Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Canon, where are you?!  (Read 11793 times)

thierrylegros396

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1879
Canon, where are you?!
« on: February 05, 2014, 01:01:18 pm »

Canon, where are you  ??? ;)

Really impressive, Canon was the absolute master a few years ago, but now, we have far more choice among manufacturers.

And it seems that Fujifilm, Olympus, and Sony are growing.

Canon seems to loose some customers.

But only for professional market, or overall?


Logged

armand

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4679
    • Photos
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2014, 01:18:47 pm »

I have no interest in Canon but I don't think that graph is that representative; from what I hear the Canon still sells well.

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11296
    • Echophoto
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2014, 02:45:00 pm »

Hi,

My best friend is pro and shoots with Canon 5DIII.

I personally use Sony Alpha 99 and Phase One P45+, neither makes me a better photographer than my friend, nor a worse one.

Images don't care about the equipment that has been used to shoot them.

Best regards
Erik


Virtually every pro I know uses Canon.
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11296
    • Echophoto
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2014, 04:35:40 pm »

Hi Keith,

I was more responding to the thread than to your posting. Excuse me if my tone was harsh, not my intention at all!

It is more like that I feel that most cameras we have around make perfectly good pictures. I guess that most of the best pictures are taken with Canons while they are used most.

Some cameras are better in some sense than some others, but it is seldom it really matters. As a matter of fact I feel that I made my best pictures with an 12 MP APS-C camera. Not because it was the best camera I had, but because photo opportunities came my way when I had it.

So I feel that we should enjoy the stuff we have and learn to make the best use of them.

Just some examples:

- The Sony Alpha 99 I have has pretty good dynamic range, but of the 75000 pictures I have on my computer DR has been an issue on perhaps a dozen.
- I saw little difference in A2 size prints between the 12 MP Sony Alpha and the 24 MP cameras. I normally print A2, seldom larger. 24 MP is nice, but if I don't see the difference, does it matter?
- I see little difference in A2 size prints between the 24 MP Sony Alpha and the 39 MP P45+

I never had a Canon, but the good images from Canon cameras I saw were as good as anything else. On the other hand, crappy pictures are crappy pictures independent of equipment

Best regards
Erik



Erik, I was reporting what they use, not why.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2014, 04:38:04 pm by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

NancyP

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2513
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2014, 06:00:25 pm »

That DP Review bar graph measures the number of clicks on a camera for the current day or two. Every time a new camera is introduced, it goes to the top of the list because people are curious and want to read its description. It so happens that Fuji brought out a number of cameras at CES trade show in late January.
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2014, 06:21:17 pm »

That is one of reveal measures at DPR that its readers are more enthusiastic about recent products from Fujifilm, Olympus and Sony than form Canon and Nikon; another is the results of its "Readers' Choice: Best Gear of 2013 Awards" poll.

But there is a big gap between these measures forum reader enthusiasm and actual sales results, where is it still 1) Canon 2) Nikon as far as I know.  Usage is a "lagging indicator" of current customer choices, so is skewed even more toward the entrenched industry leaders.

Maybe a lot of this is due to the fact that Canon and Nikon dominate in the mature product category of DSLRs, where new models are not so novel and exciting (and do not have to be, because last year's models were already very good), but which for now still dominate sales of interchangeable lens cameras, whereas companies like Fujifilm, Olympus and Sony are (out of necessity?) exploring alternatives like mirrorless system cameras, which are more exciting for many forum readers.  Will this play out like PC makers vs smart phone and tablet makers has in recent years?  Note that Canon's DSLR sales volume dipped slightly for the first time in 2013 (and Nikon and Pentax are doing worse than Canon for sales volume) so maybe DSLRs have peaked?
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13613
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #6 on: February 06, 2014, 12:12:54 am »

Maybe a lot of this is due to the fact that Canon and Nikon dominate in the mature product category of DSLRs, where new models are not so novel and exciting (and do not have to be, because last year's models were already very good), but which for now still dominate sales of interchangeable lens cameras, whereas companies like Fujifilm, Olympus and Sony are (out of necessity?) exploring alternatives like mirrorless system cameras, which are more exciting for many forum readers.

