Mind blowing Canon executive interview

[jonpais]

We know you think Panasonic and Sony suck, Matt, which is why you can always be counted on for an objective opinion. Thanks for your input, it's always refreshing to hear. I already said several times, this is not about who makes better cameras: it's about Canon abandoning DSLR filmmakers.

7 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Who gives a crap about sponsorship. Go to any biog sports event anywhere in the world and look at the 99.9% Canon being used.
And that is NOT sponsorship that is the preferred tools of sports photographers. And that includes the Olympics. 
That 99.9% of the photographers there use Canon is because they like it the most and think Panasony sucks.

Thinking the reason they don't use a m4/3 mirrorless is because of some deal is naive at best.

This isn't about sports photography either. But you do like to derail topics, it's your specialty.

[BTM_Pix]

26 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Who gives a crap about sponsorship. Go to any biog sports event anywhere in the world and look at the 99.9% Canon being used.
And that is NOT sponsorship that is the preferred tools of sports photographers. And that includes the Olympics. 
That 99.9% of the photographers there use Canon is because they like it the most and think Panasony sucks.

Thinking the reason they don't use a m4/3 mirrorless is because of some deal is naive at best.

Its more like 65/35 split in their favour over Nikon on average to be fair.

Though I doubt we'll see the duopoly dented let alone broken before sport photography as we know it ceases to exist.

At that point - when it becomes frame extract from 8K broadcast - Sony and Panasonic will have the duopoly.

[Django]

22 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Most consumers rate all camera brands very highly when it comes to reliability anyway. If your camera needs repair these days, there's a 40% chance that it was was involved in an accident, not a malfunction.

1

So what about the 60% left chance? I don't know about "most consumers" but i can tell you some camera brands are definitely more reliable than others especially when it comes to weather sealing, a very important factor for pros, especially sports. If your camera fails because of rain, overheating or any other type of situation during an official game, you can be sure you are getting ruled out by photographers, sponsorship or not. Also Nikon have had a substantial amount of recalls lately (due to outsourcing parts and quality control issues with their non-domestic plants). I know a few pros (including myself) who've left the brand due to that.

Quote

The point is that, unlike Sony, Panasonic and Fuji, Canon is pushing filmmakers to buy their expensive cinema cameras by withholding features found on practically every other hybrid camera on the market today.

 

My point is that every brand segments their products. They all have different strategies and Canon take reliability & ergonomics very seriously. They will hold back on a feature if they feel it might stress the camera or impact resistance/wear/weather sealing (hence no flippy screen on 5D's/1DX's).

One could even argue Panny is withholding APS-C/S35 on their MILC's to upsell their cine cams..

 

[Mattias Burling]

1 hour ago, BTM_Pix said:

Its more like 65/35 split in their favour over Nikon on average to be fair.

Thats probably true. Ive only covered European and World championships when held in Europe. Then Nikon has been maximum 1%. And the rest Canon. 0% of anything else.
But Im sure in the US and other countries its more of a Canikon type situation

1 hour ago, Django said:

My point is that every brand segments their products. They all have different strategies and Canon take reliability & ergonomics very seriously. They will hold back on a feature if they feel it might stress the camera or impact resistance/wear/weather sealing (hence no flippy screen on 5D's/1DX's).

One could even argue Panny is withholding APS-C/S35 on their MILC's to upsell their cine cams..

 

Yup, no cinelike D in the GX85 (without hack). No video IBIS in the GX7. No 4K IBIS in the GX8. No Vlog in the G7. The list goes on.
But when its not Canon its ignored

[BTM_Pix]

2 hours ago, Mattias Burling said:

Thats probably true. Ive only covered European and World championships when held in Europe. Then Nikon has been maximum 1%. And the rest Canon. 0% of anything else.
But Im sure in the US and other countries its more of a Canikon type situation

We must work at very different events then as I'm in Europe too and shoot Premier League, Bundesliga, La Liga, UEFA Champions League, UEFA European Championships, FIFA World Cup, Tour de France, Le Mans, Rugby Union (club and World Cup), Rugby League (club and World Cup), WBC/WBA/IBF/WBO World Championship boxing, Test Cricket, UCI Track Cycling World Championships, FIS World Skiing Championships and so on.

