arj wrote in post #15013127
Interesting discussion. I think there are a few points to it.
First of all - Canon has a major advantage above Nikon and Sony and any other SLR manufacturer and that is the lens lineup. I mean, endless choices, superb IQ etc etc.
See post above, Thats a huge reason I stick to Canon, That said, Sony has some really interesting options in their lineup (The 70-400 is actually supposedly unmatched, the 135mm f/1.8 is drool-worthy...)
The major disadvantage of Canon against Nikon, Sony etc. is the sensor technology. Look at the scores of all the Canon sensors and compare them to the Sony sensors which are now in more than 60% of all cameras worldwide and you will realize that Canon sensor tech blows. If Canon would have the Sony sensor inside, it would immediately become the king of the hill. Sony sensors and Canon lenses would be an unbelievable combination which would be unmatched. But perhaps that is the reason why Canon so far has no access to them.
I dunno if Canon sensor tech is "bad" it was king of the hill for a long while after all, But notice that Canon hasnt come out with a real "Next gen" sensor, its clinging to its old sensors still, Canon is fighting todays battle with old tech, the Sony sensors killing Canon right now are mostly brand new ones...
Then, Canon has an other major issue and that is inovation. In the mirrorless segment they are too late, and what they presented is less than what you get with the competition. Sony is rolling through this segment with their NEX line and neither Nikon nor Canon will be successfull there.
I dunno, the EOS M is interesting, Its pretty small..but i do agree it might be a bit too late here, the NEX system is growing and m4/3 has an unmatched lens selection
There is one more thing to add where Canon should watch out. Sony is pushing agressively forward. While the partnership with Hasselblad right now only produced a looney camera at an incredible price, it will in the future help promote the E and A mount Sony uses. Sony has also purchased a major stake in Olympus, so it IMHO is only a matter of time when we will see the first Olympus A or E mount camera. Again, Canon must move finally and improove or outsource their sensor tech. Otherwise they will get eaten by Nikon/Sony.
Roger said it a few months ago and i agreed with him, I've felt it for a long time as well, Sony is the new Kodak, Sony is the new 800lbs gorilla in the imaging space... and to be honest, I dont think they really care about selling the sensors to Canon its that Canon is just too proud/misguided to ask, or Canon has something up its sleeve... I think the recent moves by Sony are just the first time others are seeing what me and others were already perceiving, Sony isnt a joke, Sony isnt "third-place" and the Sony system itself has the potential to dominate everyone
I like Sony, Always have, Almost bought an a700 actually...was happy I didnt when the 7D came out though
Indeed... This is what I was talking about, Nikon had D600s in peoples hands for weeks obviously, DPReview was playing with it enough to have tons of samples up already and DxOMark conveniently has tests up when the cameras are in stores, This is how things in the modern electronics world work and Canon needs to realize that DSLRs are electronics, Not just cameras...
Look at smartphones, Engadget already has an iPhone 5 review up, its not shipping yet, Galaxy SIII, One X, and Galaxy Nexus reviews were up only a few days after announcement before you could even buy one...
jthomps123 wrote in post #15013182
Its time Canon users cleansed their souls, admit, and move on - or move to Nikon. Nikon is drinking Canons milkshake right now, in almost every way, and its not even debatable. The roles were once reversed (and Nikonians were doing the same thing your are now - knowingly wrong), and probably in a decade the role might reverse back, but insignificant moral victories here and there cant change the fact that Nikon is class of the camera industry right now - and they're cheaper to boot.
Something else to mention, I'm a former Nikonian, I started with a Nikon and came to Canon because, at the time, Canon was kicking their arse, This was also around the time I decided to get a lot more serious and invest in some serious gear, at the time Canon had IS in more lenses, Canon had USM drives in more lenses, Canon had a series of f/4 pro lenses, and Canon had the 100-400, 300 f/4L IS, 400 f/5.6L and 70-200 f/4L
Right now Nikon bodies are better, But on the lenses, I'm not so sure, They have some great new glass yes, and some of it is better than the equivalent Canon, But they still lack a lot of glass as I've said above, for me switching isnt just getting the equivalent piece of Nikon glass, because at least one of my lenses has no Nikon equal so its more like "How do i piece mail together a few Nikon lenses to do what Im doing with this one lens"
The problem is most specifically my 70-200 f/4L IS, Nikon has 70-200s, but they're f/2.8s, Thus bigger and heavier, not to mention more expensive which is bad when one is trying to switch over to a new system and get as many lenses as possible, Many folks threw up the 70-300 VR as an alternative, Alright, I concede thats pretty useful, I do use my 70-200 with a TC after all, Except I can take the TC off and still have an f/4 70-200 in most situations to get back the extra speed
Of course I suppose the counter to THAT is that im shooting APS-C and that the 70-300 would be roughly equal on a D600 to what I'm using a 70-200 for right now... and if i want shallow depth of field i just use my 105 VR instead, Fair enough
....Ok so maybe i just defeated my arguements against it... but still not sure its something i want to do