T3

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jul 1, 2003

Comments

Total: 6215, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

beavertown: Canon is the only one who develops their sensors in house among the big boys.

@vscd - "Somewhere in the near future there will be a new small company, or even Canon, building something totally fancy new and the marketleaders will be way behind."

Doubt it. Image sensor design and fabrication isn't something that just anyone can do. There's a lot of overhead and infrastructure involved. R&D costs are high. You can't just start making image sensors out of your garage. Besides, even if this "new small company" did come along with something "totally fancy," I see Sony just buying them up. Sony has plenty of money. Sony bought Toshiba's image sensor business in 2015, basically buying out a competitor.

https://www.engadget.com/2015/12/04/sony-toshiba-image-sensors/

So if Sony saw some new, exciting technology coming along from some small company, I think they'd certainly try to buy it. In 2012, Sony invested $642 million into Olympus, becoming majority shareholder. They sold off half their shares in 2015, but not before getting 5-axis IBIS.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 08:59 UTC
In reply to:

Oskar P: What upsets some is knowing that in year Canon could very well be the FF mirrorless market leader, just as they now are with ALL mirrorless in Japan.
Amazingly Canon's few APSC mirrorless bodies have outsold ALL Sony mirrorless the past few years. No doubt this new camera will increase their lead.

I'd love to see how many Sony owners use Canon lenses. It could be more than 30% use at least one Canon lens.

@lawny13 - "please. Sony is the more expensive brand here."

No, Canon is the more expensive brand here.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 08:47 UTC
In reply to:

Oskar P: What upsets some is knowing that in year Canon could very well be the FF mirrorless market leader, just as they now are with ALL mirrorless in Japan.
Amazingly Canon's few APSC mirrorless bodies have outsold ALL Sony mirrorless the past few years. No doubt this new camera will increase their lead.

I'd love to see how many Sony owners use Canon lenses. It could be more than 30% use at least one Canon lens.

@lawny13 - "But their lenses are anything but inexpensive. Purchasing 1-2 Sony lenses already offsets the cost of the body."

Have you seen the prices of Canon's RF/EOS R gear? Canon's EF 50/1.2L is $1350, but their RF 50/1.2L jumps up to a whopping $2300! That's 70% more expensive! Also, Canon's EOS R is $300 more expensive than the Nikon Z6 and Sony A7 III. And the EOS R doesn't even have IBIS. Plus, the battery grip for the EOS R is $490.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1433716-REG/canon_bg_e22_battery_grip.html

Sony's battery grip is only $348.
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1333271-REG/sony_vg_c3em_vertical_grip.html

The Canon battery grip is 40% more expensive!

Canon's proprietary USB charging cable for the EOS R is $190!
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1434036-REG/canon_3250c002_pd_e1_usb_power_adapter.html

So it's really absurd to be calling out Sony's mirrorless prices when Canon's prices are worse. But you'll probably blindly defend/justify it!

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 08:25 UTC
In reply to:

Tonio Loewald: Gotta love the softball questions and gushy editorializing.

Apparently autofocus, IBIS, and viewfinder quality aren’t fundamentals in cameras despite the fact that every review emphasizes them. (Especially odd, since Sony currently leads the pack with mirrorless autofocus. Not so much the other two.)

@vscd - Do you only have two drinking glasses in your house? Plus, when memory cards are cheaper, you are free to buy more of them. I have SD cards everywhere. I have a few at my workstation, a few in my camera bag, one in my wallet, a couple in my car, a few I've sent off to friends and colleagues. You can do that when each card isn't $130+!

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 08:11 UTC
In reply to:

MannyZero: Who cares for competition....
When you own this...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Sony_Corporation

@vscd - LOL, geez, do you know how many times people have written off Apple? Apple is doing fine. Plus, we have yet to see Apple's next chapter. After all, Warren Buffet's company Bershire Hathaway recently became the 3rd largest shareholder of Apple.

https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/05/16/apples-second-largest-shareholder-is-berkshire-hathaway

I'm betting Warren Buffet has seen what Apple is working on, and that's why he has invested so heavily in Apple. Last I checked, Buffet has a great track record. Sorry vscd, I have more faith in Buffet's keen eye for investing than yours!

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 08:07 UTC
In reply to:

Tonio Loewald: Gotta love the softball questions and gushy editorializing.

