EVERYTHING wrong with the R Strategy

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 4,736
Re: Amen to that! N/T

mr_marlo wrote:

diness wrote:

Honestly... this post is kind of ridiculous for a number of reasons. Canon chose a strategy, so did everyone else. Some will like it, some will hate it, but it’s not nearly as bad as you make it out to be as I’ll respond to below.

phatgreatwall wrote:

this is only my thoughts / speculation, i might be wrong in some of my notes, so please correct me, but please do not get personal as it sometimes does.

the below observations are based on the r5/r6 videos canon released, showing how these new tools will benefit photographers of different genres ( wedding, editorial, sports, wildlife)

Body price : i know it's an intro price, but assuming a 10%-15% discount after the initial release, they are still very expensive "tools" giving the current economic environment

They are full frame cameras with some pretty impressive specs. These kinds of cameras are expensive... that’s just reality

Lens price - you have the extreme L end of the spectrum, and you have the extreme economy version f/7.1 f/11, with few in the middle and a bunch missing.

It’s a brand new system. They are coming out with lenses at a ridiculously fast pace, but of course there’s lots missing. You can fill in with EF lenses

1. expensive F2 F1.2 lens that's the price of a decent used honda civic/corolla

And are excellent too

Yes, excellent indeed, but....... still a little bit on the expensive side of things. Sigma 40mm f/1.4 Art and Canon RF 50mm f/1.2 are close in performance if you ask me, but the RF is double the price. Not apples to apples of course, as the 50mm is f/1.2, but in general 50mm is less expensive than wider primes.

2. el cheapo f/11 f/7.1 zooms (24-105stm, 24-240stm, 600 f11, 800 f11)

3. middle ground ( 35 stm, 85 stm, 24-105 F4)

I think those are nice lenses. The 35mm is probably a little bit too compact to have a good light transmission, and even the 85mm is only f/2.0, so a bit on the compact side. The f/4.0 zoom is Canons best f/4.0 standard zoom ever. I don't see what's wrong with these lenses.

You just showed how they have some in each section...

4. no nifty fifty,

Yes, that's a pain.

no f4 wide angle, no 70-200 f4, (assuming canon wants these users to use the legacy lens via adapter)

70-200 f4 is coming and so is a 50mm according to Canonrumors.

It's only a rumor, and it's t0o late anyway.

Of course all these are available in EF lenses

target audience

1 - people with tons of money lying around and just enjoys the latest techs (usually not a photographer and are a rare breed nowdays)

All these cameras are targeted to these people in some ways... who else would you target with expensive cameras???

2 - people who own existing EF lens and would continue to use them with the R mount. (based on my personal experience with the EF 16-35 2.8ii, 70-200 f4, Tamron 150-600 G2)

i. EF protocol does not give the R user full advantage of the R system

Barely. It’s barely a difference. It’s the best adapted lens situation out there.

ii. EF USM motors are not designed for videos

True for the most part.. they still work ok

iii. older EF AFs are not ideal for advanced tracking capability of the R5/6/R/RP

In what way??

3 - people who need these specialized tools to earn a living ( wedding, documentary, fashion, magazines, sports, wildlife) and benefit from the newer technology

i. large wedding - pretty much non existent for the next foreseeable future. marriages will still happen, but gone are the days of jamming 300 people in a room, and no credited photography will want to jeopardize his life/career for a small shoot worth maybe 2k/shoot (wedding events are mostly for show in a lot of cultures, and thus the bride/groom are well aware of the cost associated with impressing family/friends, now the event is much simpler and smaller, few newlyweds are willing to dish out 5-10k for a photographer, not mentioning 99% of newlyweds are just beginning their career in this uncertain economic environment)

ii. documentary/wildlife - mostly transitioned to micro documentaries with limited budget thanks to online streaming trends, gone are the days of NG BBC BIG budget expeditions to the middle of nowhere.

iii. fashion - mostly done in-house in a fixed environment with strobes, thus not really benefiting if transitioned to mirrorless(WYSISYG) or advanced tracking, on top of it most fashion editorials are shot in medium format.

iv. magazines - all transitioned to E-books online, reducing the photography criteria and more emphasize on photo editing

iiv. sports - self explanatory, there are none with spectators for the next while, and the last thing you want to do is sit on the sideline with players dripping on you/crashing into you.

SO, there are 3 targeted audiences with the R5/6 and i don't see them flocking to the store to buy these latest and greatest gears in the next year at least.

again, please correct me if i'm wrong.

In this last part, you jut described the camera industry in general. What should these companies do? Just stop making cameras? The market is shrinking, and to be honest, it seems like the high end stuff is what’s going to keep selling, because people who buy the low end stuff are just using their phones instead. For the most part, I think Canon is doing very well with their strategy. If you want a full frame Canon mirroless you now have a cheap option (RP), a medium option with decently high MP count (R), a very fast and reasonably priced sports and all around option (R6) and a do-everything pro type option with high MP count (R5). Sounds good to me!

-- hide signature --

EF glass = bang for my buck

 thunder storm's gear list:thunder storm's gear list
Canon EOS M50 Canon EOS R Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 35-80mm f/4.0-5.6 III Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM +13 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow