DPReview Interview With Canon Execs, \

[RayValdez360]

And lack of 4K in the rest of the lineup is a lack of perception by Canon into the marketplace- in other words, they were wrong about 4K, and do not have infallible market research, as many have stated. 4K came up faster than they anticipated.

We just carried out a little experiment couple of days ago in our lab. We used three 65" televisions with different configurations: (i) 1080p input into 4k TV (ii) 4k input into 4k TV (iii) 1080p input into 1080p TV. We used identical scene for comparison.

When we viewed the output at normal viewing distance, more than 1 m away, none of us (there were six of us in the lab) could tell the difference. We could only tell the difference when we stood 30 cm away from each screen and pixel-peep at specific areas of the scene. Sure, configuration (ii) gave the best output, but it was only visible when we pixel-peeped at 30 cm distance from the TV.

I feel Canon was not wrong. 4k is over-hyped. It's great for pixel-peepers and serious video editors. But for the man-in-the-street, it's an overkill.

it's about what people want even if they dont need it once it exists. since 4k exists and is known a lot of people ask for it and to make money as a video guy, you might need to tell people you have it. this is why people switch to sony and they make money with sony now. Canonrumors is too photocentric so anything related to video here is like talking to a brick wall. if you are a pro you know what will make you money and make life easier, and 4k ilc cameras is one of those.

 

[RayValdez360]

And lack of 4K in the rest of the lineup is a lack of perception by Canon into the marketplace- in other words, they were wrong about 4K, and do not have infallible market research, as many have stated. 4K came up faster than they anticipated.

We just carried out a little experiment couple of days ago in our lab. We used three 65" televisions with different configurations: (i) 1080p input into 4k TV (ii) 4k input into 4k TV (iii) 1080p input into 1080p TV. We used identical scene for comparison.

When we viewed the output at normal viewing distance, more than 1 m away, none of us (there were six of us in the lab) could tell the difference. We could only tell the difference when we stood 30 cm away from each screen and pixel-peep at specific areas of the scene. Sure, configuration (ii) gave the best output, but it was only visible when we pixel-peeped at 30 cm distance from the TV.

I feel Canon was not wrong. 4k is over-hyped. It's great for pixel-peepers and serious video editors. But for the man-in-the-street, it's an overkill.

it's about what the client want even if they dont need it once it exists. since 4k exists and is known a lot of people ask for it and to make money as a video guy, you might need to tell people you have it. this is why people switch to sony and they make money with sony now. Canonrumors is too photocentric so anything related to video here is like talking to a brick wall. if you are a pro you know what will make you money and make life easier, and 4k ilc cameras is one of those.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Simple, the processor lacks the computational power to do it all.

You are forgetting that the higher end DSLRs have an extra processor dedicated to focusing and exposure. The 5D4 uses a Digic 6+ for image processing, but it also has a Digic 6 solely for use with focusing and exposure. Likewise the 1D cameras have three processors, dual current model processors for image processing and an older model processor for focusing/exposure/tracking as part of the focusing system. That is why it can handle DPAF and 4K at the same time. The M50 only has one processor, which has to do everything, but it can't do that all and still stay in it's thermal envelope. Hence no DPAF and 4K. The computational demands are too great. That is the technical limitation Canon is talking about. Sure, they could make a camera that could do both, simply by adding a extra processor, but that would greatly increase the cost and complexity of the camera, which in turn would result in it being priced out of the target market.

Unless you think the Canon exec is lying, in which case I can't help you.

I'm not forgetting anything. In fact, I recently listed the number and function of processors in a thread on M50.

https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=34584.msg710095#msg710095

You might want to review that information, so you can properly understand the function(s) of each processor. Of relevance here is that in the 5DIV, the Digic 6 is dedicated to processing data from the metering sensor. Those data are handed off to the Digic 6+, which handles AF (along with image/video processing).

The M50 has Digic 8, two generations above Digic 6/6+.

Thank you for continuing to demonstrate your ineptitude when it comes to knowledge of Canon's processors, among other things.

Things such as reading comprehension, clearly, since you state that Canon referenced a technical limitation for the lack of DPAF + 4K in the M50, when they stated no such thing.

 

[ichiru]

Bye bye, don’t let the door slap you on the ass on the way out!
I don’t suppose I’m the only one who doesn’t care!

