tabloid: The iPad has killed off print.And the public love the iPad.I suspect that very shortly (if not already) you will be able to read a publication via a contact lens, and the images will move (short video clips).What comes after that….the mind boggles.Keep up, or keep out.
Um, okay. I fully admit that other things need to get developed. And I acknowledged computers needed transistors and other things.
Glad you got the loom thing. There's another late 19th century digital computer.
I said OLED lighting, just to be clear that's very different than an LED.
And LEDs do such a better job than fluorescents that if they could have been developed sooner, I think they would have. And the idea of being able to skip changing light bulbs in ceiling mounts 20+ feet in the air would seem like another real motivation.
So I'm with you, but I think things could have been different and sometimes that means things can get out of the lab a bit sooner.
W5JCK: As long as Canon continues to sit on its corporate backside and turn out lackluster improvements that are merely minor updates to cameras long ago released, they will continue to slide. They need to innovate and push the envelope. Minor tweaks to outdated designs just won't cut it in today's market. That is why so many of us have jumped off the Canon wagon in search of better equipment.
Nope, I'm not going to stfu.
You can use the best Samsung lens as a start. That would be the 85mm f/1.4. It's not a lens I own.
Or you can just use a good Zeiss on your Canon body to see what you're missing with Canon L lenses--it's kind of stunning. I just did that test with a 1DX a month ago. Canon L lenses are a joke compared to good Zeisses, while the best Samsungs stand up there with Zeiss.
I don't share raws.
Snikt228: It's only a tiny fraction smaller than the Sony A5100 and very near the Sony a6000 which are both APS-C 24MP. Seems like it's time to ditch that old M 4/3?
And it's real easy to demonstrate, so not rare.
But I'm not sharing raws.
Many can be better than Canikon. Not everything else is. So don't pretend I said something I didn't.
Shoot with a good Leica or Zeiss and you can see what absolutely the best Samsungs can do. You can mount a good Zeiss on your Canon body.
Canon has good lenses, but there are better now.
snapa: IMO, the G12 that I used for 4 years was the last good fixed lens camera Canon made. Since then, it has been all down hill from their. I have yet to see anything from Canon (with a fixed lens) that has interested me, at all. Sony and Panasonic has put a major hurting on them for many years, and for very good reasons, they have made better cameras!
Actually the G7X is sharper than the Sony RX100III, and does high ISOs better.
The EVF on the RX100III is too fidgety. But can be useful, so I give you that.
Also both the RX100III and the G7X can be excellent.
Resolution is not everything.
There is more than one SonyZeiss. There are several, at least 4.
You seem lost in the more pixels thing; it's silly.
The best Samsung NX lenses are optically much better than Canikon lenses. So are SigmaArts and Zeisses and SonyZeisses, and Olympuses and PanaLeicas and Fujis.
You most certainly can't add the color of which I write. That you don't know this, means you don't pay a lot of attention to better lenses from whatever party.
mailman88: It's simple Canon, build a camera noise free at 6400 ISO, fastest AF in the business and sell it under $1700....then you'll own the camera world.
Not one of those examples if noise free at ISO 6400, all very good cameras though.
No, for example an image from a Sony A6000 shot at ISO 6400 and resampled to 12MP will still have plenty of noise.
While the $2500+ A7S and Df don't have this problem of noise at ISO 6400.
Canikon lenses, even very good ones, have colour problems.
That 24-70 isn't real sharp either. That's the only one in the list I've actually tried.
Olympus, Samsung, Fuji, Panasonic, Sigma, and even Nikon, have optically better lenses, of course you can't use many of those on a Canon. Then there's Zeiss.
$1700 is high, for something someone understands he/she may replace in few years.
It's still not a casual purchase for most at that price.
And noise free at ISO 6400 is still Nikon Df or Sony A7S territory.
HowaboutRAW: And I know Canon realizes this:
A 2006 DSLR is still very good still camera in most situations.
They’ve been lazy about introducing any serious mirrorless system.
Much of the world’s economy is still a big mess, because of the derivatives fiasco.
Better question: Why in 2015, if I were starting from scratch for digital, would I pick a Canon? There are two recent exciting cameras: The 7DII and the G7X–neither is without serious challengers. And the older 5DIII, 6D, and 70D all have serious competition.
