Canon has done it again!
The 5D Mark II is a triumph.. of marketing over real photographic features.
The FF terrain has recently seen some powerful contenders enter the ring, with Nikon with its second tier (but by no means second rate) camera making its debut with a 12mp sensor and now at Photokina Sony FINALLY announcing its first effort, highly commendable with its in-house 24mp sensor. Each is trying to create a niche for itself, trying to differentiate itself from the competition. So while all three are full-frame, and close in price (all sub $3000), they differ substantially in features. The most complete offering in my mind (though by no means the best – that is reserved for personal choice to determine) is the Nikon; a proven sensor in a largely professional body with many tricks up its sleeve. Mostly photographic controls, so I’d call it a photogs camera. Next in line is the impressive first effort by Sony, who has pulled all the stops in what will probably be their top-tier camera. They are competing in price with the other second-tier cameras, but offering build quality and features found only in the top cameras. A beautifully large viewfinder, strong body and huge sensor mean that this camera will actually compete not only with the 5D2 and D700, but likely the 1Ds3 as well. The D3 is in a different league so I don’t believe that it will attack it very much, as too the 1D3 which are both aimed at photojournalists who require high frame-rates and robust build and on-site backup options.
Finally we have the Canon 5D2, which took 3 years to perfect. Considering the timeframe of this upgrade, all I can really see that is impressive for this camera is the large-ish sensor sourced from the 1Ds3 (no mean feat.. same or better IQ as the flagship.. is Canon competing with Sony/Nikon or itself!?). Also making a differentiation appearance is a rather impressive first effort at video capability. This will interest a certain subset of pro photographers and some videographers who require FF quality and DOF effects in their videos. Really though it is a feature for advanced video people, due to the raw nature of the output, the high-level tools required to turn the captured video into a viewable move, and the astronomical data volumes that this video feature will produce. Not for your everyday shooter, landscape photographer or wedding shooter.. Still, two very good features.. But beyond that Canon marketing has stuck to its marketing guns of the past and left the rest mostly improved as per current trends, and nothing much else. A faint claim of weather resistance is made, but doesn’t compare with the competition at all, with most second tier products (including small frame K20D Pentax and Olympus E3) rather more weather sealed than the Canon. The most important button, the power on lever is totally unsealed for example!
The reality of digital is that people will experiment even further in photography, and that means photographing in different places, more often and in more inclement weather. Canon is not rising to the challenge. A nice large LCD is there, but we’d expect nothing less considering that it’s now the de-facto standard. In a while we’ll wonder how did we ever survive with those cruddy screens of yesteryear (yesterday?!)? A few other very MINOR tweaks (barely an extra frame per second being the most notable, and a whopping 2% extra viewfinder space..). Magnification stayed the same, shutter lag as well, no function button like on the 50D (which could be quite useful, i.e. a personalized MLU button!). The styling is more in tune with reality, elegant but not earth shattering. Then again it was easy to improve here as the previous 5D was truly an ugly chunk of metal taking EOS design back 20 years. No voice annotation feature, even though the camera has a microphone on-board! The key points are the price differentiator, the 1Ds3 sensor and video capability. The rest is a warmed over upgrade. To paraphrase Michael Reichmann in his D700 Nikon review.. Canon has fallen into Nikon’s trap.
What will save Canon?
The price differentiator, the resistance to change (i.e. unwillingness to ditch a lens investment for another brand) and the fact that all things considered the 5D of yore had EXCELLENT image quality. If photographers can live without real photographic features (present on the D700), build quality and weather resistance (á-la Sony and Nikon) and just want a small form factor FF camera to make beautiful pictures, then the 5D is your ticket. If you want more, more control, more professional features and couldn’t give a stuff about video (we’re photographers, right, not videographers!) then you’ll have to look elsewhere. Convergance may be coming.. but that doesn't instantly make us videographers.. nor does it follow that just because it's there, we'll wantto experiment with it..
In all this the real disappointment is that Canon doesn’t seem to have gotten the message that their cameras lack panache, styling and real photographic features. The Eos mantra is over 20 years old and a major restyling and ground-up re-think is necessary. Everyone around them is pulling themselves up by their bootstraps, and trying to make better products all around. Nikon is a case in point, not shy of making redundant their current lineup with their next-generation cameras. Sony, a new boy on the block wants to assert itself and is keen to throw in as many features as possible, barring the proverbial kitchen sink.
Sony needs market share..
Nikon needs its pro shooters back.
Canon… needs its consumers to upgrade its products every few years..
That is the sad truth of their marketing strategy. Surely selling a better made and thought out camera that will last (a little bit) longer will open up sales of things like lens and accessories. Their approach seems to be to get you to buy more cameras than lenses! This is perhaps an extreme portrayal, but it is done to show the main difference between the top three contenders in the FF segment of the market. While I appreciate Canon lenses and technology, I am not enamored by their second-tier bodies, or even their pro ones, which suffer from the opposite problem; not enough “consumer” features, even those that would actually be useful to a pro. Their data collection for their pro bodies focuses almost exclusively on pro shooters, but the vast majority of buyers of their pro products are advanced amateurs! The pros are actually an infinitesimal proportion of overall sales!
So, to conclude... I think Canon has (almost) dropped the ball. There’s a competent camera out there, but not as competitive as the competition!
