CP+ 2013: Interview with Canon's Masaya Maeda

There will be a Canon EOS 70D, but the future of semi-pro DSLRs is probably full-frame, says Masaya Maeda, Managing Director and Chief Executive, Image Communication Products Operations at Canon. However, while he says new concepts are needed to save the compact camera, he doesn't see larger sensors as being the answer for the mass market.

Masaya Maeda - Managing Director and Chief Executive, Image Communication Products Operations at Canon

No room for large sensor compacts

'Some say the digicam market is mature and that smartphones are eating into it. I would say this is true. In terms of the compact camera segment, new concepts are needed,' Maeda says: 'The PowerShot N is part of our response. Of course we have other things in the works but I can't talk about it yet'.

However, he ruled out the idea of a larger sensor camera along the lines of the Sony RX100 to offer more of an image quality distinction between smartphones and compact cameras. 'I think the market does exist but it wouldn't be very large. We think we have a good balancing point in terms of price, image quality and size. Lots of other combinations are possible, but, once you go below APS-C the next logical size is 1/2.3 inch', he says.

'Silicon conductor technology is still advancing. The answer may change, but 1/2.3" is the answer at the moment. Users want to shoot at greater distances and want to get better photos in low light - these are the needs. There will always be a gap between smartphones and compact cameras in those respects.'

APS-C - the step-up architecture

'My idea is that, if you increase the size, you go with APS-C - that's the architecture that allows low light performance. That was the reason I put an APS-C sensor in the PowerShot G1 X and the EOS M - for the time being, that's the standard.'

And, he believes, customers do understand that there's better image quality to be had. 'If you look at sites like Instagram and other sharing sites, the ones that are getting the most likes and the most comments about the photography are the ones taken with a DSLR or dedicated compact camera, and there's discussion about "how did you get that?" and the answer is that it's with a dedicated camera.'

Despite this understanding, he concedes that the EOS M hasn't yet been fully able to exploit this market. 'Looking at worldwide results we've seen users are limited to certain regions - we're seeing very positive sales in Japan and South East Asia, looking beyond that we haven't established market share yet.'

'The concept of the EOS M is to make an interchangeable lens camera as small as possible while retaining the quality we would expect from an EOS product. It must be able to support a wide range of lenses - without that support, there's no point making it. Looking at the data, we're not seeing the EOS-M users making use of a variety of lenses. So one of the challenges is to roll-out a lineup of attractive lenses - that is our response to encourage people to use them.'

The future for semi-pro

Now that full frame is appearing in cameras the size and price of the 6D, the future of APS-C at the semi-pro level is in doubt, he says: 'That's something we're considering at the moment. From our semi-pro users there's still demand for APS-C but in the future, I think we will see an increase in the number of full-frame models.' Either way, that doesn't close the door on an EOS 70D though - when asked when we can expect one, Maeda promises: 'some day in the future. Without fail.'

Comments

Total comments: 490
1234
rft1020
By rft1020 (Apr 9, 2013)

How come I feel as if I wasted money on EF-S lenses that can ONLY work with APS-C Canons! Canon must think that people have no problem scrapping an entire system for another. Is the end near (after the 70D) for APS-C and my collection of EF-S lenses?

1 upvote
r ales
By r ales (Apr 9, 2013)

Canon is disappointing, totally ignores innovation in the semi-pro category. Versus the N D7000 and others produce only various derivatives of C 550D. Nothing against C 550D, but since Canon asleep. Still the same and worse sensor, dynamic range, color depth, noise, focus speed, shooter speed, still without separately front wheel (Tv) and rear wheel (Av) for comfortable handling etc etc. Unfortunately even new digic 6 is a flop. Help is simple - other producer.

0 upvotes
Nadrek
By Nadrek (Mar 17, 2013)

Mr. Maeda, please be aware that Canon's high-pixel pitch DSLR sales are correlated with super-telephoto sales in the birding and wildlife photography sectors. In particular, the 60D/7D APS-C series with a 4.29um pixel pitch is the best current match for lenses in the 400mm+ category, particularly fast ones, for this type of photography. I would note that those lenses range in price from high to extremely high, and that Canon presumably makes a fair amount of money on those sales and the reputation those truly outstanding lenses have.

Unfortunately, if we look at the current market, the Nikon D7100 is now a 3.9 um pixel pitch camera, fully current and up to date, and the way I read reports of your comments is that Canon may be considering abandoning the high pixel pitch semi-pro and pro markets entirely.

I would urge Canon to reconsider this decision, and fully explore the possible risk to supertelephoto lens sales if Canon chooses to abandon high pixel pitch cameras.

0 upvotes
pagurus
By pagurus (Mar 5, 2013)

Canon MUST review their decisions. Cameras with APS-C sensor are one of the essentials of wild life and bird photography.Going only full frame cameras is VERY WRONG steps to make.If you do continue on this mistakes you will lose so many costumers and fans...

0 upvotes
garyknrd
By garyknrd (Feb 6, 2013)

Just quit buying there products. I completely stopped. That will solve all the problems. Either they make what you want or you go elsewhere. I am waiting on Sony and Nikon for the next APS-C camera body. Never know. Pretty interesting to watch. If Canon is truly that far behind and cannot answer then we will know pretty soon now.

2 upvotes
MyCanonPhotos
By MyCanonPhotos (Feb 5, 2013)

Canon has many tricks up their sleeve. They’re not going to come out today and release the camera of tomorrow. It’s all about timing with how the technology gets to us at a consumer level. I think they are years ahead of the curve. Who’s to say the next 5D won’t be a $3,800 Medium format…with a presentable native ISO of 75,000-150,000 expandable up to 250,000 and so on…We just have to deal with what they offer us..

0 upvotes
rb67
By rb67 (Feb 5, 2013)

Need to start selling my EF-S lenses.

1 upvote
justmeMN
By justmeMN (Feb 5, 2013)

If memory serves, a USA car rental company had the motto "we're number two, so we try harder".

I think Canon's motto is "we're number one, so we don't have to try hard".

I wish that someboy would take market share away from Canon, so they would have an incentive to try harder.

4 upvotes
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (Feb 5, 2013)

Give it a bit more time and I think you will see their market share slip as everything is starting to be in place for it to happen.

