How many sales are Canon losing from enthusiasts due to video shenanigans?

[Dunjoye]

4 hours ago, TheRealOG said:

Canon didn't need to do much, they just needed to give a bit more. The EOS R can't even compete with the X-H1 coming from Fuji. IBIS and slow motion and codec are better, minus the DPAF.  Dual card slots and a cheaper price would of been great. They should of launched it at $1,799 out the door and it would of sold quite heavily. More RF users, more Canon cameras out in the wild.

The problem is whatever more they offer, it's just never enough..

All those features you mentioned are in the 1dx mark ii, bar IBIS.

Which supports my argument that the niche market for video dont really know what they want , when they often pretend like they do.

DSLR Video market is still the only market I know of , where people are trading off their cameras within 6 months to a year looking for the next best thing, they never really need.

1 thing I know is this, canon have offered little innovation  on the video side of things on DSLR since the 5DMKIi revolutionary. However, the image as improved significantly over time

[Andrew Reid]

That is preposterous it really is. The 1D X Mark II cannot compete with the X-H1 on pricing, size, weight, codec, file sizes, 120fps quality, handheld shooting, stabilisation, ergonomics, EVF or LOG. And that is just the features off the top of my head.

The video market knows exactly what it wants and the 1D X Mark II isn't it.

Otherwise they'd be a big thread about it here but there isn't.

And when I reviewed it, it didn't exactly set a discussion going with hundreds of people saying "this is for me". I liked it in 2016 for stills and for giving the 1D C Dual Pixel AF - but losing Canon LOG and increasing the crop factor left a sour taste for my $6k.

The 1D X Mark II is a superb pro stills camera and I used it as such... With Canon's best looking 4K outside of the 1D C... But it just isn't practical. Paying that much money to shoot MJPEG in 4K, massive file sizes, losing the EVF and IBIS, very important features... Why? Along with introducing moire in 1080p and 120fps, all I can say you must really need it as a stills camera to buy it in 2019.

It's a dodo.

In 2019 I would use the X-H1 every time instead.

[Cas1]

It's almost looks like Canon does not need to compete.

I hope to see that with 3d printing, open source software EOSHD can make the ideal camera, one that does not involve the Canon Cripple hammer.

To me the S1H looks 95% perfect, the only aspect that sucks there is the CAF.

As for the consumer market I think that most people think their phone is good enough. So what remains are old folk who's eyesight are deteriorating (<1080p), and a few young enthusiast (art students and many bloggers) and maybe a few romantics that want a stand alone camera. Why is it so hard to make a good camera for them with all the features they want, especially because the technology is already there!

ps. personally I'm looking forward to the up coming E5-mark3, a little better then my G85, with useable video phase detect CAF - I hope. I like the small portable form factor for my mountain hiking, and I like to take it under water freediving.

[newfoundmass]

9 hours ago, Dunjoye said:

All those features you mentioned are in the 1dx mark ii, bar IBIS.

This is one of the sillier things ever said on here. That's a $5500 camera. The X-H1 is a $1300 camera. 

That you need to spend $5500 on a Canon camera to get the features you can from a camera that's 1/4 the price is an issue. 

 

9 hours ago, Dunjoye said:

Which supports my argument that the niche market for video dont really know what they want , when they often pretend like they do.

They want all of that for under $5500 ?

[Elias]

I'm a long-time Canon user and I decided to give them one more chance with the Canon EOS RP. I like the camera for stills (but being Canon, I feel in many aspects I gave a step back from my Canon 6D Mark II), but all these video restrictions drive my mad. So I'm waiting to see what they come up with next. The only reason I'm still in the Canon camp is their lenses, but if their next-gen mid-level cameras don't deliver on video as well a higher dynamic stills range, I'm switching to either Sony or Nikon's Z line (still waiting for more lenses there).

And like many have said, Canon is only generating ill-will against themselves with these stupid upper-management-level decisions. Their attitude is basically this: "Do not worry, remove all the features to force them to buy our more expensive gear, after all they will stay with us because of their large investment in lenses". Well, everything has a limit and soon I'll start figuring out how to get rid of all my Canon glass, or even better, adapt it to other mounts...

[EthanAlexander]

30 minutes ago, Elias said:

Well, everything has a limit and soon I'll start figuring out how to get rid of all my Canon glass, or even better, adapt it to other mounts...

There are so few limitations to the lenses you can mount to Sony E. I left Canon video in 2014 and was using adapted EF lenses. Now I'm transitioning to native E glass because it's generally much lighter and smaller (and according to DXO, much sharper), especially since IBIS means there's no need for huge IS glass. 

I do find the new RF glass intriguing but there's no way I'm going back to Canon. I'd literally rather try any other company at this point. Nikon, Panasonic, Blackmagic, Fuji...

[currensheldon]

Canon could garner a good bit of goodwill by just simply releasing a mini C100 MarkIII with 4K 60p 10-bit, RF Mount, great AF (that’s a given), dual XLRs, etc. maybe somewhere in size between the C100 and XC15. Still small and light enough to put on smaller gimbals basically. 

could just be their standard doc and one man band camera for $4500-5000. 

