Ghostboo: I'm glad to see Canon inching forward. My first DSLR (three decades ago) was a Canon and I loved it but they seem stuck in the past...just like Nikon. These two behemoths need to get with the game. Sony is setting the world on fire by giving photographers what they want and need. I will not reward a manufacturer my hard earned money until they give us products that are cutting edge. Sony is guilty too. How long has Gordon Laing and other top reviewers been touting fully articulated screens? Sony is stuck on tilting screens which is only marginally better. It makes sense once you get over traditional "old thinking". Try shooting at ground level if you are a bit older and less agile without a fully articulated screen. Panasonic has led the way and Olympus has adopted it for the Em5 Mk II. Still improvements are needed. Bigger buffers, faster write times, 4K video, etc. 2015 was a landmark year for photographers. Manufacturers began to give us what we want. Lets hope 2016 is better.
In the days of film, none of these discussions occurred. There were advancements and excitement, but the camera and the film were two entities, and digital processing was expensive and film was fairly forgiving of AF systems.Now the sensors reveal lens flaws and you have way more than a printed 4X6 to prove it. Digital processing of digital images offers an exciting new method for advancement, as well as offering a plethora of gimmicks, exaggerated claims, and unnecessary technicalities to appease the newly emboldened consumers of both the informed and ignorant variety. The interwebs offers tons of information, but no cohesive way for one to go about being properly educated. And in all that needs and priorities have been supplanted by wants and boredom and shortened attention spans.Sony has provided competition in vaguely new ways, but in ways the market was already headed. They have done interesting things and hasty, annoying things. Canon and Nikon remain extremely relevant.
Daft Punk: These ARE terrific cameras, lets be clear about that. They are capable of fantastic images.
But the sensor engineering is old. Lets not pretend it is not. The BSI sensor in the A7R2 is probably two generations ahead of Canon now. This may not matter 95% of the time, as Canon bodies offer other advantages as well.
But it is a worry. Canon cameras are effectively operating with decade-old engineering that is being pushed to its limits. Sony are a long way ahead.
It is right to worry that Canon, for all of its market size and firepower, chooses to not compete.
Maybe they are working hard behind the scenes and will soon delight us all with a new sensor, new engineering and new camera. I certainly hope so , as Canon make some fantastic lenses.
720p was great. 1080i was better and 1080p even better. Blu-ray sales slump despite having superior quality to downloadable content. Why isn't 4k king? Blu-ray? Sales don't indicate superior quality, they indicate perceived value and if better isn't worth the cost of the improvement, then it won't sell, at least not quickly. Adoption rates of ILC is abysmal and a few spikes don't indicate a trend. Still, once the improvement costs less and are sufficiently better, then I have no doubt sales will accelerate. I'm not holding my breath.
He's probably tired of hearing the same line repeated for the millionth time. It's the same with someone saying "mirrorless is the future" while they continue the same flat sales for the tenth year in a row. Yes, we know what the trends are. You've said nothing original or even mildly interesting. If the market decides Canon is doomed, let it speak for the first time ever on the subject. Until then, let's see how competition and sales motivate each company. I think Canon will continue to innovate as they always have.
Two generations in mature tech is not the same as two generations in emerging tech. Also, each generation can advance in different ways. High pixel density manufacturing is a category unto itself. Does this mean Sony is two generations behind in color tech? Many would say yes. Not to mention ergonomics and menus.However, Canon is no doubt working on advancing other aspects of digital capture. Their DP PDAF is a generation or two ahead of everyone, although processor intensive functions are still coming along (tracking, recognition).This is the game. The cycle. Consumer attention spans don't apply to a company's long term strategy. I think Canon will continue advancing in very useful and surprising ways, as they always have.Losslessly compressed RAW? Canon was ahead of Sony 15 years ago on that front. Priorities are just different. And reviewers are all biased. They are inundated by tech. New is always a relief of boredom. Pros or not, their priorities are different.
Richard Franiec: I'm not sure how many different versions of Canon Powershot cameras with previous generation of RX100 sensor would take to equal the appeal (and sales success) of RX100MkIV, a single Sony camera in the segment?
In my mind, the "revolution" in Canon compact cameras started and ended with Powershot S90/ S95, two possibly most desirable and best balanced designs at the time. The following iterations were just mundane, killed with introduction of RX100.
It is sad to see the former undisputable leader in such state of confusion and impotence.
Discussing value is pointless because it's subjective. However, to say that paying more gets you something better is redundant and obvious and...pointless. Yeah, a more expensive camera is likely better than a cheaper one. And the sky is blue, the earth is round, and the ocean is wet.
surlezi,So you're saying that orders of magnitude of price difference for your food analogy is the proper comparison for a 50% greater price charged for a camera in a different market segment? Better isn't the point. The point is how much more you have to pay for better and how much you're WILLING to pay for better. You're talking about going from a $200 point and shoot to a $20,000 medium format. This is a matter of value for money, and value for money is a measure that is extremely subjective. Not only that, but this isn't just cramming food in your face which anyone can do. This is a USE CASE scenario where people have to know how to use a camera not just pay for it and consume. Anyway, the discussion is dumb and pointless.
Cost does actually matter. Oh, and horrible Sony interface matters, too. Canon sells more cameras than any other brand. Doesn't sound impotent to me.
Studor13: Given that you actually already have a camera in an iPhone, do people really take and then transfer a photo from a large(r) camera back onto the phone?
It's sort of like I would take a photo with a phone and then for some unknown reason I would transfer it to my D800.
In any case, I have a Nikon J5 which has built in wifi and can transfer images to iOS devices, so I don't know what the big deal is.
Grrrr, I'm a grumpy old man named Stu. If something changes or becomes more convenient I hate it because humans survived back when all they had were caves and sharp sticks so why can't we?! I don't understand that high speed photography is controlled by the flash burst instead of the shutter speed, and how can anyone not know exactly how their camera works for them within the first five minutes?! All I do is comment on how stupid people are for wanting something that is strictly a convenience and, while it may not cause a revolutionary change in the world of photography, does make their workflow and business a little easier. Everyone should be like me! And think like me! Argh!!! --Stu
Did I miss the fact that you can only speak from your own experiences and have no idea there are other people on the planet? Nope, didn't miss that.
Yeah, you're right. You have experiences that span the depth and breadth of all human experience. I mean, it's impossible to lose a card. Or have it stolen. Or to want to transmit photos. Or to be in a remote location and still need to get a photo halfway across the country or around the world. Or to even post to Facebook if you feel like it. Or to have clients that would like to see images. Or to not have a camera with two card slots. Or to be another human being who has different priorities than Stu.
Studor13,Backup? In-camera RAW editing? Sharing of files that you will later seriously edit? Instant viewing for clients? Photojournalism?There are a million reasons to use a cell phone to store, transmit, and view images. It has nothing to do with rushing (necessarily) or refusing to edit. If you have important photos that you want to back up, then having a 128GB iPhone 6S+ with even half that space free reduces the number of devices you need to bring with you when travelling. You may not need it, but there are plenty of valid reasons that this is useful that don't involve being an impatient hack.
SirSeth: Apple users everywhere have just discovered that battery packs exist! Such innovation... a revolution... and in either black or white!
(Don't ruin it for them).
Somewhere other than here apparently.
darngooddesign: The best thing about articles like this is how worked up Apple haters get.
And how they reveal themselves not as knowledgeable but simply as knee-jerk haters. They don't even know a single thing about this and start drawing conclusions about how stupid it is and it proves Apple has lost touch. It's a battery case.