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 29 Dec 2016 (Thursday) 18:25
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Is it my imagination but is there a lot of Canon bashing?

 
DaviSto
... sorry. I got carried away!
Avatar
1,927 posts
Gallery: 56 photos
Likes: 898
Joined Nov 2016
Location: Abuja Nigeria
Post edited over 2 years ago by DaviSto.
     
Jan 02, 2017 11:28 as a reply to  @ post 18230706 |  #61

And reduce your available R&D budget in the process while building your competitor's? Look at the number of units that Canon sells compared to everybody else in the market. That would have been a huge financial contribution to your one real competitor in sensor development and manufacture. Reputationally, it could also have been a major hit.

There was a risk that Canon might lose the market in the period it took them to catch up ... but Canon would probably have felt that was a risk worth taking ... given their customers prior investment in glass and established brand loyalty.


David.
Comment and (constructive) criticism always welcome.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
welshwizard1971
Goldmember
Avatar
1,448 posts
Likes: 1074
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southampton Hampshire UK
     
Jan 02, 2017 12:37 |  #62

When I first started looking at this forum there was a chap who rabidly anti canon, Nikon were better, Sony were better, what were Canon playing at, he was going to chop all his stuff in for Nikon, it was like it was a personal crusade, mostly based on DR. Then the first rumour of a 5d mk iv came out, miles off the mark as it happened, well Canon were instantly the best, the DR would wipe Sony and Nikon off the face of the earth ( not a single image had been made available) , he was preordering one as the DR was so good etc. Never seen him post a single picture..


EOS R 5D III, 40D, 16-35L 35 ART 50 ART 100L macro, 24-70 L Mk2, 135L 200L 70-200L f4 IS
Hype chimping - The act of looking at your screen after every shot, then wildly behaving like it's the best picture in the world, to try and impress other photographers around you.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,882 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 2689
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Jan 02, 2017 12:42 |  #63

DaviSto wrote in post #18230694 (external link)
But shouldn't we all be glad that they decided to compete instead of helping Sony to finance their R&D and establish themselves as the monopoly supplier of sensors? No real choice left for anybody if that happened.


NO

This was a MAJOR mistake on Canons part. They should have done what Nikon Did and that was hop on the bandwagon and use the technology and continue to develop a sensor that was competitive. They went 2.5 yrs in the back of the bus and that hurt them.

AS IT STANDS NOW.....The sony sensor is still better in terms of ISO & Dark/shadow retention...not a lot but marginally better

Canon lost a bunch of customers who jumped ship and went to Nikon and Sony. Dont kid yourself. There was in fact a fire sale everywhere. I saw it and so did many others.

Sonys problem is No glass, NO integrated Flash system that works well, and a Crapola AF system with horrendous ergos for the camera. Its not a user friendly lay out by any means. garbage compared to Canon and Nikon..... But people were willing to put up with it because the sensors created opportunities and make things easier in dark environments.

Nikon has the Glass, a camera with a good AF system, and an integrated flash system that worked flawlessly.

canon has it all except for 2.5 yrs a sensor that was stuck at 6400-12800 on the 1Dx1 flagship. The D4s was out with usable 20K ISO and a flash system that worked.....game changed for Nikon shooters overnight

But I am glad canon is finally in the game. I know many that would have jumped ship if this release did not catch them up


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mark_Cohran
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
15,692 posts
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1359
Joined Jul 2002
Location: Portland, Oregon
     
Jan 02, 2017 13:36 |  #64

It's funny how things change. Does anyone remember back when Canon was making the only affordable DSLR and Nikon was scrambling to catch up? Sony didn't even have a player in the game. Now everyone lauds Nikon, and perhaps rightly so, but the fact of the matter is that the systems often trade leads back and forth over the long term. I've been shooting with Canon for about 40 years and I doubt I'll ever switch over due to some small technological advantage in another system. What I have today is light years beyond what I had when I started shooting and most all the techniques I learned to overcome the limits of that ancient (in photographic history), still works today.