In my view, the volume market still buy DSLRs mostly for the following reasons:
- mirrorless cameras are more expensive and their only real advantage is compactness,
- DSLR still have the edge in image quality where it matters for casual shooting, that is indoors during family gatherings - which means very high ISOs on typical consumer zoom lenses that are not that bright - and 99% of people only use zoom lenses,
- they already own Canon/Nikon lenses,
- AF is a concern for moving subjects and who doesn't hate blurry kids pictures?
- Canon and Nikon are here to stay and they are somehow expected to continue to release better cameras and lenses, which is less certain for smaller players.

Cheers,
Bernard

Paulo Bizarro

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6235
    • http://www.paulobizarro.com
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2014, 12:59:05 am »

My opinion:

1. To much a do about nothing, after all, do you take as serious and representative data a graph that plots the 2hits" and "likes" from dpreviewers??

2. In all photo stores I go into, Canon and Nikon have prime real estate space just for them. So much for the "death of the DSLR" and other bs...

peterottaway

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 91
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2014, 03:02:11 am »

My A7r was some $800 cheaper than the D800E and is much lighter.I was prepared to buy the Sony where I never seriously considered the Nikon.

When is Nikon going to start making its 35mm cameras so that I can use lens I wish to ?
Logged

hjulenissen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2051
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2014, 04:32:54 am »

My opinion:

1. To much a do about nothing, after all, do you take as serious and representative data a graph that plots the 2hits" and "likes" from dpreviewers??

2. In all photo stores I go into, Canon and Nikon have prime real estate space just for them. So much for the "death of the DSLR" and other bs...
While (especially) Canon seems to be in a good state at the moment, I think that things can change fast.

If "prominent" users start leaving your brand (or mock your product annoncements), this can affect (or be an indicator of) changes in the "bread and butter" sales to Joe Average. Having large white lenses at the Olympics (and local soccer matches) probably means a lot to the purchase practices of typical low-end system-camera buyers.

With the sole exception of the 70D, the Canon announcements during the last 4 years have (in my view) been decidedly yawn-worthy.

-h
« Last Edit: February 06, 2014, 04:34:33 am by hjulenissen »
Logged

OldRoy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 470
    • http://
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2014, 06:06:25 am »

...
When is Nikon going to start making its 35mm cameras so that I can use lens I wish to ?

This is a joke? Please reassure me.
It would be interesting to know just how many dedicated Nikon mount lenses are available out there. It's probably in the hundreds even discounting the use of adaptors. But you're effectively restricted by the non-availability of suitable lenses? Please explain.
Roy
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13613
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #11 on: February 06, 2014, 09:43:23 am »

This is a joke? Please reassure me.
It would be interesting to know just how many dedicated Nikon mount lenses are available out there. It's probably in the hundreds even discounting the use of adaptors. But you're effectively restricted by the non-availability of suitable lenses? Please explain

I believe that this gentlemen is speaking about his Canon glass.

But, besides for some niche glass like the 17mm T/S, the Nikon and Canon line ups are so close nowadays that it makes a lot more sense to invest in F mount lenses that you'll be able to mount on Canon bodies via adapters than to invest in Canon glass that is impossible to mount on Nikon bodies.  ;) This gives you the freedom to select whatever body has the higher performance at a given point in time.

This is especially true for Manual focus lenses like the Zeiss. I am unclear why anyone would want to buy a Zeiss lens in Canon mount.

Cheers,
Bernard

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #12 on: February 06, 2014, 10:42:27 am »

In my view, the volume market still buy DSLRs mostly for the following reasons:
1. mirrorless cameras are more expensive and their only real advantage is compactness,
2. DSLR still have the edge in image quality where it matters for casual shooting, that is indoors during family gatherings - which means very high ISOs on typical consumer zoom lenses that are not that bright - and 99% of people only use zoom lenses,
3. they already own Canon/Nikon lenses,
4. AF is a concern for moving subjects and who doesn't hate blurry kids pictures?
5. Canon and Nikon are here to stay and they are somehow expected to continue to release better cameras and lenses, which is less certain for smaller players.
I agree with parts of this, especially 3, 4 and 5, but:

a) "mirrorless cameras are more expensive"? Entry level mirrorless cameras start at lower prices that entry level DSLRs, even if you restrict to ones with sensors of the same "APS-C" size as entry level DSLRs. Those low priced mirrorless cameras are mostly what I will call "LCD cameras", the ones without an eye-level viewfinder, so maybe you are thinking only about "EVF cameras", which do start at higher prices than either "LCD cameras" or "OVF cameras" (which in the entry-level or mainstream consumer price range means DSLRs with penta-mirror viewfinders and roughly APS-C sized sensors).

