Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Down

Author Topic: Canon sows FUD  (Read 38338 times)

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: "vaporware" is the term ... if a product is announced but never ships
« Reply #80 on: September 13, 2015, 08:13:46 pm »

So, you think it is nothing but a desperate attempt to protect its (market-share and profit-share leading) DSLR sales from Sony and Nikon, by the allegedly evil strategy of giving some early and therefore not detailed information about its product development directions.

Leaving the "evil" part aside, that's at least how I feel about it. I don't see anything evil about the plan though, it is one possible marketing strategy among others.

But the fact that they have been the only camera company feeling like it may be a winning strategy for them to issue such an announcement very much conveys the impression that they think they don't have the real products it takes to win against their current - and probably soon to be announced - competition.

Cheers,
Bernard

dwswager

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1375
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #81 on: September 13, 2015, 08:14:49 pm »

FUD is not intended to DIRECTLY hurt a competitor, but is targeted at a companies own users and/or unaffiliated users and is intended to forstall purchasing decisions of a competitors products that are currently available.

Every company does it and it can be either passive or active.   That is, they can spread uncertainty and doubt by not providing any information or they can do so by providing misleading information.

Nikon (I've been shooting Nikon since the N90s) has a classic example in the D400.  There has been speculation since the D300s in 2007 about a D400.  Nikon has never denied that their would be an updated professional level DX camera even though they have failed to deliver one.  The intent is to forestall current Nikon shooters from switching in hopes there will be something in the future whether they intend to deliver something or not.

Note that this is different than withholding specific feature or release dates in an effort not to hurt current sales or cause significant channel disruption.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #82 on: September 14, 2015, 02:45:18 pm »

Of course it is FUD. Other historical examples of FUD:

- 1961 President Kennedy's promise to put a man on the Moon "before the end of the decade."

Imagine the nerve to promise something so far into the future, without the specific delivery date. He should have left it instead to the next president to announce it eight years later that the rocket to take men to the Moon shall be launched within weeks. That would be a proper product announcement.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #83 on: September 14, 2015, 03:23:05 pm »

Of course it is FUD. Other historical examples of FUD:

- 1961 President Kennedy's promise to put a man on the Moon "before the end of the decade."

Imagine the nerve to promise something so far into the future, without the specific delivery date. He should have left it instead to the next president to announce it eight years later that the rocket to take men to the Moon shall be launched within weeks. That would be a proper product announcement.


That's a good point, but somewhat irrelevant because the 'filming' wasn't done in the Mojave at all. The truth of the matter is that it was shot in Lanzarote. They picked that dusty, black isle because at the time, very few tourists went there, and even if they had, you can do almost anything you like within the shelter of a small volcano.

I believe that César Manrique had offered his Playboy Pad for the operation, but it was rejected because of the danger of wandering Bunnies trying to get onto the set in hope of getting 'noticed' later on in Hollywood (where, incidentally, the final cut was put together) and, consequently, giving the show away.

Not a lot of people knows that.

Rob C

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #84 on: September 14, 2015, 04:43:54 pm »

Of course it is FUD. Other historical examples of FUD:

- 1961 President Kennedy's promise to put a man on the Moon "before the end of the decade."

Imagine the nerve to promise something so far into the future, without the specific delivery date. He should have left it instead to the next president to announce it eight years later that the rocket to take men to the Moon shall be launched within weeks. That would be a proper product announcement.

False equivalency is truly the backbone of the internet.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18090
  • When everyone thinks the same, nobody thinks
    • My website
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #85 on: September 14, 2015, 06:14:44 pm »

Time to prove it's false,  synn.

Paulo Bizarro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7393
    • http://www.paulobizarro.com
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #86 on: September 15, 2015, 02:00:24 am »

Interchangeable lens mirrorless cameras went from 0% market share to roughly 25% market share in the total interchangeable lens camera market. Most of these mirrorless cameras are Sony. I bet Canon has taken notice as their revenue and profits from their camera division have been sliding in that same time period.

5 years ago it was Sony who...today you see discussions about Sony cameras on every board.

Good for them, and for me, since I use Sony. But nothing of what you say contradicts my observations... and at least some of the discussion around Sony revolves around lack of lenses, lack of support, quick product replacement, not all good stuff. Just ask Sony APSC MILC users...

One year from now, the A7RII will probably be replaced, which will leave some people unhappy about their USD4000 wonder-camera...