Well for one Canon should care because there are loads of other people doing the same out there my friend =D.

Only in your mind, my friend. Of course there are people switching from Canon to Sony. But there are also people switching from Nikon to Canon, and from Sony to Fuji, and every other possible direction. The thing is, Canon has been gaining ILC market share, and expects to gain more. So these 'loads of other people' you mention are irrelevant...as are you, my friend.

Your bias towards a given brand is admirable, I really do respect that. Meanwhile I personally prefer keeping my horizons open and I am completely able to keep my love for Canon intact (I have over 20 K invested in them) and criticize them all day long for what they do poorly, this camera being a great example of that.

I am fully aware of the ILC market shares meanwhile I do not know a single reviewer out there would place the Canon mirrorless anywhere above the competition. Sales are on Canon's side right now but how long can it last when loads of it are from pure fanboyism? Let's be real man, Canon has an awesome name and they're riding on it because of it's past success more so than it's present.

Meanwhile... we'll see where Canon stands where it enters the professionnal and full frame mirrorless market. And yup, if they didn't care about what people like me think, they wouldn't even be discussing a mirrorless camera. They will catch with the times, I just wish they would hurry the hell up. Don't you!?

 

[EduPortas]

The new M50 is an entry-level model, because that’s where the high-volume sales are. We want to establish ourselves in this market

Yep, just like we said about 1,000 times on this forum.

So again, there's no super secret strategy when talking about Canon products. Mainly bc they lead in sales in almost every imaging category.

The key word here is "establish", not "break in" or "disrupt" the market, like Panny or Sony have done.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Bye bye, don’t let the door slap you on the ass on the way out!
I don’t suppose I’m the only one who doesn’t care!

Well for one Canon should care because there are loads of other people doing the same out there my friend =D.

Only in your mind, my friend. Of course there are people switching from Canon to Sony. But there are also people switching from Nikon to Canon, and from Sony to Fuji, and every other possible direction. The thing is, Canon has been gaining ILC market share, and expects to gain more. So these 'loads of other people' you mention are irrelevant...as are you, my friend.

Your bias towards a given brand is admirable, I really do respect that. Meanwhile I personally prefer keeping my horizons open and I am completely able to keep my love for Canon intact (I have over 20 K invested in them) and criticize them all day long for what they do poorly, this camera being a great example of that.

I am fully aware of the ILC market shares meanwhile I do not know a single reviewer out there would place the Canon mirrorless anywhere above the competition. Sales are on Canon's side right now but how long can it last when loads of it are from pure fanboyism? Let's be real man, Canon has an awesome name and they're riding on it because of it's past success more so than it's present.

Meanwhile... we'll see where Canon stands where it enters the professionnal and full frame mirrorless market. And yup, if they didn't care about what people like me think, they wouldn't even be discussing a mirrorless camera. They will catch with the times, I just wish they would hurry the hell up. Don't you!?

I'm biased toward reality. You claimed that, "Canon should care because there are loads of other people [switching to Sony]." The reality is that Canon is gaining ILC and MILC market share. My point was that reality renders your statement moot. Sorry if that's a tough pill to swallow.

 

[Talys]

I am fully aware of the ILC market shares meanwhile I do not know a single reviewer out there would place the Canon mirrorless anywhere above the competition. Sales are on Canon's side right now but how long can it last when loads of it are from pure fanboyism? Let's be real man, Canon has an awesome name and they're riding on it because of it's past success more so than it's present.

Meanwhile... we'll see where Canon stands where it enters the professionnal and full frame mirrorless market. And yup, if they didn't care about what people like me think, they wouldn't even be discussing a mirrorless camera. They will catch with the times, I just wish they would hurry the hell up. Don't you!?

What about people who actually choose Canon cameras because they think they're a better camera? The M50 has more features that I'll use every day, like dual pixel autofocus, a fully articulating viewfinder, and lossless compressed RAW, as opposed to features that I won't, like PDAF/Contrast Hybrid 4k AF, resampled (uncropped) 4k, or lossy RAW compression?

 

[Deleted member 379512]

I am fully aware of the ILC market shares meanwhile I do not know a single reviewer out there would place the Canon mirrorless anywhere above the competition. Sales are on Canon's side right now but how long can it last when loads of it are from pure fanboyism? Let's be real man, Canon has an awesome name and they're riding on it because of it's past success more so than it's present.