3 upvotes
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (Feb 5, 2013)

Part 2 for Maverick:

Sorry I can only edit this now and not delete. It was meant to be a reply:

Also this all depends on the success of Canon full frame in the future. Ask a lot of wedding photographers what they think of their 5D MKIII at the moment and they are not happy at all with not being able to use the camera that well in low light in churches as they cannot see the focus point. They are also fed up with Canon overcharging on their full frame lenses compared to Nikon on a quality for quality basis.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Maverick_
By Maverick_ (Feb 5, 2013)

Of the few interviews posted in this NEWS section recently, I found this one the most informative. The key point that I got from this is that the future of mid-level DSLRs will be full frame as prices drop.

This to me makes a lot of sense. Once you can buy a full frame sensor in a DSLR body for less than $1500, why would you want anything else.

And it would be conceivable to think that in the next 6 years, full frame will be the standard even at entry level DSLRs, and it will be like film days that all SLR's shot 35mm film, no matter how cheap they cost.

Due to this reasoning, the small sensor being used on MF3rd cameras are doomed and aren't a good potential for real longevity. At that time in the future when you can buy a $700 full frame with high frame rate and new technology that might allow even lighter bodies and lenses, and cell phones that will shoot better than today's digicams, there would be no room for mid-level sensors.

2 upvotes
Stu 5
By Stu 5 (Feb 5, 2013)

You would want something else if the lenses you purchased for your smaller sensor don't perform so well on full frame. That is why Nikon make two different ranges of lenses for the two formats. Also the lenses you have already purchased will not give you the same coverage on Full frame which will lead many having to sell lenses and purchase others. At this point short of having to buy a new flashgun it is no more expensive to switch to Nikon or Sony full frame.

It is also not just a case of making the full frame cameras and lenses lighter than they are they need to be smaller which at the moment is not really happening that much. 6D is smaller but for many not enough.

For many M43 will become a very attractive option for size as full frame will still be too large. Same as the Sony NEX will become attractive as long as they start making more lenses. Canon mirrorless option at the moment is very poor and unless they sort themselves out before going full frame they will lose customers.

0 upvotes
BJL
By BJL (Feb 5, 2013)

With an imagined 36x24mm format body at $1500, I can see a couple of good reasons why many people would still prefer a smaller format:

1. Smaller format cameras are already available for far lower prices: $1500 would still be at the level of the high end film SLRs from Canon and Nikon like the EOS-1 and F5, which accounted for a small (but profitable) portion of their total SLR sales.

2. The smaller format cameras are likely to continue to have smaller photosites amd thus higher absolute resolution in l/mm, allowing the use of smaller, lighter, less expensive telephoto lenses. Particularly if Canon stays stuck at about 22MP in its 36x24mm format cameras, giving only about 8MP if you try to use the same telephoto focal lengths on them as with EF-S bodies and then crop.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
BJL
By BJL (Feb 4, 2013)

The suggestion that the only size step beyond 1/2.3” (6.2x4.5mm) worth making is all the way to the almost APS-C sized 18.7x14mm of the G1X sounds like a classic PR smokescreen:
"we do not (yet) have a certain category of product that our competitors do, so we will talk trash about that category ... until we have one to announce".

Like Canon talking down the need for mirrorless interchangeable lens systems before the EOS-M, or successive claims that Apple was not interested in phones, or e-book readers, or tablets smaller than the original iPad.

Of course there is room for intermediate size/performance trade-offs size in that huge format size gap, which is a factor of nine in sensor area and a factor of three in focal lengths needed, so that lenses of equal minimum f-stop need about 27 times the mass of glass in them. Photography has always had format choices in increments of less than three in the area of the sensor or film frame. 1“ format is near the middle of Canon's gap ...

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
rallyfan
By rallyfan (Feb 4, 2013)

I don't want to belittle the problems of those voicing criticism or even "concern" about the future if Canon; substance abuse is no laughing matter.

Canon sells the most SLRs.

Even if we accept their products are as terrible as the posters here maintain, they still sell more of those products than anyone else. In fact if the products are so terrible yet still sell the most, imagine if they were less terrible... Yet there is no need to make dramatic changes; the SLRs are selling better than anyone else's.

I'm more curious about what camera was used to shoot Maeda's mug shot in the article than whether Canon corporate strategy matches user expectation. If it does, great. If not I'll shoot something else. They'll continue to have huge market share either way; Nikon will continue being second, and so on.

Went to an event the last two days; next to the line of workers with their cream lenses ( guess what brand they used) were not others with black lenses sporting a colored ring, but numerous people with phones and tablets. That's the real change, not MILCs. I'd love to shoot smaller stuff and have been actively "ILCing" but I've yet to see their impact on Canon in the wild. Lower market segments, maybe; events, no.

Nobody cares about EOS M, not even Canon.

0 upvotes
ddtwenty
By ddtwenty (Feb 4, 2013)

Hello mr.CEO
I really want to talk about EOS M.
I think you should make it more easier by making the same mount as EOS S.
The difference in size of EOS M and EOS S is not much I think.
If you can make mirrorless cameras share the same lenses of EOS lines without that adapter that make thing more aukward and not quite make sense, when you choose mirrirless you want sth. Smaller but the adapter doesn't make thing small.

Thank you for listening.

0 upvotes
Deleted pending purge
By Deleted pending purge (Feb 4, 2013)

Mr. Maeda,

There is an old saying; "Delete what's obsolete". It is a good starting concept.
So, if I'm allowed to suggest, do quit the obsolete DSLR concept.
All modern cameras are D, every one is SL, and none has to be LR ever again!
- Say goodbye to the mechanical mirror for good, use internal monitor instead, and solve the low-light framing problems the way Sony did years ago, by "Night Framing" option.
- Make 1:1 square sensor and offer a (software) option for format dialling. ALL formats and aspects are reducements of a square format, and it uses the lens FOV in the best possible way (bar the circular format, of course.
- See what the CHDK people have to say, and build their good ideas in your firmware right up front.
- Offer an intervalometer / timer in all your cameras. It costs nothing.
- Let the top-of-the-line model of environmentally sealed models withstand normal diving depths. All commercial and recreational divers is big enough market.

There's more, but.

