Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

eoshd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 132 posts

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#31

Post by jdietrich »

zazaraka wrote: post #14

The lack of vision at DSLR companies is mind boggling. Why can't I do light editing and post to Instagram directly from the camera? Why can't download the photos directly to a phone? Why can't I charge from a micro-USB/USB-C cable? I get it that pros don't need these features, but how hard are they to implement? The camera is already $1000+ dollars, how much more could adding a touch screen, a SIM card and a beefier…

It's a huge investment in software and hardware for an almost non-existent user base. Most current DSLRs already have Wifi or a Wifi option; those that don't can be fitted with a Wifi SD card. It turns out that hardly anyone actually uses that feature, because Wifi transfer rates are generally a more problematic bottleneck than the inconvenience of pulling the SD card and putting it into a card reader. The main users of Wifi tethering appear to be sports and news photographers, who do sometimes need to upload a photo right now.

Adding what amounts to an entire smartphone to every DSLR is simply madness - the kind of person who spends >$1000 on a bulky and complex camera is almost certainly the kind of person who has an Adobe Creative Cloud account; they're not going to post-process an image on the back of their camera through choice.

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#32

Post by BeetleB »

zazaraka wrote: post #14

The lack of vision at DSLR companies is mind boggling. Why can't I do light editing and post to Instagram directly from the camera? Why can't download the photos directly to a phone? Why can't I charge from a micro-USB/USB-C cable? I get it that pros don't need these features, but how hard are they to implement? The camera is already $1000+ dollars, how much more could adding a touch screen, a SIM card and a beefier…

Completely agree. Why don't they provide APIs so people can customize the behavior and processing? Take a look at this:

https://ai.googleblog.com/2017/04/experimental-nighttime-pho...

Using a relatively crappy camera on a phone, they were able to get great results merely because they can program it.

As a simple example: I want to reduce high ISO noise by taking N photos and taking the median. This is an established technique in photo editing. Why do I have to manually tell the camera to take those N photos (and make sure autofocus and autoexposure is not enabled), and then transfer N images, and then load a program to do the median calculation for me? Why can't I create a plugin/app for my camera where I just input the number of photos and it does it all for me?

I think any camera manufacturer that makes an API available for their cameras could see a serious boost. People no longer have to rely on the company deciding what cool features to add.

There's really not been any serious innovation in DSLRs in over a decade. Pentax occasionally comes up with something neat, but that's about it.

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#33

Post by la_barba »

tristor wrote: post #24

This isn't a surprise. Canon has lagged behind Sony on the sensor side of things for ages. Nikon was also lagging, but decided to do the right thing which was buy its sensors from Sony. For full-frame DSLR camera bodies, Nikon is far superior to Canon currently and has been for a long time. Canon has primarily survived off brand loyalty with professional photographers driven by the extremely high quality lenses they…

While it may appear so from a retail consumer standpoint, I don't think Canon is lagging behind in tech from an IP and R&D standpoint. The thing is they make the sensor themselves, and the fabs and tooling is super super expensive. Canons MO is to extract as much profit as possible from a pre-existing process before moving over to something new. They already have BSI tech.. they already have the means to create a 100MP sensor as well as compete on AF (for video I think dualpixel AF is already ahead of the competition). Canon has diversified product lines and doesn't want to upset its Cinema EOS lineup too much by offering "too many" features. Sony, being the newcomer has sunk a ginormous amount of capital into fabs and tooling to differentiate itself in a saturated market and it has worked for the amateur and enthusiast crowd. They have a few weaknesses, specifically ergonomics, color science, the smaller E mount diameter, and a less rugged body for professional use (compared to 1DX or D5). It will be interesting to see how they tackle the new challenger..

>but they've made huge leaps in R&D for large telephotos with usable fresnel lenses at 300mm and 500mm focal length.

Canon already has this tech, as they showed in their 400 DO II, which is a freakishly awesome lens.

>his too has been challenged lately by Sony and their partnership with Zeiss

Hmm, have there been any sony-zeiss lenses since Sony started their GM lineup?

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#34

Post by petepete »

AWildC182 wrote: post #28
AlexandrB wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why can't download the photos directly to a phone? You can on some cameras (e.g. Canon 80D), but it’s somewhat cumbersome and eats batteries at a fantastic rate because the camera hosts its own WiFi access point.

Z6/7 does this with ease. Also, it has a touchscreen and can edit files on the camera but I don't know of anyone who bothers.

My D500 also has no problem doing this via SnapBridge. It was total crap when it launched (the app, the D500 was stellar from the offset) but has been gradually improving.

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#36

Post by dheera »

UI_at_80x24 wrote: post #18

I used to work for Canon in a different division. It was an interesting company to work for, fantastic human-perks i.e. 2 weeks paid time off (not counted against vacation) if you got married, 1 week of paid time off if you moved. (not counted against vacation) You got your birthday off (paid and not counted against vacation). Upper (middle?) management were all dinosaurs, and stuck in their ways. The entire 'digital…

We live is a world with a distorted notion of success. About 1/2 the people I know who take photography seriously use Canon cameras. I'm also a happy Canon customer. How is this a sinking ship?

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#37

Post by hestipod »

throwanem wrote: post #30
hestipod wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought about going back to film in order to get back into the hobby "cheaply", but quickly learned it was not going to be cheap at all and not worth the drawbacks even then. Prices are on the rise in all regards. Cameras and glass are "vintage" rather than just old, and priced accordingly. Film and processing costs are stupid high now, not on every corner like before, and not to mention the inability to process, l…

If you want to get back into the hobby cheaply, go for one of the prosumer kits, like the Nikon 3xxx/5xxx/7xxx series, or whatever in the Canon line is comparable. (I'm heavily invested in the Nikon F system, and as a hobbyist can't justify investing in Canon as well, so I don't really know anything about their lines.) Film has become extremely niche in the last decade, even among the niche that is interchangeable-le…

I had no desire to live with the limits of film again, I just thought it might be a cheap workaround. Ends up not being the case. I really cannot justify spending at all right now but I have looked at the prosumer stuff you mentioned. While they are good for the new cost there are a lot of compromises and each iteration seems to remove some obvious feature like a remote port or ISO button etc as they keep shoving old guts into new bodies and optimizing production costs. The math always works out cheaper to get used stuff with more appropriate specs when/if I can afford to do anything at all. Rather than spend twice on a kit then upgrading, it's more sensible to buy once and keep that stuff as long as it is physically possible to maintain it. My hopefully "buy it for life" rational desire is a Canon 6D Mark I, a fast everyday zoom, and a really fast prime for the stars. Some day.

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#38

Post by throwanem »

hestipod wrote: post #19

I am probably a minority but I hate live viewfinders as looking at a tiny screen, despite the benefits live exposure composition offers, gives me eyestrain and headaches. I much prefer an optical viewfinder so for this reason I really hope the mirrorless hype isn't going to displace DLSRs entirely and Canon keeps making them. Bit of a moot point for me at present as all I have is an old Lumix LX1 with manual settings…

Now's a pretty good time to be looking at your local camera store's stock of used bodies, because mirrorless is already displacing them among pros and hobbyists who prioritize gear acquisition over technique^W^W^W^W^Whave already made the switch. It'll be a year or two, I expect, before we see D850s and equivalently high-end Canon bodies start hitting the used market in numbers, but aside from that, things are already pretty flush.

(That said, check the shutter count, and the rated shutter life of the model, before you buy a used body! That's the primary wearing item in any DSLR, and the cost of replacement means you're pretty much better off just replacing the whole body instead. You shouldn't expect to pay as much for a used body with a high shutter count as you do for a low one, and if someone tries to get you to, you're likely better off shopping somewhere else.)

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#39

Post by zazaraka »

jdietrich wrote: post #31
zazaraka wrote: post #14

The lack of vision at DSLR companies is mind boggling. Why can't I do light editing and post to Instagram directly from the camera? Why can't download the photos directly to a phone? Why can't I charge from a micro-USB/USB-C cable? I get it that pros don't need these features, but how hard are they to implement? The camera is already $1000+ dollars, how much more could adding a touch screen, a SIM card and a beefier…

It's a huge investment in software and hardware for an almost non-existent user base. Most current DSLRs already have Wifi or a Wifi option; those that don't can be fitted with a Wifi SD card. It turns out that hardly anyone actually uses that feature, because Wifi transfer rates are generally a more problematic bottleneck than the inconvenience of pulling the SD card and putting it into a card reader. The main users…

> for an almost non-existent user base

> the kind of person who spends >$1000 on a bulky and complex camera

I'm talking about opening up a new market - instagrammers, who already spend money on ring lights, tripods for their phones, but who don't want to learn all the intricacies of using a DSLR camera + adapters + laptop.

The DSLR camera makers focus on a constant/shrinking market of pros, while totally ignoring a booming Instagram market.

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#40

Post by jdietrich »

hestipod wrote: post #26
goldcd wrote: post #23

I listened to an interesting podcast on Kodak - https://www.spectacularfailures.org/episode/2019/07/15/kodak... My previous perception which I think is common, is that due to the amount they made from non-digital, they ignored digital until it was too late. My revised perception after listening is that Kodak was right there at the cutting edge (and has the cameras and patents to prove it). Problem was how the company…

I thought about going back to film in order to get back into the hobby "cheaply", but quickly learned it was not going to be cheap at all and not worth the drawbacks even then. Prices are on the rise in all regards. Cameras and glass are "vintage" rather than just old, and priced accordingly. Film and processing costs are stupid high now, not on every corner like before, and not to mention the inability to process, l…

A two-generation-old DSLR is still a really, really good camera and will still absolutely trounce the performance of any reasonably fast 35mm film. Sigma and Tamron are now making affordable glass that goes toe-to-toe with Canon L; there are a lot of good, cheap DSLR lenses hitting the used market right now thanks to the move to mirrorless.

If you can avoid getting swept up with the idea that you need the latest and greatest, it's a really great time to get back into photography. eBay is full of fantastic kit at yard sale prices.

Post reply on HN