Its a lot more than 1% shooting on Nikon, in my experience.

Even when Canon are sponsoring our photo vests.

[Trek of Joy]

3 hours ago, jonpais said:

Panasonic provided the AV equipment and dozens of broadcast cameras that covered the opening and closing ceremonies and the competitions at the 2018 Winter Olympics that were watched by twenty million people a night. so what?

Not in the NBC broadcasts. They're a Canon company.

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/about/newsroom/press-releases/press-release-details/2018/20180208-olympics/20180208-olympics

[Mattias Burling]

13 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Its a lot more than 1% shooting on Nikon, in my experience.

The only time Ive actually counted the numbers of cameras around Swedens biggest sports arena it was less than 1% Nikon. Literally.

But Im sure you are right. It doesn't matter one bit, I still make my point, which was that you don't see a bunch of mirrorless  

[BTM_Pix]

43 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

The only time Ive actually counted the numbers of cameras around Swedens biggest sports arena it was less than 1% Nikon. Literally.

But Im sure you are right. It doesn't matter one bit, I still make my point, which was that you don't see a bunch of mirrorless  

Absolutely.

My Fuji dalliances are still viewed with curiosity/disdain/open hostility depending on whoever it is sat next to me !

[Mattias Burling]

7 minutes ago, BTM_Pix said:

Absolutely.

My Fuji dalliances are still viewed with curiosity/disdain/open hostility depending on whoever it is sat next to me !

I carried an X-Pro2 and was actually approached with curiosity and enthusiasm from a couple of french sports photographers. 
We had a great conversation about the Pro DSLR vs what we use for pleasure. For them, just like me, there is a big difference between the work tool and what I enjoy using with my family.

They all agreed that they would love to be able to use something like a small Sony or Fuji for work. But they would never risk it.

[Django]

Never say never

[IronFilm]

On 3/20/2018 at 4:16 PM, Trek of Joy said:

I never get the endless Canon bashing here, as if they're the only one that segments its lineup.

Because Panasonic/Sony/BMD/Kinefinity/etc on a per $ basis do far less "crippling" than Canon does. 

So yes they segment it a bit, but at least even at the lower / mid range of their selections, you're getting far better value for you $ than the equivalent priced one from Canon. 

Canon is a target of bashing exactly because of this contradiction of them being the #1 camera company and being poor value for money due to holding back more than others do. 

(am sure if Canon was say #6 ranked player in the market, then no one would give a flying hoot, and we wouldn't see the "bashing" like we do now in forums)

On 3/20/2018 at 5:22 PM, jonpais said:

Panasonic’s philosophy has always been to give excellent value for money.

Exactly. I've sometimes felt that Panasonic's camera division is a bit like the mainstream version of BMD.

[Mattias Burling]

Value for money is subjective and user dependent.

[IronFilm]

On 3/21/2018 at 1:58 AM, Márcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

And indeed a lot of filmmakers spend a ton of cash buying the Canon's C line - which makes us to come back to the first two posts.  People still buy Canons a lot - why they will change?

They will only change when the revenue starts to drop

And that is why it could be a good thing to point out the flaws in Canon and drive away potential buyers from Canon. 

As likely Canon will only come screaming kicking to the table to offer us more, if their bottom line gets hurt. That is what is need for them to jolt awake and pay attention. 

 

7 minutes ago, Mattias Burling said:

Value for money is subjective and user dependent.

Indeed, and that is what allows a greater variety of companies to thrive rather than just one monopoly. 

[Kisaha]

22 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

And that is why it could be a good thing to point out the flaws in Canon and drive away potential buyers from Canon. 

As likely Canon will only come screaming kicking to the table to offer us more, if their bottom line gets hurt. That is what is need for them to jolt awake and pay attention. 

 

Indeed, and that is what allows a greater variety of companies to thrive rather than just one monopoly. 

Why to do that and limit my own options?

I should have done the same with my NX cameras because Samsung abandoned us without any excuse, but C100/C300 and NX cameras are my most used cameras, favorite, and the tools I use the most.

So it happens that Canon also make great tools, that's why people still buying their products.

