Canon FF mirrorless...

Messages
9,272
Edit My Images
Yes
Absolutely agreed. But I just feel sometimes that there are so many who are only interested in the headline grabbing novelties. I wish they'd look at how the thing works and hold the manufacturers to task. One fellow I really like is Thom Hogan. Disagree or not but he gets down to the important stuff in a well - reasoned articulate way. If you look at the amount of "comparison sites" ( and even more bafflingly - comparison videos - where you watch text scroll by for 2.5 minutes while crappy music plays in the background :confused: ) just list a bunch of specs as you watch ! and the style of reviewing that flows from that mentality it gets very depressing.
agreed i like Thom Hogan and bought 2 of his camera guides,i like to know the ins and outs of what im using,not saying ive read them all but he is extremely thorough and well researched
 
Messages
6,377
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
...it got boring even discussing this new wave of gear long ago, pity it's 90% of what's discussed on here lately. It'll pass though ;)
....As the title of this thread is "Canon FF Mirrorless" and it is new camera gear, what would you expect or prefer this discussion to be about?

Or are you saying that 90% of ALL discussion threads on TalkPhotography is about "new waves of gear"?
 
Messages
6,377
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
Well, if you don't want to plonk down £2k+, I know where you'll be able to get your hands on one.
....By hiring from LensesForHire by any chance? Although I wrote "I am impatient to get my hands on an EOS R" it would have been more accurate to have written "I am very keen to..." and I am inclined to wait until a higher spec version is released.

Being able to hire a Canon 500mm F/4L II from LensesForHire was extremely valuable before making my buying decision and I love this lens! However, being very familiar with the Canon EOS bodies and controls I bought each of my 7D-2, M5, 5D-4 (no longer owned), and 1DX-2 bodies without any prior handling at all and so I probably am happy to buy an EOS R body without handling it first, especially as I know I can return it within 30 days if I don't like it. I can see from all the videos etc what it's like.

Being both Canon mirrorless bodies, my owning a EOS M5 tells me that the EOS R has quite a few things in common with it and so it wouldn't all be strange or unfamiliar.
 
Messages
13,519
Name
Keith
Edit My Images
No
....As the title of this thread is "Canon FF Mirrorless" and it is new camera gear, what would you expect or prefer this discussion to be about?

Or are you saying that 90% of ALL discussion threads on TalkPhotography is about "new waves of gear"?

I am sick of the s***e talk, you can lap it up all you desire. This thread is one thing, but it's creeping across all threads. You won't have noticed, but I've not been near as bothered on here lately as it is beyond boring. I just happened to pick this thread to say so. So, I'll call it, I'm done with this one, as I don't plan to buy an R. I was semi-interested in them all to start, but c'mon, it's worn well thin.
 
Last edited:
Messages
6,377
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
I am sick of the s***e talk, you can lap it up all you desire. This thread is one thing, but it's creeping across all threads. You won't have noticed, but I've not been near as bothered on here lately as it is beyond boring. I just happened to pick this thread to say so. So, I'll call it, I'm done with this one, as I don't plan to buy an R. I was semi-interested in them all to start, but c'mon, it's worn well thin.
....Fair enough if you are finding that discussions on TP are like that.

I am provisionally planning to buy a Canon EOS R in the future and so I don't feel the same as you, Keith. I get bored if I read the threads 'discussing' politics :D
 
Messages
2,277
Edit My Images
No
If these new cameras from Canon and Nikon add enjoyment and functionality to the basic things cameras do and do them a bit better I will maybe buy one of them. Personally, I don't need any fancy new add-ons or innovation in every new release but would be happy with them doing the basic things a camera should do a bit better every time. I'm pretty baffled by internet "reviewers" slagging off Canon, and on this occasion, Nikon, for lacking in innovation.
I think it's a question of expectations, Nikon teased us then released what appears to be a more expensive mirrorless D850 and Canon released their low/mid camera which was always going to be a disappointment when compared to competitors. I don't think it's unreasonable to have high expectations in the 2-3k bracket.