On the other hand, some people actually prefer Canon and their more conservative approach regarding camera replacement cycles. Inspires some confidence that their system is not going the way of the dodo.

Rob C

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24074
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #87 on: September 15, 2015, 03:43:20 am »

Good for them, and for me, since I use Sony. But nothing of what you say contradicts my observations... and at least some of the discussion around Sony revolves around lack of lenses, lack of support, quick product replacement, not all good stuff. Just ask Sony APSC MILC users...

One year from now, the A7RII will probably be replaced, which will leave some people unhappy about their USD4000 wonder-camera...

On the other hand, some people actually prefer Canon and their more conservative approach regarding camera replacement cycles. Inspires some confidence that their system is not going the way of the dodo.


I think that's a very important point, and I also wonder if the camera makers are not also very aware of the danger of too rapid a change in products.

You can't hope to keep selling stuff if it doesn't last longer than a season; you might as well just be a farmer. Or a shop. All you'd need to invest in R'n'D would be another big fridge.

That was one of the reasons why Hasselblad, Rollei etc. did so well during the film era: any product changes were very minor, and there was no great advantage to change, and better yet, the equipment lasted, and the only disaster would have lain in the death of a film format.

But then, photography probably meant something quite different in those days. Mass appeal seldom means improvement in end result, i.e. actual photographs, just more gadgets with which to play.

Rob C

michael

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5084
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #88 on: September 15, 2015, 11:41:20 am »

I think that it's necessary to recognize that the camera industry is now the consumer electronics industry. One of the reasons why CE companies like Sony (Fuji and Panasonic as well) have pushed into mirrorless is that it removes a huge amount of the expensive mechanical mechanisms in a camera, such as the mirror assembly, and prism alignment, not to mention the AF module, alignment etc.

This allows highly-featured cameras to be made for less, and often to be sold for the same price as their more mechanical cousins, thus producing higher profit margins.

When the bulk of the cost of a new model is silicon and programming, change happens faster.

Whether this is "a good thing" depends on one's perspective.

I can resists upgrading my iPhone and iPad to every second generation, and my TV and stereo to every third or fourth generation. But my camera....humm... not so infrequently. If a new model really ups the game and has the potential to improve my imaging, as the A7RII, most definitely does, then I give in to temptation. Others may have more self-control and differing needs.

Michael
Logged

AlterEgo

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1995
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #89 on: September 15, 2015, 11:52:44 am »

On the other hand, some people actually prefer Canon and their more conservative approach regarding camera replacement cycles. Inspires some confidence that their system is not going the way of the dodo.

first of all - they simply have no choice, then one other system with conservative approach was the old 43 dSLR from Olympus (top tier line of E-bodies)... was slower than Canon and gone...  the slow cycle is not a sign of anything by itself
Logged

nemophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1021
    • Nemo Niemann Photography
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #90 on: September 17, 2015, 04:10:15 pm »

Wow. Bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch, bitch.

I haven't seem so much whining and complaining about a company working to develop different technology. For the Sony lovers, it's "oh, they don't have the DR." For the Canon critics, it's "oh, well they announced 50MP in 2007. Or was it 2008? Maybe it was 1946?"

The fact that Canon has working models of cameras with a 250MP sensor, and another than has a sensor that goes to 4,000,000 ISO simply means they aren't asleep at the wheel. They are pushing technology in areas no one else has (hello? Sony? Nikon... oh that's right. They don't actually produce their sensors), or at least has mentioned. People seem to forget that part of R&D is to produce things that may not see the light of day as a consumer item, but often paves the way for other technology that is used. I think in the recent past Canon has been cautious -- both with development and announcements of what they're working on. Now that they have awoken from their somnambulant existence, you would think people would be glad that a major technology company is striving to develop new technology.

Since we're taking steps back in time, I remember when people thought a 6MP sensor was the pinnacle of 35mm based DSLRs, and that it was equal to 35mm film. I also seem to remember people saying, "Oh, we'll never use the capacity of a 1TB drive. We really don't need it." There was a time when 40MB drives seemed huge.

For those who wish to grouse about technological advancement, I have a bag phone I'd really love to sell you.
Logged

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #91 on: September 17, 2015, 04:52:08 pm »

I think that Canon has been doing some fine things in lenses. Canon camera ergonomics are pleasing, the live view is very functional (I remember a lot of bitching from Nikon users who didn't like the Nikon LV implementation). The new AF algorithms work well, the STM lens line is cheap and is a boon for the non-professional video shooter who doesn't pull focus manually, the night sports photographers love the anti-flicker mode that enables good exposure under outdoor-type flood lights. Canon has a good system with strengths and weaknesses.