Thank you!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Feb 4, 2013)

Those are not sensible options for an "everyman" camera. Nobody wants to pay for a square sensor with millions of pixels they'll switch off and never use. Some want a real pentaprism viewfinder that is superbright and superdetailed. An intervalometer does cost money....software changes cost money. Every line of code costs money. Every bug found in every line of code costs money. Withstand normal diving depths as a part of the body design? That is the most lunatic thing I've ever heard in my life. Sony solved a problem by creating an entirely new set -- taking light away from the sensor is a bad idea unless absolutely necessary, and it usually isn't necessary.
Are you trying to being ludicrous?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Deleted pending purge
By Deleted pending purge (Feb 4, 2013)

Like everyone else, I'm seeing things my way, and that's the way I present them. To my mind, they're useful and feasible. I also know what costs money, don't worry: even this discussion does. What I can't do is make you see things my way. Some of that requires careful reading. I have proposed that "top-of-the-line model of environmentally sealed models withstand normal diving depths", not every model.
As to what's lunatic or ludicrous... the options of not replying or doing it politely are always available.

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting
1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Feb 4, 2013)

The existence of a market doesn't imply anything about the desirability of getting into that market. Top of the line models concentrate on the environment where almost every single shot they're used to capture will occur: air. Niche markets are left to niche products. If it was another five bucks to make a DSLR that could withstand an atmosphere or two of water pressure then it would be the most sane thing one could do, but you're talking about a mod that would make the camera so bulky it would only be suitable for underwater photography...and so expensive that nobody would want it. Much better to buy a housing if that is your desire. If you want to be treated with respect please don't start off by claiming the DSLR concept is obsolete when it is by far the most proven and useful technology in the professional camera market. Don't make silly claims about Sony having it all figured out when they only have you figured out. Don't insult others by imposing your own values on them.

1 upvote
Deleted pending purge
By Deleted pending purge (Feb 4, 2013)

@howardroark... Let's just say that opinions differ. So you are perfectly free to have and keep yours, providing you let others keep their own.
About DSLRs, in my opinion, not even the acronym has any sense today, let alone the need to have mechanical moving parts in the camera, seeing that there are better ways to achieve what once has been only possible with a mirror. But I will respect your preferences.
I wouldn't even suggest DSLRs made to withstand pressures, since no variable-volume camera can be made pressure-resistant. I mentioned something quite different which is solidly based on my 45+ years of diving and photographing experience. No use explaining the problematics here, but let me just state that a dive-capable camera does not need be much bulkier, and it doesn't have to cost much more too. It's a question of applying several proper construction principles which are already known for ages.
I won't tell you anything about silly claims, nor do or don't things. Enjoy!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Feb 5, 2013)

There's the default word "better" that people use when they can't explain what they mean. It's just better. A fixed mirror like the Sony Alpha bodies robs light from the sensor. A EVF uses power and costs money and has less resolution than a pentaprism. Everything is a tradeoff and mechanical mirror/shutter mechanisms have been refined over decades whereas the technologies you speak of are in their infancy, yet somehow better. Sorry man, puking out he word "better" is the hallmark of a poorly reasoned argument.

1 upvote
howardroark
By howardroark (Feb 3, 2013)

Do you people actually think Canon is telling you the truth? Every word put out by any company is propaganda meant to either sell their current product line or deceive their competitors. If everyone thinks Canon is doing one thing while their doing another, then whatever Canon does release will be a total shock. Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you read.
Oh, and one more thing -- look at all the chatter this nonsense has created. Mission accomplished Canon PR machine. Mission accomplished.

Comment edited 15 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Feb 3, 2013)

While THEY'RE doing another....they are, not Canon possessing "doing another."

Comment edited 14 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 4, 2013)

The last thing Canon needs to be doing is undermining confidence in their brand by lying to the market. Everything Meada said makes perfect sense and is probably the truth as he understands it.

0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Feb 4, 2013)

Operative word there being "either" fellas. I think showing confidence in their strategy and being reliable are more important to their overall strategy than making camera geeks happy. Most people buying their cameras, pro or consumer, are NOT here talking about this trivia, nor are they reading interviews with camera execs. This interview does what any good salesman or politician wants to do, communicate confidence in their current strategy. "Hey guys, keep buying cameras. There's no need to wait for some wacky new technology that will make everything obsolete. We'll keep improving, but we're not in the business of making novelty items -- we make cameras for people who want to take pictures."
Maloy, Canon has proven their ability to create new products that consumers want and that are of high quality. You may not like the features in the 6D, but there are some people who see the value and appreciate the balance of cost to features.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Feb 5, 2013)

Your advanced sense of humor escapes my primitive caveman brain. For I am but a simple cave man, thawed out from a chunk of ice unearthed in the Alaskan wilderness. Stupidity isn't funny, chief.

0 upvotes
lucarome
By lucarome (Feb 3, 2013)

the super-super-zoom camera is the future.

0 upvotes
Alec_c
By Alec_c (Feb 3, 2013)

I would say that pushing by canon of the FF over APS-C is mainly to their technical inability to develop in that direction. Not that it is not possible - see Sony - but rather THEY cannot do that. The argument is the less than great (see respective dpr reviews - from a time when they were running such instead of mobile-phone and stick on lenses news) performance of the whole 18/19MP sensor line (600, 650, 60, 7)

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 3, 2013)

Except that Nikon who can use any sensor they want is also pushing toward FF over APS-C. Just look at the Lenses Nikon has been releasing. The semi-Pro cameras are all moving to FF in a generation or two. Meada said as much.

Full frame is needed if DSLRs are going to stay competitive and relevant with the more trendy, stylish, convenient to carry and easier to use MILCs that are already starting to be viable alternatives to the less expensive DSLRs an are only getting better every year.

APS-C was just a compromise to make DSLRs affordable. Now with more pressure from MILCs and the price of FF sensors much less it is a compromise that in a few years is no longer going makes sense for DSLRs.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
jocuribarbius
By jocuribarbius (Feb 3, 2013)

Is a good idea and also is very cool for make such as things and photos great ,Wooow, so even the 5D III is beaten by Nikon "hands down"... Oh dear... Well, it seems that many reviewers <a href="http://www.jocuribarbi.us">Jocuri Barbie</a>

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
eozdural
By eozdural (Feb 3, 2013)

I think he is playing with us, I think the 7DII or something like it is quite close.

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Feb 3, 2013)

well by saying 70D, he may mean that
1> the body will be more lightweight like 60D
2> we may never get pro-AF like the old D300
3> the frame rate will be lower than, at least not exceeding 7D
4> the price will fall like a stone

0 upvotes
rrccad
By rrccad (Feb 3, 2013)

he was quoted in another interview last week as stating there will be a 7D Mark II .. it's under development, and will not be just a "spec sheet" improvement over the 7D.