It seems everyone was having a breakdown over the 5DmIV because it didn't have the headline novelties to appease the iPhone generation. It supposedly wasn't a big enough leap from the III whereas people who actually looked beyond the "wow it's new" stuff saw that the sensor was massively improved ( especially in the latest obsession of being able to pull detail from underexposed shadows), and the AF system which was an quantum leap forward.
So if they improve the sensor that's good and warranted but if other companies do that and add other features that's bad as fancy new add-ons are somehow redundant? Canon gets complaints because the pace of their improvements to product lines is glacial compared to competitors and making a good camera isn't anything special, every manufacturer makes a good camera you can take great photos with if you know what you're doing.

iPhone generation? The iPhone came out about 2 years after the 5D, they're pretty much the same generation...

We're obsessed with new tricks. Currently the best one is underexposing images and then seeing what they look like pushed 5 stops. It then becomes a big deal and an "essential feature". Wow!
True but they need something to show the difference between these cameras, if they just post photos in optimal conditions people aren't going to notice any difference and there's not much mileage in a new product video that says it's not the equipment, it's you. How many stops would matter to you though?

IBIS is a necessity without which we can't take pictures properly. It might be important for some. It doesn't matter to me.
Why would you gloss over a useful feature for a wide range of photography that's present in every competitors products? Let me guess, you avoid all those silly Canon lenses with IS because it doesn't matter too right?

What I want is good ergonomic design, good AF, good lens range, good IQ, ( not necessarily 21 stops of DR ) good customer service and a reliable ( preferably weather - sealed ) product. A manufacturer who does this will win my business over one serving up frothy bells and whistles I will never use or need.
Why does anything outside your requirements get described as frothy bells and whistles?

Folk seem to expect some new bit of glitz every year because their phone, or computer, or TV, or something has to be the latest and comes with some meaningless piece of crap they don't need and doesn't work that well.
No that's a straw man, they saw what competitors were offering and expected Canon to improve on that. As I've said before Canon has a really great business plan but I can't praise them for stalling improvements to products because they're focusing on profits.
 
Messages
875
Edit My Images
Yes
First I need to apologise because I can't do the multi-quote things. Bear with me.

"I think it's a question of expectations, Nikon teased us then released what appears to be a more expensive mirrorless D850 and Canon released their low/mid camera which was always going to be a disappointment when compared to competitors. I don't think it's unreasonable to have high expectations in the 2-3k bracket."

My expectations are those I outlined in my post above. I do not believe competitors fulfil these. You might disagree and that's fine by me.


"So if they improve the sensor that's good and warranted but if other companies do that and add other features that's bad as fancy new add-ons are somehow redundant? Canon gets complaints because the pace of their improvements to product lines is glacial compared to competitors and making a good camera isn't anything special, every manufacturer makes a good camera you can take great photos with if you know what you're doing."

Not what I’m saying.Please re-read and re-consider my post. I am criticising reviews which are ill-informed and can only report or react to new additions and fads dictated by the market and not what are to my mind essential functions of a camera. What would you like the 5dIV to have had that it missed. Maybe IBIS or the ability to push shadows 6 stops a bit better?

"True but they need something to show the difference between these cameras, if they just post photos in optimal conditions people aren't going to notice any difference and there's not much mileage in a new product video that says it's not the equipment, it's you. How many stops would matter to you though?"

Fair enough but there is no practical consequences of these differences. To show something that doesn't matter in an attempt to demonstrate a difference is foolish and pointless.

"Why would you gloss over a useful feature for a wide range of photography that's present in every competitors products? Let me guess, you avoid all those silly Canon lenses with IS because it doesn't matter too right?"

IBIS is as I said maybe important to some, but not to me. I do avoid IS in Canon lenses. I will tell you how I did it. I moved to Fuji which has no IS in most of it’s prime lenses. If IS was crucially important I wouldn’t have done this. Surely you can see that as a reasonable point of view?

"Why does anything outside your requirements get described as frothy bells and whistles?"

It doesn't, but I feel many consumers are involved in chasing some meaningless alleged technological superiority that doesn't make the slightest difference to their photography. It's an exercise in futility.

At the moment the two cameras I feel I might buy next happen to come from Canon and Nikon. I own Fuji and I consider myself to be brand agnostic. I just feel if we're bashing a camera it should bye for the right reasons, and not some unimportant omission.

RE your views on Canon. Of course they're fair enough if that’s your how you see them. I don't have any brand loyalty to one company or another and I'm not even mainly a Canon shooter. I don't know what you shoot but I assume from your unhappiness with their products and your desire to see Canon improve you might be a Canon shooter, otherwise why would you bother?

