Sony A9: Is Canon doomed ?

eddieb1 wrote in post #18334685
Canon isn't only into photography. It's tentacles spread to quite a few other industries.

Fair enough. I was only referring to its camera business [and the thread title is supposed to be a provocation ].

CheshireCat wrote in post #18334690
No, but its Windows Phones are.

There are lots of similarities between MS and Canon in that they are both fairly well diversified in regards to revenue.

But Microsoft coming into the phone game with so little hardware experience and honestly a pretty horrible GUI history is nothing like a perrenial dominant player like canon in the SLR/DSLR space. Neither are they like Sony who has a long history of innovation. While many of their products have shaken up industries and gained strong footholds, others have been able to wiggle in and compete with their own products. Sony seems to rely on winning with new technologies not marketing (I'm including the entire marketing chain, not just advertising)

And I don't see Canon sticking their head in the sand and saying Sony is crap either.

IMO, Canon is using their dominant position to do some market research via sales and actual users. This is a slow process and has resulted in some backlash for not innovating.

Sony is throwing tons of technical resources at every social media complaint leveled at Nikon and Canon in the last decade but disregarding the bigger picture marketing issues that many pros see as major reasons to stay with Canon.

It's hard to argue with specs, but the things that are less cut and dried are where many end up staying with the market leader for fear of being let down after the sale.

Luckless wrote in post #18334700
Yes, because every time you use a camera with a fast burst rate, you need to shoot 20 images at a time, and at the end of the day you have to come home with at least a thousand frames...

I own a pair of 7D cameras, carry one daily, use it at least every other day on average, and literally go months between bothering to charge the battery. Why? Because many times I take the camera out, frame the subject study it, and then don't take a photo... (There is after all little sense in taking a photo once you already know you don't like it and won't use it.) Other times I'm only taking a handful, but I'm often framing photos up for long periods of time without actively capturing images.

And in the original post you quoted me in was also comparing the 1Dx series and its massive battery, and not the smaller one found in the 7D.

I don't have faith in the A9's ability to be ready to take a photo at any time during the day when I grab my camera and lift it to my eye. I've sat for hours with my 7D and a telephoto trained on a target point waiting for the shot (Critters coming out of a den), all the while watching through the view finder, and not put a dent in the battery usage, because the camera can be fully functional while in a mode that uses nearly zero power while allowing you to frame your image and still have no delay on your shutter.


This thread is about whether or not a product like the Sony A9 can doom Canon. Given that the Sony A9 fails to meet use-case needs of many photographers, and Sony does not have nearly as strong level of customer trust as Canon does, it would then suggest that the 'doom' of Canon is rather unlikely based on this one camera.

True, but it's been stabbing Canon on multiple fronts with it's lineup of cameras. The A7r (2) was a big blow that turned a lot of former Cannonites over to Sony. The A9 will just be another dagger in the side of Canon.

We are seeing DSLR sales sliding every year whereas mirrorless sales continue to gain momentum. This has got to worry CaNikon a lot as they see their bread and butter market shares slipping.

Luckless wrote in post #18334700
This thread is about whether or not a product like the Sony A9 can doom Canon

... Canon's camera business.

artsf wrote in post #18334059
I gave it a second thought and came to the conclusion that it is possible that Sony step on Canon. I keep forgetting that Sony quickly and quietly became the king of compact cameras starting with the release of RX100. My understanding is that even Canon buys 1" sensors from Sony.

If Sony opens up the FE mount specs to third party vendors and revamp their user interface, there would be a real threat to Canon. Also, don't forget that Sony has thr ability to purhase Sigma, the entire company.
What is not clear is whether Canon can continue improving its sensors or we will see the current generation being reused for the next 5 years when Sony would have made a quantum leap in technology by then.

The proximity sensor is actually inside the eye cup. Long story short, it doesn't come on unless the camera is held up to your face.

Hogloff wrote in post #18334724
We are seeing DSLR sales sliding every year whereas mirrorless sales continue to gain momentum. This has got to worry CaNikon a lot as they see their bread and butter market shares slipping.

Am I the only one that see the mechanics and form factor pretty much irrelevant?

The battery life thing is blown out of proportion IMO. You get significantly more shots per charged than advertised. Battery life is shorter than DSLR (I'd say that its about half the capacity in real world use), but the need to change batteries is not as catastrophic as people make it out to be. It takes maybe 5 seconds to change batteries...it takes longer to change lenses. And just like changing lenses, or doing whatever other gear jumbling you do when shooting, the key is to be smart about your work-flow. i.e. I keep batteries in my pocket or an easily accessible part of my bag, and I don't wait for my battery to be fully dead in the midst of a key moment. When there's a lull in my shoot and I have less than 20% battery, I spare the 5 seconds to change it then and there.

eddieb1 wrote in post #18334695
If you read some of the reviews, the Sony isn't up to par compared to the Canon and Nikon offerings. The Sony weather sealing is nowhere near that of Canon and Nikon pro series cameras. The Sony isn't as robust as the other two.

Which for $1500 and $2000 (respectively) less money, it is quite a good compromise for anyone but the most extreme photographers.