Apparently autofocus, IBIS, and viewfinder quality aren’t fundamentals in cameras despite the fact that every review emphasizes them. (Especially odd, since Sony currently leads the pack with mirrorless autofocus. Not so much the other two.)

@vscd - "where is the problem of putting $130 in a 64GB card if you spend $2000+ in the body?"

There is a fallacy in thinking that just because you spend X amount on something that you should just not give any consideration to any costs. Did you know that a lot of rich people are actually quite cheap and do a really good job of watching their money? That's how many of them got rich in the first place! I just don't see the need to spend more money just for the heck of it. Besides, photographers don't just buy one memory card. Many of us buy several. I have lots of memory cards. When you multiply that $130 several times, it starts to really add up!

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 08:00 UTC
In reply to:

RandyPD: It can't be. Fuji, Panasonic, they 'design' their own sensors......

@cosmicnode - Having a contractor cast your body shells for you is a lot more simple than designing an image sensor. Image sensors are hugely more complicated and complex to design. It seems increasingly clear (at least from the article and other evidence that people have dug up) that camera manufacturers are selecting from a selection of pre-designed sensors on which they may be adding some customization and tweaks.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 07:54 UTC
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: Then why do camera manufacturers always insist on the sensor being their own? It's like a childish play. Whenever I talk to any responsible figure in a camera manufacturer, the moment you mention sensor origin, they act as if it were a freaking military secret!

I think it's an issue of pride. The image sensor is, figuratively, the heart of a digital camera, and they don't want to admit that they are buying the heart of their camera from someone else.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 07:40 UTC
In reply to:

RandyPD: It can't be. Fuji, Panasonic, they 'design' their own sensors......

@cosmicnode - But a lot still depends on the expertise of the "contractors". For example, if you hire someone to build your house, you can "design" it in the general sense (ie, how many rooms, how big you want the rooms, where you want the closets, etc), but you still depend heavily on the expertise of the contractors to work out the fine details (plumbing, electrical, air conditioning ducts, building codes, etc).

Or it could be like buying a pre-designed house, but you have the ability to add some "upgrades" and custom options to the house.

I'd love to know how much of the sensor is really "designed" by the camera manufacturers vs how much is already preset and established by Sony. I would guess that a lot of it is already preset and pre-designed by Sony.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 07:32 UTC
In reply to:

Dystopia: The build quality in general looks OK but definitely consumer grade, it should be reliable and durable enough to last five years or so. By that time a much better replacement will be available.

"Light things just bounce without any damage."

If you dropped the EOS R, I doubt it would do much bouncing, especially with the weight of a lens mounted on it. The camera body isn't a lightweight plastic cup! It still has plenty of weight to it (1.46 lb of weight, including the battery). And even more weight when you add a lens!

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 06:15 UTC
In reply to:

Ebrahim Saadawi: And why did samsung pull out of the large-chip sensor manufacturing when they were clearly the only rival that can beat Sony? They could have kept the option to create off-the-shelf sensors. I mean Samsung had, 5 years back, a back illuminated 30.3mp APS-C chip (28mp effective) that could do a 240fps readout at FULL resolution, with immemse DR & noise performance. I bet Fuji would have picked that chip had it been available at a competetive price package. I bet Nikon would also be interested in upgrading their APS-C line to 28mp. Also huge potential customers in the cinema market, where it's an amazing S35 7K 240p chip. Huge potential wasted by savage corporate structuring.

The ILC camera sensor market is peanuts compared to the smartphone image sensor market or other industries such as automotive image sensors. Think of how many smartphones and cars are sold compared to ILC's!

https://www.samsung.com/semiconductor/image-sensor/automotive-image-sensor/

http://www.samsungsemiblog.com/systemlsi/automotive-industry-drives-new-demand-for-cmos-image-sensors/

The automotive image sensor market is growing, while the ILC market is shrinking. But even it it weren't shrinking, it's still a small market compared to smartphones and automotive. That's why Samsung would rather make sensors for smartphones and automotive rather than ILC.
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20180502006354/en/Global-Automotive-Image-Sensors-Market-2018-2022-Steady

Global smartphone shipments hit 1.55 Billion Units in 2017.
https://www.counterpointresearch.com/global-smartphone-shipments-reached-record-1-55-billion-units-cy-2017/

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 05:10 UTC
In reply to:

Tommi K1: "There are a lot of use cases for dual card slots. For example using one card as backup, or one for JPEG and one for Raw. Dual card slots are very useful to the customer, we think. Some customers are OK with just one card, but from our research we think that many people will want two slots."