 

 

[MochaP]

13 minutes ago, currensheldon said:

Canon could garner a good bit of goodwill by just simply releasing a mini C100 MarkIII with 4K 60p 10-bit, RF Mount, great AF (that’s a given), dual XLRs, etc. maybe somewhere in size between the C100 and XC15. Still small and light enough to put on smaller gimbals basically. 

could just be their standard doc and one man band camera for $4500-5000. 

 

 

BMPCC 6k almost provides all the spec you mentioned except the great AF with $2,500 USD price tag. Canon won't lower the price to surrender. 

[currensheldon]

5 hours ago, MochaP said:

BMPCC 6k almost provides all the spec you mentioned except the great AF with $2,500 USD price tag. Canon won't lower the price to surrender. 

It doesn't have an RF Mount, dual XLRs, or an internal ND (either internal or with the adapter). So the Pocket 6K does not have all of the specs a C100 III would have. 

I've tried out the Pocket 4k and all of the usability issues remain in the 6K version, 3 or 4 of them being fatal flaws (meaning, I won't use it professionally): 
- terrible battery life
- fixed screen that is difficult to work with and not daylight viewable
- Terrible ergonomics and general shape.
- Quite a few reports on random shut-downs (I had the Pocket 4K turn off on me more than a dozen times whenever the battery got close to 50%). 

Currently, Black Magic makes cameras that give you a beautiful image with a fantastic codec and menu system at a GREAT price, but everything else is a bit of a disaster. 

[kaylee]

well said @Andrew Reid

[Avenger 2.0]

5 hours ago, currensheldon said:

Currently, Black Magic makes cameras that give you a beautiful image with a fantastic codec and menu system at a GREAT price, but everything else is a bit of a disaster. 

Indeed. Perfect for a controlled environment where you (can) do retakes. But would never trust them in one-time events like weddings, etc...

[Mokara]

I doubt they will lose many if any sales from the lack of 24p. Not in this class of camera. The number of people who buy these cameras who absolutely must have 24p are insignificant.

On 8/31/2019 at 5:19 PM, Patrick B. said:

Amen. A lot of people rave about sharpness, but that is the exact opposite of what I look for in an image.  It’s one reason I’ve enjoyed shooting on Canon over Sony (despite the disappointing lack of features in their lower tier cameras).

What they are talking about is true resolution not sharpness. Oversampled footage is often criticized as "sharpened" but it is actually due to superior resolution. You can always make resolved footage softer, but you can't get create resolution that you don't have in the first place.

On 9/1/2019 at 2:58 PM, Video Hummus said:

Are those camera/imaging division only employees? I have my doubts. Now it’s clear how blackmagic is releasing what would traditionally be $8K+ for only $2.5K. 

Blackmagic are able to sell for a low price because (a) their cameras are for video only, and (b) they strip out just about all the bells and whistles, including hardware encoding (which requires more expensive processors). They can also press the envelope because their customers are more willing to swallow teething issues, issues that normally would result in something like a Canon or Sony being returned. The traditional companies have to be more conservative in their implementations otherwise their margin would be crushed by returns.

[Mokara]

On 9/1/2019 at 4:02 PM, newfoundmass said:

I think you can really trace Canon losing their dominance in that space to how slow they were to roll out 4K in their lower end cameras. They were so late to the party, and when they arrived they crippled the auto focus. By that point Panasonic and Sony had already unleashed affordable 4K cameras for people to buy. I think a lot of the people that bought the G7 and the A6300 would've gone with the latest Rebel or EOS M if they'd had 4K offerings, even with crippled auto focus. Why go the Canon route though when you could spend the same amount, or less, and get a 4K capable camera? 

 

If Canon could have rolled out a practical 4K consumer camera when Sony and the others did, they would have. The simple fact is that the processors they had at the time were not capable of it in the form factors and hardware configurations available at the time. It is only with Digic 8 that they had a processor capable of at least some form of 4K in consumer models. Magic is not a real thing, a company has to work with the tools available to them, and at the time Canon did not have the tools to do it in a practical manner. Wishful thinking does not make a real product.

[SteveV4D]

3 hours ago, Avenger 2.0 said:

Indeed. Perfect for a controlled environment where you (can) do retakes. But would never trust them in one-time events like weddings, etc...

I've shot over 50 Weddings with the Pocket 4K.  Never let me down.  It even got knocked to the floor twice, and kept on recording to the USB drive.  When a similar thing happened to my GH5, it shut down and the file was badly corrupted.  Best camera I've owned.  :). And to think I very nearly cancelled my pre-order last December....

 

[Andrew Reid]

3 hours ago, Mokara said:

If Canon could have rolled out a practical 4K consumer camera when Sony and the others did, they would have. The simple fact is that the processors they had at the time were not capable of it in the form factors and hardware configurations available at the time. It is only with Digic 8 that they had a processor capable of at least some form of 4K in consumer models. Magic is not a real thing, a company has to work with the tools available to them, and at the time Canon did not have the tools to do it in a practical manner. Wishful thinking does not make a real product.

More ill-informed bollocks.

Canon 1D X was 4K capable, disabled in firmware. Digic processors in 1D C are identical.