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 3, 2013)

AT this point who knows what they are going to do. It could be he is just telling people what they want to hear about the 7D Mark II or that Canon's plans have changed and they are going to call the camera that was going to be the 7D Mark II the 70D and only have one semi pro APS-C model like Nikon is probably doing with the D7000 successor. Either way I think his comments make it clear that within a generation or two most if not all the semi pro models are getting full frame sensors and APS-C is going to end up being in only the Rebels and the EOS M.

0 upvotes
tommy leong
By tommy leong (Feb 3, 2013)

sounds like 70D is a LOOOONG way off

0 upvotes
CCH dp
By CCH dp (Feb 3, 2013)

1 more quite important: *RAW !!

0 upvotes
CCH dp
By CCH dp (Feb 3, 2013)

My Hope (roughly)..
I hope to see at least: for example the Canon PowerShot sx280 HS series
*Tilting and bigger monitor screen
*NFC..WiFi
*Better battery!!
*Improve lenses quality
*Better sensor (and the size)
*Improve High speed burst quality (*with Continues focus, *able to save more shots) More fps.

I know it's abit greedy, but it's true that what me/most of us want and hope..
Probably Just a Daydreams... but ^_^ This will be super great! IF it's appear very very soon..

0 upvotes
speculatrix
By speculatrix (Feb 6, 2013)

I considered the Canon SX### and ended up with a Lumix G5 with the PZ 14-42 lens and its very compact.
https://picasaweb.google.com/116367041269325477816/Lumix#5793233367133882914

0 upvotes
CCH dp
By CCH dp (Feb 3, 2013)

I Hope, for the goodness of enthusiast/Consumer.. Canon can make what they actually can produce in their COMING PowerShot...may be sx280 HS

Then, that will be truely great.

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
migus
By migus (Feb 2, 2013)

read also the Oly interview just posted!

We may speculate and be frustrated (i'm), yet Maeda-san knows his business.
1) FF dSLR (big for pros, Rebel-sized for enthusiasts) is a solid niche with its large glass. FF glass seems safe investment, though bulky.
2) 1/2.3" superzooms also have a market beyond travel, see luminous-landscape. Personally i don't see their use other than macro.
3) Endangered species are the entry P&S (extincted by phones) and the APS dSLRs (arguably terminated by u43, NEX and NX... long argument on handling, markets will decide)

Next BIG thing: There's no clear winner in the sensor size for ILCs and premium P&S, until one ideal lens&sensor form factor emerges clearly ahead. The race is open between 2/3, 1", u43, APS-C and perhaps a new standard. My beloved 1/1.7" is neither small, nor large, enough to qualify. Sensor + Lens = form factor.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
dj0502
By dj0502 (Feb 2, 2013)

I keep hearing people saying that the death of APS-C is due to FF dropping prices to near current APS-C prices. However, those people dismisses the fact that APS-C prices will also go down as well, hence, there will still be a strong market for it.

4 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 2, 2013)

I agree, I but I think it will not be in a DSLR type camera.

0 upvotes
rrccad
By rrccad (Feb 2, 2013)

yes, but there comes a time though that it's just not worth making 7 different cameras to put into a 1K dollar slot.

2 upvotes
Stephen_C
By Stephen_C (Feb 2, 2013)

How many Rebels sell per 5dMkiii? APS-C is very popular and isn't going away any time soon. I think the 7D was taking sales from the more expensive full frame cameras, which is why they are shying away from a 7DMkii. That and they keep using the same 18MP APS-C sensor for the past several years.

3 upvotes
JavierDiaz
By JavierDiaz (Feb 2, 2013)

@Stephen_C: This field moves amazingly fast. APS-C is very popular now, but prices for FF cameras are going down, and as cost also go down, it is a matter of time when big companies will be more focused on manufacturing FF sensors than APS-C. It'll be like the "brain-dead" 286 IMB PC chip. When that happens, APS-C sensors may become marginal and get phased-out altogether since companies may be more tempted to level their offerings toward FF as it becomes the standard.
Therefore, market will be split between 4/3rds and mirrorless cameras, and FF more pro-oriented machines.

1 upvote
NancyP
By NancyP (Feb 3, 2013)

All would be well if the next sensor has high pixel count, perhaps 40MP ish, and the user could choose to shoot as FF or as APS-C format (boost in fps and relative buffer capacity), the latter for sports and wildlife / bird shooters. Circa 18MP of improved capacity / SNR pixels would be usable as the crop mode in this high end camera.
It is helpful to "put more pixels on the bird" by small pixel pitch relative to current crop of Canon FF dSLRs. This can also be done by use of the Big Whites, aka 600mm and 800mm lenses, but these brutes are expensive and not handholdable, at least for long.

1 upvote
Zzzyzzzyx
By Zzzyzzzyx (Feb 3, 2013)

I think you just nailed it, Stephen_C

Comment edited 15 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
eozdural
By eozdural (Feb 3, 2013)

I think the semi-professional APS-C cameras will always be popular with bird shooters and sports shooters and people who need the crop multiplication in their lenses. I have a 7D and a 5DII and use them both a lot for different things.

1 upvote
Mrrowe8
By Mrrowe8 (Feb 2, 2013)

These comments reflect canons notoriously slow movement as a company to reinvent its products .. Sadly its smacks of what American auto makers did and then act surprised they lost huge market share ... If they where smart they would offer to partner with Apple or Samsung to build the ideal "camera phone " notice the word camera is 1st .. Not a phone with a camera ..and sadly when read his refusal to make a full frame g camera means I guess I am buying the Sony and continue my switch to Nikon & by the way I am not a nikon or canon guy I am a who makes the best image making product kinda guy , hence my loss market share comment and I suspect most real consumers r like me

6 upvotes
meland
By meland (Feb 2, 2013)

I'm not sure Apple or Samsung would have any interest in what you are proposing.

0 upvotes
JavierDiaz
By JavierDiaz (Feb 2, 2013)

Samsung is a direct Canon competitor in the compact and DSRL camera fields. And its smartphones are excellent products, including especially the photographic sensors that go into them. So a deal is, IMHO, highly implausible.

Apple, on the other hand... It is big for now, but with its dictator dead for over a year, the company may find itself in need of an strategic alliance IN THE FUTURE to keep its iPhone line afloat.

0 upvotes
migus
By migus (Feb 2, 2013)

I work for IBM, though not a Japanese company :-).
A company the size of Canon can and will not change course like a startup; they can't discard their P&S, Rebels and dSLRs over night, even if they may actually want it... :-)

I believe that Canon has contributed plenty until perhaps the introduction of 5D; 1st... CMOS sensor in mass production, dSLR under 1K, FF dSLR under 3K etc. Open RAW (not encrypted channel as Nikon at the time), large mounts etc.

