Canon is king, but they sure aren’t getting that level of respect from photographers. What does this mean for their future?
The camera industry is in the middle of a huge shakeup with mirrorless being seen by some as the future of photography. From 2016 to 2017, the mirrorless market grew 29 percent while the DSLR market shrank for the fifth year in a row. Nikon, which was unseated by Sony for the number two spot in the full-frame interchangeable lens camera market last year, has taken this threat seriously and seized the opportunity by improving their product line to be highly competitive. On the other hand, reigning market champion Canon has not made the same strides in their recent product releases.
Many are reacting to this non-action with disapproval and counting Canon out. Barely anyone is taking them as a serious contender for the future, and a lot of customers I hear from seem to believe they are just riding out their camera system until the wheels fall off. Across Internet forums and blog posts, and in conversations I’ve had with other journalists, Canon is the butt of the joke right now when talking about the state of the photo industry. Canon is an underdog.
The funny thing is, Canon is number one on the leaderboard. They’ve dominated the market for the past 14 years. They could probably go on down the same path they’re on for quite some time before anyone catches up to their level. They already have the numbers, and for the time being they simply don’t need to be neck and neck competitive (as much as we would love them to be). Canon is a top dog.
What does this mean? If it plays out in Canon’s favor, this time period could actually turn out to be explosive and monumental for the company. Take a look at what Sony was able to achieve in a couple years when most people scoffed at their mirrorless product lineup. No one cared what they were doing and then they knocked Nikon (Nikon!) down a peg in full-frame marketshare. Canon has the sustainability and time allowance that no other camera company has right now, and if they come out swinging with the technology of tomorrow when the opportunity is peaking, this whirlwind combination of top dog and underdog is going to set them up to be untouchable for the next 14 years as well.
Photo by StockSnap via Pixabay.
lol.
Before you post your useful comment, learn to control your highlights and study some more in regards to composition.
Nah I'm good fam. I like your photo of the chupacabra though.
Good for you.
A major difference here between say Sony and Canon is sensor technology. Sony has it. Canon doesn't. The gap will widen as Sony continues to outspend Canon and delivers superior technology.
Canon: Lazy Dog
It’s just a camera, a tool what’s the problem? Do you honestly think the badge on the front makes the difference?
A better camera than what! I’ve seen great images that have been taken with a dustbin with a hole in it lined with photographic paper! Do you honestly think your preferred make will allow you to take better images than those photographs that use other makes?
I have never once noticed if my furnace repair guy is using Craftsman, Black and Decker or if they are using what is considered the top tool brand in those industries. My furnace works when he's done. That's all I care about.
You know. I...............................................thought kind of the same thing but when I switched systems to a fuji from canon I noticed I'm really digging how accurate fuji is producing it's color for me =[[ It's been pretty spot on.
Care less for Mirrorless, 5D MKII and For no DSLR access My LG G4 Works great for me.
Honestly for years I rarely read Camera articles. I remember the release of Canon 5D was very involve reading But after MKII release realize creativity was the most important with what I have.
Doesn't mean my fellow photographers doing all wrong & Im right I feel Im more in to first impression than the mechanics created from.
The pictures I take and sell have more to do with light than anything else. I use strobes as well as tripods. I’m not sure anything other than a cameras format matters much to me. Certainly not how the company is doing in some revenue race
How many more articles we will get about how canon “suck”?
That's not what this article is. My apologies if that wasn't clear.
Sorry but it kind of is...yes Canon is stagnating for one reason or the other and I quote you quoting someone else : “Canon is a butt of a joke etc...”. But that was discussed in several articles already.
You're taking that out of context though. It's like you stopped reading the article right there.
I love Canon but there's little doubt that it is a very ill and dying top dog.
I shoot commercially full time and use an A7R2 with Metabones IV & V adaptors and Canon glass. Shooting tethered with Capture One the Sony is the best still life camera I have ever used. I can understand how some may find the viewfinder awkward to use but for me it's a minor issue.
Steve Jobs allegedly said that you can either let your various product lines cannabalise each other or you can let your competition cannabalise your product lines. With their choice to decontent some models to protect others, Canon have encouraged the latter.
These articles always focus on bodies and the comments I have read has also done that. The vast majority of people buy into a system and not just one camera body. I shoot Canon partly because I like the ergonomics and features of the bodies etc but a big part of it is the selection of lenses available from canon and aftermarket manufacturers. Over the years I have owned and regularly used over a dozen Canon lenses alongside a handful of bodies. Whilst Canon might not be winning in the minds of pixel peepers and specification head, in the real world amongst photographers who judge a system by the output they are up there.
I really don't understand the size argument of mirrorless camera. I had read a post somewhere (petapixel maybe) where they were comparing Canon/Nikkon + lens with Sony + the same lens and in fact, Sony once the lens on was bigger that the two others.. You just end-up with and badly wieght balanced gear and an increased risk of drop.. Mirrorless has plenty of advantages for sure but size is really not one. If one day, technology find a way to avoid glasses in lens and replace them with electronic or so, there, we will talk about size/weight advantages.
The outdated size argument came about when Sony was getting started in full frame mirrorless. At that time, it was a more compact system. Unfortunately their marketing really stuck and years later people are still hung up on that point when it isn't relevant to the discussion of the current generation.