Maybe you would indicate what Canon has missed that inhibits your actual photography experience and frustrated your creativity. I'd really be interested to know. Also, what brand would meet these and allow you to express yourself photographically in a more satisfying way?
 
Last edited:
Messages
23,467
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
but I can't praise them for stalling improvements to products because they're focusing on profits.
Step back a bit and see how ridiculous this viewpoint is.

To ‘focus on profits’ they need to sell cameras, to sell cameras they have to offer what people* want. If they don’t sell what people want, they’ll go out of business. No one sets out to produce mediocre products.

*people aren’t ‘people who frequent forums’ They’re ‘people who buy cameras’, and what’s important about people who buy cameras? ...

Through this ‘not as good as the Sony’ thread we find; Sony are outselling Canon in North America which proves how great Sony are doing! Shortly followed by the fact that canon are the best selling cameras worldwide being irrelevant, they’re clearly underperforming.

Not picking on you alone Simon; there’s a bunch of people so entrenched in Internet ‘opinion’ that reasoning is left behind.
 
Last edited:
Messages
2,277
Edit My Images
No
Step back a bit and see how ridiculous this viewpoint is.

To ‘focus on profits’ they need to sell cameras, to sell cameras they have to offer what people* want. If they don’t sell what people want, they’ll go out of business. No one sets out to produce mediocre products.
I believe I already addressed this point: "making a good camera isn't anything special, every manufacturer makes a good camera you can take great photos with if you know what you're doing.". Nowhere did I say they're making mediocre products.

Anyway, I'm not asking Canon to follow my whims, I have zero expectation of that but that's where the criticism of Canon stems from, we know they can put out a better product if they want to.

If Canon decided full frame was no longer worthwhile and focused solely on APS-C would you celebrate what a great business decision that is if you're currently using full frame? That's not a realistic example but I'm trying to get a point across here, should I celebrate them working half as hard as the competition if I don't get a better camera out of it? I reason no and I'd rather celebrate companies working harder to make better products even if they're not the market leaders.

This is at the end of the day a discussion about a specific product, it's only logical to compare it to competitors offerings and I think it's a poor argument to ignore obvious omissions just because the business is doing well.
 
Messages
2,277
Edit My Images
No
My expectations are those I outlined in my post above. I do not believe competitors fulfil these. You might disagree and that's fine by me.
Yes but weren't we talking about others expectations?

Not what I’m saying.Please re-read and re-consider my post. I am criticising reviews which are ill-informed and can only report or react to new additions and fads dictated by the market and not what are to my mind essential functions of a camera. What would you like the 5dIV to have had that it missed. Maybe IBIS or the ability to push shadows 6 stops a bit better?
I understood that (fairly confident anyway) but I just thought it odd you say how the IV being slagged off for not offering enough yet it was a good update because they improved the sensor and then to immediately go on to complain about the novelties of other cameras updates.

The last 5D I owned and used was the II so I'm no position to judge what the III or the IV should have had but I thought the criticism was the III wasn't much of an update and the IV corrected this?

Fair enough but there is no practical consequences of these differences. To show something that doesn't matter in an attempt to demonstrate a difference is foolish and pointless.
My question was at what point does it stop mattering?

IBIS is as I said maybe important to some, but not to me. I do avoid IS in Canon lenses. I will tell you how I did it. I moved to Fuji which has no IS in most of it’s prime lenses. If IS was crucially important I wouldn’t have done this. Surely you can see that as a reasonable point of view?
You avoiding IS as you don't need it is completely reasonable and the correct decision for your needs but the point I was making is you're being unreasonable to dismiss it because it's an obviously useful feature for a majority of people.

It doesn't, but I feel many consumers are involved in chasing some meaningless alleged technological superiority that doesn't make the slightest difference to their photography. It's an exercise in futility.

At the moment the two cameras I feel I might buy next happen to come from Canon and Nikon. I own Fuji and I consider myself to be brand agnostic. I just feel if we're bashing a camera it should bye for the right reasons, and not some unimportant omission.
Believe it or not but I agree with your point in general but taking it to an extreme a lot of us could still be happily using cameras from ten years ago but let's not pretend there haven't been useful/helpful improvements made along the way. As I say above, you don't really get bad cameras from the major brands, the Canon R and both Nikon Z's I'm sure will all be great cameras but they will have short comings too and we should be reasonably able to cover that without it devolving into product or brand bashing.