Their sensor fabs ... being left 2+ generations behind in a very costly business means you may have to make drastic changes or move out. IBM did just that a few times already, after having invented the HDD, the PC, the hi-res LCD/AMOLED... and will do it again. Ditto for Canon and their sensor fab. So what? Plenty of OEM's and Nikon has no qualms using them.

But i wish Canon came w/ true competitors to Fuji and Sony (not to mention u43 and Samsung), cameras that can beat the RX100 and RX1 in size, function and IQ.

1 upvote
JavierDiaz
By JavierDiaz (Feb 2, 2013)

@migus: funny, but APS-C sensors remind me of the "brain-dead" 286 IBM processor...

Comment edited 12 seconds after posting
1 upvote
chillgreg
By chillgreg (Feb 2, 2013)

Fake Chuck Westfall is spot on.

0 upvotes
JavierDiaz
By JavierDiaz (Feb 2, 2013)

Too bad he didn't address the growing gap between his Company sensors and those manufactured by Sony (of which the FF 34 MPx used in Nikon's D800 is a showcase).

By what I read, Sony sensor technology is a big leap forward while Canon has a very conservative stance. The issue seems to be not the megapixel race, but the more BETTER megapixels race, which makes it a totally different contest. And there Sony seems to have a significant advantage. If substantial technological differences exist between their sensors, then Canon may have a problem no only on the smartphone vs compact cameras field, but on the upper market as well.

Before I get shot, I must say my whole equipment (forever a Canonist) was stolen a month ago and I had to start again from scratch. I could switch brands and go for a Nikon D800. Instead, I stuck with Canon and replaced the 5D MK3 with another. But if this were to happen in two years from now, I'm not so sure Canon would be then my choice. You're welcome :-)

9 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Feb 2, 2013)

Actually looking at the sensor in the D5200 it looks like Toshiba might just be making better sensors then even Sony. One this is for sure. Canon can't keep reusing the 18MP APS-C sensor they have been using for going on 5 years. Even the micro four thirds sensor in the OMD E-M5 is out performing it, though admittedly only by a hair.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
Zerg2905
By Zerg2905 (Feb 2, 2013)

Please read carefully and don't be fooled: this is "usual" corporate "smoke screen". The quantity of information you (we) got is (almost) "zero", this gentleman (Mr. Maeda) is very good. Cheers! :)

6 upvotes
meland
By meland (Feb 2, 2013)

There are some incredibly arrogant or stupid people (or both) commenting here, including Zigadiboom who probably thinks his comment below is extremely witty.

Come on guys - some of you are totally over reacting to an 'interview' which is probably just a fraction of what was actually said and may or may not be accurate in any case. Was this even a real 1:1 interview or is DPP simply reprinting a portion of something that might have been translated badly from Japanese?

The hand wringing and wailing are totally ridiculous. As are the personal attacks against Mr Maeda.

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
aftab
By aftab (Feb 2, 2013)

@meland
Tell me about it. In my previous post I tried to be polite and not use words like 'stupid' or 'arrogant'. But you did the right thing. They deserve it.
Anyways, I don't see a problem even if Maeda's interview was translated accurately.
At the moment Canon faces two big challenges.
1. To stay relevant in the era of smartphones. Maeda says, new concepts are needed for compact cameras. What can be a better thinking?
2. The popularity of mirrorless ILC cameras.
Panasonic came up with 4/3 because they realized that they can't compete with Canikon in DSLR. They tried to keep the sensor size as close as possible to APS-C. They (along with Oly) became a success story. Nikon on the other hand went for a much smaller sensor and with some huge discounts in Japan for J1 became a success story as well. Canon came to the market much later with M. Maeda admits that it was not a success. His answer to the issue is 'line up of attractive lenses'. What is the problem with this idea?

1 upvote
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Feb 2, 2013)

aftab,

I agree with 1), although I'm not sure how new the concepts have to be. There will be a market for travel zooms, super zooms, and high-end compacts with accessories (flash shoes, etc.), because they do things that phones can't. I think cameras like the elph series are in danger, though.

As far as 2) goes, I think that m43 has a leg up on other mirrorless systems, because of the consortium. I got burned by Olympus with 4/3 DSLR, but thankfully I can still use my lenses on m43 with an adapter. But I see that other companies burn their users, too. Let's face it. They make a lot of money by selling new lenses, especially FF lenses, if they can convince you to go that way! However, with m43 there is already a good lens lineup, more than one company is involved, and the shared standard makes me think that the mount won't be going away anytime soon.

Even if Canon makes 5 fantastic lenses for the M mount, would you trust the M mount or m43 mount to be around longer?

0 upvotes
aftab
By aftab (Feb 2, 2013)

I agree.
Three things have made photography very popular. Digital technology, social media and smartphones. All of them, including smartphones, are good news for dedicated camera manufacturers. A lot of people using smartphones for snapshots now will become interested in photography and will want something that can do more. All camera manufacturers will have to address this need and do something different in a small size with higher image quality. Compact cameras will have to evolve a lot to remain relevant. And as you said there will always be demand for cameras like TZ series, superzooms and RX100, but the demand for them is not as great as basic compact digicams.
For mirrorless ILC, we don't know how things will play out, but at the moment Pana and Oly seem to have the momentum and largest market share. But we can't blame Canon or Nikon for not coming up with the idea or leading the market. They didn't need to invent this market, but Panasonic did.

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Feb 2, 2013)

the APS-C DSLRs are fading out the market and this 70D may be the last chance that Canon can have to make a better camera than Nikon.

D300 got the pro-level AF and it should be the minimum that Canon do the same 5 years late, together with other new tricks like a cooperating imaging AE.

4 upvotes
Hide Takahashi
By Hide Takahashi (Feb 2, 2013)

You know...you can not choose your parents nor your boss. If you get a good one(s),good for you but if you don't,Amen! If canon engineers read his statements,they all would be shaking their heads.

0 upvotes
justmeMN
By justmeMN (Feb 2, 2013)

I guess Canon's "C" is for complacent.

