Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 22 Jan 2013 (Tuesday) 00:19
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Where do you think Canon 'missed the boat'?

 
elitejp
Goldmember
1,766 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 204
Joined Mar 2008
     
Jan 24, 2013 09:56 |  #106

bratkinson wrote in post #15527461 (external link)
Regarding controls not in the same position as previous models...How many recall when where you put your key to start your car was on the right side of the dash....but some were on the left? Or, even after moving the key to the steering column for anti-theft reasons, Chevy decided to put the key on the top right of the dash? Or the wiper controls on the dash? Or the bright-lights switch on the floor? Technology doesn't stop moving. Controls move. Deal with it.

Or Canon doesn't have this capability, or that capability, or does a not-so-good job on the other thing? Fine! Sell your Canon and buy a Nikon! They'll be happy to have you whining about what they do worse than Canon, etc.

Bottom line, there's nobody holding a gun to your head forcing you to buy Canon. Plain and simple, the grass =IS= greener on the other side of the street. Feel free to go there!

Seriously, you gotta calm down. The whole thread is about what people think Canon couldve or shouldve done better.


6D; canon 85mm 1.8, Tamron 24-70mm VC, Canon 135L Canon 70-200L is ii

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
les24preludes
Member
97 posts
Joined Nov 2012
     
Jan 24, 2013 09:56 |  #107

I'm interested in why Nikon is seen as the obvious alternative to Canon. Obviously it is in full frame, which is what a lot of you guys are working in, but what about those of us using cropped sensors?

Is there no love for Pentax?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pwm2
"Sorry for being a noob"
Avatar
8,626 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2007
Location: Sweden
     
Jan 24, 2013 10:16 |  #108

les24preludes wrote in post #15528040 (external link)
I'm interested in why Nikon is seen as the obvious alternative to Canon. Obviously it is in full frame, which is what a lot of you guys are working in, but what about those of us using cropped sensors?

Is there no love for Pentax?

Lots of people probably prefer a camera body where the manufacturer is regularly releasing new lenses filling a broad spectrum of needs. How big selection of good AF lenses do you have for that Pentax?


5DMk2 + BG-E6 | 40D + BG-E2N | 350D + BG-E3 + RC-1 | Elan 7E | Minolta Dimage 7U | (Gear thread)
10-22 | 16-35/2.8 L II | 20-35 | 24-105 L IS | 28-135 IS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.8 II | 70-200/2.8 L IS | 100/2.8 L IS | 100-400 L IS | Sigma 18-200DC
Speedlite 420EZ | Speedlite 580EX | EF 1.4x II | EF 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KirkS518
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Jan 24, 2013 10:33 |  #109

elitejp wrote in post #15528039 (external link)
Seriously, you gotta calm down. The whole thread is about what people think Canon couldve or shouldve done better.

Exactly.

It's not intended to be 'Canon Sucks Because...', or 'I hate Canon becaue...'

I just wanted to see what people think of when they're saying "Gee, I wish my Canon had this or did that".

But I'm enjoying the education on sensors.


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Footbag
Senior Member
391 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Scranton, PA
     
Jan 24, 2013 10:38 |  #110

Canon screwed up the Canon 60Da...

Most astro-imagers modify their cameras. This removes an internal glass filter that blocks out H-alpha light. It costs $200 to have it done professionally or the brave can do it themselves.

I heard a rumor a few years ago that Canon was coming out with an astronomy camera. At first, it was just a few Canon reps at an imaging conference asking questions. Then, I was told by a reliable source that it was going to happen. This source would be the one person who knew, so I believed it. Despite the fact that most were saying it would never happen, it did.

Canon released the 60Da. I was at NEAF(Northeast Astronomy Forum)shortly after the release. I had a bunch of questions for the Canon guys, but the word was already spreading. Canon made a big mistake on this one. The replacement glass front filter they used doesn't pass nearly as much H-Alpha as custom modified or user modified cameras. This is a dealbreaker. You see, the 60Da sells at a $500+ premium. But a custom modified 60D will run you under $1000k and this will be a better camera. You see, Canon went through the effort, and then screwed it up at the last minute with a choice of bad glass. This is something you would expect Canon to know something about.

There are a few other things they screwed up. First, the 60D body wasn't the best choice to be modded. Since astro-imaging requires expensive mounts, weight is of the utmost concern. Also, we only use basic modes, no advanced features. The T3 or T3i would've been a better candidate.

As well, by not including an intervalometer in the firmware, they really demonstrated that this was a business decision. They want to sell more hardware intervalometers. It would only take one person a few hours to develop a firmware intervalometer and frankly, Canon needs this now. For all of their cameras.

I was extremely exited about this camera. I went to NEAF thinking of buying one. I don't know if the Canon reps were having a bad day, or were sick of explaining all of the shortcomings; but I found them extremely rude and dismissive. I'm still a Canon guy, but I'll be doing my own mods.


Adam
My Astrophoto Gallery (external link)
The Astro Imaging Channel (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ChuckingFluff
Goldmember
Avatar
1,391 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Canada Eh!
     
Jan 24, 2013 10:39 |  #111

Has anyone seen the new 1Dc that's coming out? other than price that thing is awesome. It costs money to put all the bells and whistles on and make them work together. Many of us are not in a situation where we can afford it but we all want it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DocFrankenstein
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,324 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Apr 2004
Location: where the buffalo roam
     
Jan 24, 2013 10:41 |  #112

mystik610 wrote in post #15527626 (external link)
You can shrink down the size of the camera all you want, but when it comes to lens design, you still can't ignore physics. You can't have a zoom lens, built for a decent sized sensor, with a large fixed aperture, and high quality optics without some size. Unless some engineering breakthrough develops one day, when it comes to lenses, small inevitibly = crippled.

Same story goes for speakers btw!

I agree. I'm not asking for a small f/1.4 prime.

I'm asking for a small f/2 prime.

The way it stands now is that the physically simpler 35/2 flares more and is less sharp at f/2. This is not supposed to happen.


National Sarcasm Society. Like we need your support.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KirkS518
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Jan 24, 2013 10:42 |  #113

les24preludes wrote in post #15528040 (external link)
I'm interested in why Nikon is seen as the obvious alternative to Canon. Obviously it is in full frame, which is what a lot of you guys are working in, but what about those of us using cropped sensors?

Is there no love for Pentax?

Because since the 70's, Nikon, Canon, and Minolta were the camera manufacturers of choice. That name recognition is huge. In addition, throughout the 60's and most of the 70's, just about every major photograph, and professional photographer, used Nikon (35mm format, not talking about Med/Lg format).

My Dad, and probably most Dads had one of the 'Big 3', and that carries down the genetic line.

When Canon took the lead in market share from Nikon, those with Canons always compared them to Nikons, and vise verse.

As for Minolta, I think Canon got to number one over Nikon by taking Minolta's share, and not Nikon's in the 80's/90's. That killed them.

Sony has a reputation of either being a high end manufacturer of consumer electronics, or of being a 'you're paying for the name' brand. They (IMO) are a gadget brand. They come out with new and exciting gadgets for the novice in any field. They're audio equipment was loved by the novice audiophile, but Bose, Harmon Kardon, Klipsch and a bunch of others were the choice of the educated audiophile. I think that reputation has carried over, and that's exactly in the market that they want to be. I don't know what percentage of professional tog's use, or would use a Sony for the bread and butter.

Just my 2 cents.


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Footbag
Senior Member
391 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Scranton, PA
     
Jan 24, 2013 10:52 |  #114

KirkS518 wrote in post #15528180 (external link)
Sony has a reputation of either being a high end manufacturer of consumer electronics, or of being a 'you're paying for the name' brand. They (IMO) are a gadget brand. They come out with new and exciting gadgets for the novice in any field. They're audio equipment was loved by the novice audiophile, but Bose, Harmon Kardon, Klipsch and a bunch of others were the choice of the educated audiophile. I think that reputation has carried over, and that's exactly in the market that they want to be. I don't know what percentage of professional tog's use, or would use a Sony for the bread and butter.

Just my 2 cents.

I agree about the gadget brand, but Bose falls into the same category. You can buy Bose quality speakers for much less then Bose charges. They're are perceived as a high end brand because they know how to charge for it and have good retail placement, but their sound quality isn't on par with the other mid to high end audio products.


Adam
My Astrophoto Gallery (external link)
The Astro Imaging Channel (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,139 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6241
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jan 24, 2013 11:08 |  #115

DocFrankenstein wrote in post #15528175 (external link)
I agree. I'm not asking for a small f/1.4 prime.

I'm asking for a small f/2 prime.

The way it stands now is that the physically simpler 35/2 flares more and is less sharp at f/2. This is not supposed to happen.

35F2 IS is a little bigger, but looks pretty good optically. Quite a bit smaller than the 35L

the pancake is another option although it's not an F2 lens, so I'll never buy it. I'm sure canon will make an F2 version, hopefully stabilized as well.... that would be awesome.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kfreels
Goldmember
Avatar
4,297 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, IN
     
Jan 24, 2013 14:13 |  #116

pwm2 wrote in post #15528097 (external link)
Lots of people probably prefer a camera body where the manufacturer is regularly releasing new lenses filling a broad spectrum of needs. How big selection of good AF lenses do you have for that Pentax?

That's an interesting question. Why is that? So many of us started off in schools with the venerable Pentax K1000 that you would think they had a captive market coming out of photo classes. That's worth an entire thread of its own....Where Pentax drop the ball?


I am serious....and don't call me Shirley.
Canon 7D and a bunch of other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Azathoth
" ...whose name no lips dare speak aloud"
Avatar
1,506 posts
Gallery: 665 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 4578
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Funchal
     
Jan 24, 2013 14:57 as a reply to  @ kfreels's post |  #117

On other news, old Nikon fanboy Ken Rockwell is now a Canon fanboy:

Well, maybe it's because Nikon's three new FX cameras introduced throughout 2012 are so flawed, while Canon's 2012 line of three new full-frame cameras are so much better than ever.

Specifically, my D600, D4 and D800 make images with a slight green color bias to my eyes at their default settings (a dangerous first from Nikon), so I have to set M1 white balance shift, which is then usually too much. I just can't get reliably excellent color out of the newest breed of Nikons

The other deal breaker for me is ergonomics. The new Canons all greatly improve on the previous years' models, while the new Nikons are mostly the same as they were back in 2007, and step even further back by removing both the AF mode and AF area mode selector switches and moving these functions back into the electronics.

http://www.kenrockwell​.com/tech/00-new-today.htm (external link)

;)


500px (external link) | flickr (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
les24preludes
Member
97 posts
Joined Nov 2012
     
Jan 24, 2013 16:19 as a reply to  @ Azathoth's post |  #118

Well, Ken Rockwell puts it different ways:

The Nikon D600 is Nikon's best digital camera ever, at any price. The only bad thing about the D600 is that it has the same green color shift problem of the D800 and D4. I set:

MENU > SHOOTING > White Balance > AUTO > right click to AUTO Normal > right click to the rainbow chart > click one down to M1 > OK

and the green goes away.

No worries, set that M1 trick and the colors are fine. I'm very, very happy; I didn't think Nikon would ever actually release the D600, which is an improved, lighter-weight version of the D800 for less money than any full-frame Nikon digital ever.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Azathoth
" ...whose name no lips dare speak aloud"
Avatar
1,506 posts
Gallery: 665 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 4578
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Funchal
     
Jan 24, 2013 17:10 |  #119

les24preludes wrote in post #15529411 (external link)
Well, Ken Rockwell puts it different ways:

The Nikon D600 is Nikon's best digital camera ever, at any price. The only bad thing about the D600 is that it has the same green color shift problem of the D800 and D4. I set:

MENU > SHOOTING > White Balance > AUTO > right click to AUTO Normal > right click to the rainbow chart > click one down to M1 > OK

and the green goes away.

No worries, set that M1 trick and the colors are fine. I'm very, very happy; I didn't think Nikon would ever actually release the D600, which is an improved, lighter-weight version of the D800 for less money than any full-frame Nikon digital ever.

Hilarious that you have to do some trick in order have reliable color out of "Nikon's best digital camera ever, at any price"... :rolleyes:


500px (external link) | flickr (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KirkS518
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,983 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Central Gulf Coast, Flori-duh
     
Jan 24, 2013 17:18 |  #120

Footbag wrote in post #15528222 (external link)
I agree about the gadget brand, but Bose falls into the same category. You can buy Bose quality speakers for much less then Bose charges. They're are perceived as a high end brand because they know how to charge for it and have good retail placement, but their sound quality isn't on par with the other mid to high end audio products.

Oh, I totally agree - in present day. But in the 70's and 80's, Bose was a premier audio company, right there with HK, B&O, and the like. HK has also (now) faltered IMO.

I have an uncle that would cringe, and mumble "Sucker" if he heard you bought something Sony. He would go to audio stores and listen to the Sony sales pitch, then tear it apart, point by point just for fun on his lunch.

Anyway.....


If steroids are illegal for athletes, should PS be illegal for models?
Digital - 50D, 20D IR Conv, 9 Lenses from 8mm to 300mm
Analog - Mamiya RB67 Pro-SD, Canon A-1, Nikon F4S, YashicaMat 124G, Rollei 35S, QL17 GIII, Zeiss Ikon Ikoflex 1st Version, and and entire room full of lenses and other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

16,673 views & 0 likes for this thread
Where do you think Canon 'missed the boat'?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Crazeenick
904 guests, 330 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.