G5X, G9X coming?

meland wrote:

Jim wrote:

meland wrote:

Jim wrote:

meland wrote:

Jim wrote:

TacticDesigns wrote:

kurth wrote:

LOL.

Sorry.

I'm not in this to have the latest and greatest piece of technology.

I just want something that takes nice pictures.

I have lots of nice cameras, but the one I'm missing is a camera with a 1-inch sensor that I can carry around on vacation, hopefully in a pocket. At worst, a small pouch.

For vacation I've been using my Canon S90 and Fujifilm XP50 most recently.

...as usual canon's late to the race, copying the other horses, and still stuck playing catchup !

?

What does it matter if they get it right?

The reason that it matters is that by the time Canon introduces their product, the competition has already/is about to introduce the next iteration of theirs (to wit: the G3X vs the FZ1000). I prefer Canon products because almost all my accessory camera gear is Canon. Many here have the same "prefer Canon" inertia for the same reason. But that only goes so far. I agree with you that getting it right is important but other companies have gotten it right too...sooner and cheaper. This too can't be overlooked.

Jim

If other companies have "gotten it right too...sooner and cheaper" how is it that they are not more successful?

Who says that they're not? I think you would agree that Sony is a successful company. Other companies are successful but are relatively new to the camera business. Samsung and Panasonic come immediately to mind and look how their products have come along. Pretty well I'd say.

Jim

Have any of their camera divisions made a profit recently?

I don't have their financials handy so you might know more than I do on this particular question. However, these companies continue to bring out new products and most of the organizations are much more product diversified than either Canon or Nikon. They can afford to grow their respective camera division's business and remain in the "black" or support them until they achieve profitability. What do you think would happen to Nikon and Canon if their camera business took a sharp downturn? Talk about instant red ink... However, I think we're straying afield from the subject at hand and that is Canon's "me too" outlook for the last two to three years. I'm a fan of the company and enjoy their products. I just wish they were a bit more forward leaning and a bit less fuddy-duddy.

Jim

But nobody's camera divisions are growing at the moment because the camera market overall is declining. So the only way companies can grow their camera divisions is by poaching market share from someone else. And that isn't happening to any significant extent. So what Financial Director will continue to sanction losses when there is no real prospect of a return?

Personally I think what you call "Canon's "me too" outlook" is precisely because they realise that the camera market has plateaued, that it has been time for a strategic pause and a rethink and I suspect from now on you will see a much more aggressive approach but one built on the back of solid financial foundations.

I concur that Canon should be making prudent financial decisions because I certainly want them to stay in business. But the products that they're introducing are hardly technology shattering products requiring tons of R&D. The GxX series are mostly derivatives of the G7X chassis. My case in point is the G3X vs the FZ1000 from a price/feature perspective. The FZ1000 will likely have a successor in the not too distant future and the feature gap between the just-introduced G3X and that product will be even more pronounced than it already is. Given this, I wonder why Canon just doesn't build a product that has all the bells and whistles. It doesn't have to be radically out in front of the competition but it should not be lagging behind either...particularly for what they price them at.

Anyway, just my take.

Jim