best possible result.

 

[AchimT]

Andy, I have been told that Canon make their own sensors. So buying Sony sensors would leave their own sensor plants unused - which is probably economically difficult.

 

[Byker28i]

B


But can YOU produce better pictures with them? - Emphasis on the YOU.
.

No you've got this wrong - it's all about the megapixels...

 

[rjbell]

Why can't they use the same Sony sensors that Nikon use, giving us the same DR. That is one thing I don't get. Canon DSLR's are far behind Nikon in that respect. I'd rather sacrifice FPS and features for a better image.

I don't know this could be dangerous for Nikon in the future. I don't think they would ever use the same sensor as Nikon. In light of samsungs new BSI APS-C sensor maybe they will look to them. I doubt it though, much better making your own.

 

[odd jim]

Eh? Er... No. I ran an Elan SE for over 100K miles and then an Elise and they're wonderful cars but if you want to carry more than two people a Fiesta wins every single time and the same is doubtless true of cameras. If you want the abilities a Canon DSLR offers then they're tickerty boo but they lost my interest years ago and like looking back at a failed relationship... I just don't know what I saw in them now well I do, but I'm not going there again

Er, yes! (Forgot about the insignificant Elan they were turd, more of an Isuzu than a Lotus. I don't include that in my comment.)

But anyway, if I wanted to do a track day, I'd use a Lotus. If I wanted to get from London to Glasgow in 4 hours, I'd use the Lotus. If I wanted to do donuts, I'd use the Lotus. If I wanted to go to the Nurbergring for a weekend, I'd use the Lotus. If I wanted a car to enjoy looking at, I'd use the Lotus. If I wanted to go out for a fun, spirited drive, I'd use the Lotus.

I could go on.

 

[odd jim]

Unfortunately such topics often lead to some less desirable niggling and arguing. So I apologize for this posting, and precede it with the note that it is meant as purely factual, not in any way brand-related, although of course it is about brands. But I'll leave the brands out of the posting, to avoid arguments about brands. With this posting I want to say that getting the right gear can be important, even for hobby photographers.

I had a DSLR, a simple model, but still a step forward from Compacts. But I was disappointed by the image quality. Sometimes the colors were not realistic, sometimes details disappeared, the metering seemed to always favour the wrong portions of the image, dark spots were too dark, bright spots lacked detail and had the wrong color, once a friend explained to me that the metering was off because there was a sand road in the picture which reflected the sun and threw the metering off - I had not even seen that in the seeker, because the viewfinder didn't display 100% of the image.

Then I started researching and learnt - also with the help of a friend - a lot about digital photography, and also a few things I had forgotten since my analog SLR days. And then I went out and researched for cameras offering more dynamics, offering greater bit depth, offering the technical aspects which would allow me to recover detail from blown highlights and darker spots, whose viewfinder would show me 100% of the image, and so on.

In the end I found that camera, and bought it, and I am very happy I bought that camera and not another one (ok, I bought another one, but the same family, that's another story) because it has the ability to give me good pictures to work with, good pictures taken under the light conditions I like to take pictures in. With a camera which does not have these abilities, those images might still look nice, but colors might not be all there, details might be lost, and the colors might long wrong here and there. But with the camera I have now, all this is not the case.

So, while I don't want to talk about a brand, I would like to say that even for hobbyists like myself, it can be an important decision which camera to buy. And of course, which lens. It is true, usually it is the photographer who causes the problems, but then again, sometimes it's the camera, and getting the right camera for the purpose can make a difference. For a hobbyist, it's only for the fun, and hence maybe not that crucial. But it's still nice if the camera gives you the best possible result.

I hate to say it, but it sounds you weren't really using it properly, or to its full potential.

You certainly shouldn't be 'missing detail' shooting in raw, far from it, and the colours can be tweaked of course to how you want it. Metering you can change.

I see it all the time, people suddenly buy a dslr but completely fail to get the best from them as they only scratch the surface with them then give up.