# Is it just me? So far Canon has been disapointing this year.



## krbimaging (Oct 6, 2014)

At the beginning of the year we all talked about "Year of the Lens", a Medium format camera. Also another full frame step between the 1D and 5D. Lastly the rumors of the 7D2.

Well, from what I have seen it's not been much in the way of great Lens releases. We got the 7D and the 5T Rebel release. So far though it seems rather lack luster.

Also the rumors about Canon changing the lens mount has me down right scared!. I got screwed the last time they did this.

On the Flip side Nikon has brought out some really nice additions.

Now I will be honest, I have not been reading the forums so I could have missed something. So please be gentle if I did. LOL


----------



## KmH (Oct 6, 2014)

Where did you hear Canon might change their lens mount?


----------



## Derrel (Oct 6, 2014)

The d-slr market is no longer growing at the explosive rate it was a decade ago, or even five years ago. For the past four years, a number of technology writers and photo industry writers, like Michael Reichmann at The Luminous Landscape, have written some very damning articles, faulting Canon for failing to innovate, and instead, just regurgitating the same old stuff, with new nameplates, but the same sensors and the same basic capability levels. And it does seem that iteration, not innovation, is what Canon has become guilty of. But I do not think that is entirely unexpected, nor is it entirely their fault; the d-slr market is contracting, and it is MUCH more difficult to innovate when the subject of said desired innovation is already highly-refined and was cutting edge when it was premiered. All of the easy stuff has been done, models ago!

Refinements, and better overall designs, with more well-rounded feature sets and solid, core performance metrics are what Canon seems to be striving for, as well as keeping their industry-leading sales position secure. Baby steps are an easy corporate sell in Japan. Still, the news on-chip focus detection and touch-screen focusing and the expanding of the "intelligent light metering" feature Canon copied from Nikon, and the new radio-controlled remote speedlight technology Canon has created are often ignored. People have it so good, but they keep expecting HUGE advances, 15 years into the d-slr revolution, in a mature system like the EOS system. Just is not gonna' happen. 

The prosumer types, always eager for new-new-new and upgrade-upgrade-upgrade look at Sony's maniacal efforts to innovate and to try new things, and wonder why Canon,and Nikon, are not following in Sony's footsteps. Answer--because Sony has no real strategy, and has a minor slice of the pie, and simply MUST chase after people, trying to get customers. Canon already HAS a huge customer base. They have a history in the camera business. A long history. Canon is not Sony--and has not launched four different lens mounts in the last seven years...


----------



## runnah (Oct 6, 2014)

I would say that like a lot of consumer electronics things have kinda reached a plateau where the advancements are evolutionary rather than revolutionary.

I think bodies are where the most gains can be made. Lenses aren't going to change drastically, just get more refined.


----------



## runnah (Oct 6, 2014)

Also I don't really know what the OP was expecting.

Short of Canon/Nikon coming out with a 100mp, 30fps, 8k, ISO 2,000,000, camera not much can really blow my doors off. Like I said everything that has come out has been slightly better in it's range. D4s, D810, D750 and the 7D mkII are all a little bit better than the ones before it.


----------



## Overread (Oct 6, 2014)

Canon's radio controlled flash is a major market changer. Granted its got a high price; but still cheaper than Pockerwizards + 580EX 2 flash and significantly less bulk/wires and setup. I'm honestly surprised that whole area is so quiet, although I put it down to the relative high price on the units (good for what they are but still a few hundred pounds each so chances are its something that will affect the market in a few years once the tech filters down the product line more so). 

Also in todays market I an't see a wholesale lens mount change being viable - certainly not when Canon isn't 100% leading the market. Plus their market is a LOT bigger now and also contains a LOT more consumer level customers. That's a large number of people who would not like a massive change like the lens mount design. They could do it with EF adaptors but even then it would have to present a huge advantage (back when they changed to EF that was the addition to auto focusing into their lenses).


----------



## Derrel (Oct 6, 2014)

The problem with lenses, from the point of the camera makers, is that 1) lenses last TOO LONG and 2)third-party companies can design and make good lenses. Since a good lens can last 30 years under light, hobbyist/amateur use levels, there's not a lot of true *replacement buying* going on. And lenses like the 24-70 and 70-200 models, those designs can last easily a decade without being horribly outdated. Sigma, and Tamron are now making some very good-quality lenses, in some cases lenses which are significantly, measurably better performers than Canon or Nikon lenses (Sigma's new 50mm f/1.4 ART is better than Canon's 50/1.2-L, optically, and costs a lot less, and is world's better than Canon or Nikon's 50/1.4 'pro' models, costing 2x as much as those 1.4 stalwarts cost).

