Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge • Hacker News Board

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#71

Post by ulfw » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 9:03 PM UTC

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…

Most of the stuff you wrote can be done with modern cameras. Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji et al have mobile apps with a variety of functionality depending on model. But all basically allow you to connect via bluetooth to GPS tag pictures and download them via Wifi to your phone, where you can 'directly post them to Instagram'. You can charge most modern cameras (Canon EOS R, Sony A7(R)III, Nikon Z6/Z7, Fuji XT-3(0) etc) with USB-C. Canon and Nikon have great touch screen support, Fuji so-so, Sony horrible.

I am not saying everything is perfect. But it seems you haven't done research on modern cameras.

Trying to put a whole phone stack in there isn't the core competency of any of those manufacturers (except barely Sony, though a different division). It's not just "slap a SIM and a beefier CPU" in there. Camera CPUs are highly specialised. So you'd have to essentially put another phone in there. That adds BOM cost plus reasearch and development of folks without core competency. Issues with software updates, compatibility, let alone battery life. All so you can edit a picture on a tiny 3" screen to post a 4megapixel version of a 24-45Megapixel original image directly to instagram?

Zeiss is coming out with a phone just with everything you've described. They're late. It will be huge. It will be incredibly expensive. Not sure I'd want to go that route.

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#72

Post by throwanem » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 9:07 PM UTC

BeetleB wrote: post #67

throwanem wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't do that because no one is building general-purpose computers into DSLRs - or, for that matter, MILCs - because no one cares about that use case, and the resources wasted on making it possible are better spent on supporting the things that photographers expect cameras to do. That said, you probably could do something like that with sufficient effort invested in CHDK or Magic Lantern or whatever the current h…

>because no one cares about that use case, and the resources wasted on making it possible are better spent on supporting the things that photographers expect cameras to do. No one except all the people who are using smartphones instead of DSLR's, causing a decline in sales? And what do you mean "no one cares"? The use case I've provided are precisely ones that "real" photographers care about. The amateur non-hobbyist…

Yeah, I mean, I do exposure stacking sometimes too, when I'm goofing around trying and failing to get good at landscape photography, for example. Sure, it's a bit of extra work to produce a finished shot. But it's not so much extra work that I've ever wanted to write code against an API built into my camera to do it for me, especially not when software tools already exist that let you load a set of images and then more or less automatically stack them for you. The same is true of macro focus stacking, which is a lot more work when done by hand. And I'm a lot happier with the idea of paying $50 or $100 for an application I run on the general-purpose computer I already own to do this kind of work, than I am with the idea of cramming a general-purpose computer into a camera that will not be a better camera, and may well be a worse one, for the addition.

(I don't shoot Canon either, and yes, the homebrew firmwares are homebrew and thus not officially supported. I don't really know what effect they have on the warranty, but based on things I've heard, I think people just reflash bodies with stock firmware before shipping to the service center and it's basically fine.)

It's also worth noting that smartphones and ILCs don't compete directly any more. They never really did; once smartphones with good enough cameras to take casual snapshots and family photos started happening, ILCs were done in that market. Since then, they've been specializing toward those markets where they don't have to compete against smartphones. You're more or less suggesting that they do the opposite, and I don't know if you realize that the reason they're not already doing that is because they got murdered the last time they tried it and they're not in a hurry to get murdered again.

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#73

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 9:07 PM UTC

prolepunk wrote: post #13

I'm a bit interested in making DSLR videos. May I present some anecdotal evidence. I bought a Canon consumer camcorder (Vixia HF R800) for about $200 last year and it was dismal: - Tiny sensor -- Terrible performance indoor - Lacks viewfinder -- terrible performance outdoor - No 4K, 1080p max - Abysmal bitrate 25Mbps for 60FPS 1080p - Connecting power supply when recording introduces 60Hz hum on line in audio. - Elec…

[deleted]

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#74

Post by hestipod » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 9:10 PM UTC

mdorazio wrote: post #56

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…

Personally, I have the exact opposite opinion on optical viewfinders. Optical is eyestraining, non-ergonomic, physically limiting (can't use an optical viewfinder when you're shooting at foot or waist level without contorting yourself into weird positions), and modern shooting modes often require a lot more setup and selection than is comfortable to use without a full-size screen and looking at the controls you're hi…

You can't use an EVF at foot or waist level either. That's not what I am on about. I have no issue with using the large back display, articulating or not, as a live display when needed. But when I want to use a viewfinder I want it to be optics, not a tiny screen in a tube simulating that view. And like @throwanem said having tactile buttons/dials available as no look controls is a thing a lot of people like to use over touch screens. I understand it's a personal preference and an increasingly minority opinion.