I am not sure that Canon is aiming the super-high-MP cameras at most hobby, editorial, or commercial photographers. 120 MP or 250 MP seems like a better fit for a high-end commercial, technical, or surveillance subject, not one that is fated to appear at 72 ppi on someone's computer screen.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #92 on: September 17, 2015, 05:08:15 pm »

I don't think this about not liking progress really.

That more resolution helps is obvious. Who wouldn't want more pixels if there is no drawback? Whether that helps in measurable ways for 99.9% of applications is of course a different story. For me 120 megapixels is becoming interesting since it is getting closer to the resolutions stitchers have been used to for years for very large prints.

But it is also obvious that any sensor maker can manufacture today a 120 mp sensor if there are no constraints for it to perform well along other metrics, such as, yes signal to noise ratio that translates into DR. This is especially true for sensor manufacturers already using for years processes with finer lithogaphy, which appears to be pretty much everyone but Canon (think Sony, Toshiba, Samsung, Aptina,...).

So such a partial announcement (only resolution given as sensor spec) tells us basically zero from a technological progress standpoint. It in fact conveys the very opposite message about the non reality of actual product availability, which ends up speaking more about the lack of reality of the supposed advances than the silence of others.

In essence, picking resolution as the measure of upcoming future photographic progress this way sounds like marketing at its worse. It doesn't speak to the engineer in me, and even less to the photographer.

This is what the mockery is about IMHO.

Cheers,
Bernard

scooby70

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 489
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #93 on: September 17, 2015, 06:00:13 pm »

I can hardly believe what I'm reading here.

Canon don't replace their cameras as fast as the competition and this is a good thing?

From a used kit value point of view maybe but in terms of offering cutting edge kit it can't be.

Imagine Ford still making the Model T. Sure, next to the latest Toyota it's a musium piece and it can't do what the Toyota does but so what, it gets me from A to B and I'll get back what I paid for it all those years ago.

That's a valid view, I suppose, but if I want the abilities of the Toyota I'm willing to pay for them.
Logged

labirdman

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #94 on: September 17, 2015, 07:23:58 pm »

I think Bernard is correct; anyone could produce a 120MP sensor, particularly if DR, cost, etc. were not an issue.

Canon is doing the only thing it can do, since Sony obviously has their magic almost-no-read-noise exmor technology on patent lockdown. Canon must know what they need to do to gain DR, but not in a way that would not run afoul of patent law.

So it is a somewhat inelegant attempt to remain relevant, in terms of pure sensor tech--throw out some huge MP numbers in the hope that they slow the rate of defection. That's all this is--a more extreme version of the 5Ds/5DsR. 

I think Canon is doing all they can do--obviously sensor tech like Sony can be produced by very few (Samsung might be almost in their league?) And Canon's lenses, lately, have been superb. Obviously, if they could produce a DR monster like the exmor, they would do so ASAP. It's wrong to blame them, I think. They're in a bad spot.
Logged

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #95 on: September 17, 2015, 08:13:36 pm »

So far as I am concerned, the lenses Canon are producing, with the improved technology (DO and the new blue-refractive material) are a strong incentive to consider the system. And yes, you can use the lenses on Sony cameras, if you need the Sony sensor more than the more integrated user experience on the OEM (Canon) camera. But do I really want to process 200 MB images all the time? I am fine with the 6D for now, and might consider a higher MP, higher dynamic range camera in the near future.

I am trying to avoid too much G.A.S.   ::)  Fat lot of luck, with the TS-E 24 II and a faster supertelephoto lens (500 or 600 f/4 DO?) plus set of teleconverters v. III on my wish list.
Logged

nemophoto

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1021
    • Nemo Niemann Photography
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #96 on: September 17, 2015, 09:28:23 pm »

Bernard, I'd be careful about making such broad, sweeping statements such as "... it is also obvious that any sensor maker can manufacture today a 120 mp sensor..". The fact is, they can't. Because if they could, if they could even approach that ability, Samsung, Sony or whomever would let everyone know they could do it, even if it was just a prototype years away from any possible production, regardless of the caveats. Are Canon's sensors perfect? No. Do they do the job? Yes, and very well. For my commercial work, I've yet to find the dynamic range a limiting factor. For my own personal work, if I really feel the DR is an issue, I bracket and merge. That in itself yields far more DR than any given chip on the market. But to say any manufacturer could produce 120MP sensor is just not true. We would have seen it by now.