5 upvotes
aftab
By aftab (Feb 2, 2013)

Maybe. But 'C' could also stand for 'Crown'.
I see a lot people here would love to see Maeda go. But I don't think Canon would agree.
Maeda joined Canon in 1975 and became the chief of its imaging in 2007. This was the year when Nikon almost caught up with Canon in worldwide DSLR sales.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13580_3-9882670-39.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20
Nikon's market share increased from 33% to 40% and Canon's dropped from 46% to 42%. Under Maeda's leadership Canon widened the lead again, maintains it till date while Nikon's DSLR sale has fallen below 30% of global market share. Nikon used to sell more DSLR in Japan than Canon. Last year Canon became the leader. Canon still sells more compact digicam than any other manufacturer globally and in many parts of the world expanded the lead.
So, it would seem that a person who eats, breathes, shits and farts camera knows more than those who think Canon should stop making cameras and sell lemon juice instead.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
rrccad
By rrccad (Feb 2, 2013)

well said sir. LOL

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Feb 2, 2013)

I'm sure he remembers what happened with the original 5D. Would a significant number of people step up to FF if the price came down, but was still $2500 for just the body? Nah. Maybe they would sell a few....

0 upvotes
aftab
By aftab (Feb 2, 2013)

Those who are waiting for 7DII this interview with Maeda should be encouraging.

http://www.canonwatch.com/interview-with-canons-tian-rong-makoto-7d-ii-not-a-story-of-the-day-so-far/

0 upvotes
NoFunBen
By NoFunBen (Feb 2, 2013)

There is really room in the camera market for someone to come in and take over. no 7d or d300 replacements.

both models sold so well, why give up on them?

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Feb 2, 2013)

"Without fail?"

"Yes... without fail!"

"Yes, Mr Dawes... I shall be there precisely at 8:00."

Dawes, Tomes, Mousley, Grubbs, Fidelity Fiduciary Camera Corp
.

1 upvote
qwertyasdf
By qwertyasdf (Feb 2, 2013)

Actually what was Maeda referring to? :P
"some day in the future" or the "70D"
hope it's not a 18mp sensor paired with a 9-point focus system!!!

2 upvotes
Mark B.
By Mark B. (Feb 2, 2013)

I guess the 7D is going to be a one-trick pony. Still love mine, just can't believe there's nothing Canon can't improve on. Built-in wi-fi, improved DR, improved auto-bracketing (should have been done with the firmware update), even better high-ISO noise, etc.

0 upvotes
biggles266
By biggles266 (Feb 2, 2013)

If there is no 7D replacement coming soon, why else has the price of 7D's been dropping sharply? I think it should be coming soon.

0 upvotes
rrccad
By rrccad (Feb 2, 2013)

where was that stated?

0 upvotes
SirSeth
By SirSeth (Feb 2, 2013)

Interesting comments ya'll.

My take is that Canon is going to do nothing new. It's safe and tested. They will continue to pump marketing money into convincing everyone that full frame is dope and anything less is not worthy. (I agree that FF is dope, but there are many other worthy and capable options in other formats). They will continue to release incremental upgrades that are just a notch better than the previous models. They will continue to hire shills to troll the forums. (Yes I do believe they hire trolls). And they will leave their head in the sand concerning great innovations happening in the market.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind Canon cameras and I have used them a lot, it's the company itself and the disproportionate number of Canon sheep that drive me nuts.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
9 upvotes
TheDman
By TheDman (Feb 2, 2013)

Stopped posting over at the 9/11 conspiracy forum long enough to drop in here, I see.

1 upvote
SirSeth
By SirSeth (Feb 2, 2013)

Yep. :) Hey, I haven't seen you over there in a while and thought you might like to know that we found new evidence that Obama was born in Pakistan.

0 upvotes
biggles266
By biggles266 (Feb 2, 2013)

So many people on here arguing about the downside of huge prices for telephoto for FF, and saying that that boosts the market for crop and for m43 because they offer still decent quality but with more flexibility. Here's my vision of the future which makes all that argument silly, or am I missing something?

To me, the future is FF cameras, with IBIS, available below $2000 (preferably down to $1300-$1500 as hardware costs inevitably reduce like they always do), with the feature of letting the photographer switch it to crop/Dx mode or to m43 mode, or even lower. You get top FF quality for most photos, and simply reduce that quality as much as you want to when you want more telephoto or do macro. No need for huge expensive telephoto lenses for FF, just buy a very long lens designed for say crop/m43 etc instead. So in that sense, there is no market for just 'crop' cameras, since the future camera should be both FF and crop and more.

I would love to see a Canon 3D model like this.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
AOKH
By AOKH (Feb 2, 2013)

The FF's would need to have very high MP sensors in order to give a sufficient pixel pitch in crop modes. That's not the direction we see with the new FF's, though, as the MP race has settled for the foreseeable future.

0 upvotes
biggles266
By biggles266 (Feb 2, 2013)

Yes, I forgot to put bigger megapixel in my criteria for the FF sensor. The other thing I like about it besides keeping telephoto affordable is, if your main walkabout lens is a FF EF lens, but you quickly need some extra reach, or want a different DOF effect, you can flip it to crop mode and turn it into a crop camera with a 1.6x altered focal length on your lens, as long as you don't mind your image lowering to crop quality.

As long as FF becomes affordable enough, there is no longer a need or market for a purely crop camera. I can't see Canon being innovative to do this though, they are probably too scared of cannibalizing sales.

Comment edited 45 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
TheDman
By TheDman (Feb 2, 2013)

Why can't you just crop it after the fact in Photoshop?

0 upvotes
biggles266
By biggles266 (Feb 2, 2013)

That's extra work, plus if the cropping happens beforehand in camera the exposure will then be accurate for the crop image, if you take it as a FF and then crop in post, the exposure is correct for the FF image, so by having it in camera it's much easier to get exposure right. Also, it greatly helps your composition to see it in crop/m43/etc in the camera in the first place. Lastly, a big tele lens for a smaller sensor area is smaller, lighter and cheaper, so it would be possible to make and buy affordable, good quality, big tele glass for them, whereas any tele glass that handles FF gets big, heavy and expensive faster. So I think it is a better solution overall to getting a long reach than cropping in post.

The main point is that it gives the user more flexibility, and also that once FF cameras with this ability are available cheaply enough, there will be no need for crop-only dslr's, they will appear too limited and so that segment of the market may die.

1 upvote
hedwards
By hedwards (Feb 2, 2013)

The only problems with that is that you're paying for pixels you might never use. You're generating extra heat from photosites that you might not want and you're still having to have lenses that are optimized for the FF as you might be using it from time to time.