So--the LENS market is really a market where 1) each sale can potentially satisfy customers for from one to two to maybe even as long as three decades and 2) where third-party manufacturers have a VERY strong position and 3) where old name brands, like Zeiss, can command astronomical prices for "*German lens quality*" on lenses assembled in Asian plants and sold at exorbitant markups. All of these three factors mean that camera bodies are profit centers which *only the camera makers themselves* can control. Camera bodies are very difficult to make, and are their own, no-substitutes-possible part of the photography world. I cannot buy a third-party Canon body from Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Samyang, nor Sony, nor Zeiss, nor Cosina.

The new Tamron 150-600mm is selling well, and Sigma has just announced TWO brand-new 150-600mm lens models to compete with Tamron's 150-600 and Nikon's new 80-400 AF-S VR, so...the lens market is seeing increasing competition from third-party makers who used to be like pesky, annoying, twerpy little brothers, but who have since grown into strapping young men who can hit back...hard.


----------



## runnah (Oct 6, 2014)

Overread said:


> Canon's radio controlled flash is a major market changer. Granted its got a high price; but still cheaper than Pockerwizards + 580EX 2 flash and significantly less bulk/wires and setup. I'm honestly surprised that whole area is so quiet, although I put it down to the relative high price on the units (good for what they are but still a few hundred pounds each so chances are its something that will affect the market in a few years once the tech filters down the product line more so).



I agree. I used 3 at a wedding and was blown away how easy it was and how good the results were using ettl on 3 speed lights.


----------



## runnah (Oct 6, 2014)

Derrel said:


> The problem with lenses, from the point of the camera makers, is that 1) lenses last TOO LONG and 2)third-party companies can design and make good lenses. Since a good lens can last 30 years under light, hobbyist/amateur use levels, there's not a lot of true *replacement buying* going on.



Bingo. It's a battle of inches in the lens world. Once you have your "kit" you are good. Granted there are always the $10k prime that you can dream about but for the common focal lengths not much upgrading would be needed.

For me the cost of upgrading some of my lenses is not worth it. My 85mm 1.8 is fantastic and the alternatives are the L version and the Ziess. Both are stupid expensive and to me not worth it.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 6, 2014)

runnah said:
			
		

> Bingo. It's a battle of inches in the lens world. Once you have your "kit" you are good. Granted there are always the $10k prime that you can dream about but for the common focal lengths not much upgrading would be needed.
> 
> For me the cost of upgrading some of my lenses is not worth it. My 85mm 1.8 is fantastic and the alternatives are the L version and the Ziess. Both are stupid expensive and to me not worth it.



Exactly! The Canon 85/1.8 EF, owned one myself for six, seven years...a fine lens, and a heck of a value proposition! GOOD optics, small size. I saw Matt Granger's review of the new Zeiss 85mm f/1.4 manual focus lens on the D800...OMG...the new Zeiss is an extraordinary performer. _Truly extraordinary!_ Buuuuuut....the damned thing is HUGE, heavy, and very expensive, and its manual focus only, so, there goes the ability of a fast 85mm prime lens that can be used for fluid situation, low-light or sports/action/reportage work...so, once again, the real financial analysis is Canon will sell many,many affordable 85mm f/1.8 EF lenses, perhaps 1000 to every one Zeiss sold.

Nikon took the bull by the horns with their 85/1.8 G-series and 85/1.4 G-series, and made high-performance optics available at the entry and mid-point levels, as a way to circumvent losses to Zeiss/Sigma. What most people need are light, smallish, affordable, very good lenses, priced fairly. Canon already has plenty of lenses, so there's never been any need for a "Year of The Lens" for Canon users...Canon already has almost anything anybody might ever need, right now.


----------



## Overread (Oct 6, 2014)

Funny that lens updates are being mentioned - Canon has updated a lot of them over the last few years - heck most of their biggest and slowest sellers (the big white super primes) have been updated with new versions and many more are being rolled out. They've even started adding things like 24-70mm f4 lenses to broaden the market and get more people in who want the lens performance/range but who don't have the money or need for an f2.8 aperture


----------



## krbimaging (Oct 6, 2014)

The 600 Flash came out last year.  Oh and I love mine. I have several and the Transmitter.


----------



## runnah (Oct 6, 2014)

You didn't answer my question. What were you expecting?


----------



## astroNikon (Oct 6, 2014)

I'm surprised only Canon has added a builtin RF to their flash.

With Yongnuo (and others) pushing (or so I thought) the manufacturers on RF things I would of thought Nikon/Canon would jump on the higher priced flash bandwagon and offer RF triggers of their own.  Nikon's aging SU-800 now seems a second thought compared to the YN-622TX (at least to me).  And I'm surprised Yongnuo hasn't put more RF in their other flashes.


----------



## Overread (Oct 6, 2014)

Honestly I suspect Canon decided that a complete package was the best approach - that way they offer something Pocket Wizard can't do so Canon doesn't have to compete with them. If users want an all in one they get the 600EX and off they go. 