Nemo
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13983
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #97 on: September 17, 2015, 09:58:00 pm »

Bernard, I'd be careful about making such broad, sweeping statements such as "... it is also obvious that any sensor maker can manufacture today a 120 mp sensor..". The fact is, they can't. Because if they could, if they could even approach that ability, Samsung, Sony or whomever would let everyone know they could do it, even if it was just a prototype years away from any possible production, regardless of the caveats.
...
But to say any manufacturer could produce 120MP sensor is just not true. We would have seen it by now.

The other manufacturers may know that telling the world about a 120mp sensor without any other specs is meaningless?

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: September 18, 2015, 02:05:33 am by BernardLanguillier »
Logged

eronald

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6642
    • My gallery on Instagram
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #98 on: September 18, 2015, 02:33:18 am »

Bernard, I'd be careful about making such broad, sweeping statements such as "... it is also obvious that any sensor maker can manufacture today a 120 mp sensor..". The fact is, they can't. Because if they could, if they could even approach that ability, Samsung, Sony or whomever would let everyone know they could do it, even if it was just a prototype years away from any possible production, regardless of the caveats. Are Canon's sensors perfect? No. Do they do the job? Yes, and very well. For my commercial work, I've yet to find the dynamic range a limiting factor. For my own personal work, if I really feel the DR is an issue, I bracket and merge. That in itself yields far more DR than any given chip on the market. But to say any manufacturer could produce 120MP sensor is just not true. We would have seen it by now.

Nemo

Of course they can ALL show samples. When the Sony 50MP chip came on the market, the Raw sample files distributed by Sony were 2 years old. The problem is that they cannot get the economically viable yields *today*. Today, only one chip in 20 or so will work, and they won't be tuned to effective use - the video speeds will be bad, readout will be slow etc.  That is why they have R&D departments and production engineers who slowly turn the prototypes into commercial products. 

Edmund
« Last Edit: September 18, 2015, 02:35:29 am by eronald »
Logged
If you appreciate my blog posts help me by following on https://instagram.com/edmundronald

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8913
Re: Canon sows FUD
« Reply #99 on: September 18, 2015, 03:40:58 am »

Of course they can ALL show samples. When the Sony 50MP chip came on the market, the Raw sample files distributed by Sony were 2 years old. The problem is that they cannot get the economically viable yields *today*. Today, only one chip in 20 or so will work, and they won't be tuned to effective use - the video speeds will be bad, readout will be slow etc.  That is why they have R&D departments and production engineers who slowly turn the prototypes into commercial products.

Hi Edmund,

What (conveniently) seems to be ignored, is that a company like Sony depends on introducing new (relatively untested technology) at a rapid pace. This allows to fund their research, but also means short product life-cycles. Any forward looking statement (like the longer term vision expressed by Canon's frequent 'development', not announcement (!), press-releases) would threaten the chance of people buying in to the latest fad, instead of waiting for a more mature product or skipping a generation.

We've seen e.g. the A7R development with various issues like irreversible Raw compression artifacts, shutter shock, limited battery capacity, and service problems. Canon on the other hand, operating with a different marketing model, has no ill effects to be expected from disclosing what their future vision is. Canon first developed a new vibration reduction shutter mechanism, before introducing a new high resolution camera body, the 5DS / 5DS R. People will not postpone their next Canon purchase because of such vision statements, but rather see it as confidence building for the long haul. Canon's camera/lens service is a very useful feature for the long term use of their products. I've had 2 shutters replaced (out of warranty but for free, and with available replacement bodies) because they started showing issues too long before their rated operational life expectancy.

Given this completely different marketing approach, I still think that Michael's qualification of FUD is totally misplaced (besides being the wrong term), and not a (panic) reaction but a common procedure/tradition of sharing long term vision and all sorts of technology development reports, a long time before they are turned into White papers on actually announced/introduced products.

Again, a development report is not a product announcement. The latter is potentially a tactic called 'pre-announcement' if it takes a long time to actual delivery of production models. A pre-announcement is indeed intended to buy time, but that was not what the press releases were about.

Cheers,
Bart.
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6   Go Up