Sony A9: Is Canon doomed ?

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18572395
No dpaf during 4K, but has it for 1080 which uses the full frame.

So I am no video person so please enlighten me. If they can do DPAF during 1080, why can't they do during 4k?

And what is eye AF if you can't track an eye. I might as well put an af point on the eye and shoot. This is 2018.

These are excellent questions.

The camera is pushing a lot of data in 4K h.264, I suspect that with just one Digic processor the DPAF requires too much of the processor to be accurate.

I wonder if we will find out more about the eye AF in the days to come.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18572531
These are excellent questions.

The camera is pushing a lot of data in 4K h.264, I suspect that with just one Digic processor the DPAF requires too much of the processor to be accurate.

I wonder if we will find out more about the eye AF in the days to come.

or it's just canon being canon

if you've lived with canon for a while, you should know how their updates go by now. Maybe with enough pushback, they'll even release a firmware update that allows PDAF in 4K. Not sure about that crop mode, it's probably backed in, so you're screwed in that regard.

Charlie wrote in post #18572542
or it's just canon being canon .

Other than the 6D II stupidity, I don't really think there has been that much blatant "wtf canon? marketing decisions."

I think they are actually having problems downsampling 4K video in their DSLRs. Isn't that what caused Sony to have the overheating problem?

Yeah processor is likely bottleneck to the AF system. Probably the same reason their pupil detect only works in single shot mode. The camera is still really solid at its price point, but it seems more underwhelming than the spec sheet led on at first.

It still doesn't seem that Canon wants to bring a no holds barred mirrorless camera market, which is a shame. Sony is announcing a mirrorless camera today. It'll likely be the a7riii, but we could see an apsc model announced too.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18572531
The camera is pushing a lot of data in 4K h.264, I suspect that with just one Digic processor the DPAF requires too much of the processor to be accurate.

That is why Canon is using a DIGIC 8 processor: designed specifically for handling 4k h.264 and ARM instruction sets for other processes.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18572546
I think they are actually having problems downsampling 4K video in their DSLRs. Isn't that what caused Sony to have the overheating problem?

Again, newer processors are designed for 4K video, and so they don't use as much electricity to generate more heat. There are also several types of techniques for downsampling full frame resolutions to 4K or 1080P (pixel binning vs skipping vs oversampling). Each of these techniques have strengths and weaknesses for for video quality or high ISO ability.

Just because they are designed for video, that doesn't mean they are designed well.

Just checked on some comments at Canon rumors. One guy is saying that it might be a sensor read out issue rather than a processing issue. My assumption would be that if that is the case, the camera would need to "read" the sensor in a seperate pass between frames to get the focus data.

But considering that the only canon cameras to do 4K DPAF have dual processors, it sure seems that it is indeed a processing issue. If 4 frames a second (just a random number I made up) need to be analyzed for focus, it seems just "duplicating" frames destined for the video file and sending them to another processor would make more sense than trying to grab an extra 4 frames that are strictly for focus data.

The M50 is the first Canon to use the DIGIC 8 processor. Keep in mind that most processors in devices are now multi-core and have multiple threads for carrying out different tasks simultaneously. Canon probably spent the extra money on a new single processor so that it could have better battery life and efficiency then two older processors. The specs say that the M50 will have contrast detect only when shooting 4k, and DPAF when shooting 1080P. 4K is also being shot in a crop mode (smaller even then the 5D4's frame), so it could be a matter of not enough DPAF points being present in the 4K frame to be effective.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #18572635
Just checked on some comments at Canon rumors. One guy is saying that it might be a sensor read out issue rather than a processing issue. My assumption would be that if that is the case, the camera would need to "read" the sensor in a seperate pass between frames to get the focus data.

But considering that the only canon cameras to do 4K DPAF have dual processors, it sure seems that it is indeed a processing issue. If 4 frames a second (just a random number I made up) need to be analyzed for focus, it seems just "duplicating" frames destined for the video file and sending them to another processor would make more sense than trying to grab an extra 4 frames that are strictly for focus data.

Makes sense actually. The thing about mirrorless cameras is that autofocus, metering...basically everything is done by the image sensor itself, so you need to move a lot data off the sensor quickly for things to function. When you look at the things Sony's mirrorless cameras are able to achieve, the design of the sensor itself is at the heart of things. Back-side illuminated sensor in the a7rIII, stacked sensor in the a9....these designs allow data to be pushed downstream faster, and are driving things like continuous eye AF, black-out free shooting, 20fps, etc etc.

With regards to Canon's efforts with mirrorless cameras...it might not actually be a matter of willingness to produce a competitive mirrorless camera, but a matter of manufacturing and design capability. They finally were able to adopt on-chip DAC sensors to achieve better dynamic range out of their sensors...but they're still effectively 2 generations behind Sony in terms of sensor design.

mystik610 wrote in post #18572703
With regards to Canon's efforts with mirrorless cameras...it might not actually be a matter of willingness to produce a competitive mirrorless camera, but a matter of manufacturing and design capability. They finally were able to adopt on-chip DAC sensors to achieve better dynamic range out of their sensors...but they're still effectively 2 generations behind Sony in terms of sensor design.

.
But isn't this in itself a function of willingness and/or determination? . I mean, if they wanted to make a mirrorless system to compete with Sony's then they could just throw a crapton more money into sensor R&D, and come up with something comparable, right?

I think the fact that they haven't thrown several hundred million more dollars into sensor R&D is because they haven't decided to make it their top priority ....... which speaks of their willingness & determination.

So, what, then, is their top priority? . If you look at the way they have been running their interchangeable lens camera division, their top priority seems to be short-term profits and stock gains.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18572715
.
But isn't this in itself a function of willingness and/or determination? . I mean, if they wanted to make a mirrorless system to compete with Sony's then they could just throw a crapton more money into sensor R&D, and come up with something comparable, right?

I think the fact that they haven't thrown several hundred million more dollars into sensor R&D is because they haven't decided to make it their top priority ....... which speaks of their willingness & determination.

So, what, then, is their top priority? . If you look at the way they have been running their interchangeable lens camera division, their top priority seems to be short-term profits and stock gains.

.

It depends on if they think they will recoup that money through increased sales. I seriously doubt that DSLR/mirrorless sales are a big enough market alone to make the investment worthwhile. Sony pretty much owns the cell phone market which greatly helps distribute the R&D and infrastructure expenses. I still thinks Canon's greatest failure was not jumping headfirst into the cell phone market.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18572715
.
But isn't this in itself a function of willingness and/or determination? . I mean, if they wanted to make a mirrorless system to compete with Sony's then they could just throw a crapton more money into sensor R&D, and come up with something comparable, right?

I think the fact that they haven't thrown several hundred million more dollars into sensor R&D is because they haven't decided to make it their top priority ....... which speaks of their willingness & determination.

So, what, then, is their top priority? . If you look at the way they have been running their interchangeable lens camera division, their top priority seems to be short-term profits and stock gains.

.

Tom,
It is not merely a matter of 'willingness' or 'determination'...if new (sensor) technology is directly related to semiconductor manufacturing technology (and it very often is) there comes the issue that they would need to build an all-new semiconductor manufacturing facility (so as to allow uninterrupted product using the older technology, not interrupting the flow of whatever for a period of time). Hundreds of millions of dollars might be needed for the land, building construction, and then filling it with the newest semiconductor fabriication equipment.

I just found this statement:

"Estimates put the cost of building a new fab over one billion U.S. dollars with values as high as $3–4 billion not being uncommon. TSMC invested $9.3 billion in its Fab15 300 mm wafer manufacturing facility in Taiwan."

My very first job out of college was as supervisor of a brand new department in a relatively new semiconductor fab facility, which is how I had an idea of the relative costs. (Boy was I glad to be in a layoff from that brutal business!)
Being in the business of semiconductor fab, Sony could invest more into facilities which are defrayed by production services sold to other companies; Canon is not in the fab services business.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18572715
.
But isn't this in itself a function of willingness and/or determination? . I mean, if they wanted to make a mirrorless system to compete with Sony's then they could just throw a crapton more money into sensor R&D, and come up with something comparable, right?

I think the fact that they haven't thrown several hundred million more dollars into sensor R&D is because they haven't decided to make it their top priority ....... which speaks of their willingness & determination.

So, what, then, is their top priority? . If you look at the way they have been running their interchangeable lens camera division, their top priority seems to be short-term profits and stock gains.

.

Well from a capability standpoint, the advantage that Sony has been leveraging is a synergy between their imaging products department and an industry leading semi-conductor business. In this type of environment, as a camera company you can either choose to invest the resources in developing that type level of capability in house, or simply do what most others are doing: source from Sony.

Now Canon has a healthy balance sheet with enough cash to make billion dollar acquisitions with no debt (axis), but like you said, developing that level of capability doesn't appear to be a strategic priority for them. So yes its a lack of willingness to invest in that type of capability, but either way their sensor design and fab capabilities do not appear to be on par with Sony at the time.

From a business standpoint you can see why Canon would take such a position. Their market position is still very strong even though they are technologically behind the curve. So investing in R&D does not have the sexiness of a growth opportunity for them and there will be a lot of resistance to making those types of capital investments. It is a very short-sighted way of thinking, but I've worked in finance for a long time, and as frustrating as it is, propping up earnings in the short-term to appease shareholders is always the strategic priority for publicly traded companies.. It doesn't do photographers who could benefit from more capable cameras any favors though.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18572715
.
But isn't this in itself a function of willingness and/or determination? . I mean, if they wanted to make a mirrorless system to compete with Sony's then they could just throw a crapton more money into sensor R&D, and come up with something comparable, right?

I think the fact that they haven't thrown several hundred million more dollars into sensor R&D is because they haven't decided to make it their top priority ....... which speaks of their willingness & determination.

So, what, then, is their top priority? . If you look at the way they have been running their interchangeable lens camera division, their top priority seems to be short-term profits and stock gains.

.

Maybe they dont want to compete?

It could be that their profits are good enough and they dont care to compete.