I wouldn't buy the M50, or the 4000D (which is an even worst deal, with only a couple of hundreds less than the M50!) for that matter, but maybe next year a Canon can fit my needs. I am brand agnostic, whatever works really.

[mercer]

This is just getting silly now. Canon is a company that is in business to make money. To make money, a business needs to offer a product or service that people want or need. If the entry level market needed these “features,” that Canon apparently diabolically leaves out of their lower tiered camera models, and Canon was losing sales opportunities based upon these needed features, then why wouldn’t they include said features?

Furthermore, I am one hundred percent sure Canon understands the entry level, interchangeable lens, camera market better than some videographers on a forum does.

It’s been repeated time and time again on this forum that the market share isn’t large enough for all of these companies, so eventually other companies will go the way of Samsung and I can guarantee it won’t be Canon.

With that being said, I do wish Canon would be more aggressive with their lower tiered products because I love using Canon cameras. But when it comes time for me to upgrade, and if Canon doesn’t offer a product I need or want, then I will look elsewhere but I won’t waste my time assigning conspiracy theory motives to their marketing and product choices.

[IronFilm]

On 3/21/2018 at 8:13 AM, jonpais said:

The chief difference is that Sony, Panasonic and Fuji don’t require you to invest in an expensive cinema camera if you want manageable files, 4K HDMI out, exposure tools (Fuji notwithstanding), flat picture profiles and articulating screens. Oh, and IBIS. All at a savings of 60% over the 5D Mark IV. So this isn’t only about their entry level camera for those upgrading from a smartphone. I see it as the story of the company that sparked DSLR filmmaking, only to abandon those very customers. 

The reason is Canon NEVER intentionally sparked DSLR filmmaking, they stumbled onto having the crown of the #1 choice for DSLR filmmaking entirely by chance it sometimes seem. 

Remember how the Canon 50D was a whisker away from having video in it. But was only thanks to Nikon introducing video in the Nikon D90 that Canon felt that they had to respond with their own HDSLR camera. (because Canon and Nikon watch each other like a hawk)

 

8 hours ago, jonpais said:

But you did put a smile on my face when you said the 1.74x crop of the Canon was no worse than the GH5. hehe

That crop is waaaaaaaaaay worse! As the 5Dmk4 has no way to easily handle this crop, as the EF mount means no access to native mount lenses designed with that crop in mind, and also no focal reducers can be used. 

 

13 hours ago, Django said:

in the end, yes of course Canon segment the hell out of their cameras. they're also a little slow in product cycle/development. but as stated by the execs, they are very careful to ensure their cameras run stable (no overheating, bugs etc). and that's how they get the olympics and other events where camera failure just isn't an option.. 

 

Canons (unlike Panasonic) have historically been known to overheat.

 

 

[IronFilm]

1 hour ago, Kisaha said:

I should have done the same with my NX cameras because Samsung abandoned us without any excuse, but C100/C300 and NX cameras are my most used cameras, favorite, and the tools I use the most.

C1200/C300 are a different kettle of fish to Canon's HDSLRs

[OliKMIA]

Not very mind blowing, it's not like the guy said anything we didn't already know for years. At least he is not trying to hide the obvious.

[hmcindie]

This is just silly. It costs way less to offer the same hardware, then cripple it in software than building different hardware for different price points. You think any business is different? Well graphics cards, the GTX 1070 is basically the same as the GTX 1080 but crippled at the factory (They fuse parts of the GPU for "yield reasons" and of course that customers couldn't unlock them later for free). The Intel lineup of 7900-7980x processors are just basically renamed xeons sold at a lower price and ECC taken out. Etc etc etc.

Some of you guys are acting really weird around this issue like you've never run a business where you offer different services for different price points. The market segmentation happens at the software level. As software companies do too. For example, you buy a plugin (neat video for example) and it costs a different amount depending on are you using the "pro" version or not. It's the same software just "crippled".

[jonpais]

We’re not talking about segmentation in the same way many here are. We’re talking about having to move up into the expensive cinema lineup rather than being able to shoot uncrippled 4K with an interchangeable lens camera like Fuji, Olympus, Sony and Panasonic. Is that so hard to do without destroying Canon’s world-class reliability? To borrow the car analogy, why should I have to move up from a sedan to an SUV just in order to get air conditioning? Geez...