I'm not really sure how that makes any sense. The best situation would be to maintain 1 or 2 lines of APS-C sensors and just let people buy them that want them, now that there are a ton of people that learned on them and have grown to like them, I can't see how taking that away isn't just going to anger people and send them running for Nikon or somebody else.

0 upvotes
biggles266
By biggles266 (Feb 2, 2013)

I guess so, but that isn't a big deal for me. There are always features on a camera that aren't being used, some spare pixels wouldn't bother me. Anyway, it is just an idea of mine, happy to raise it without arguing about it. I don't see it happening from Canon, but Nikon might be bold enough. Personally the Fx/Dx feature of Nikon on one of their current models looks great to me.

I would like a sub-$2000 FF Canon that can change sensor area being used, my lens set might look something like: 16-35mm (FF) or a 10-22mm (Dx) as an alternative if say I rarely used UWA and wanted to save $700, 24-70mm main walkabout lens (FF but sometimes used Dx if convenient), 70-200mm (FF capable, used FF for portraits but often used in Dx mode for longer reach), a sub-$1000 300 or 400mm tele designed for Dx or m43 size only, for birds, surfing and other occasional situations where I don't care about maximum image quality but do want something more lightweight and less money. Lots of flexibility.

1 upvote
biggles266
By biggles266 (Feb 2, 2013)

It's not that you would never use all the FF pixels, you would definitely use them all much of the time, just sometimes not.

1 upvote
BJL
By BJL (Feb 4, 2013)

This assumes that a sensor more than twice as large as an APS-C sensor and with the same pixel size, so considerably more pixels to read out, will some day not cost mich more than the smaller alternatives that are already meeting the performance needs of most SLR users. Maybe, but I doubt it:
(1) There is still a gap of well over $1000 between the price of entry level APS-C and 35mm format bodies.
(2) Chip prices go down mostly due to size reduction, no use for sensors at fixed 36x24mm size. Increased volume does help some through economies of scale, but those gains level out eventually.
(3) Chips larger than 33x26mm are far more expensive to make, because that is the industry-standard maximum field size for the steppers used to make chips, so that larger sizes like 36x24mm require a slower, more expensive, lower-yield process of on-wafer stitching. And there is absolutely no sign that larger format steppers are coming, with the dominant trend being towards smaller chips: see item (2).

Comment edited 46 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Feb 2, 2013)

Here's what I don't understand. People claim that FF has the best IQ. I'll concede that point. (It's not true, though. Medium format digital has better IQ, for example.) But since when has "best" IQ decided what cameras people buy?

In the 80s, you could buy 35mm film, medium format, or large format. 35mm had the worst IQ, and the best sales. We have always been able to spend more, and carry more weight, for improved IQ. But people choose not to.

The improvement of medium format film and large format film over 35mm film was huge too, much greater than FF digital over m43, for example, which requires pixel peeping on computers, and produces prints at all common sizes up to 13x19" which are virtually or actually indistinguishable.

35mm film, too, gave better telephoto reach, a big reason it was so popular.

What has changed, FF digital fans? Why do we all of a sudden want to pay LOTS more for body and lenses, for a MINIMAL IQ improvement, when that has NEVER been the case in the past?

8 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Feb 2, 2013)

People did, in fact use medium and large format cameras. Not everybody chose 35mm. For the majority who did choose 35mm there were many possible reasons. Portability, speed, convenience, BNS (black Nikon syndrome) or just not being able to afford the larger formats. Even image quality may have been a consideration.

The interesting thing about saying FF is the future is that the vast majority of camera buyers are not professionals so one has to wonder if amateurs and people on a budget will pay for FF. I'd like to see a new OM-concept camera; a full sized sensor and therefore FF quality with a smaller body and lighter lenses. That would be innovation.

2 upvotes
TheDman
By TheDman (Feb 2, 2013)

We've always wanted the best image quality we could afford. Medium and large format film wasn't within the realm of affordability for most people. Think the 5DIII is more expensive than the 7D? Trying going from a Canon EOS Elan II to a Mamiya 645. Shoot and process 10,000 frames of that each year and tell me how your wallet is doing.

On top of that, it wasn't nearly as portable. Packing my 5DIII on a weeklong backpacking trip is no problem. Bring a large format setup and 3,000 sheets of film and I would need a team of pack mules.

1 upvote
hedwards
By hedwards (Feb 2, 2013)

It's different formats for different things. Getting a 320mm lens in order to get the angle of view that I want is a much more expensive proposition than getting a 200mm lens with a 1.6x crop factor, and I get to benefit from the greater DoF that comes from a shorter lens. For a wildlife photographer, a cropped sensor is really the way to go.

Now, somebody who works on landscapes primarily is going to go with a FF if at all possible as it provides not just more pixels, but an easier way of going wide angle. And probably favoring lenses that are sharp edge to edge where the crop factor photographer just has to worry about the middle of the lens.

I don't believe that crop factor sensors are going away any more than large format, because there are plenty of niche photographers that need it. In fact, I'd suspect that it's less likely to disappear than large format due to the reduced cost versus FF.

0 upvotes
glassdesigns
By glassdesigns (Feb 3, 2013)

Well said Bob. I'm sure that the IQ of today's tech hasn't contributed anything to actually taking a better photograph. If you don't have the eye, who cares how good the IQ of your equipment is. Creativity comes from the brain not the equipment. It goes back to the old line, that a bad craftsman blames his tools.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
TheDman
By TheDman (Feb 3, 2013)

It has, however, contributed a ton to making those photographs reproducible at larger sizes and with less noise.

0 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Feb 2, 2013)

If you think Maeda has the final word on the direction Canon takes in the photographic business, you are wrong. You know who has the final word? Yes, consumers like you and me. If we do not buy any of their products, they'll be forced to change their direction.

That's what happened with mirrorless cameras, isn't it? If MILCs have not been so successful, we won't be seeing the EOS-M, only more D-Rebels.

On the other hand, when Canon gave up the FD mount, there was lots of unhappiness. But an even bigger group supported the new EOS mount, proving Canon's direction was right ultimately.

Maeda is merely guessing the direction the market is going to take. Ultimately, consumers have the final say. There is no need to get all riled up over his prognostication.

8 upvotes
Fox Fisher
By Fox Fisher (Feb 1, 2013)

EOS-M was a failure. Never seen a single person use it yet. Fuji's system is much more better in this class and let's not forget Sony NEX dominance.