Mark
-----
Some primes, some zooms, some Ls, some bodies and they all play nice together.
Forty years of shooting and still learning.
My Tumblr Site (external link) (NSFW)
Follow Me on Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
level5photog
Member
171 posts
Likes: 30
Joined Nov 2015
     
Jan 02, 2017 14:18 |  #65

I agreed. I haven't been shooting that long compared to alot of my peers but I always see people chasing for technological advancement from Sony/Nikon and other company in an effort to make their images stand out from the rest. Switching from one brand to another is expensive and time consuming process. The different in IQ is not significant enough to warrant a change. After seeing alot of people with expensive camera, lens and lighting, I still think the photographer skill is the most important factor. Even with the old Canon 6D, it still produce amazing results.

That is why I am still shooting shooting Canon and have diverted my time and money on lens, lighting gears and most importantly photography education instead. Company will always leap each other from one generation to another. Canon have finally caught up with the sensor and it just a matter of time before Canon lead the pact. Even if they don't, the camera on the market right now is more than adequate for my needs. Newer camera just make it easier to get the shot, but it won't make you a better photographer.

Mark_Cohran wrote in post #18230853 (external link)
It's funny how things change. Does anyone remember back when Canon was making the only affordable DSLR and Nikon was scrambling to catch up? Sony didn't even have a player in the game. Now everyone lauds Nikon, and perhaps rightly so, but the fact of the matter is that the systems often trade leads back and forth over the long term. I've been shooting with Canon for about 40 years and I doubt I'll ever switch over due to some small technological advantage in another system. What I have today is light years beyond what I had when I started shooting and most all the techniques I learned to overcome the limits of that ancient (in photographic history), still works today.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DaviSto
... sorry. I got carried away!
Avatar
1,927 posts
Gallery: 56 photos
Likes: 898
Joined Nov 2016
Location: Abuja Nigeria
Post edited over 2 years ago by DaviSto.
     
Jan 02, 2017 14:22 |  #66

umphotography wrote in post #18230787 (external link)
NO

This was a MAJOR mistake on Canons part. They should have done what Nikon Did and that was hop on the bandwagon and use the technology and continue to develop a sensor that was competitive. They went 2.5 yrs in the back of the bus and that hurt them.

AS IT STANDS NOW.....The sony sensor is still better in terms of ISO & Dark/shadow retention...not a lot but marginally better

Canon lost a bunch of customers who jumped ship and went to Nikon and Sony. Dont kid yourself. There was in fact a fire sale everywhere. I saw it and so did many others.

Sonys problem is No glass, NO integrated Flash system that works well, and a Crapola AF system with horrendous ergos for the camera. Its not a user friendly lay out by any means. garbage compared to Canon and Nikon..... But people were willing to put up with it because the sensors created opportunities and make things easier in dark environments.

Nikon has the Glass, a camera with a good AF system, and an integrated flash system that worked flawlessly.

canon has it all except for 2.5 yrs a sensor that was stuck at 6400-12800 on the 1Dx1 flagship. The D4s was out with usable 20K ISO and a flash system that worked.....game changed for Nikon shooters overnight

But I am glad canon is finally in the game. I know many that would have jumped ship if this release did not catch them up


I understand the argument ... but, to me, a two-and-a-half year technology gap in one aspect of camera performance is really neither here nor there. It doesn't mean much to me. I'm expecting to upgrade camera bodies on a five or six year cycle ... longer than that if I am not suffering mightily as a result. In that context, a couple of years gap one way or the other really isn't that important, especially when it is in only one (and arguably far from the most important) aspect of camera performance. Things like familiarity with the menu system, being used to the location of buttons and dials ... and what they do ... just feeling comfortable with the camera in my hands ... are very important to me. Photography is not my whole life and there are real limits on how much effort, money and time I would be prepared to put into assembling and mastering a new system just to get some marginal gains.

Hey, perhaps I should be more ambitious and excited to face new challenges, and I can understand others get a real kick out of that. But I'm not ... period.

Lots of people will see things differently (thankfully, we are not all the same) ... but Canon was probably on pretty safe ground believing it could ride out two or three years of being behind on sensor performance. There are enough like me, who are not going to jump quickly for one reason or another ... and the ones that jump quickly may be the easiest to entice back.

Anyway, time will tell.


David.
Comment and (constructive) criticism always welcome.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,882 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 2689
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Jan 02, 2017 14:33 |  #67

Agreed Mark Cohran

once your heavily invested its hard to jump ship. Like I have said many many times.......Im glad I waited

But I can see why many were bad mouthing Canon. I think they deserved some of the bashing.


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Colorblinded
Goldmember
Avatar
2,649 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 437
Joined Jul 2007
     
Jan 02, 2017 15:09 |  #68

umphotography wrote in post #18230916 (external link)
Agreed Mark Cohran

once your heavily invested its hard to jump ship. Like I have said many many times.......Im glad I waited

But I can see why many were bad mouthing Canon. I think they deserved some of the bashing.

Biggest pain to me is that I've waited and the improvement is finally here, just not as much as I'd hoped for in some areas. I'm still likely going to get me a 5d4 at some point soon, I just hoped for more.


http://www.colorblinde​dphoto.com (external link)
http://www.thecolorbli​ndphotographer.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
welshwizard1971
Goldmember
Avatar
1,448 posts
Likes: 1074
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Southampton Hampshire UK
     
Jan 02, 2017 15:17 |  #69

But isn't that always going to be the case?


EOS R 5D III, 40D, 16-35L 35 ART 50 ART 100L macro, 24-70 L Mk2, 135L 200L 70-200L f4 IS
Hype chimping - The act of looking at your screen after every shot, then wildly behaving like it's the best picture in the world, to try and impress other photographers around you.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,882 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 2689
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Jan 02, 2017 15:36 |  #70

welshwizard1971 wrote in post #18230963 (external link)
But isn't that always going to be the case?


No I do not think so at all

My opinion is ( after playing with some Sony Sensor files in post up to 102ooo ISO )

Light is really bad when you need to be above 12800. Another stop and its 25000 ISO. There Just is not much there to work with w/0 supplementation. You start cranking up the ISO to use 52000 Files and the just look bad to me eye.

So I think they have gone about as far as they can for quality imagery and the sensors. I see Nikon is coming out with stuff that will shoot in the dark. I frankly dont see the point.

But where I really see the benefit of the higher ISO improvements is shooting in the sweet spots when the light is low. 4000-12800 with these clean sensors means faster shutter speeds in the dark and it also allows you to use the Auto modes like AV. With Flash supplementation we can shoot and let the camera do more work, and really concentrate on whats going on and not have to worry about the light. You can set parameters with Auto ISO and just let the camera do its thing. Who cares if it goes to 12800...the images is going to be usable. My 1Dx2 I have it set for 16000. I frankly dont care if it goes there because I know its a usable file. HSS, auto ISO and ETTL use at these higher ISO's and faster shutter speeds is really producing great stuff for many....you just dont have to worry anymore so thats the real advantage to me.....On my 5D3...I really Dont want to exceed 6400 ISO for my wedding work in poorly lit rooms. Bad light even on a good sensor creates issues.....1Dx2 is really not a problem at 12800 is poor light...Its just clean.

So im good where these sensors are at now. I dont see much need to be playing around in 25000 ISO land


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,311 posts
Likes: 2346
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jan 02, 2017 15:37 |  #71

The 5DIV closes the gap significantly. I have yet to play with one but I have a few raws I have played with and I am quite impressed. Not quite as good as my 800 but miles ahead of my 5DII


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Colorblinded
Goldmember
Avatar
2,649 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 437
Joined Jul 2007
     
Jan 02, 2017 15:49 |  #72

umphotography wrote in post #18230990 (external link)
No I do not think so at all

My opinion is ( after playing with some Sony Sensor files in post up to 102ooo ISO )

Light is really bad when you need to be above 12800. Another stop and its 25000 ISO. There Just is not much there to work with w/0 supplementation. You start cranking up the ISO to use 52000 Files and the just look bad to me eye.

So I think they have gone about as far as they can for quality imagery and the sensors. I see Nikon is coming out with stuff that will shoot in the dark. I frankly dont see the point.