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#75

Post by jdietrich » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 9:11 PM UTC

dheera wrote: post #36

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?

I know lots of historically loyal Canon shooters who have recently switched to Sony A or Nikon Z; I know others who are seriously considering a Panasonic DC-S1 or a Fuji GFX 100. I don't know anyone who has gone the other way. That's really not a good place to be.

It's obvious from the heavy price cutting that EOS M is struggling. EOS R isn't a disaster, but it's a big disappointment. Canon are still lagging well behind Sony in sensor quality and Panasonic in video functionality; their mirrorless offerings aren't capitalising on Canon's historical advantage in terms of ergonomics.

Canon still make good cameras and good lenses, but there's no obvious reason to buy into the Canon ecosystem unless you're an existing Canon customer, nor is there any sign of Canon turning things around.

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#76

Post by mktmkr » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 9:13 PM UTC

hestipod wrote: post #69

mktmkr wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to use the tiny screen. Mirrorless cameras generally come with a large display. I almost always use the display on my Olympus because it's easier and I don't look like I have a machine on my face (this was also an important advantage of old view cameras with the focus screen on top, like the Hasselblad 500). If you want, you can attach a much larger screen to your mirrorless camera, they just use HDMI…

I meant specifically when using a viewfinder on a mirrorless camera, it means looking at a tiny LCD/OLED screen inside an eyepiece that simulates the classic view vs through glass lenses/prisms for an actual optical view. I like optical viewfinders not little screens in tubes.

Sure but just because it's there doesn't mean you have to use it. It's there for nostalgia reasons, mostly.

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#77

Post by hestipod » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 9:18 PM UTC

mktmkr wrote: post #76

hestipod wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I meant specifically when using a viewfinder on a mirrorless camera, it means looking at a tiny LCD/OLED screen inside an eyepiece that simulates the classic view vs through glass lenses/prisms for an actual optical view. I like optical viewfinders not little screens in tubes.

Sure but just because it's there doesn't mean you have to use it. It's there for nostalgia reasons, mostly.

I disagree its nostalgia. I prefer composing that way and don't use it "because it's there", rather because I like to. It's more comfortable for me. It's also not bothered by sunlight washing out the display. It's not some impractical relic used for old times sake.

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#78

Post by souprock » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 9:21 PM UTC

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…

I would like that "simple auto-mode" to be enabled with the power switch. When I turn the camera on, I might not have time to mess with settings.

That mode should turn off bit by bit as I make manual adjustments. If I adjust ISO and exposure, then the camera is left with aperture and shutter speed under auto control. If I turn the focus ring, then the camera stops doing autofocus.

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#79

Post by robocat » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 9:23 PM UTC

criddell wrote: post #21

fetus8 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While smartphones have decimated the smaller portable camera markets, there is still a large market for larger sensor cameras (APS-C, Full Frame, Medium Format, Etc.) Canon specifically has fallen drastically behind their competition in those spaces, allowing Sony to decimate them when it comes to features/performance and cost. Canon's current line up of cameras are missing features that their competitors have had fo…

> there is still a large market for larger sensor cameras It's large, but shrinking according to: https://petapixel.com/2019/07/08/canon-increased-market-shar...

"[In 2018] total sales volume for digital cameras dropped by a whopping 22%. The story is perhaps rosiest for Canon, whose 40.5% market share represents an increase of 3.9% over 2017. Meanwhile, its closest competitors both saw market share drop, with Nikon logging 19.1% (a decrease of 2.7%) and Sony at 17.7% (a drop of 0.7%)" from your link.

"So far, 2019 is continuing that trend" (downwards).

Re: Canon rush to reassure investors as camera profits plunge

#80

Post by tomatocracy » Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 9:30 PM UTC

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…

I think what has really hurt Canon is their failure so far in the mirrorless segment. As others have said, for quite a while they've relied in large part on high quality glass and people's glass investments within the EF ecosystem to drive people to that and retain them within it. It's worked well - they are "good enough" on the sensor side and have also won (or at least not lost) on things which professionals care about quite a lot like reliability.

But mirrorless eroded a lot of that advantage - they were late to the trend, then came with a substandard offering (EOS M series) and then tried to catch up with the EOS R but leveraging existing glass investments to drive adoption is much harder because people see part of the point of mirrorless as moving to a new mount which allows for smaller lenses (at least at shorter focal lengths).