"Dear Canon" article

https://petapixel.com …anon-happened-innovation/

no sales = no innovation



I would say, Canon seems to not want to introduce risk into the full frames (6D, 5D, and 1D) as this are all professional cameras....

the innovation like dual pixel (70D), new sensor (80D) seems to reach the crop bodies first.

there is less risk being the number 2 in technology than being number 1.

Nobody is twisting my arm (either, I do have two) to make me use Canon gear. I didn't upgrade my 6D to a 6DII because I don't need anything the 6DII offers. I did upgrade my 60D to an 80D, because it offered a ton of things I wanted/needed in my aps-c camera.

Do you really believe that Canon, or anyone else, should offer YOU exactly what YOU need every time a new product is offered? If I wanted more features/bells/whistle​s, I could upgrade to a 5D4 or 1DX2. Don't need, either. Canon, thanks for offering, though.

As much as I would like to see more innovation, as I read the article, the author lost me immediately at the point where he thought the 5d2 was the last innovative camera. The 5d2 was a warmed over 5d with video. I had a few 5d2, and thought it was the one of the most boring of the 5d series. It's ISO wasn't much an improvement over the 5d, it had the same AF, and not other really innovative features other than video. That article is silly IMO.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18451017
As much as I would like to see more innovation, as I read the article, the author lost me immediately at the point where he thought the 5d2 was the last innovative camera. The 5d2 was a warmed over 5d with video. I had a few 5d2, and thought it was the one of the most boring of the 5d series. It's ISO wasn't much an improvement over the 5d, it had the same AF, and not other really innovative features other than video. That article is silly IMO.

5D2 has been historically the most biggest jump canon has ever done.

firmware massive jump, live view, video recording, megapixels, 2 stops native ISO improvement (3 stops higher when boosted), a real useable rear LCD. It was absolutely a massive upgrade. I remember the time when it happened, the photography world was twisted upside down.

Charlie wrote in post #18451130
5D2 has been historically the most biggest jump canon has ever done.

firmware massive jump, live view, video recording, megapixels, 2 stops native ISO improvement (3 stops higher when boosted), a real useable rear LCD. It was absolutely a massive upgrade. I remember the time when it happened, the photography world was twisted upside down.

Yes, and the 5D3 has been a total flop. Nobody has any real use for auto-focus that can actually focus, automatically. Why bother with 65 (or whatever) AF points? Users are totally happy with 9, 8 of which are total SPIT. I've never heard one real complaint about the AF on the 5Dc/II. Jeez, forget about the 5D4; just more of the same.

BTW, available higher ISO settings are not even distantly related to higher ISO performance. If it were, the 5D2 would have had ISO 12 billion available, and ISO would no longer be an issue. Kind of like the speedometer going to 120mph in my RAV4 implies absolutely nothing about the ability to get to that speed, or performance when (if?) it ever gets there.

Charlie wrote in post #18451130
5D2 has been historically the most biggest jump canon has ever done.

That would be debatable. What about the AE-1: being the first Canon plastic/metal coated body with a CPU chip inside? It also had the highest sales for a SLR. What about the controversial move to dump the FD mount and go, completely electronic lens motor, EOS?

As for the 5D2, it was its use of video that was revolutionary. I had been a 5D owner, and only real issues I found was with AF. Since an upgrade offered no real performance difference with stills photography, I never felt the need to get a 5D2.

I get where the author is coming from, and agree to certain extents. The 5D2 was revolutionary in terms of its video, even though I don't shoot video, and certainly pushed boundaries in other ways. To me, nothing Canon has done since has changed things up in such a significant way. Canon has certainly evolved and improved the product, there's no denying that, but they've also been pretty lazy in terms of making real improvements that I can say I'd benefit from. The improved dynamic range and image quality of most of their recent sensors (excluding the 6D2 for some reason) is appreciated, but I won't kid myself that I wouldn't mind having the flexibility of the better Sony (and now Nikon) sensors as a tool in my toolbox.

Canon is certainly at the head of the pack, if not leading the way in many respects, when it comes to lenses though.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18451017
As much as I would like to see more innovation, as I read the article, the author lost me immediately at the point where he thought the 5d2 was the last innovative camera. The 5d2 was a warmed over 5d with video. I had a few 5d2, and thought it was the one of the most boring of the 5d series. It's ISO wasn't much an improvement over the 5d, it had the same AF, and not other really innovative features other than video. That article is silly IMO.

Charlie wrote in post #18451130
5D2 has been historically the most biggest jump canon has ever done.

firmware massive jump, live view, video recording, megapixels, 2 stops native ISO improvement (3 stops higher when boosted), a real useable rear LCD. It was absolutely a massive upgrade. I remember the time when it happened, the photography world was twisted upside down.

I'm with Charlie on this one. If you look at the 5DII in the context of all the 5Ds today (5D, 5DII, 5DIII, 5DIV, 5DSR, 6D, 6DII) then it does look like a rather boring upgrade. But back when it was introduces all there was was the 1Ds, 1DsII, 5D, 1DsIII and Nikon D3. The 5DII looked pretty good among that group and had way more than just video. Charlie forgot to a near doubling of resolution, MFA, SRAW, custom modes, and other features. But above all, there was a significant improvement in the IQ over the 5D.