Canon 5D Mark III was capable of a 4K sensor readout, as Magic Lantern RAW clearly shows.

Both those cameras date back to 2012!

Are you suggesting Canon went backwards with slower processors until 6 years later?

5D Mark IV was Digic 6 by the way.

3 hours ago, Mokara said:

I doubt they will lose many if any sales from the lack of 24p. Not in this class of camera. The number of people who buy these cameras who absolutely must have 24p are insignificant.

Obviously not insignificant enough for Canon to keep it in like they did with nearly all previous cheap Rebel DSLRs aimed at the same customers. If it is an insignificant number tell me why Canon are bothering with the crippling at all or care enough to push customers towards the EOS R!

[tosha187]

so the 83 year old CEO, Chairman and Emperor of Canon Fujio Mitarai basically said that "we are now aware that we have lost the camera market lead and will cut our R&D costs into cameras and try to compensate by selling more Corporate Printers instead". to me it seems like a matter of Pride & Principle when a greedy old fart and his ego can't accept and admit that he was too Greegy and it didnt work and that he should just Quit and commit HARAKIRI and be done, and so will also end the age of weird basic feature crippling on overpriced products that no one wants to buy anymore anyway... Party's Over Canon!

XC10 (wtf!?) why didnt it have EF mount? or EF-S even? probably so we dont buy or use it by mistake. ehh go figure...
even the Canon lens devision is still waiting for a Camera to put all that new 2.5K glass they keep making on...
and then... 1 Card Slot - No Joystick... ok... the EOS R is as aborted baby a 1DXII made on the side with a 700D... A Crippled Perfect Cam. but crippled... beautifull but ugly at the same time! i guess we just wait 2 more years... save up some Rubels... maybe then...

this for me is the embodiment of the "OLD MAN CANON" mentality that has left me (and others it seems) feeling abandoned and even betrayed, still waiting for that 1DC style 4K shooting "5D-MKIV" that never came (...) and the last 'Worthy' Canon (the 5dMKIII which i still use) owes most of the LOVE it got to the Magic Lantern guys anyway. Now 6 yrs later they would rather completely stop playing than admit defeat - i guess it's a Japan thing...

DAMN you Canon for basically forcing me to have to buy that Square Sony! 
but i now realise that my wait will never end if i dont...
oh well... i think i'll go take a nap now...

 

 

[Avenger 2.0]

3 hours ago, SteveV4D said:

I've shot over 50 Weddings with the Pocket 4K.  Never let me down.  It even got knocked to the floor twice, and kept on recording to the USB drive.  When a similar thing happened to my GH5, it shut down and the file was badly corrupted.  Best camera I've owned.  :). And to think I very nearly cancelled my pre-order last December....

 

Thanks, good to know. Would you recommend it instead of the GH5 for weddings then?

[Eugenia]

I own 4 Canons (along a BMPCC og & 4k, and GX85) and I was looking into upgrading my Canon M50 with the M6 MkII (as a walk-around video camera). I was shocked to see no 24p in there. So instead, I pulled the trigger just last week and bought a Sony A6400 with its kit lens, and an EF/S adapter. The A6400 has its own crippled sensor with (surprisingly high) rolling shutter. But at least it provides me with the right tools to create a cinematic image, if I'm careful of how I shoot. The M6 does not. No 24p, and still no zebras, spot metering, or a log profile after all these years. So despite its own problems, the A6400 was a better buy for me. Canon lost a sure sale. And now I'm hearing about pixel binning and upscaling, which makes me happier about my decision to go Sony.

At the end, it's Fuji that it's going to win me over though, I know it in my gut. As long as they have an updated X-T3 with ibis, I'm there. I'll get their f/2.8 kit lens zoom, and the Fringer EF/S adapter, and I'll be golden for many years to come, I reckon. The last camera I'll buy for a good long while. It'd be good enough for what I need.

[tupp]

1 hour ago, Eugenia said:

I own 4 Canons

Is one of those Canon cameras an HV20?

 

 

1 hour ago, Eugenia said:

I pulled the trigger just last week and bought a Sony A6400 with its kit lens, and an EF/S adapter. The A6400 has its own crippled sensor with (surprisingly high) rolling shutter.

[snip]

At the end, it's Fuji that it's going to win me over though, I know it in my gut. As long as they have an updated X-T3 with ibis, I'm there. I'll get their f/2.8 kit lens zoom, and the Fringer EF/S adapter, and I'll be golden for many years to come, I reckon.

Why didn't you just go with the X-T3?

 

Welcome to the forum!

 

[Eugenia]

Quote

Is one of those Canon cameras an HV20?

It used to be. I used to be in the HV20 community forum back then, I was quite active (and a moderator). These days, it's the 5D Mkii, M50, and three EOS M. I was looking forward to upgrade to the M6 MkII, but Canon had other ideas...

Quote

Why didn't you just go with the X-T3?

I didn't want to pay almost $1100 more (kit lens, plus Fringer adapter) and not get IBIS. So basically, I see the A6400 as a cheaper, in-between camera, until an updated Fuji next year. That way at least, I have one sample each from all major manufacturers, lol...