b) If you
 wish to consider only "EVF cameras" in your price comparison, then I have to disagree with your next comment, that "their only real advantage is compactness".
Because compared to the small, sometimes dim image in the penta-mirror OVF of an entry-level OVF camera (especially when combined with a not-so-bright entry-level zoom lens), the EVF cameras have some significant advantages in viewfinder performance and features (see hundreds of posts in these forums on that debate!).  Also, let's face it: in situations when live view is wanted --- like videos of those kids you mention! --- a DLSR's mirror-up, rear-screen live view is far less convenient than what you get with a dedicated live view camera, even on the rear-screen and more so when you can get it through an eye-level EVF.

c) "DSLR still have the edge in image quality where it matters for casual shooting ... very high ISOs".  This is clearly not true for mirrorless systems cameras as a whole; after all, many of them use sensors of the same size as entry-level DSLRs.  And given there overwhelming acceptance of phone-camera IQ, I very much doubt that most purchasers of "cameras for documenting the kids" are agonizing over differences in low-light performance between the various consumer priced system camera options; that is mostly an issue for more dedicated photographic enthusiasts and for internet forum gear-heads.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13613
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #13 on: February 06, 2014, 12:52:14 pm »

Some data points based on Japanese prices:

- Nikon D5300: 71,000 Yen
- Nikon D3300: 57,800 Yen
- Canon Kiss 7: 51,500 Yen
- Olympus OMD-EM5: 73,500 Yen
- Olympus Pen EP5: 78,000 Yen
- Panasonic GM1: 68,000 as lens kit (couldn't find the price of the body alone)
- Nikon V2: 55,000 Yen
- Canon EOS M2: 57,000 Yen

So, from what I can see, both the Nikon and Canon entry DSLR are at equal price point of cheaper than mirrorless bodies of reasonably close specifications.

As far as expectations go, the people buying those bodies are not people happy with smartphone or digital compact cameras, mostly because of AF and image quality in dark situations. I believe that many of them go to store with a problem they need be fixed and specifically ask for cameras that work well in indoor situations.

Cheers,
Bernard

stevesanacore

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 267
Re: Canon, where are you?!
« Reply #14 on: February 06, 2014, 01:08:51 pm »


That chart seems silly. Anyone living in the real world knows that Canon and Nikon are at the top of the popularity list for amateurs as well as pros. I am always amazed by how many tourists I see lugging around DSLRs from these two brands just to take snapshots. At least once a week I must get asked, "should I buy a Canon or Nikon?" by people I meet after they find out that I make a living as a photographer.

I'm a huge fan of M4/3 cameras but the public seems unmoved by them. I am also shocked at how many local camera stores carry Nikon and Canon but act dumb when I ask about M4/3 cameras. I don't know if the big brands are using leverage to keep the small mirror-less brands out of their stores, or they are really that ignorant.
Logged
We don't know what we don't know.

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
how about looking at entry level models like EPM2, EPL5, NEX3 and NEX5
« Reply #15 on: February 06, 2014, 01:56:37 pm »

I was looking get US prices, as seen at B&H; maybe Japanese pricing is different.

Or maybe the Japanese market does not get the entry level "LCD camera" models that I was looking at?!
In the USA,
1) Prices for Olympus models start with EPM2 and EPL5 (you have only two more expensive Olympus models).
1) Prices for Panasonic models start with GF6 and G5, not the GM1.
2) Prices for Nikon One start with the "LCD only" J and S series, not the more expensive V2.
3) Sony makes mirrorless cameras too! And prices start with the NEX3, NEX5 and forthcoming a5000.
(It puzzles me that you have no Sony mirrorless cameras in your price comparison, and yet bother with the famously overpriced, underselling Canon offering.)

