I neither own nor use a Canon 5D. Canikon lenses aren't optically good enough for my purposes and I don't care about shooting sports so don't need fast AF. Then none of the 5D bodies can match the best Nikon's best high ISO DSLRs.
However the Canon 5D bodies are still a big deal.
> High ISO on Nikon, lol.
He's kind of right about high ISO, it's the part about the lenses that sounds so funny considering there are no vendors in all of photography who have as many high-quality, high-grade modern SLR lenses as Canikon.
> Canikon lenses aren't optically good enough for my purposes
Hilarious. Let me guess, only the Zeiss Atus deserves a place in your camera bag. lol.
pdelux: canon have ridden the wave of their reputation for a long time. but how will it last when they keep releasing lack luster products.....
> I guess I shouldn't have expected Canon fanboys
Pulling out the "fanboy" card because you have no answers aside, I'm not a Canon user but it's just foolish to think that they make lack luster gear when they are a market leader. You cannot name one vendor other than Nikon who has anywhere near the SLR system that Canon offers. Their sensor technology is far from obsolete, in fact it's good enough to have a number of cameras near the top of DxOMark's sensor ratings. Sensor technology does not make us better photographer or help us book more weddings or portraits. Professionals and amateurs all over the world use Canon gear to create all kinds of award winning work. Who is kidding who?
> marike6, there is nothing special about any of those products either
I'm not a Canon user, but "lack luster"? How ridiculous. Who's kidding who? You are talking about Gold Award cameras in the 5DIII, 70D, 100D, and outstanding, class leading optics in above the lenses. The EOS Cinema line, not only did it beat Sony to the punch for offering 4K RAW, but it's one of THE premier run and gun documentary or high end wedding cinema camera systems available.
As far as other manufacturers, no other vendor but Nikon offers anywhere near as complete as SLR system as Canon does.
> canon have ridden the wave of their reputation for a long time
5D III, 6D, 70D, 100D, 24-70 f/2.8 L, 40 f/2.8, 35 f/2 IS, C100, et al
There is nothing lack luster about any of the above products.
People seeking small MILCs for walking around or travel are but a tiny percentage of the overall camera market. Canon understands this.
marike6: So this is where mirrorless fans come with their unrealistic views of the camera market to laugh at the EOS M.
In the meantime, Canon will continue to dominate the camera industry and they will continue to laugh all the way to the bank. :-)
@TrojMacReady "Doesn't that tell you something about yourself?"
"How about you worry about yourself and your images and less about what I'm up to"
"I don't have any advice for anyone."
Context is everything. If someone I don't know gets personal, I'll call them on it. Wouldn't you?
Don't know anyone who lets gear talk get under their skin, but it is interesting how web interaction is so different from normal interpersonal communication. "Web etiquette" is a misnomer because there is very little that's polite about these boards.
Richard Murdey: Assuming that it is now competitive in the autofocus department (and the original was astonishingly awful in that respect) Canon can now go out compete with the NEX5, various PEN models, the tiny GM1, and the new low end Fuji bodies - which is more than can be said for Nikon.
Nikon chose to walk away from that fight, a decision that may have been the right one: at least there are reasons to chose Nikon 1, tradeoffs that may or may not appeal, whereas what Canon is fielding -while competent - cannot be said to have any originality or unique selling point.
Nikon didn't choose to walk away from anything. At the end of 2012, Nikon was fourth place in the worldwide mirrorless camera sales ahead of Canon, Samsung, and Fujifilm. Since then almost all mirrorless camera sales have been flat at best.
But Canon and Nikon are not like Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus, Samsung, et al. Canikon make the much of their profit from DSLRs so they have to walk a fine line being careful not to cannibalize their DSLR lineups, both of which dominate all the mirrorless vendors in camera sales. Some may want an highly specified APS-C Nikon or Canon mirrorless but such a camera would frankly be bad business for both companies.
As far as the Nikon 1, it's at a disadvantage because of the 1" sensor, but its AF system, solid DSLR level AF tracking and fast processing make it a nice system to shoot with. And with a lens like the 18.5 f/1.8 you can get decent DOF control if you can get close to your subject and IQ is decent.
Timmbits: hmmm, lets see... about the same size as a GM1 (slightly larger, but with larger sensor also), but less lenses available for it. Canon is still on the fence as to whether it's time to allow their whole rage of cameras evolve into mirrorless... until then, EOSM will be nothing but a GM1 equivalent. That's a moot topic though, as the real cameras are the OMD, GX7, NX20, A7, Fuji... for mirrorless.