So they think....

So many claims that it is for a backup, yet everyone who knows what word "backup" means, knows that it can'be achieved with the dual card slots in the camera.

And JPEG to one card and raw to other? Like who does that and for what reason? To give the JPEG to customer and keep the raw?

There's a rule thumb amongst pros: two is one, one is none. It's not just used in photography. Other fields use it too. The Navy SEALs use that adage as well:
https://quotefancy.com/quote/1792592/Navy-SEALs-Two-is-one-one-is-none

The idea is simple. If you only have one, and that one goes bad, you're screwed. Dead in the water. That goes for memory cards in your camera as well. A camera writing simultaneously to two cards is safer. If one goes bad, you still have one. Two = one, one = none. That's why pros and serious users want two card slots.

If a future Canon 1DX III or Nikon D6 came out with only one card slot instead of their current two slots, there would be mutiny!

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 04:39 UTC
In reply to:

jonby: Given that the 6D II's starting price was significantly below the R, and that the R doesn't have the complex mirror mechanism, it seems Canon will be making a beefy profit on this body. Yes it has the more expensive sensor, but the 6D II was well overpriced as it was.

Clearly Canon still think they will sell it at this price - and no doubt they are right, for the usual reasons - lens ecosystem, brand recognition and investment lock-in.

@Oskar P - Sorry buddy, but the legit price of an A7RIII is not $2399. When a camera (or any item) is selling for hundreds of dollars below the street price on eBay, there's something fishy. Margins on cameras for the retailers/dealers is not great. Ask any small camera store. The margins are very small, which is why so many brick-and-mortar camera stores are out of business. Let's say that this "Electronics Valley" was making only $50 profit on the sale of their $2399 A7RIII. That would mean that Amazon, B&H, Adorama are making $650 profit when they sell the A7RIII at $2999. That's simply not possible. Dealer margin on cameras is typically about 10%, maybe 15% for larger dealers who are placing huge orders. Like I said, dealer margin is pretty slim on cameras, which is why small brick-and-mortar camera stores can't cut you a deal to match big online stores. They might throw in some accessories, but the margins are so low on cameras that they don't drop the price of the camera itself.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 02:42 UTC
In reply to:

jonby: Given that the 6D II's starting price was significantly below the R, and that the R doesn't have the complex mirror mechanism, it seems Canon will be making a beefy profit on this body. Yes it has the more expensive sensor, but the 6D II was well overpriced as it was.

Clearly Canon still think they will sell it at this price - and no doubt they are right, for the usual reasons - lens ecosystem, brand recognition and investment lock-in.

@Oskar P - Again, likely the result of credit card fraud. You can find practically ANY item on eBay at greatly reduced prices. But that's not what the legit retailers are selling them for. Show me any of these prices at legit retailers such as Amazon, B&H, Adorama, or Best Buy.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 00:50 UTC
In reply to:

jonby: Given that the 6D II's starting price was significantly below the R, and that the R doesn't have the complex mirror mechanism, it seems Canon will be making a beefy profit on this body. Yes it has the more expensive sensor, but the 6D II was well overpriced as it was.

Clearly Canon still think they will sell it at this price - and no doubt they are right, for the usual reasons - lens ecosystem, brand recognition and investment lock-in.

@Oskar P - Sure, anyone can sell anything on eBay for whatever price. That's how credit card fraud works. People steal credit card numbers, put it on a dummy card, go buy a camera or whatever high priced item using that credit card number before the card number is cancelled, then sell that item on eBay. But that's not what retailers are selling these cameras are, hahaha! If that's your best evidence that the A7RIII price has been "slashed," then that's just not valid.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 00:47 UTC
In reply to:

AlexisH: Q: Do you have a different design approach for APS-C and full-frame lenses?

A: No. Our strategy is unique - one single mount. For example, future APS-C customers might use our G-Master 24mm F1.4. So our lens design should be consistent for all types of models.