In the same vein, the original 5D was revolutionary when it was introduced. It was the first FF DSLR in the "pro-sumer" price point. The 5D2 was more technically revolutionary for the inclusion of video. It brought about the term HDSLR.

gjl711 wrote in post #18451195
I'm with Charlie on this one. If you look at the 5DII in the context of all the 5Ds today (5D, 5DII, 5DIII, 5DIV, 5DSR, 6D, 6DII) then it does look like a rather boring upgrade. But back when it was introduces all there was was the 1Ds, 1DsII, 5D, 1DsIII and Nikon D3. The 5DII looked pretty good among that group and had way more than just video. Charlie forgot to a near doubling of resolution, MFA, SRAW, custom modes, and other features. But above all, there was a significant improvement in the IQ over the 5D.

My comparisons and tests showed a different result. The ISO and noise rendering between the 5D and 5D2 were very close in my tests, and that mirror'd DPReview's summary as well. The 5D2 had almost a stop more DR, which is great, and had more resolution, which is also great. Live view was already out in other cameras, so adding liveview to the 5D2 was more evolutionary at that point then revolutionary. AF was no better.

So for when I had those and compared to the 5D, there were 4 things that really were enhancements that mattered in the end product:
- More resolution
- Better DR
- 1080P Video
- Availability of higher ISO

Features nice to have, some from other bodies:
- Live view (from 40D, 1D3)
- AFMA (from 1D3)
- 1 extra FPS
- Better LCD
- Host of other smaller items like HTP, selectable NR, sraw, etc much of which were taken from the 1D3 and others...

AF was not any better, as stated prior, a pretty critical aspect to many types of photography. I only consider the FF video and better DR to be the innovative aspects at that time. Other cameras already had good high ISO, high resolution, etc. If others had it and Canon added it, it isn't innovative IMO. If Canon had features and capabilities in other models and added them to this, then there is some level of innovation, as long as competition didn't have it, but to a lesser extreme. Was the 5D2 a great value for the money? Absolutely yes. Was it the last major innovative product Canon created? No. Was it a notable blip on the camera technology roadmap? Yes, but mainly because of video, with an episode of House being filmed with it to help advertise it.

In any case, there does seem to be a level of slowdown regarding innovation. However that isn't all bad in itself. As a product becomes very mature, it changes less and less. Unfortunately this means that upgrades happen less and less by the consumer too, reducing revenues by an organization, which means less R&D for innovation, and the cycle spirals downwards.

Bassat wrote in post #18451139
Yes, and the 5D3 has been a total flop. Nobody has any real use for auto-focus that can actually focus, automatically. Why bother with 65 (or whatever) AF points? Users are totally happy with 9, 8 of which are total SPIT. I've never heard one real complaint about the AF on the 5Dc/II. Jeez, forget about the 5D4; just more of the same.

BTW, available higher ISO settings are not even distantly related to higher ISO performance. If it were, the 5D2 would have had ISO 12 billion available, and ISO would no longer be an issue. Kind of like the speedometer going to 120mph in my RAV4 implies absolutely nothing about the ability to get to that speed, or performance when (if?) it ever gets there.

Upgraded AF was certainly well received, but consider history for a moment.

The Nikon D700 had fairly good AF and full frame.


it was also COMPLETELY overshadowed by the 5Dii. The 5Dii was so popular that when the 6D came out, the 5Dii was selling for MORE than the 6D for a while, I traded up to the 6D and made money....

how many folks were switching to the D700 for the superior AF?

You must have caught the market just right then, because this track of the pricing of the 5D2 shows a continual downtrend, especially at the announcement of the 6D in Sept 2012. Canon threw some really good rebates on it to get rid of them, and that isn't usually something a manufacturer does if they are selling so well.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18451302
You must have caught the market just right then, because this track of the pricing of the 5D2 shows a continual downtrend, especially at the announcement of the 6D in Sept 2012. Canon threw some really good rebates on it to get rid of them, and that isn't usually something a manufacturer does if they are selling so well.

Regarding the 5D3 prices, the 6D2 announcement and subsequent release has had zero impact on the prices of that camera. Some major activity around the 5D4 announcement, but still stable after that too. 1D style AF and even better ISO management was the 5D3's redeeming trait.

at that time, it was a kit + rebate. The 24-105 use to fetch a decent price too. I didnt make much, maybe $100, but still, better than paying for an upgrade!

Sure, no doubt, any time you can clear positive funds by moving from old to new, it is a good thing.

After the interesting release of the 6DII, it will be very telling about the 7DIV, 5DV and 1D whatever that should be announced over the next year or so, I suspect. It is just hard to see where Canon could wow us, vs just providing evolutionary products. Sony keeps trying new things though, but I am not a Sony fan. I have seen them try many things in the past, then abandon them, or just have products simply just fail with poor customer service. I have written them off as a consumer, but not as a shareholder.