> Canon is still on the fence as to whether it's time to allow their whole rage of cameras evolve into mirrorless..
Why on earth would Canon turn their awesome SLR system into a mirrorless system? Canon professionals all over the world would leave in droves if Canon changed their big, bright OVFs to EVFs. The DSLT experiment has already been tried by Sony. Seen any DSLT cameras at the weekend football or basketball games?
Other than some new sensors, Canon doesn't need to change a thing. It's all about the system, and the EOS system is superb. If I didn't shoot Nikon I would shoot Canon. Great cameras, excellent glass. Nobody wants mirrorless EOS instead of their DSLRs. Obsoleting EF mount would be a mistake Canon would never recover from. For travel or walking around, there are tons of small cameras including compacts. For work, few photographers sit around worrying about camera size when their DSLRs get the job done better than anything else.
> For someone with so much advice for others not to judge your ways, you (Marike) sure judge a lot yourself.
I don't have any advice for anyone. But when people talk trash, as a New Yorker, it's in my nature to react. And normally I'll be the one defending the gear that's under assault, this EOS M a case in point.
But yes, these front page comments can be unpleasant when brand warriors and cropped format fans come out to talk smack about the latest gear. So much acrimony around here, it gets a bit old, that's all. Canon knows exactly what it's doing.
> Doesn't that tell you something about yourself?
Yeah that was a little joke. I couldn't care less what names people call me. Everybody is a fan of something. Who would have thought, I'm a fan of the brand camera that I shoot with? How incredibly unusual. lol.
Man, these front page comment sections are about the least pleasant place to be on earth. Everybody has something to say. How about you worry about yourself and your images and less about what I'm up to.
> What's unrealistic about wanting a camera that does not suck?
What's wrong with the 70D, 100D, 700D, 6D, 5D III, cameras that have viewfinders, great AF systems, and mount every EF lens ever made?
Why do you want to start a whole new lens mount just to have a slightly smaller camera bag?
> Canon doesn't dominate. Canon is one of TWO brands that dominate.
Yes, I realize that. But I get called the "F word" (i.e., "fanboy") so frequently in these comments now I try to avoid mentioning my preferred brand at all. It makes it tricky to talk about gear, but the mere mention of that N company seems to upset some users, so I'm trying to erase it from my lexicon.
> What's amazing to me is that Canon is so successful
Look at their system of cameras, their lenses and flashes and you'll understand why they are so successful. Mirrorless fans seem to think ALL users want what they want, but that is not the case. Canon is only interested in a small piece of the mirrorless pie. If they wanted to, they could make miniature C300 style still camera with 15 fps, Dual Pixel AF, 4K RAW video etc. But unlike Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Fujifilm, et al, Canon absolutely must protect it's bread and butter DSLR lineup, just like that other DSLR company who shall remain nameless. :-)
Sigma has some excellent lenses in its lineup, but in general, I didn't buy a Nikon body to slap Sigma and Tamron lenses on it. I have in the past, but lately I've been using all Nikon lenses. Rock solid AF and excellent color/contrast that Nikkors are known for.
It was the same when I shot Canon. Mostly, I didn't skip L lenses to go to shopping at the Sigma and Tamron counter at B&H. On DX, Sigma and Tamron have some sharp, compact and reasonably priced f/2.8 standard zooms. And Tokina has a few great UWA zooms. There are some great values in Sigma, but on FX, I mostly stick with Nikkors.
For the Df, I'll likely use a mix of G and AIS Nikkors.
samfan: I know the 1st party manufacturers aren't under any obligation to provide support for 3rd parties. But do they really think that if they don't make their own lens such as 50-150/2.8 or 18-35/1.8 for DX, and break the support for such a 3rd party lens, I'll buy a 70-200/2.8 VR and 24-70/2.8 instead? And maybe a FX body to boot? Really?
Because the answer is no, I won't, and I also won't buy any more bodies from Nikon. If my existing bodies get way too old to still be useful, I'll rather just switch to a brand that 1) offers the lenses I need, 2) allows me to use 3rd party lenses without being too worried about the future.
Fortunately I'm in no hurry. Let's see which of the DSLR/MILC manufacturers get their sh*t together the best.
> But do they really think that if they don't make their own lens such as 50-150/2.8 or 18-35/1.8 for DX, and break the support for such a 3rd party lens, I'll buy a 70-200/2.8 VR and 24-70/2.8 instead?
Why would Nikon make a 50-150 when they offer have 3 70/80-200 lenses in their lineup? And why would you waste your time with a 50-150 f/2.8 when you could have a sharper and more future proof 70-200 f/2.8 or f/4 VR lens? The Sigma weighs the same. Depending on what you shoot, a FF 70-200 on a DX camera is extremely useful, i.e. a 105-300 f/2.8 that works well with Nikon's 1.4 and 1.7 TCs.
Is the focal range from 70-100mm really so important?
And by the way, Nikon is not purposely breaking anything. Sigma reverse engineers Nikon's AF protocols which do change. Nikon is trying to improve their cameras, and they have their own lens lineup to worry about. Besides, AFAIK, Nikon does not get a dime from Sigma lens sales so Nikon's priority is Nikon, not third party lens support.
So this is where mirrorless fans come with their unrealistic views of the camera market to laugh at the EOS M.
UnChatNoir: Who is waiting for this? After being compromised with the EOS M now a second attempt to push this silly concept in the market but still without viewfinder. Canon, do you really think you can save your DSLR-market by NOT making a serious, credible Mirror-less camera range? By just offering a toy that maybe the full equipped Canon DSLR-user will pick up to play with, on a hot summer trip? Soon there will be only Sony's, Fujifilm X's, Olympus and even others to conquer your realm.
> Soon there will be only Sony's, Fujifilm X's, Olympus and even others to conquer your realm.
Don't know what it's like where you live. Here in the US if you look at Amazon's Top Cameras you won't find a single CSC in the Top 100 Best Sellers. Not one. Lots of Canikon cameras, not a single MILC. So it's doubtful anyone is conquering anything.
There is almost zero mindshare among professionals,the amateur space is dominated by DSLRs, and it would appear some mirrorless vendors are struggling to survive.
Josh152: Wow I can't believe they didn't put the 70D's sensor with dual pixel AF in it. It would have had the best AF in any mirrorless camera to date. Pluse a cmaera like this is begging for an EVF.
The Nikon 1 camera were the first MILC, AFAIK to have PDAF and it's likely still one of the best around for AF tracking. Robust predictive AF algorithms are one of Nikon's strengths. For video AF, the Dual Pixel system does work well from what I've seen. Canon wasn't about to put that system in this camera. It would have been bad business.
(unknown member): So let me get this straight . . . the "improvement" is Canon simply made the auto focus finally work? That's the improvement? I have been a loyal Canon fan for decades but the once mighty Canon indeed is slipping. Sony, and others, are making Canon look stupid now. Actually, Canon is making itself look foolish.
Why should Canon worry about the "small at all costs" crowd when they are outselling other vendors with their DSLR lineup, one of the two most complete SLR systems ever created?
Because you want Canon to enter the niche enthusiast MILC space doesn't mean Canon is "slipping". A camera like the A7/A7r might interest a few mirrorless fans and tech industry types, but it likely won't even be speed bump in Canon's road to market dominance. Camera systems have always been about the complete system of bodies, lenses, flashes and accessories, and in this area Canon has only Nikon as its rival.
Sony inherited the excellent Minolta mount and lenses, finally made a pretty nice FF with A900, and then they started putting EVF into all cameras causing many to completely loose interest in the Alpha line.
In video, Canon actually shipped a 4K camera, the C500 before Sony was able to ship its 4K camera the F55. So nobody is making Canon look foolish, that could be in your head. :-)
wcbert: I been shooting with Canon DSLR for over a decade ands own 12 "L" lens. I am also a Fuji X-e1 owner too. Canon has to do better alot better than this. There is no excuse they are not even trying to become a leader in the mirrorless camera world. They not even trying to be in third place!
Canon read the writing on the wall and look what Sony is doing. If not then except to become the Blackberry of the camera world.
What you may be missing is that Canon and Nikon don't want to release an MILC that will cannibalize their own bread and butter DSLR sales. Other companies have more freedom to release high spec'd MILCs without fear of hurting their own business model.
Timmbits: A bit ironic that SONY has such poor videoconferencing equipment for the video link (for Marc who couldn't be there).
> Sony a7 siblings are already putting a lot of pressure on Canon and Nikon who just wouldn't let go of mirror boxes for the larger sensors
Have you actually looked at something like Amazon's "Top 100 Digital Cameras"? Not a single CSC to be found anywhere in the list. The idea that Canon and Nikon have to change ANYTHING because of the A7 or any other mirrorless camera is one that doesn't match the reality of camera sales in 2013 at all.