Hogloff wrote in post #18334718
I use the A7R and get about 400 shots off a battery using single shot mode. I typically carry 1 spare battery with me, they are tiny, and very rarely do I need to use the spare. I can get even more shots by turning the camera into airplane mode, but I always forget to do that.

My A7R2 is always in airplane mode, and I carry 2 spare batteries just in case, for long sessions.
With the 1Dx, I carry 1 spare which takes more space than 2 Sony batteries.
I change battery much more frequently with the Sony, but this takes 5 seconds.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18334723
IMO, Canon is using their dominant position to do some market research via sales and actual users. This is a slow process and has resulted in some backlash for not innovating.

Sony is throwing tons of technical resources at every social media complaint leveled at Nikon and Canon in the last decade but disregarding the bigger picture marketing issues that many pros see as major reasons to stay with Canon.

It's hard to argue with specs, but the things that are less cut and dried are where many end up staying with the market leader for fear of being let down after the sale.

Can you please show me where you get your information from that Sony does not do their market research and just blindly create specs. I understand creating the A9 Sony spent a considerable amount of time with professionals understanding what was required by them in their field.

As a side note...wonder what customer research lead Canon to have a print button on their cameras for so many years?

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18334723
There are lots of similarities between MS and Canon in that they are both fairly well diversified in regards to revenue.

But Microsoft coming into the phone game with so little hardware experience and honestly a pretty horrible GUI history is nothing like a perrenial dominant player like canon in the SLR/DSLR space. Neither are they like Sony who has a long history of innovation. While many of their products have shaken up industries and gained strong footholds, others have been able to wiggle in and compete with their own products. Sony seems to rely on winning with new technologies not marketing (I'm including the entire marketing chain, not just advertising)

And I don't see Canon sticking their head in the sand and saying Sony is crap either.

IMO, Canon is using their dominant position to do some market research via sales and actual users. This is a slow process and has resulted in some backlash for not innovating.

Sony is throwing tons of technical resources at every social media complaint leveled at Nikon and Canon in the last decade but disregarding the bigger picture marketing issues that many pros see as major reasons to stay with Canon.

It's hard to argue with specs, but the things that are less cut and dried are where many end up staying with the market leader for fear of being let down after the sale.

The reason for Canon's lack of innovation is simpler than that and actually shares a lot in common with microsoft in the early 00's.

The market for cameras is shrinking, and Canon has saturated its position in what's left of the market. So the release a FF mirrorless camera will not necessarily bring them new customers....they'll simply be cannibalizing their DSLR customers. So the motivation to innovate does not exist. Nikon, Canon's DSLR counter-part, is in the same position, and the two of them have been locked in a classic game theory type situation, where it is mutually non-beneficial for either of them to release mirrorless cameras that directly compete with existing DSLR lines.

Sony's position in the grand scheme of things is very different....for them, mirrorless cameras present an opportunity for growth, and they have all the motivation to to aggressively push the technology forward as a means to capture more of the market.

Hogloff wrote in post #18334755
Can you please show me where you get your information from that Sony does not do their market research and just blindly create specs. I understand creating the A9 Sony spent a considerable amount of time with professionals understanding what was required by them in their field.

Wait, I said what about Sony?

As a side note...wonder what customer research lead Canon to have a print button on their cameras for so many years?

Wait, I said what about Canon?


BTW, the print button is good evidence of what I was talking about in regards to Canon.

Also, asking for a source on something that follows "IMO" ? ? ?

mystik610 wrote in post #18334768
The reason for Canon's lack of innovation is simpler than that and actually shares a lot in common with microsoft in the early 00's.

The market for cameras is shrinking, and Canon has saturated its position in what's left of the market. So the release a FF mirrorless camera will not necessarily bring them new customers....they'll simply be cannibalizing their DSLR customers. So the motivation to innovate does not exist. Nikon, Canon's DSLR counter-part, is in the same position, and the two of them have been locked in a classic game theory type situation, where it is mutually non-beneficial for either of them to release mirrorless cameras that directly compete with existing DSLR lines.

Sony's position in the grand scheme of things is very different....for them, mirrorless cameras present an opportunity for growth, and they have all the motivation to to aggressively push the technology forward as a means to capture more of the market.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18334780
Wait, I said what about Sony?

Wait, I said what about Canon?


BTW, the print button is good evidence of what I was talking about in regards to Canon.

Also, asking for a source on something that follows "IMO" ? ? ?

Sorry, didn't see the IMO...would have totally ignored everything.

nekrosoft13 wrote in post #18333292
i was holding on to Canon and every year hoping for that unicorn magical camera that Canon might release, and over two years later it still hasn't happened.

So, I'm asking: how often did you look at an 16x20 print from a Canon camera and think to yourself, "Damn! If I had that unicorn magical camera, this shot would have been sooooo much better. This is garbage!"? The level of excellence in every large sensor camera today and a lot of small sensor ones in smart phones is such that if one's photos su... um... suffer from recognizable deficiencies, it's not the fault of the camera. I'm just sayin.