When do people actually expect Canon to catch up sensor wise?

with the release of the 7d2 and no real sensor improvement (although it still has alot going for it) our only next hope is whatever camera canon releases next can finally compete with every other company sensor wise. So this is bit of a two fold question:
How long has nikon and sony been ahead of Canon sensor wise? im guessing it was with the release of the d800 in the summer of 2012.
Given canon would put in a new competing sensor in their next camera release when would you think that might happen?

Honestly, probably never. Even if they were to catch up to Sony with some announcements next year, Sony and Samsung will have will have raised the bar even higher by then.

elitejp wrote in post #17206458
How long has nikon and sony been ahead of Canon sensor wise? im guessing it was with the release of the d800 in the summer of 2012.

2007 when the D3 came out

It will be when the "next BIG something" comes along, for sure.

rick_reno wrote in post #17206496
It will be when the "next BIG something" comes along, for sure.

Unless that big thing turns out to be a video about a director that shoots Sony.

Thomas Campbell wrote in post #17206497
Unless that big thing turns out to be a video about a director that shoots Sony.

haha

back on topic, I think they will never catch up, best thing for them to do is buy some sony sensors.

When they released the 5DMK3 and the DR actually went DOWN, that's when I knew the gig was up.

Eventually.

Unless Canon starts using Sony sensors they'll never catch up. Look at the 7DII, they are already admitting that their focus as a company isn't on upgrading the sensor tech but on other features that are cheaper for them to implement in their products.

Now it's up to the consumer to decide what they would rather shoot with for their needs.

Couldn't this argument have taken place in the reverse when Canon was eating everyone else's lunch? But then they put it on cruise control and hungry Sony slipped by. Same thing can happen. It's not like Sony/Nikon sensors have improved dramatically in the past 2-3 years, either. It was just that big leap up and now it's pretty flat. Plenty of opportunity for Canon to catch up, if they want and if they can.

I remember the Nikon D70 vs Canon 30D and it was like 2 stop advantage for Canon. Nikon could barely do ISO 800. And Canon 40D slaughtered the Sony A700 at every ISO. So at one point it seemed like Canon had the insurmountable lead, too.

Thorrulz wrote in post #17208003
Unless Canon starts using Sony sensors they'll never catch up. Look at the 7DII, they are already admitting that their focus as a company isn't on upgrading the sensor tech but on other features that are cheaper for them to implement in their products.

Now it's up to the consumer to decide what they would rather shoot with for their needs.

Hrmmm, I completely disagree with this.

Sony makes excellent sensors. They have really perfected the column adc tech. They did not, however, invent it. Their sensors do rock, though.

Canon makes excellent all around sensors that are lacking in one area only. However, their design gives Canon some advantages (other than price).

However, Sony doesn't have a monopoly on getting good low ISO DR. The D7100 chip is not a Sony chip, for example. The Nikon D4 has better base ISO DR than the 1Dx (though imho the 1dx is the better cam) but uses a Nikon designed sensor with a more traditional readout, although the ADCs are on chip they are not per column.

Canon could get amazing base ISO DR without moving the ADCs on chip, as well. Proof of this is magic lantern dual ISO. However, Canon clocks the CMOS imager chip pretty fast. This has ups and downs. The design on the Sony chips lets them do the readout slower (thousands of ADCs).

One can also use digital CDS (supposedly, I could be wrong about this, but supposedly it has it) and on chip ADCs and produce crap (The Leica M--I don't care what anyone says or what DXO says, but that sensor, while having the high tech features and being done on a more modern fab, is nowhere near Sony or Canon sensors lol).

So, we'll see. Sony makes amazing sensors.

The DXO results saying the 5d3 has less DR than the 5d2 is flat out wrong though. It may technically be true, but due to pattern noise in the real world the results are way, way, WAY in the other direction. The 5d3 sensor is a huge improvement, and the 6d one is a decent step above that imho.

And, I like DXO's measurements. They are useful. But, don't panic~.

The word 'Never' has been thrown around here quite a bit - pretty bold statements. Throughout my life I've learned to be very careful when I use the word never - as it rarely sticks.

It does seem a while since Canon has led in sensors. Add to this the 'Canon sees impossible' campaign and I can understand why so many think that Canon wont' catch up - but history has proven the market leap frogs, and I expect this to occur again - it's just a matter of when. Never say never.

adza77 wrote in post #17208241
It does seem a while since Canon has led in sensors. Add to this the 'Canon sees impossible' campaign and I can understand why so many think that Canon wont' catch up - but history has proven the market leap frogs, and I expect this to occur again - it's just a matter of when. Never say never.

As I've stated in another thread, Sony are spending 3 times what Canon are on R&D.
If this was reversed I'd say they'd be back bigger, better and stronger, but you have to worry when they have 1/3 the budget to not only create better sensors, but also create a new line of cameras (mirrorless) etc.

"Eventually". Sony has apparently been dumping money like mad into R&D, but they have also shown themselves to be a rather unreliable company financially in the last decade or so. Canon has been playing things safe and keeping costs well in check while still developing and deploying some solid and excellent technology. Canon is a diverse field but focused company who is spread just wide enough to be stable, but not so wide as to conflict with itself. Nikon is overly focused with too few markets to rely on in the case of economic troubles, and Sony has become a joke trying to stick a finger in every last pie it sees and utterly failing in many fields.

My view is: I'm happy with how Canon cameras work and function, and it will be several more years before I consider taking the effort to jump ship. But honestly if I jump ship from Canon it won't be to go to Sony/Nikon 35mm or crop offerings, but rather I'll likely be jumping up to a Pentax medium format.

(Last week I went digging for a high end photo contest that kept exif data. 75% of the finalists images from 2013 were shot on Canon, mostly 5DII and 5DIIIs, and all winners in each category were a Canon, and one had been shot on a T3...)

So there will always be some rather vocal tech-heads and pixel peepers whining about who has the 'better' sensor, while most of the world will care about who has a 'good' sensor... And these days no one is producing a bad sensor for a DSLR style camera and staying in business.

I didn't realize Sony was outspending Canon 3:1 on sensor R&D. Where is that documented?

Sony seems to have become the Intel of the sensor world and I think I'm to the place where I would like Canon to realize it and just use Sony sensors in their top products.

I have contended that "competition is good", that it's good that Canon continues to compete. But any serious PC or Mac has an Intel CPU in it these days. So I'm coming around to thinking the same ought to be true for serious cameras having Sony sensors.