But where I really see the benefit of the higher ISO improvements is shooting in the sweet spots when the light is low. 4000-12800 with these clean sensors means faster shutter speeds in the dark and it also allows you to use the Auto modes like AV. With Flash supplementation we can shoot and let the camera do more work, and really concentrate on whats going on and not have to worry about the light. You can set parameters with Auto ISO and just let the camera do its thing. Who cares if it goes to 12800...the images is going to be usable. My 1Dx2 I have it set for 16000. I frankly dont care if it goes there because I know its a usable file. HSS, auto ISO and ETTL use at these higher ISO's and faster shutter speeds is really producing great stuff for many....you just dont have to worry anymore so thats the real advantage to me.....On my 5D3...I really Dont want to exceed 6400 ISO for my wedding work in poorly lit rooms. Bad light even on a good sensor creates issues.....1Dx2 is really not a problem at 12800 is poor light...Its just clean.

So im good where these sensors are at now. I dont see much need to be playing around in 25000 ISO land

I'm not even looking at the higher ISO end, even at base ISO there are advantages to the Sony sensors still. That's where I will personally find the most improvement and benefit from the 5D4, but again it's still an area where the Sony sensors are superior.

As a whole, the improvement is good & welcome. But on its own merits, if I weren't so tied to Canon, it's harder to argue for investing or staying in the system when Nikon or Sony can still better it in those areas with older cameras.


http://www.colorblinde​dphoto.com (external link)
http://www.thecolorbli​ndphotographer.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Deardorff
Member
110 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Oct 2016
     
Jan 04, 2017 18:30 |  #73

TheRump soon to be in the White House and not ragged on Canon... yet.


"I've been a procrastinator all my life. I keep meaning to do something about that."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dlee13
Goldmember
Avatar
4,189 posts
Gallery: 613 photos
Likes: 3822
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Sydney
     
Jan 11, 2017 08:01 |  #74

mwsilver wrote in post #18229089 (external link)
What I find interesting if that often the people that yell the loudest about the superiority of this or that piece of gear generate mediocre or moderately decent images at best. There are photographers, and then there are the gearheads for whom the numbers and latest features are everything. This is not to say great specs and the latest features aren't useful, but they don't trump good skills and great composition.

This reminds me of this guy who would always comment on random articles bashing Canon and praising Nikon. The article could be about a new Fuji lens and he would just start talking smack in the comments. One time he annoyed enough people and they just started laying into his photos (he loved the hdr type photos that look more like oil paintings). After that he deleted all his photos and I haven't seen him post since.

umphotography wrote in post #18230787 (external link)
NO

This was a MAJOR mistake on Canons part. They should have done what Nikon Did and that was hop on the bandwagon and use the technology and continue to develop a sensor that was competitive. They went 2.5 yrs in the back of the bus and that hurt them.

AS IT STANDS NOW.....The sony sensor is still better in terms of ISO & Dark/shadow retention...not a lot but marginally better

Personally I don't think Canon did anything wrong. In the consumer market they may appear to be behind Sony (I only mention them since they make Nikons sensors), but you have to remember they have many other ventures. They make security cameras and those huge megapixel sensors that they show off are the types of products that will get them government contracts for surveillance and make them big money which is probably where a lot of their focus is.


Sony Alpha A7III - Sony FE 35mm f/1.8 - Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro
Sony FE 85mm f/1.8 - Canon EF 16-35mm f4L IS -
Canon EOS M5 - Canon EF-M 32mm f/1.4 - Canon EF-M 22mm f/2 - Canon EF 11-22mm f/4-5.6 STM

Blog (external link) | Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
h14nha
Goldmember
Avatar
2,034 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 114
Joined Nov 2008
Location: South Wales, UK
     
Jan 12, 2017 00:36 |  #75

Dlee13 wrote in post #18240883 (external link)
Personally I don't think Canon did anything wrong. In the consumer market they may appear to be behind Sony (I only mention them since they make Nikons sensors), but you have to remember they have many other ventures. They make security cameras and those huge megapixel sensors that they show off are the types of products that will get them government contracts for surveillance and make them big money which is probably where a lot of their focus is.

Sony are commited to making/developing cameras.


Ian
There's no fool like an old skool fool :D
myflickr (external link)
My Gear - 7d, / 16-35mm F4 / 70-200 2.8 II / 100-400 / 300mm 2.8 / 500/4 :D XT-1 Graphite 18/35/56

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

16,754 views & 99 likes for this thread
Is it my imagination but is there a lot of Canon bashing?
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 quadrentau
2010 guests, 307 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.