Meanwhile... we'll see where Canon stands where it enters the professionnal and full frame mirrorless market. And yup, if they didn't care about what people like me think, they wouldn't even be discussing a mirrorless camera. They will catch with the times, I just wish they would hurry the hell up. Don't you!?

What about people who actually choose Canon cameras because they think they're a better camera? The M50 has more features that I'll use every day, like dual pixel autofocus, a fully articulating viewfinder, and lossless compressed RAW, as opposed to features that I won't, like PDAF/Contrast Hybrid 4k AF, resampled (uncropped) 4k, or lossy RAW compression?

Is the new cr3 a lossless compressed raw? That's interesting for the likes of any future high resolution models. I thought I'd seen that it was a lossy compression, so had kinda written it off

 

[unfocused]

I just re-read the interview and I’m surprised by at least one thing. DPReview has been very vocal and consistent about criticizing Canon on two fronts - dynamic range and autofocus. Yet, when they had the chance to confront Canon directly on this, they wimped out.

I know these industry interviews are almost always fluff, but it would have been nice if they had actually asked some tough questions.

We might have gained some insight into the next generation of sensors and autofocus.

 

[9VIII]

Your bias towards a given brand is admirable, I really do respect that. Meanwhile I personally prefer keeping my horizons open and I am completely able to keep my love for Canon intact (I have over 20 K invested in them) and criticize them all day long for what they do poorly, this camera being a great example of that.

I am fully aware of the ILC market shares meanwhile I do not know a single reviewer out there would place the Canon mirrorless anywhere above the competition. Sales are on Canon's side right now but how long can it last when loads of it are from pure fanboyism? Let's be real man, Canon has an awesome name and they're riding on it because of it's past success more so than it's present.

Meanwhile... we'll see where Canon stands where it enters the professionnal and full frame mirrorless market. And yup, if they didn't care about what people like me think, they wouldn't even be discussing a mirrorless camera. They will catch with the times, I just wish they would hurry the hell up. Don't you!?

It's amazing how self deceived people have to be in order to make Sony look good in their own eyes.

Canon and Sony are competing for the same customers in the same market with the same group of products, Canon's stance on Mirrorless is utterly irrelevant, and so is Sony's.
No one honestly cares if their camera does or does not have a mirror, everyone cares how well any camera takes pictures.
Sony is going to have to keep this up for at least another decade before they can comprehensively compete head to head with Canon.

 

[9VIII]

I just re-read the interview and I’m surprised by at least one thing. DPReview has been very vocal and consistent about criticizing Canon on two fronts - dynamic range and autofocus. Yet, when they had the chance to confront Canon directly on this, they wimped out.

I know these industry interviews are almost always fluff, but it would have been nice if they had actually asked some tough questions.

We might have gained some insight into the next generation of sensors and autofocus.

To their credit, DPR has been fairly positive about the new generation of Canon sensors.
Ironically, I like the way the 1DX samples look more than the 1DXII, so once again opinion differs, I like the old sensors, but at least DPR's primary source of negativity has been shut down.

 

[Talys]

I just re-read the interview and I’m surprised by at least one thing. DPReview has been very vocal and consistent about criticizing Canon on two fronts - dynamic range and autofocus. Yet, when they had the chance to confront Canon directly on this, they wimped out.

I know these industry interviews are almost always fluff, but it would have been nice if they had actually asked some tough questions.

We might have gained some insight into the next generation of sensors and autofocus.

The autofocus issue is kind of tough, because DPR and Canon have different ideas on what makes good autofocus.

DPR thinks crows over subject tracking, face tracking, eye focus -- the technology perspective. The readers and youtube watchers are really impressed by green boxes following subjects in the EVF, yay. OMG, when the person moves, the green box follows the eyes! I mean, it's not like DPR ever says, a 5D4 or 6D2 can't get a fast AF lock on the center point.

Canon associates autofocus with raw AF performance, in terms that sports photographers at major sporting events need -- so in their pro body (1DXII) how many frames out of 16fps sets can end up on a website or magazine.

The target audiences also have totally different type gear. The guys who like the DPR reviews are looking at little cameras with (relatively) little lenses; the way Canon looks at AF, there's a super tele attached to it and the operator is very experienced, often with a monopod or gimbal. And if it's a handheld, smaller lens, they know how to use that sucker to get good shots out of it.

One crowd thinks of 40-50 megapixels as OMG awesome I can crop this guy out of 1/8 of the frame; the other simply shrugs picks a bigger lens so that the 20 megapixels isn't much cropped at all. It matters because when you're not deep cropping and you have superb optics that let in 2-3x more light, you just don't need to worry about dynamic range much.

 

[9VIII]

I just re-read the interview and I’m surprised by at least one thing. DPReview has been very vocal and consistent about criticizing Canon on two fronts - dynamic range and autofocus. Yet, when they had the chance to confront Canon directly on this, they wimped out.

I know these industry interviews are almost always fluff, but it would have been nice if they had actually asked some tough questions.

We might have gained some insight into the next generation of sensors and autofocus.

The autofocus issue is kind of tough, because DPR and Canon have different ideas on what makes good autofocus.

DPR thinks crows over subject tracking, face tracking, eye focus -- the technology perspective. The readers and youtube watchers are really impressed by green boxes following subjects in the EVF, yay. OMG, when the person moves, the green box follows the eyes! I mean, it's not like DPR ever says, a 5D4 or 6D2 can't get a fast AF lock on the center point.

Canon associates autofocus with raw AF performance, in terms that sports photographers at major sporting events need -- so in their pro body (1DXII) how many frames out of 16fps sets can end up on a website or magazine.

The target audiences also have totally different type gear. The guys who like the DPR reviews are looking at little cameras with (relatively) little lenses; the way Canon looks at AF, there's a super tele attached to it and the operator is very experienced, often with a monopod or gimbal. And if it's a handheld, smaller lens, they know how to use that sucker to get good shots out of it.

One crowd thinks of 40-50 megapixels as OMG awesome I can crop this guy out of 1/8 of the frame; the other simply shrugs picks a bigger lens so that the 20 megapixels isn't much cropped at all. It matters because when you're not deep cropping and you have superb optics that let in 2-3x more light, you just don't need to worry about dynamic range much.

You were doing great until you mentioned Megapixels.
It has been noted many times on this forum that there is no “landscape oriented” 1D body being made right now, and that is something lacking in Canon’s current strategy.
The insane popularity of the D850 can’t be ignored. My bet is the D850 is eating a lot of sales that the D5 could have had because people want both aspects (sports and landscape) in one body.
A repeat of that design philosophy in a modern 1D would be no less popular than the 1DSMkIII was in 2007.

 

[5D2-shooter]

If Canon want to be taken seriously for mirrorless they need to increase the range of native M mount lenses, preferably ultra-compact and pancake type designs to keep the whole package compact. So many new EF lenses throughout the industry are trying to out-do each other with huge heavy f1.4 prime lenses. M mount needs some nice light compact prime designs, perhaps even f2.8 to keep them small.

 

[bolray]

The EOS M50 offers 4K video and Dual Pixel CMOS AF, but not at the same time. Is there a technical reason for this limitation?
With the EOS 5D Mark IV, we do offer 4K video and Dual Pixel CMOS autofocus, so technically it is feasible. But given the position of the M50 in the lineup, we can’t include all of the features available in a product like the 5D IV. Given the position of the product, we wanted to achieve the optimal balance [of features] in a camera in that range. We’ve optimized the M50 as best we can [for its market position], and within those parameters, the combination of 4K video and Dual Pixel CMOS autofocus was not possible. <a href="https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/1807023531/canon-interview-increased-competition-allows-us-to-level-up">Read the full interview at DPReview</a></p></blockquote>
<p>Image Credit // <a href="https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/1807023531/canon-interview-increased-competition-allows-us-to-level-up">DPReview</a></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

Based on this it seems clear that M50 could have both features but marketing department was twisting their arm to prevent this. I wonder how long can they sustain this attitude?
The new canon mirrorless will have to use a new camera mount, because science. If the new full-frame mirrorless is not a curved sensor (lighter, and cheaper lenses) with IBIS (again lighter lenses) then why would we buy a canon mirror-less camera; that too their first attempt? They really need to study their users.

the thing is none of the kit decisions are a perfect fit from a design POV. the 6D is a compact FF DSLR but no IBIS so you still need to buy lenses with OS making the kit bulky. if I try to build my kit around lighter lenses (i.e. f/4 lenses) the IQ is low or I have to use prime lenses. again the IQ suffers.
OR I enjoy the oldschool lenses. that too sucks if I use the focusing screens meant for manual focus lenses as the viewfinder is too small and gets too dark(if you put a f/4 lens).