2 upvotes
Ross the Fidller
By Ross the Fidller (Feb 2, 2013)

And don't forget the Canon users (5D II in a number of cases) selling or shelving their gear to use the lighter Olympus OM-D kit.

0 upvotes
MikeSE25
By MikeSE25 (Feb 1, 2013)

At the UK Wildlife Photographer of the Year exhibition in London, I think +70% of the cameras in the hands of the top 100 (out of 48000 entrants) were Canon, most of the rest Nikon. I wonder what will be the percentage in 5 years?

As for the EOS M, it seems the least inspired of the mirrorless cameras, and to dismiss the RX100 really suprises me. Maybe Canon has something up its sleeve and isn't ready to announce?

1 upvote
Ross the Fidller
By Ross the Fidller (Feb 2, 2013)

It could have been better if Canon were willing to accept the challenge & made sure the focus wasn't so sluggish & added a means to add an EVF (in the future at least), and more than two dedicated lenses.

Unfortunately, Canon seems to have been reluctant to include anything developed by other camera makers & have been late to implement them. Things like live view, ultrasonic sensor cleaning, articulating screen & art filters & yet they have included them (but not necessarily as well as they could have) & then they blow a loud trumpet announcing it like it was a new thing.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Feb 2, 2013)

Canon's weakness is that they are so good at selling bland cameras, they don't have much incentive to innovate. They know what sells and how to make lots of it at a profit. D800s are cool; Rebels & Powershots are gold. Lenses are another story. Except for wide angle zooms, I think most would agree Canon makes some terrific lenses and is a real innovator in this area.

1 upvote
hedwards
By hedwards (Feb 2, 2013)

@Abrasive, what features do you think are missing that require innovation? I admit that I'd like to see defocus control, but I can't think of any other things that I really want or need. Most of the innovation right now seems to be things like m4/3s and mirrorless, which I specifically don't want. And integrated IS which has it's own set of pros and cons attached to it.

It's a serious question, I can't think of anything they're doing so poorly in cameras I've used which would require revolutionary thinking. They've mostly hit the point where refining is the more advantageous route.

0 upvotes
hedwards
By hedwards (Feb 1, 2013)

I don't like what I'm hearing. For those of us that shoot wildlife and who need longer lenses, moving to FF is going to be a serious problem. Sure it opens up the wide end of the glass, but it makes what I want to do a much more expensive proposition.

I see absolutely no reason why they can't maintain a proper dSLR line dedicated to the APS-C product line, continuing where the 7D left off.

From what I'm seeing with the 7D, I don't see any reason why I need a larger sensor.

2 upvotes
rrccad
By rrccad (Feb 2, 2013)

they see the APS-C market changing in the future? where does that preclude another 7D Model?

APS-C was only originally a compromise on expense .. if full frame sensors continue to decrease in price, there's no real need especially with pixel densities and DIGIC improving the way it is in pipelining data.

2 upvotes
hedwards
By hedwards (Feb 2, 2013)

He's promising a 70D and unwilling or unable to commit to the format on a longer term basis. I personally find that to be extremely troubling seeing as I invested a decade learning the format and get better results than I could have gotten with a full frame sensor.

I'm guessing that with the various outcries that they'll realize that there needs to be a permanent APS-C option for pros and semi-pros, but the unwillingness to commit to it just sucks. Wildlife and sports have been incredibly important to them over the years and it feels really disrespectful of them to imply that it's a matter of cost rather than format advantages that keep us with the APS-C format.

1 upvote
garyknrd
By garyknrd (Feb 2, 2013)

+1 I spent a fortune on big glass. Just a sickening proposition all the way around. Just sickening. I shoot mainly small birds?
7D is perfect. But the AF with the new lenses is not up to snuff.
They can give the astronomers a camera and not the wildlife shooters? what the hell..... my money stops here and now with Canon, until I see a good crop camera. Period.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
rrccad
By rrccad (Feb 2, 2013)

it wasn't a new camera .. it was a 60D that had the IR cut filter modified.

considering that the prior astro body from canon was the 20Da . i'd say they waited a long time for an upgrade.

Maeda already has been quoted in saying there is a 7D Mark II in the works .. so why are you complaining again?

0 upvotes
matt kwok
By matt kwok (Feb 1, 2013)

Is it just me or is one of his nostrils bigger than the other?

0 upvotes
Ross the Fidller
By Ross the Fidller (Feb 2, 2013)

Some people can raise individual eyebrows & others different strange things. Maybe he can dilate each nostril separately. ;)

0 upvotes
SkiHound
By SkiHound (Feb 1, 2013)

In the interest of disclosure I'm not a Canon owner, but I'm not a brand basher. My view is that while it's a very extensive system with many terrific lenses and accessories, Canon as a company has been extremely conservative in terms of camera technology and innovation. I was really interested in what the EOS-M would bring to the ILC table. And it just seemed like a very under-specked camera. Except for a larger sensor it was basically specked like a first generation m43. The APS-C sensor technology has not really kept pace with those being produced by Sony and except for releasing updated Rebels (most small updates) it's been a long time since there has been a new APS-C sensor camera. I do think APS-C SLRs are getting squeezed by lots of very good, smaller, and lighter ILCs and by increasingly affordable FF cameras. The new 6D looks like a pretty interesting camera.

3 upvotes
rrccad
By rrccad (Feb 1, 2013)

neither canon, nikon or sony are coming out that many new DX lenses, the top line APS-C's have not been refreshed in a dog's age .. both canon and niikon obviously see APS-C being squeezed.

I doubt you'll see APS-C be a booming market potential when it's being squeezed from the bottom end and also full frame coming down in price.

between APS-C and smaller? in a way i could see this as well .. the below APS-C sized is saturated with 4/3's and niche "larger sensor" cameras, but it's also getting squeezed by the lower margins and prices on APS-C level DSLR's and better functioning smaller sensor cameras with BSI and other technology really making the larger sensors in this group pretty much a diminished return. nokia showed us a 30+ Mp phone based camera already. smaller sensor cameras are getting better and if you are going for absolute portability than 4/3's isnt' it either.

poeple seem to be "experts" on the market - but I don't know ..

1 upvote
photosen
By photosen (Feb 1, 2013)

70D: At the appropriate juncture. In the fullness of time. When the moment is right.

1 upvote
Mark Plonsky
By Mark Plonsky (Feb 1, 2013)

Just hope it is not a day late and a dollar short ;)

2 upvotes
Total comments: 490
1234