Some data points based on Japanese prices: [rearranged in order of price -- BJL]

- Canon Kiss 7: 51,500 Yen
- Nikon V2: 55,000 Yen
- Nikon D3300: 57,800 Yen
- Canon EOS M2: 57,000 Yen
- Panasonic GM1: 68,000 as lens kit (couldn't find the price of the body alone)
- Olympus OMD-EM5: 73,500 Yen
- Nikon D5300: 71,000 Yen
- Olympus Pen EP5: 78,000 Yen
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13613
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: how about looking at entry level models like EPM2, EPL5, NEX3 and NEX5
« Reply #16 on: February 06, 2014, 04:57:07 pm »

Or maybe the Japanese market does not get the entry level "LCD camera" models that I was looking at?!
In the USA,

(It puzzles me that you have no Sony mirrorless cameras in your price comparison, and yet bother with the famously overpriced, underselling Canon offering.)

I never meant this list to be comprehensive, hence the "data point" wording.

As far as lower end mirrorless goes, to me they don't really compete with DSLRs, they are more overgrown compact in nature.

But anyway, let's agree to disagree on this one. You don't think that mirrorless prices are a hindrance to their more widespread adoption, I do based on my own experience, no big deal. ;)

Cheers,
Bernard

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Re: how about looking at entry level models like EPM2, EPL5, NEX3 and NEX5
« Reply #17 on: February 06, 2014, 07:10:34 pm »

As far as lower end mirrorless goes, to me they don't really compete with DSLRs, they are more overgrown compact in nature.
Methinks you are changing the question in order to get the answer you want. Your comment was about sales volume of CSCs [all of the category] vs DSLR's, for which it does not matter whether they "really compete with each other"; all that matters is how many people find the respective categories provide the best choice for whatever it is they want out of a camera, and your argument needs to apply to the whole CSC category, not some cherry-picked higher examples.

Anyway, the idea of not coppering is dubious to me: avoid the fallacy of that "product B does not match most or all the capabilities of product A, so it is not competing with product A", because that was the reasoning of the computer industry about the iPad and Android tablets not competing with netbooks. A product does not have to compete with an alternative on all specs; just on the ones of interest to the particular customer. For example, even the cheapest CSCs compete far more closely with DSLRs in consumers' purchasing decisions that camera-phones do with compact digital cameras, and yet clearly a good many people are choosing to pay extra for a phone with decent photographic performance, and are therefore not buying as compact camera.  I am fairly sure that likewise, many people have traditionally bought an SLR rather than using a compact or phone primarily for two reasons:
(a) the bigger sensor,
and
(b) the ability to use more than one lens,
and some millions of people are now finding that a CSC does that job for them.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2014, 07:15:24 pm by BJL »
Logged

scooby70

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 489
Re: how about looking at entry level models like EPM2, EPL5, NEX3 and NEX5
« Reply #18 on: February 06, 2014, 08:27:24 pm »

As far as lower end mirrorless goes, to me they don't really compete with DSLRs, they are more overgrown compact in nature.

Cheers,
Bernard


I think that even low end mirrorless will trounce the vast majority of compacts for image quality. Is there a compact camera (and by that I mean a tiny sensor shirt pocket thingy) that can compete with a low end CSC for image quality? If there are any I bet you can count them on your thumbs.
Logged

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13613
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: how about looking at entry level models like EPM2, EPL5, NEX3 and NEX5
« Reply #19 on: February 07, 2014, 01:12:45 am »

Methinks you are changing the question in order to get the answer you want. Your comment was about sales volume of CSCs [all of the category] vs DSLR's, for which it does not matter whether they "really compete with each other"; all that matters is how many people find the respective categories provide the best choice for whatever it is they want out of a camera, and your argument needs to apply to the whole CSC category, not some cherry-picked higher examples.

Again, I don't care about being proven wrong or about mirrorless sales, I don't have any stake in this debate. ;)

I am just trying to find a reasonable explanation as to why mirrorless sales have been a lot less successful than many thought they would be compared to lower end DSLRs, as the current sales figure clearly show.

The reason why I am not taking into account lower end mirrorless in my price comparison is because the experience of the photographer is IMHO closer to that he has been having with the compact digital camera he/she is typically coming from, mostly in terms of lack of viewfinder (be it electronic or optical) and also in terms of form factor.

So what I mean is that the mirrorless camera offering a shooting experience similar to that of low end DSLRs are typically in the same price range or more expensive and I believe that many compact upgraders want something different than a larger compact looking camera.

That's probably the reason why Fuji has adopted a DSLR like formfactor in their new higher end camera btw.

Feel free to disagree.

Cheers,
Bernard
« Last Edit: February 07, 2014, 01:17:05 am by BernardLanguillier »
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up