Which Platform has better FUTURE? Samsung NX or EOS-M

johnsmith404 wrote:

007peter wrote:

Which Platform do you think has a better FUTURE?

Samsung NX or

Canon EOS-M

Well, Samsung NX obviously. The bodies are technologically much more advanced and the lens selection is much more complete. The only reason I didn't got for Samsung is that I don't like their design and that the lenses I want, esp. the 11-22 is slightly better in Canon land (but Samsungs UWA seems to be quite decent and affordably priced too).

NX has already scheduled its own 300 2.8. I bet EF-M won't have anything comparable even in 2020. The only advantage of EF-M is the EF-EF-M adapter. But if you're planning on using EF lenses a Canon DSLR will be the better choice for years to come so why bother.

I agree; if it weren't for the EF to EF-M adapter, and the promise that someday Canon will get serious about mirrorless, this would be a blowout victory for NX over EF-M.

Even with the EF to EF-M adapter, Samsung has the edge right now. Canon has no advanced bodies with things like built-in EVF, many fast AF points spread across the sensor, IBIS, etc. Canon also has a lack of speed: slow AF-C, low framerates on all EOS-M models, low bitrate video, etc. This makes me think that Canon's lack of investment in smaller-process fabrication facilities is starting to damage its ability to compete.

Samsung has $billions invested in fabs and thus has a long-term sensor, chip, and circuit advantage that Canon can't match since Canon has so much less volume. Companies like Samsung can basically use their cutting-edge fabs on smartphone chips, DRAM, and solid-state memory. When the fabs become obsolete for those purposes, they can repurpose them for sensor and camera chips.

In contrast, Canon does not have that ability to spread costs of fabs across as many industries and with as much volume, so Canon rarely upgrades its fabs. Most Canon sensors are still at 500nm. In contrast, Intel is at 14nm and many companies have been at 20nm for a while now. The big 500nm process can't be good for perf/watt... and might explain why the EOS-M has such poor battery life.

Canon can get around this problem by basically giving up and outsourcing the production its electronics components to other companies, which is basically what Nikon has done, but I think Canon's corporate pride makes that a nonstarter. And that's too bad because Canon is not keeping up with the sensor tech of its rivals.

A naive person might think Canon is an 800 pound gorilla in sensors because of its large market share in ILCs, but ILCs are a small part of a much larger market that includes everything from smartphone/tablet camera sensors to military sensors to action/security/video cams to automobile sensors. http://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1326279 (chart is market share by revenue--if it were market share by volume, Canon's share would hardly be visible, since it'd be swamped by all those smartphone sensors and such)

The argument that ILCs are a core business for Canon and that Samsung might "give up" made sense even 1 year ago, when Samsung hilariously didn't even have HSS or any serious ILCs. But with the NX1 I think it's clear that Samsung is not giving up anytime soon.

We may see some interesting mergers in the future, though. Can you imagine what would happen if Sony and Oly merged? They'd probably ditch M43 and focus on Sony E/FE, with Oly designing the glass and Sony leveraging its electronics expertise (similar to Samsung, above). Or imagine what happens if Apple buys Nikon or Canon.