RE your views on Canon. Of course they're fair enough if that’s your how you see them. I don't have any brand loyalty to one company or another and I'm not even mainly a Canon shooter. I don't know what you shoot but I assume from your unhappiness with their products and your desire to see Canon improve you might be a Canon shooter, otherwise why would you bother?
In truth, my desire is for Canon to give me an excuse to hop back on Canon, I started with them and they're still the cameras I feel most comfortable with but they keep slacking off and not giving me an excuse to do so. A little tongue in cheek but seriously I don't care which brand I'm using, they're just tools.

Maybe you would indicate what Canon has missed that inhibits your actual photography experience and frustrated your creativity. I'd really be interested to know. Also, what brand would meet these and allow you to express yourself photographically in a more satisfying way?
IBIS! My hands are shaky. Joking aside, I wasn't saying that they're restricting my creativity, as I keep having to say, they won't be bad cameras.
 
Messages
23,467
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
I have zero expectation of that but that's where the criticism of Canon stems from, we know they can put out a better product if they want to.
We don’t...
Unless you have some inside information, that’s exactly my point. Ridiculous assumptions based on emotion rather than facts.

The rest of your answer, just read it back... jeez, whataboutery!
 
Messages
6,792
Name
Riz
Edit My Images
No
We don’t...
Unless you have some inside information, that’s exactly my point. Ridiculous assumptions based on emotion rather than facts.

The rest of your answer, just read it back... jeez, whataboutery!
Correct, we don’t know if Canon could have put out a better product than what they did, however if this is the case, what have Canon R&D been doing these past 5 years while watching Sony / Fuji etc deliver great well praised bodies / lenses? :D
We can only assume and go on what we have in front of us.
 
Messages
875
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm no fanboy of any brand, and I don't usually read a lot of gear - oriented discussions as they rarely interest me that much. The main reason I am reading this thread is because I'm trying to guess my needs for the future while I can afford to buy a system if I choose. I'm re-evaluating whether Fuji is the right system for me to stick with and keeping my 7DmkII and 400mm f5.6 for wildlife. I might buy into Canon's R or a Nikon Z or I might well stay with Fuji, and buy an XT3 and enhance my wildlife arsenal with a 5DIV. I honestly don't know.

What I do know is that the things most people seem to fall out about are irrelevant other than personal preferences.

I guess my recent search has made me intolerant of 90% of internet reviews which seem to me to focus on unimportant issues, self aggrandisement and ignorance.

Anyway, I will probably end up with one ( or maybe two ) of Nikon, Canon, or Fuji systems and whichever one (or two ) I have, will probably far exceed my needs but will certainly, in some ways, fall short of my desires :)
 
Last edited:
Messages
23,467
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
Correct, we don’t know if Canon could have put out a better product than what they did, however if this is the case, what have Canon R&D been doing these past 5 years while watching Sony / Fuji etc deliver great well praised bodies / lenses? :D
We can only assume and go on what we have in front of us.
:banghead:

Of course... because the biggest camera manufacturer in the world is staffed by idiots who haven’t got your intellect and understanding of the market.
 
Messages
6,792
Name
Riz
Edit My Images
No
:banghead:

Of course... because the biggest camera manufacturer in the world is staffed by idiots who haven’t got your intellect and understanding of the market.
What’s the size of the manufacturer got anything to do with what said?
You seem to think Canon is the worlds best company, is it not and they can make mistakes.
I suggest you take a look at the last 12 months of Canon’s share prices..... lol

Some people base their buying decisions on specifications and features and not always a brand name.

I never stated that I understand Canon’s marketing logic but surely it doesn’t take a genius to work out Canon have handicapped the Canon R to protect sales of their DSLR lines, do you honestly think the Canon R is the best they could come up with?

I stated earlier, we can only go on what is in front of us, which is the Canon R!
 
Last edited:
Messages
22,943
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
Surely the prudent manufacturer, in the interests of long-term business profitability, will put out a product that's just 'good enough' to sell in the required numbers - and no better, even if they could. They'll keep that better performance in hand for the next model, so they can sell us two new cameras over time instead of one. But of course, we can only guess at what the difference between 'good enough' and 'as good as we possibly can' might be.

Canon has played it pretty safe with the R I think. It's unrealistic to expect ultimate performance from a mid-to-high-end camera priced at £2k, but it certainly seems to be good enough for that category (more a mirrorless 6D Mkii than 5D Mkiv). The job it has to do is pick up on the growing trend away from DSLRs to mirrorless and stem the flow to Sony, and I think they've done that with a) a pretty good mirrorless camera for the money, and b) a simple adapter that opens the EOS-R to millions of existing EF lens users, and beckons the entire EF lens range. That's the stake in the heart for Sony.

Sony's mirrorless mission is very different - they need to steal market share from Canikon (and they've had a free ride so far) but that's a lot harder than merely holding on to loyal customers with a big investment in lenses. Hence Sony has had to throw the kitchen sink at it, and they need to keep on pushing on both tech and price.

I think both Canon and Nikon have done enough so far, stuck their finger in the dike and bought some time to find their mirrorless feet, but they'll need to build a wall quickly. I think we'll have to wait for the Mk2 and possibly Mk3 versions before we know for sure how the big three brands actually compare technologically.
 
Last edited:

StewartR

Efrem Zimbalist Jr
Advertiser
Messages
12,076
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
... what have Canon R&D been doing these past 5 years?
Dual pixel autofocus?
http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2017/intro-to-dual-pixel-autofocus.shtml

Blue spectrum refractive optics?
https://petapixel.com/2016/03/10/canons-new-blue-spectrum-refractive-lens-technology-works/

120 megapixels sensor?
https://petapixel.com/2018/03/29/this-is-the-power-of-canons-120mp-camera-sensor/

4,000,000 ISO sensor?
https://petapixel.com/2016/09/13/stargazers-filmed-iso-400000-canon-mh20f-sh/

It appears to me that Canon are investing in some serious R&D. Since they are clearly not putting all of that into every product they make, then we seem to be back to the point where you know better than Canon how to maximise their profits.
 
Messages
22,943
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
No
Dual pixel autofocus?
http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2017/intro-to-dual-pixel-autofocus.shtml

Blue spectrum refractive optics?
https://petapixel.com/2016/03/10/canons-new-blue-spectrum-refractive-lens-technology-works/

120 megapixels sensor?
https://petapixel.com/2018/03/29/this-is-the-power-of-canons-120mp-camera-sensor/

4,000,000 ISO sensor?
https://petapixel.com/2016/09/13/stargazers-filmed-iso-400000-canon-mh20f-sh/

It appears to me that Canon are investing in some serious R&D. Since they are clearly not putting all of that into every product they make, then we seem to be back to the point where you know better than Canon how to maximise their profits.
True (y)

And Canon have also shown that they can produce a global electronic shuttered sensor (no costly mechanical shutter needed, no rolling-shutter issues, no x-sync problems) with several patents and prototypes shown plus an actual global shutter option (expensive) in the C700 professional video camera. It's sensor tech that will rule the mirrorless world and Canon seems to be leading on this aspect from what we've seen, but who knows what the other tech giants have got up their sleeves.

Sony is the obvious threat and generally credited with the best sensors for image quality, but there's a lot more to it than than ISO-invariance and dynamic range - like power consumption, heat and of course cost - plus they have fingers in a lot of distracting pies like smartphone sensors and numerous other applications. Canon is focused on making their own camera sensors, presumably saving on cost and certainly enjoying scale economies by using the same basic sensor designs modified to different formats and needs.
 
Messages
2,277
Edit My Images
No
We don’t...
Unless you have some inside information, that’s exactly my point. Ridiculous assumptions based on emotion rather than facts.
I'd say that's pretty damning of Canon's technical ability if the R is their pinnacle then.

The rest of your answer, just read it back... jeez, whataboutery!
No that's not whataboutery, that was an analogy. You may think Canon's always right because they have the market share but if that's really the case you'd probably be better off buying some of their shares than waiting to pounce when someone questions their decisions.
 