That said Pocket Wizard still has some edge, from what I understand there are some things that their radio setup can do that the Canon can't; although I would be shocked if Canon didn't increase the flexibility and feature set of their radio flash setup (its also a fantastic way to really get back at Nikon who for ages had a far superior control setup).


----------



## Derrel (Oct 6, 2014)

astroNikon said:


> I'm surprised only Canon has added a builtin RF to their flash.
> 
> With Yongnuo (and others) pushing (or so I thought) the manufacturers on RF things I would of thought Nikon/Canon would jump on the higher priced flash bandwagon and offer RF triggers of their own.  Nikon's aging SU-800 now seems a second thought compared to the YN-622TX (at least to me).  And I'm surprised Yongnuo hasn't put more RF in their other flashes.



Yeah, Steve, I hear ya, I do. What I see is this: The camera makers are seeing their high-profit accessory market being hurt by the flood of Yongnuos; the Yongy 560-III looks pretty good to me, for the money. I think Yongnuo and other China-based knock-offs, like Meike, have really hurt the development of flash units from the camera makers. People now have more choices than they used to, and when those choices include capable, low-cost knock-offs, that low-cost product's widespread availability curtails camera maker innovation at the "affordable" end of the price spectrum, and even into the mid-range. I'd LOVE a multi-flash off-camera speedlight system with built in trigger/receiving/controlling, but at $1500 for three 600 EX-RT units...ummm...three Yongy 560-III units ar $71 each looks very tempting for non-millionaires.

I think the low-cost, almost disposable pricing, of the Yongnuo flashes, and the Meike flashes, have hurt innovation. The sprouting up of CHEAP replacement/alternatives in battery grips are behind the huge uptick in price for Nikon battery grips; huge swaths of the sales of camera-maker-branded accessories have been stolen by the Chinese companies that use industrial espionage to literally steal injection moulding moulds to make knock-off flashes and battery grips, low-end digital cameras, and other accessories.


----------



## astroNikon (Oct 6, 2014)

Yup,  Nikon/Canon might as well take away the market that PocketWizard now has.
Why not, everyone else does things like that in other industries.
If it leads to increased profits & sales go for it .. even at the dismise of PocketWizard.


----------



## Overread (Oct 6, 2014)

That's the way the market is - although honestly I suspect that Canon/Nikon isn't the problem so much as the cheap Chinese company knock-offs are/ PW would compete in the same expensive sector as Canon and Nikon certainly - however so long as they could continue to provide niche tools and features they could still command a good market hold - the cheap stuff though can steal a lot of c ustomers.


----------



## bratkinson (Oct 7, 2014)

Was it the womens' fashion industry or the automobile industry that initiated a 'new, improved' model(s) every year?  That kept the cash register ringing and profits growing.  In the micro computer era, that was the 8088, 286, 386, 486, Pentium... then 'new, improved' versions of Windows that people waited in line to buy the first copies.  Now it's the latest and greatest iPhone or <whatever> phone that has people lined up every year. 

So now the photography 'world' is anxiously awaiting the new model year cameras or lens upgrades as well?  And, quite obviously, some are less than thrilled with anything other than 'earth shaking' advancements in photography.  Perhaps a 10mm-HubbleTelescope mm f1.0L IS USM lens is on the horizon for under $2,000?  Is THAT what is necessary to appease the "I want a new super-duper xxx every year" crowd?  Then what would be needed after that? 

Derrel has hit the nail on the head.  Unless one has a bad case of GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome), once they have the camera and lens combination they can get the pictures they want to take, what is the need for rushing out and buying a new, super-duper whatever that has little added benefit?  In my film days, I was done buying cameras and lenses about 1980.  Everything I wanted to shoot I could.  I reached that point 2 years ago when I got a 5Diii for its focusing accuracy and high ISO capabilities.  Even if a 5Div came out tomorrow, what new features would it need have to cause me to rush out and get one? 

In short, one has to realize that the camera equipment makers are doing whatever they can to keep the cash registers ringing in what is likely a dwindling marketplace due to cell phones taking away much of the easy money, high volume point and shoot business, and perhaps even the mirrorless business as well.  And how many DSLR photographers are in a position to spend $500 or more for a better lens, or $2000+ for that better body in the next 12 months?  Yes, the professionals need to replace worn out gear and upgrade at the same time, but that's not likely to be 100,000 units/month worth of sales.   In my estimation, the reality is that as the giant cash flows from photography has dwindled, so has R&D at the camera makers.  As a result, the number and/or frequency of new <whatever> is reduced as well. 

Perhaps a new set of tail fins or new headlight treatment on an otherwise 'last years lens model' would satisfy the 'gotta have it' crowd?


----------