Fuji, Samsung, Olympus, Sony, Panasonic, and even Nikon, Leica and Ricoh are significantly ahead of Canon in mirrorless. (Despite the prevailing attitude, the Nikon 1 system is a plenty serious, if too expensive, mirrorless line.)
Now there are reasons to pick Canon pro and prosumer video cameras, but those also have serious challengers.
I'll take your word on Canon's customer service.
Not a great mystery to me why people pick both Canon and Nikon DSLRs.
But if you're looking beyond Costco, there are many more very good cameras to choose than there were in say 2008.
The question is if you're starting out in 2015 without prior commitment to Canon or Nikon, what compels you to pick either--assuming you want an interchangeable lens system with a 4/3s or bigger sensor?
AbrasiveReducer: The problem is not cell phones. The problem is that cameras are already good enough. For every guy with a D800, a 14-24 and a tripod, there are 1000 who are happy with what they have, or not willing to spend what it would take to get something significantly better.
Very few people have a genuine need for a specific level of image quality. Want? Sure. Need? No. The notion that a camera or sensor is stale or out of fashion does not work when the results people get from what they already own fulfill their expectations.
And a good 2010 DSLR will still be perfectly good in 2020--as a still camera.
mpgxsvcd: Canon is delusional. They can’t even see that the downward trend for them is steadily increasing. Nikon has started to right its ship. However, their “perceived” quality issues are not helping them.
Sony is making great cameras but they simply don’t know how to get the word out there to the mass public. That and they simply haven’t had enough time to build up their lens lineup yet.
Samsung made a killer product with their NX1. However, it too suffers from a lack of publicity.
M4/3s is hanging in there. They have a devout following with their diehard consumers. However, compact and super-zoom cameras like the LX100 and FZ1000 actually hurt their m4/3s sales. The lenses offer them more profit but Panasonic is concentrating more on their compact cameras right now. Olympus is doing much better by producing great glass and great camera bodies to go along with that glass.
I'm not sure I agree, but there is only the LX100 as an example of an m4/3s camera with a lens affixed.
Yep, they have a good lineup of lenses, but the optical results aren't as good as Samsung, Oly, Pana, Fuji, SonyZeiss, Sony, and Nikon on a good day. Canon's best isn't bad, but it's no longer really really good.
Wouldn't sales of the LX100 count as m4/3s sales?
Many of the bodies are excellent.
The lenses aren't optically amazing. Even Nikon looks to finally be figuring that out.
Good enough like a Nikormat or AE1 or an OM2 was good for 10 years, but now you don't even need to buy film.
Mike FL: "Q4 Canon sold 7.8 million compact cameras" So it take Canon 3 month for selling 7.8 million b/c Smart Phone.
Forget 3 months, lets see what 3 minutes can do for a Smart phone sales event:
"Apple's Biggest Rival In China Sold Out Its New Phone In Just 3 Minutes...
Xiaomi has received more than 220 million reservations for the mobile device (though these won't all translate into sales)... Mi Note starts at $370..."
And yet now Apple has the biggest selling smartphone in China.
But still no raw.
Also you look to be more concerned with stocks than with camera gear or photography.
Do you own Xiaomi stock? This is not the first time you've pushed it.
volks 1: Until someone like Canon, Nikon and others reinvent the camera, sales will continue to drop. All we keep getting are minor updates but no real change. Iv'e been saying for a very long time now that the bulk of the market are amateurs.I would further bet that the majority of amateurs use the auto and scene mode of their dslr's which produce so so results. Give them a camera that is as easy to use as the film cameras of the past with the same superb rich colors and sharpness. All we get is the same old same old. If you still need Photoshop to make your photos right, you have failed.
"I would further bet that the majority of amateurs use the auto and scene mode of their dslr's which produce so so results."
I think that's unlikely.
Sonyshine: Canon and Nikon especially keep on churning out the same old cameras with annual 'updates'.
When are they going to really take a long hard look at the ease of use and convenience of a smartphone and start to bring all of those features to their cameras?
Proper WIFI, editing, GPS, mapping, linking to Facebook, Instagram, APPs, Decent touchscreens, 4k Video, etc etc.
Why not rethink lenses and lens mounts?
Why not some pioneering mirrorless from Canon and Nikon?
The longer they try and protect their existing concepts the more outdated they appear.
Its not just Canon and Nikon - ALL the manufacturers need to wake up to 21st century realities!
Nice idea, but sales would be low.
And Leica beat them to it.