Messages
6,792
Name
Riz
Edit My Images
No
Dual pixel autofocus?
http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2017/intro-to-dual-pixel-autofocus.shtml

Blue spectrum refractive optics?
https://petapixel.com/2016/03/10/canons-new-blue-spectrum-refractive-lens-technology-works/

120 megapixels sensor?
https://petapixel.com/2018/03/29/this-is-the-power-of-canons-120mp-camera-sensor/

4,000,000 ISO sensor?
https://petapixel.com/2016/09/13/stargazers-filmed-iso-400000-canon-mh20f-sh/

It appears to me that Canon are investing in some serious R&D. Since they are clearly not putting all of that into every product they make, then we seem to be back to the point where you know better than Canon how to maximise their profits.
Your the second person to say I know better than Canon, if you honestly think that’s the case then fair enough. :D

It’s a shame that these serious investments you speak of haven’t made much impact on their share price these past few years....
since all we keep hearing is that Canon are targeting certain people with their hardware and it’s all in the quest for profits and that they know what they are doing etc

All I’m saying is Canon isn’t invincible and the negative comments, previews and threads proves that the Canon R has divided opinion... I seriously doubt it’ll win any awards and I’m entitled to comment negatively about Canon if I wish to do so.

Next people will be saying they don’t need awards as Canon is market leader blah blah blah.

Let’s just wait and see how well they do in a years time once the Canon R has settled into the market place.... but up until they release a dual slot body, they will face criticism...... rightly so.
 
Messages
23,467
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
More emotional responses rather than logic...
What’s the size of the manufacturer got anything to do with what said?
Because they're clearly not a bunch of clueless amateurs who you know more than.

You seem to think Canon is the worlds best company, is it not and they can make mistakes.
There's no basis for this assumption, you're funny. Of course they can make mistakes - engineering isn't easy. They should have started developing better IBIS years ago, but they thought they didn't need to

I suggest you take a look at the last 12 months of Canon’s share prices..... lol

Some people base their buying decisions on specifications and features and not always a brand name.
People base their buying decisions on lots of different things. The difference between you and me is that I appreciate that, you seem to think cameras are only worth buying if they appeal to you ;)

I never stated that I understand Canon’s marketing logic but surely it doesn’t take a genius to work out Canon have handicapped the Canon R to protect sales of their DSLR lines, do you honestly think the Canon R is the best they could come up with?

I stated earlier, we can only go on what is in front of us, which is the Canon R!
More emotional illogical nonsense.
There is NO REASON for Canon to want to sell DSLR's rather than Mirrorless cameras - a sale is a sale - and I think it's a safe assumption that their profits are well covered. In fact if we follow a logical path, Mirrorless sales will be more important to them as they're closer to the point they've had to invest to produce them. whereas DSLR's are mature technology.

I appreciate there won't be a logical response - we're going round in circles - the Sony is a better camera, etc etc.
 
Messages
8,022
Edit My Images
No
Dual pixel autofocus?
http://learn.usa.canon.com/resources/articles/2017/intro-to-dual-pixel-autofocus.shtml

Blue spectrum refractive optics?
https://petapixel.com/2016/03/10/canons-new-blue-spectrum-refractive-lens-technology-works/

120 megapixels sensor?
https://petapixel.com/2018/03/29/this-is-the-power-of-canons-120mp-camera-sensor/

4,000,000 ISO sensor?
https://petapixel.com/2016/09/13/stargazers-filmed-iso-400000-canon-mh20f-sh/

It appears to me that Canon are investing in some serious R&D. Since they are clearly not putting all of that into every product they make, then we seem to be back to the point where you know better than Canon how to maximise their profits.
How many are those in the eos R?
 
Messages
23,467
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
Logic goes out of the window again...
I'd say that's pretty damning of Canon's technical ability if the R is their pinnacle then.



No that's not whataboutery, that was an analogy. You may think Canon's always right because they have the market share but if that's really the case you'd probably be better off buying some of their shares than waiting to pounce when someone questions their decisions.
I never said the Canon R was the pinnacle of their technical ability - but they have missed the boat on some technological improvements; however don't ignore they're also leading on others.

Why would you assume I think Canon are 'always right' - sorry Simon that's just stupid. You clearly have a lack of understanding of my posts, again, take away the emotion, kick start the grey matter and use some logic rather than kneejerk reactions.
 
Messages
1,474
Name
Soeren
Edit My Images
Yes
And people complained about Sony having overheating issues tsk tsk....it was just the hand warmer being active :)
 

StewartR

Efrem Zimbalist Jr
Advertiser
Messages
12,076
Name
Stewart
Edit My Images
Yes
Apologies if this has already been posted in this thread: I tried searching for it using a few different search terms but got no hits.

Anyway, it's an article titled "Canon EOS R: A deep-dive Q&A session with the Canon engineers", posted on Imaging Resource last week. There are some very interesting observations regarding why Canon made some of the design choices they did, and how those choices will affect overall system performance.

https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2018/09/15/canon-eos-r-qa-with-the-canon-engineers
 
Messages
23,467
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
He's not the only one it seems..... just relax, its only a camera company, its nothing life and death. :)
Y see; here’s the thing
I’m perfectly relaxed, trying to have a grown up discussion about a camera (it’s not even a camera I have an interest in).

And some hot headed logic free ‘members’ appear to think I care about a company I don’t own any shares in ;)
 
Messages
23,467
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
If you’ve ever seen my responses to a ‘what camera...’ question, you’d know that IMO cameras are about the least important aspect of photography. Photography is about pictures not cameras, and pictures are made from subjects and light, but they’re harder to ‘think’ about - so forums are full of this kind of thread (mostly b****x) from the unthinking.

Not only do I not get excited about cameras, I don’t understand the tribalism, or the obsession with camera bells and whistles that these threads are full of.
 
Messages
6,377
Name
Robin
Edit My Images
Yes
And Canon have also shown that they can produce a global electronic shuttered sensor (no costly mechanical shutter needed, no rolling-shutter issues, no x-sync problems) with several patents and prototypes shown plus an actual global shutter option (expensive) in the C700 professional video camera. It's sensor tech that will rule the mirrorless world and Canon seems to be leading on this aspect from what we've seen, but who knows what the other tech giants have got up their sleeves.

Sony is the obvious threat and generally credited with the best sensors for image quality, but there's a lot more to it than than ISO-invariance and dynamic range - like power consumption, heat and of course cost - plus they have fingers in a lot of distracting pies like smartphone sensors and numerous other applications.

Canon is focused on making their own camera sensors, presumably saving on cost and certainly enjoying scale economies by using the same basic sensor designs modified to different formats and needs.
....And also by making their own camera sensors, Canon can retain control and are not subjected to a third-party's whims about its specification and supply.

For example, in Formula One motorsport Ferrari also supply engines to another team (and rival in the overall championship) which is Sauber. Which of the two teams Ferrari and Sauber do you think gets the latest performance updates first and races with the more competitive version? < It's a no-brainer!

A helpful and interesting post, Richard, to those of us who are genuinely interested in making future Canon EOS system purchases (y)
 
Messages
23,467
Name
Phil
Edit My Images
No
Apologies if this has already been posted in this thread: I tried searching for it using a few different search terms but got no hits.

Anyway, it's an article titled "Canon EOS R: A deep-dive Q&A session with the Canon engineers", posted on Imaging Resource last week. There are some very interesting observations regarding why Canon made some of the design choices they did, and how those choices will affect overall system performance.

https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2018/09/15/canon-eos-r-qa-with-the-canon-engineers
The first ‘useful’ post on the features of this camera. Well done Stewart (y)
 
Messages
8,022
Edit My Images
No
Exactly.id rather have a heated debate about composition then gear
If you’ve ever seen my responses to a ‘what camera...’ question, you’d know that IMO cameras are about the least important aspect of photography. Photography is about pictures not cameras, and pictures are made from subjects and light, but they’re harder to ‘think’ about - so forums are full of this kind of thread (mostly b****x) from the unthinking.

Not only do I not get excited about cameras, I don’t understand the tribalism, or the obsession with camera bells and whistles that these threads are full of.
 
OP
OP
woof woof
Messages
21,717
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
No
If you’ve ever seen my responses to a ‘what camera...’ question, you’d know that IMO cameras are about the least important aspect of photography. Photography is about pictures not cameras, and pictures are made from subjects and light, but they’re harder to ‘think’ about - so forums are full of this kind of thread (mostly b****x) from the unthinking.

Not only do I not get excited about cameras, I don’t understand the tribalism, or the obsession with camera bells and whistles that these threads are full of.
Fair enough Phil but whilst you think it's all b****x others may think it's a bit of fun or even interesting or might just want to discuss how they feel about a feature you couldn't give a flying about.
 
Top