I mean I love my 50mm f/1.8 STM but only because its small.
do you feel the same way?

I for one am waiting until september (6 months post A7iii launch) before deciding to jump ship or not.
atlease I have the ability to use manual focus lenses.

 

[scyrene]

Bye bye, don’t let the door slap you on the ass on the way out!
I don’t suppose I’m the only one who doesn’t care!

Well for one Canon should care because there are loads of other people doing the same out there my friend =D.

Only in your mind, my friend. Of course there are people switching from Canon to Sony. But there are also people switching from Nikon to Canon, and from Sony to Fuji, and every other possible direction. The thing is, Canon has been gaining ILC market share, and expects to gain more. So these 'loads of other people' you mention are irrelevant...as are you, my friend.

Your bias towards a given brand is admirable, I really do respect that. Meanwhile I personally prefer keeping my horizons open and I am completely able to keep my love for Canon intact (I have over 20 K invested in them) and criticize them all day long for what they do poorly, this camera being a great example of that.

I am fully aware of the ILC market shares meanwhile I do not know a single reviewer out there would place the Canon mirrorless anywhere above the competition. Sales are on Canon's side right now but how long can it last when loads of it are from pure fanboyism? Let's be real man, Canon has an awesome name and they're riding on it because of it's past success more so than it's present.

Meanwhile... we'll see where Canon stands where it enters the professionnal and full frame mirrorless market. And yup, if they didn't care about what people like me think, they wouldn't even be discussing a mirrorless camera. They will catch with the times, I just wish they would hurry the hell up. Don't you!?

How is it biased to state facts like market data? People like you keep coming here - and have been for years - saying they are switching, and everyone they know has too. But there is no data to suggest that is happening in enough numbers to have any relevance to Canon's strategy - they are doing fine, so why should they care even if you have switched? They can't chase every single customer; so long as the aggregate figures are fine, they're happy.

 

[scyrene]

One crowd thinks of 40-50 megapixels as OMG awesome I can crop this guy out of 1/8 of the frame; the other simply shrugs picks a bigger lens so that the 20 megapixels isn't much cropped at all. It matters because when you're not deep cropping and you have superb optics that let in 2-3x more light, you just don't need to worry about dynamic range much.

To be fair, there is a point beyond which there are no bigger lenses, and then higher res + cropping is the only way to go; admittedly, this concerns a tiny minority of people/shots/situations, but it's not necessarily either/or. I don't disagree with your general points though.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Based on this it seems clear that M50 could have both features but marketing department was twisting their arm to prevent this. I wonder how long can they sustain this attitude?

Agreed, it's called product differentiation. How long can they sustain it? Considering that all manufacturers do it, and Canon has been doing it since they were the Precision Optical Instruments Laboratory and sold Kwanon cameras, I'd say it's quite sustainable.

The new canon mirrorless will have to use a new camera mount, because science. If the new full-frame mirrorless is not a curved sensor (lighter, and cheaper lenses) with IBIS (again lighter lenses) then why would we buy a canon mirror-less camera; that too their first attempt? They really need to study their users.

The new Canon full frame mirrorless could easily have an EF mount, because 130 million EF lenses.

I'm sure Canon has studied their users, but they don't care about you individually. As pointed out above, if you 'jump ship' it really doesn't matter to them, because the aggregate data show they're gaining users. But if jumping ship makes you happy, good for you. The only question is, why wait? Just do it!

 

[ranonar]

But given the position of the M50 in the lineup, we can’t include all of the features available in a product like the 5D IV.

If they had asked anyone outside of Canon Inc., they would have know that the issue with 4k and DPAF isn't about the choice between the M50 and the 5D4. It's about the M50 and a Panasonic or Fujifilm or Olympus, or even a Sony.

You won't win even one buyer of a 5D4 by crippling the M50, 6D2, 7D3, ... but loose buyers on those. Canon is lost with this snotty attitude.

 

[neuroanatomist]

You won't win even one buyer of a 5D4 by crippling the M50, 6D2, 7D3, ... but loose buyers on those. Canon is lost with this snotty attitude.

If they are so 'lost', please explain how it is that they remain the market leader and are gaining marketshare.