"increased risk of drop"? I guess that neckstrap that came with the camera is more important than I thought.LoL
In 30+ years of shooting I have never dropped a camera....lenses? sure, and knocking stuff over, all the time,
Where Canon kills the competition for me is reliability, build quality, ease of use, and customer service.
They might not throw the latest and greatest tech into their cameras every 6 months but I’ve never had a Canon camera glitch out on me or cause serious issues on a shoot. The same can not be said in my rather short time shooting Nikon and Sony
Why are serious pros always photo journalists, war photographers or wedding photographers? The majority of photographers making a living from photography are not journalists. Speaking for myself as a professional architectural photographer, I’d happily use another brand if it weren’t so expensive to change over.
I love it when wedding photographers are put into the same groups as war photographers....
I would buy a 5d Mark IV tomorrow if it had 4K and a decent, production-worthy codec. But Canon wants me to spend ten grand to get that kind of video capability, with their C-series cameras. I have had plenty of people tell me to port over to Sony cameras. I don't want to move brands. I want to keep the Canon glass I have spent ages to acquire, and I want to use them on Canon cameras with no Metabones adapters. It's ridiculous. My 5D is fine, but not competitive for the festival or commercial spaces anymore. C'mon Canon. Give me a reason to give you more of my money.
Whenever I wonder what Canon is doing, I first ask myself, "What do Japanese photographers want Canon to do?"
I learned long ago that Canon listens first to photographers in Japan.
Wait, wait, let me check something. Hmm. My Canons are still making me money.
Back when I bought a Canon 5D, its quality was finally good enough for me to retire my Mamiya RZ67 cameras and go completely digital. It enabled me to offer large wall portraits with everything I shot, not just the clients who were pre-qualified as large-print clients (because it simply wasn't worth hauling around the Mamiyas for everything).
Because of that, the 5D paid for itself in literally the first month. That set my bar: If changing to a new camera system changes my work dramatically enough to pay for itself in one month or two, then it's worth the change.
In an attempt to save everybody some keystrokes, you probably could have copied & pasted this discussion from any of 1,000 other threads where this argument has played out already, because so far I haven't read anything new in these comments. Interestingly, it probably wouldn't work because these arguments usually aren't about facts so much as they are about people wanting to express their opinion to the world. "Optical viewfinders are better because I say so". Please.
Here's something I've yet to read in any of these discussions: What about tomorrow's professionals? The reason these discussions keep going in the same circles is the same reason I haven't seen much of this point made elsewhere: it's all me, me, me.
I don't have a problem with DSLRs. I don't have a problem with mirrorless. Use what works for you, there's nothing wrong with that. But there seems to be this idea among some professionals that because they're professionals today and this is what they use, the next generation gives a crap about what they think. Newsflash: not all of the amateurs who are buying mirrorless today will stay amateurs forever. And since people "buy into systems", you can bet that when they're ready to start shooting professionally, they're going to want to stick with a viewfinder and menu they're familiar with, and use some of their existing lenses. So I think this idea that DSLRs are going to remain exclusively professional forever is shortsighted, even if we do ignore the fact that there are professionals who are already using mirrorless today (seriously, talk about ostrich syndrome).
So the next time you're blabbering on about how mirrorless can't do this or that and that they're inferior to DSLRs in every way possible, think back to all those times when you found yourself thinking "the camera doesn't matter" when people said, "hey, nice picture, you must have used a really expensive camera", because you're basically turning around and putting stock in that idea.
Just the fact they are number 1 means they are getting respect. Like the article says, there is a transistion going on in photography....New players...Mirrorless....Virtual Reality....4k Video....Action Cams...you name it. I'm a pro SONY user, however, Canon is not going anywhere. Unless Canon is totally clueless, like General Motors or other legacy companies, Canon will still be a leader in photography.
Swap in the right tech company and a time-frame and that will give you a pretty good idea on what's going to happen.
There had always been titans of the market share cut down. IBM, Apple, Microsoft, BlackBerry.
Canon better have an ace in the whole and still look at that Sword of Damocles really carefully.
Two things almost never happen. 1) the leader in the maket place almost never gets beaten 2) second place in the market almost never gets beaten by the other players. Nikon being beaten by Sony is monumental. Me personally, I have been a lifelong fan of Nikon and am a very loyal customer. I'm now using Sony more all the time and don't see Nikon in my future. I love my DSLR, but mirrorless keeps pulling me back in, and down the rabit hole I'm going. I think Canon needs to react right now, mirroless is kicking ass and Sony is off to a good start. If Canon doesn't react and go all in soon, I don't see them lasting long before they are in big trouble. A larger company has more debt, and cannot afford these losses
Still top dog but with tucked tail. Corporate-wise Canon's strategy works, it's profitable in shrinking uncertain market. However, Canon abused its market leader position and its loyal customer base for too long. Juggling and re-shuffling the same old features from one lusterless model hit the end of the road. Now Canon has to pull a rabbit out of hat before its brand is damaged irrevocably. To stay afloat Canon has to deliver at least one mirrorless model on par with competition (whether full frame or crop), one 6D Mark III with top sensor and 4k and one professional camera on par with Nikon D850. That would work even without fancy features like pixel shifting of focus stacking or peaking. https://www.photogallery.info/?p=1921
For Caine corral Kennels reviews visit https://www.consumer--reviews.com/canine_corral_kennels.html
Canine Corral Kennels Reviews- A good dog breeder https://www.goodbreeder.org/dogbreeder/2020-canine-corral-kennels-custom...