1. No different design approach. Meaning that they design lenses for full-frame and their APS-C system will not make sense as a standalone system. It's always going to be a supporting act for their full-frame system

2. One single mount strategy. Finally, they admit there is no future in A-mount. Took them long enough. But what makes this strategy unique?

@Oskar P - "When someone tries to quote Amazon's fake meaningless stats..."

Hahaha, you sound like Donald Trump who cries "fake news" in response to anything he doesn't like to hear or see!

Please enjoy your state of denial. The rest of the world will move on without you :)

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 00:35 UTC
In reply to:

jonby: Given that the 6D II's starting price was significantly below the R, and that the R doesn't have the complex mirror mechanism, it seems Canon will be making a beefy profit on this body. Yes it has the more expensive sensor, but the 6D II was well overpriced as it was.

Clearly Canon still think they will sell it at this price - and no doubt they are right, for the usual reasons - lens ecosystem, brand recognition and investment lock-in.

@Oskar P - "And last month I bought a NEW A7Riii for $2300. That is over $1000 under MSRP."

The A7RIII was introduced at $3200. It is now $3000. That's only a 6.25% reduction.

https://www.amazon.com/Sony-42-4MP-Full-frame-Mirrorless-Interchangeable-Lens/dp/B076TGDHPT

Feel free to keep your head buried in the sand, lol. Enjoy your state of denial :)

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 00:23 UTC
In reply to:

jonby: Given that the 6D II's starting price was significantly below the R, and that the R doesn't have the complex mirror mechanism, it seems Canon will be making a beefy profit on this body. Yes it has the more expensive sensor, but the 6D II was well overpriced as it was.

Clearly Canon still think they will sell it at this price - and no doubt they are right, for the usual reasons - lens ecosystem, brand recognition and investment lock-in.

@Oskar P - "Canon probably sold more 6Dii cameras at $1999 than Sony sold all FF cameras in its first few months."

No, the price was cut because the 6DII wasn't selling well. And it's still not selling that well, even at its discounted price. Here are all the FF digital cameras in Amazon's top 100 "Best Sellers in Digital Cameras" list, currently, with their sales rankings:

#3. Sony A7III body
#33. Sony A7III kit
#46. Nikon D750 body
#55. Nikon D850 body
#68. Canon 6DII body
#85. Canon 5DIV body
#99. Nikon Z7 kit

As you can see, two Nikon bodies, even the four year old D750, is outselling the 6DII. Companies simply don't slash the prices of new cameras that are selling well. They do it because cameras aren't selling well.

Link | Posted on Oct 21, 2018 at 00:13 UTC
In reply to:

mxx: "Canon has been very clear that they think lens stabilization is superior."

Of course only if a lens has it.

@Roland Karlsson - Besides, you're never going to sell anyone on the idea that they should avoid IBIS because it's better to "lock down" the sensor. Consumers are becoming more and more accustomed to in-camera stabilization. The cat is out of the bag. People want image stabilization built into their cameras! They don't care what you call it, or what technology it uses, they just want stabilization built into their cameras. That's really what it comes down to. And more and more, people are going to be looking for that when they buy cameras.

I think the only way you're going to sell people on "locked-down sensors" is by saying that it cuts costs and therefore they can buy a camera that is priced much lower. It's a tough sell to be have to people pay *more* for a camera with a "locked-down sensor." That just sounds like a con job, lol.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2018 at 23:51 UTC
In reply to:

mxx: "Canon has been very clear that they think lens stabilization is superior."

Of course only if a lens has it.

@Roland Karlsson - "It is, after all, a fixed sturdy thing."

Yes, great to absorb all the shock that travels through a camera upon impact.

"That the floating sensor is an advantage for shock I doubt. If it is floating, and I drop the camera, then it might move inside the camera and then hit its limit in movement, with a crash."

Did you watch the video where the person shoves the sensor with his finger? There is a considerable amount of travel, and there is no "crash" of the sensor into anything. The electromagnetism prevents this. Have you ever tried to press two magnets together of the same polarity? It's like an invisible field preventing movement. The same is with the IBIS tray. The designers have designed the tray to have a maximum amount of movement, and it's not going to "crash" into anything.

Sure, feel free to lock down your sensor. But I would MUCH rather have IBIS. IBIS is so effective and valuable. And it also allows for sensor-shift image stitching technology.

Link | Posted on Oct 20, 2018 at 23:41 UTC
Total: 6215, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »