# Canon Celebrates 12th Straight Year of No.1 Share of Global ILC Market



## Canon Rumors Guy (Mar 26, 2015)

```
TOKYO, March 26, 2015—Canon Inc. announced today that the Company’s interchangeable-lens digital cameras (digital SLR and compact-system cameras) have maintained the No.1 share worldwide in terms of volume within the interchangeable-lens digital camera market for the 12-year period spanning 2003 to 2014.<sup>1</sup></p>
<p>Canon develops the key components, namely the CMOS image sensors, image processors and interchangeable lenses, employed in its interchangeable-lens cameras. The most advanced of these technologies are incorporated across the Company’s entire product lineup, spanning from professional-use flagship cameras to entry-level models, enabling the Company to maintain the top global share by offering a robust product lineup that effectively responds to the needs of a wide range of users.</p>
<p><!--more--></p>
<p>In 2003, the dawn of digital SLR cameras, Canon introduced its breakthrough EOS Kiss Digital (EOS Digital Rebel or EOS 300D Digital in other regions). This groundbreaking camera, which featured a compact, lightweight design and was offered at a competitive price, set the stage for growth in the digital SLR market and enabled the Company to capture the top share of the global market. Since that time, Canon has continued to launch epoch-making new products, including the EOS-1D series of digital SLR cameras targeting professional users, and the EOS 5D series, which paved the way for digital SLR video recording thanks to its full-frame sensor employing a video-capture function.</p>
<p>In October 2014, targeting advanced-amateur users, Canon launched the EOS 7D Mark II, which has garnered high acclaim from the market for its fast continuous shooting speed of 10 frames per second and superior autofocus performance. It is thanks to Canon’s impressive camera lineup, including the EOS 7D Mark II, that the Company has maintained the No. 1 share in the market for 12 years running. Furthermore, in April 2014, Canon celebrated an impressive lens-manufacturing milestone with the production of its 100 millionth EF-series interchangeable lens for EOS cameras. The Company’s extensive EF lens-series lineup, which currently comprises a total of 97 models,<sup>2</sup> is one of Canon’s biggest strengths, helping the EOS series to realize a wide spectrum of imaging possibilities and rich visual expression.</p>
<p>Aiming to further strengthen its wide product lineup, Canon introduced five new camera models in February of this year. The new lineup comprises the EOS 5DS and 5DS R, which achieve the world’s highest pixel count among 35 mm full-frame sensor digital SLR cameras,3 the EOS 8000D (EOS Rebel T6s or 760D) and EOS Kiss X8i (EOS Rebel T6i or 750D in other regions) entry-level digital SLR cameras, and the EOS M3 digital compact-system camera, which achieves greatly enhanced AF performance.</p>
<dl class="list list02 clearfix small">
<dt>1. Based on a survey by Canon.</dt>
<dt></dt>
<dt>2. Includes EF Cinema Lenses.</dt>
<dt></dt>
<dt>3. As of February 6, 2015, based on a survey by Canon.</dt>
</dl>
```


----------



## CaptureWhatYouSee (Mar 26, 2015)

We'll never get more DR!


----------



## Foxdude (Mar 27, 2015)

How is this possible with this crap Canon sensors/bodies, Sony is soooo much better in every way...


----------



## AvTvM (Mar 27, 2015)

Nothing more but whistling in the dark forest. ;D

Utterly ridiculous that canon celebrates its market leadership mot only in DSLRs but also imply that they got much of anything in compact system cameras (mirrorless), when EOS-M comes in way below Sony, Fuji and mFT.


----------



## Eldar (Mar 27, 2015)

The entire market is shrinking. Canon, being the market leader is leading the way into decline. There is no one else to blame. The higher they sit, the deeper they fall (DEC, Nokia ... and a few other examples out there).

Where is the innovation and strategy to lead people back into ILC?

Sony, Samsung, Nikon ... are eating their way into this shrinking market. Yes, they have the most complete system, but they are loosing just about every single IQ comparison I have seen. Where is Canon's counter attack?

Sony and Samsung is flooring Canon in mirrorless. Where is the counter attack?

Cell phones are killing point&shoot. Where is the counter attack?

Sigma 24/1.4, 35/1.4, 50/1.4 and soon 85/1.4. Where is the counter attack?

In my view Canon is showing all the signs of a market leader falling asleep at the wheel ...


----------



## sanj (Mar 27, 2015)

Guys. Don't say anything against Canon, the grandfather of the forum will say rude things and put you down. 
You will write earnestly and politely but you will be called names. 
You have been warned.


----------



## MintChocs (Mar 27, 2015)

And they continue to be market leaders, they probably make more on each camera than the other manufacturers. Image quality is still decent enough so I can't see any improvements being made on that front. If anyone really really needs more dynamic range, you can have another system.


----------



## dak723 (Mar 27, 2015)

Foxdude said:


> How is this possible with this crap Canon sensors/bodies, Sony is soooo much better in every way...



Yes, so much talk and internet testing proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt! So I bought one the other day - the new A7 II. Lot's of nice innovations and, of course, that great sensor! Too bad the lens was soft on the right side. Too bad the EVF was too dark in the daylight and too light indoors, thus reducing the advantage of WYSIWYG. Too bad the camera underexposed most shots. Too bad, in direct comparison with the shots I took with my 6D, there was no real noticeable difference in IQ (aside from the less sharp pics). Too bad I had to return the A7 II for a full refund! The biggest advantage of the Sony cameras is that the grass always seems greener on the other side.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2015)

Careful, sanj – someone might accuse you of having a regressive mentality. 

That Canon remains the market leader isn't terribly surprising, they clearly know how to develop products that a majority of customers want to buy. Many people here on CR Forums just seem unable to grasp the reality that our view simply do not represent those of that majority. 

As for MILC, Sony and Olympus are clear leaders, Canon is nearly tied with Panasonic and Fuji and Samsung are barely a blip. Sony's share of MILC sales in Japan actually dropped ~10% over 2014. Keep in mind that Canon is actually fairly competitive in that space, and doing so with only one model series, not the diverse selections that the other players have. Canon probably sees no need to do more than dip a toe into what is currently still a very shallow pool (MILC is ~7% of total camera sales). 




MintChocs said:


> And they continue to be market leaders, they probably make more on each camera than the other manufacturers.



That may be true, but this announcement is based on volume of sales, not revenue or profit.


----------



## ritholtz (Mar 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Careful, sanj – someone might accuse you of having a regressive mentality.
> 
> That Canon remains the market leader isn't terribly surprising, they clearly know how to develop products that a majority of customers want to buy. Many people here on CR Forums just seem unable to grasp the reality that our view simply do not represent those of that majority.
> 
> As for MILC, Sony and Olympus are clear leaders, Canon is nearly tied with Panasonic and Fuji and Samsung are barely a blip. Sony's share of MILC sales in Japan actually dropped ~10% over 2014. Keep in mind that Canon is actually fairly competitive in that space, and doing so with only one model series, not the diverse selections that the other players have. Canon probably sees no need to do more than dip a toe into what is currently still a very shallow pool (MILC is ~7% of total camera sales).


It is also not true about Canon not innovating. At least for crop users they innovated duel pixel sensors and stm lens. Only thing they are lacking is DR at low ISO. So they are loosing all those comparisons in DPR and DXO.
Recently DPR did exposure latitude test by pushing 5EV on 70D and E-M5 2 and declared E-M2 sensor is superior. If one looks at actual results, both are terrible. 70D is very noise and E-M52 is clean without showing any picture details.

Not sure if any one looked into Sony MILC offerings. I tried to find out alternatives for general purpose lens for kit lens (something like 17-55 IS f2.8). I am surprised that there are none. There are threads running for pages and pages recommending to live with sigma 19mm f2.8 prime or buying expensive f4 zooms. Sony kits lens scores are not great either in photozone tests. They have lot of f2.8 primes and expensive f4 zooms. Every one recommended me to get Canon 10-18. Though it is considered terrible, Canon M has very useful lens with good IQ.


----------



## ritholtz (Mar 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Careful, sanj – someone might accuse you of having a regressive mentality.
> 
> That Canon remains the market leader isn't terribly surprising, they clearly know how to develop products that a majority of customers want to buy. Many people here on CR Forums just seem unable to grasp the reality that our view simply do not represent those of that majority.
> 
> As for MILC, Sony and Olympus are clear leaders, Canon is nearly tied with Panasonic and Fuji and Samsung are barely a blip. Sony's share of MILC sales in Japan actually dropped ~10% over 2014. Keep in mind that Canon is actually fairly competitive in that space, and doing so with only one model series, not the diverse selections that the other players have. Canon probably sees no need to do more than dip a toe into what is currently still a very shallow pool (MILC is ~7% of total camera sales).


It is also not true about Canon not innovating. At least for crop users they innovated duel pixel sensors and stm lens. Only thing they are lacking is DR at low ISO. So they are loosing all those comparisons in DPR and DXO.
Recently DPR did exposure latitude test by pushing 5EV on 70D and E-M5 2 and declared E-M2 sensor is superior. If one looks at actual results, both are terrible. 70D is very noise and E-M52 is clean without showing any picture details.

Not sure if any one looked into Sony MILC offerings. I tried to find out alternatives for general purpose lens for kit lens (something like 17-55 IS f2.8. I am surprised that there are none. There are threads running for pages and pages recommending to live with sigma 19mm f2.8 prime or buying expensive f4 zooms. Sony kits lens scores are not great either in photozone tests. They have lot of f2.8 primes and expensive f4 zooms. Every one recommended me to get Canon 10-18. Though it is considered terrible, Canon M has very useful lens with good IQ.


----------



## ashmadux (Mar 27, 2015)

Fantastic. 

Now how about an AFMA tool so photogs dont have to waste time with this nonsense. 

Sigma can do it, why lazy canon


----------



## sanj (Mar 27, 2015)

Neuro. Peace. 
Lets forget and move on.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2015)

ashmadux said:


> Now how about an AFMA tool so photogs dont have to waste time with this nonsense.
> Sigma can do it, why lazy canon



Can you share some more info on this Sigma AFMA tool?


----------



## unfocused (Mar 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> ashmadux said:
> 
> 
> > Now how about an AFMA tool so photogs dont have to waste time with this nonsense.
> ...



If he is talking about the Sigma lens dock, I don't think it does what he thinks it does. On the other hand, I do hope Canon soon finds a way to use DPAF to make AFMA automatic. As I understand it, DPAF guarantees that in live view, the lens plane of focus will actually fall on the sensor. (Probably not using the right terms) It does seem as though there ought to be a way to feed that data back to the lens and then adjust it for the viewfinder.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 27, 2015)

sanj said:


> Neuro. Peace.
> Lets forget and move on.



Yikes, that's a creepy picture!


----------



## unfocused (Mar 27, 2015)

Foxdude said:


> How is this possible with this crap Canon sensors/bodies, Sony is soooo much better in every way...



Something tells me your sarcasm will go over the heads of many on this forum.


----------



## AvTvM (Mar 27, 2015)

unfocused said:


> If he is talking about the Sigma lens dock, I don't think it does what he thinks it does. On the other hand, I do hope Canon soon finds a way to use DPAF to make AFMA automatic. As I understand it, DPAF guarantees that in live view, the lens plane of focus will actually fall on the sensor. (Probably not using the right terms) It does seem as though there ought to be a way to feed that data back to the lens and then adjust it for the viewfinder.



Yes. Actually any Canon camera with liveview would be fully capable to do full automatic in-camera AFMA. All that's needed is a rather simple piece of software. But for whatever reasons, Canon seems unable to deliver it. 

Yet another wasted opportunity to create additional, massive unique sales propositions for the EOS system that would be truly useful to every serious photographer. 

Just like the refusal to bring back Eye Control AF in a much improved, digital-age version 2.0 

Or the strange hesitation to really push the radio wireless RT speedlite system forward - i.e. to build an RT commander into every single EOS camera and bring a smaller/cheaper 430EX-RT slave flash and a small, reliable and affordable RT-transceiver to allow owners of 580EX II/430EX II speedlites [but not third party flashes] to include those speedlites in a radio wireless flash setup. 

Absolutely inexplicable, why Canon still did not implement those 3 things. Would not cost a lot, but generate massive advantages for Canon EOS users and help Canon in the marketplace.


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 27, 2015)

yet unlike my waterproof Olympus P/S camera, Canon has yet to come out with a dedicated mode for taking pictures of cats... they really have not grasped the true meaning of photography for the internet age....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2015)

unfocused said:


> If he is talking about the Sigma lens dock, I don't think it does what he thinks it does.



I thought that was most likely the case, but I wondered if he might have wanted to dig a deeper hole for himself before jumping in headfirst. Even more amusing is that since the Sigma dock lets you enter values for four different focus distances, it's potentially more accurate than Canon's implementation...but even more complex for someone who thinks they're getting an automagical AFMA solution. 




AvTvM said:


> Yes. Actually any Canon camera with liveview would be fully capable to do full automatic in-camera AFMA. All that's needed is a rather simple piece of software. But for whatever reasons, Canon seems unable to deliver it.



What makes you think they're unable? I trust you're aware that unable and unwilling aren't the same.


----------



## AvTvM (Mar 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > Yes. Actually any Canon camera with liveview would be fully capable to do full automatic in-camera AFMA. All that's needed is a rather simple piece of software. But for whatever reasons, Canon seems unable to deliver it.
> ...



If Canon were able to, why would they be unwilling? Nothing to be gained from having dissatisfied users who claim their Canon lenses are not well focussing on their Canon cameras.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 27, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...



1. Loss of face from further supporting what could be perceived as acknowledgement that gear leaving the factory is less than perfect (they aren't perfect, of course, but an automatic correction tool highlights it). 

2. Concern about causing more problems than they solve – lighting and target choice cause variability, and something 'automatic' should just work. In that context, note that the Canon manuals warn that AFMA can result in improper focus. 

3. The more automatic they make it, the fewer billable calibration repairs. 

That's off the top of my head, and granted some are conflicting (but that's not uncommon in a business case).


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 27, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



My bet is that your second point is bang on the money. Look at the amount of ways there are to screw up AFMA using focal.... poor shutter speed, vibrations, poor lighting, misalignment of the target, the floor shook when you moved..... now try and do it without a standard printed target! Now consider that the people who buy Focal are the fanatics and the gearheads, arguably a more technical bunch than the public at large, and try to imagine what would happen.

Manual AFMA used by only the most determined may well be the lesser of two evils to Canon. Making it automatic could end up being a disaster.


----------



## AvTvM (Mar 28, 2015)

"Automatic" does not mean "no user control whatsoever". I would like to hve it implemented in the menu system, and it has to be started by the user, but then the calibration sequence runs on its own. Similar to having the camera store information about dirt on the sensor/specs and then applying it for auto correction, which is possible in many/all? EOS DSLRs. Or like setting a capture as custom white balance. Of course there is margin for user error, same as when you select a shot of the deep blue sea as the custom wb image for a tungsten lit scene ... Results may not be as expected. A clear set of instructions displayed on the lcd could lead users to correctly set up the af target and lighting (maybe automatic use of pop-up flash or requiring external speedlite). 

possible user error should definitely not serve as an excuse to not include an automatic AFMA procedure in cameras with liveview/contrast or on-sensor phase af. 

There would also be no loss of face for canon at all, as long as they would just call it something like "worlds first and most advanced closed loop self-calibrating ultra precision autofocus system! Or something similar in marketing blather. Canon normally has no problems with that part of the exercise.

Again, no acceptable reason for not


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 28, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> All that's needed is a rather simple piece of software. ... Canon seems unable to deliver it.





AvTvM said:


> Again, no acceptable reason for not



I'm sure you're right, Canon software engineers are so totally incompetent that they can't code what you describe as a relatively simple piece of software. Yes, that makes perfect sense and must be why they haven't done it. Thanks for your pithy insights. 

EDIT: Sorry, looking back I realize you stated "no acceptable reason," and I guess you mean acceptable to _you_. Canon has a reason, and they don't care a whit whether or not you find it acceptable. But if you've ever used FoCal with less than ideal lighting or stability, you may have some ideas of an acceptable reason.


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 28, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> "Automatic" does not mean "no user control whatsoever". I would like to hve it implemented in the menu system, and it has to be started by the user, but then the calibration sequence runs on its own. Similar to having the camera store information about dirt on the sensor/specs and then applying it for auto correction, which is possible in many/all? EOS DSLRs. Or like setting a capture as custom white balance. Of course there is margin for user error, same as when you select a shot of the deep blue sea as the custom wb image for a tungsten lit scene ... Results may not be as expected. A clear set of instructions displayed on the lcd could lead users to correctly set up the af target and lighting (maybe automatic use of pop-up flash or requiring external speedlite).
> 
> possible user error should definitely not serve as an excuse to not include an automatic AFMA procedure in cameras with liveview/contrast or on-sensor phase af.
> 
> ...


I can see several easy ways of implementing this....I think the best would be to keep a running tally of how far off the various lens/focal length combinations are off by and do some form of statistical averaging over time. It could be done by setting a "learning flag" and then when you take a picture, while the mirror is still up, re-focus in live view and record the difference. 

This is so simple that it is a wonder that Canon isn't doing it already.... unless there is something they found out when they tried it that keeps it from working.... the thing is, we don't know. Perhaps they are working on it and haven't got it reliable enough yet.... we just don't know. What we do know is that if they had it working, they would slap it into their new cameras (Firmware update for 7D2 and 70D) and lord it over everyone else as to how superior their system is for focusing ability.


----------



## Foxdude (Mar 28, 2015)

unfocused said:


> Foxdude said:
> 
> 
> > How is this possible with this crap Canon sensors/bodies, Sony is soooo much better in every way...
> ...



I think so, too. Guys, this is not that serious...


----------



## AvTvM (Mar 28, 2015)

Re. Automatic AF calibration I am sure Canon is unable to, not unwilling.

They could easily write the software to only work with Canon lenses, leaving Sigma, tamron and all other third party lens makers in the dust - one more time. It is a game that canon just Loves to play normally. Especially when the competitors deliver really great lenses, that beat older design canon lenses that were not updated in a long time (eg 50mm/1.2, 1.4, 1.8, 85/1.8, 100/2, 135/2 etc.). Canon not offering auto-afma exclusive for their own lenses is fairly clear evidence they are not able to do it (yet).


----------



## fragilesi (Mar 28, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> Re. Automatic AF calibration I am sure Canon is unable to, not unwilling.
> 
> They could easily write the software to only work with Canon lenses, leaving Sigma, tamron and all other third party lens makers in the dust - one more time. It is a game that canon just Loves to play normally. Especially when the competitors deliver really great lenses, that beat older design canon lenses that were not updated in a long time (eg 50mm/1.2, 1.4, 1.8, 85/1.8, 100/2, 135/2 etc.). Canon not offering auto-afma exclusive for their own lenses is fairly clear evidence they are not able to do it (yet).



Yes and having been a software developer and worked with lots on various things it's amazing how often something "simple" suddenly turns into something near impossible to get right in the "real world".


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 28, 2015)

Maybe it's semantics. They could certainly (and I suspect already have done so) write the code to compare a set of live view shots with phase AF shots, determine the offset, and apply it as an AFMA. That's what I mean by 'able' to do so. However, I doubt such an implementation would be robust enough to work effectively in the hands of the masses. Thus, they are 'unwilling' to release it. 



AvTvM said:


> A clear set of instructions displayed on the lcd could lead users to correctly set up the af target and lighting (maybe automatic use of pop-up flash or requiring external speedlite).



Sorry, I don't really believe you've thought this through adequately. On screen instructions starting: "Mount camera on stable tripod," something which the average user probably doesn't even have. Automatic use of popup flash? What's needed is bright, continuous lighting during repeated autofocusing steps.


----------



## Marsu42 (Mar 28, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> They could certainly (and I suspect already have done so) write the code to compare a set of live view shots with phase AF shots, determine the offset, and apply it as an AFMA. That's what I mean by 'able' to do so. However, I doubt such an implementation would be robust enough to work effectively in the hands of the masses. Thus, they are 'unwilling' to release it.



This is about what Magic Lantern dot_tune does, freely available on all Canon camera bodies except a few exotic models :->. Imho the measurement itself is rather fool-proof - *if* you really take the pain to set up the camera properly which the more difficult to do as you pointed out.

The real problem is that it varies so much with subject distance, or at least that's my experience. That's why *any* method to automatically measure afma with the current system would backfire on service costs as people of course would expect the results to work "out of the box".
.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 28, 2015)

Marsu42 said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > They could certainly (and I suspect already have done so) write the code to compare a set of live view shots with phase AF shots, determine the offset, and apply it as an AFMA. That's what I mean by 'able' to do so. However, I doubt such an implementation would be robust enough to work effectively in the hands of the masses. Thus, they are 'unwilling' to release it.
> ...



Exactly my point. I also think (based on personal testing) that DotTune adds some additional variability, enough to make it unreliable IMO.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 28, 2015)

Don Haines said:


> ...I think the best would be to keep a running tally of how far off the various lens/focal length combinations are off by and do some form of statistical averaging over time. It could be done by setting a "learning flag" and then when you take a picture, while the mirror is still up, re-focus in live view and record the difference...
> 
> ... unless there is something they found out when they tried it that keeps it from working.... the thing is, we don't know. Perhaps they are working on it and haven't got it reliable enough yet....





fragilesi said:


> Yes and having been a software developer and worked with lots on various things it's amazing how often something "simple" suddenly turns into something near impossible to get right in the "real world".



I'm going with Don and Fragilesi here. I'd be willing to bet Canon is working on this – it's such a natural and obvious outgrowth of DPAF that I can't imagine they haven't considered it.

I'm no software engineer, but I know from 60+ years of life experience that when an outsider claims something is "simple" or "easy to do" they are invariably wrong. 

I don't buy the argument that Canon is somehow withholding the feature – that's just nonsense. I also don't think it has anything to do with protecting their repair business – Most repair facilities are run at cost or even at a loss, so anything that might reduce the volume would be seen as desirable.

I do, however, believe that Canon would not implement the technology until it is perfected, simple and reliable and I suspect that takes more time and research than people here imagine.


----------



## sanj (Mar 28, 2015)

unfocused said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > Neuro. Peace.
> ...



That is what Mr. Rude calls me.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 28, 2015)

sanj said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > sanj said:
> ...



It seems you are incapable of any of those. How sad.


----------



## RGF (Mar 28, 2015)

Foxdude said:


> How is this possible with this crap Canon sensors/bodies, Sony is soooo much better in every way...



Why haven't you switched - serious question, not a cheap shot. Cost or does canon offer some benefits such as range of lenses that does not?

Or should I read you smily face as a wink?


----------



## RGF (Mar 28, 2015)

Eldar said:


> The entire market is shrinking. Canon, being the market leader is leading the way into decline. There is no one else to blame. The higher they sit, the deeper they fall (DEC, Nokia ... and a few other examples out there).
> 
> Where is the innovation and strategy to lead people back into ILC?
> 
> ...



DEC - I have not heard that name for years. What happened to them and their VAX computer? This will definitely show my age but in grad school we had a PDP 11/40 running RT11.


----------



## RGF (Mar 28, 2015)

unfocused said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > ashmadux said:
> ...



It would be great if this could be made to work


----------



## RGF (Mar 28, 2015)

AvTvM said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > If he is talking about the Sigma lens dock, I don't think it does what he thinks it does. On the other hand, I do hope Canon soon finds a way to use DPAF to make AFMA automatic. As I understand it, DPAF guarantees that in live view, the lens plane of focus will actually fall on the sensor. (Probably not using the right terms) It does seem as though there ought to be a way to feed that data back to the lens and then adjust it for the viewfinder.
> ...



Love to see eye control back though I suspect Canon abandoned it because users were inconsistent in how they placed their eye up to the camera (making the technology very difficult / nearly impossible to implement robustly).

As far as radio controlled flashes, this may be a legal /manufacturing challenge. Different countries allow different frequencies. It is easy to make a flash to listen to all, but harder to make the range of bodies needed for each country. Easier to make flash control unit specific to each country (vs a body).


----------



## sanj (Mar 30, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > unfocused said:
> ...



Incorrect! I am incapable? Me?? I was the one to who offered peace. But you did not bother to respond. I still want to make peace. Hope you do too. Really hope you do. But if you think it is below you to make peace, it will be indeed sad. I never called you any names - I just said: "You seriously think that them improving technology for betterment of photography and ease of photography is a bad thing? Is it all only about sales for you? I find this mentality so regressive."

Do note: I did not say YOU were regressive, just that that kind of mentality is. I hope you can see the difference. 

I have over the last years spoke very highly of you in many posts. But you called me, a 50 year old guy "grow up" and iced that with calling me Pollyana. I still told you that lets forget all this and move on. But you ignored that completely. 

And if you do want to peace (not sure you do as you did not respond to the earlier offer), then you would have to admit that calling me Pollyana was below the belt. 

Your move.


----------



## sanj (Mar 30, 2015)

RGF said:


> Foxdude said:
> 
> 
> > How is this possible with this crap Canon sensors/bodies, Sony is soooo much better in every way...
> ...



He is joking....


----------



## fragilesi (Mar 30, 2015)

unfocused said:


> I don't buy the argument that Canon is somehow withholding the feature – that's just nonsense. I also don't think it has anything to do with protecting their repair business – Most repair facilities are run at cost or even at a loss, so anything that might reduce the volume would be seen as desirable.
> 
> I do, however, believe that Canon would not implement the technology until it is perfected, simple and reliable and I suspect that takes more time and research than people here imagine.



Spot on. In fact I suspect it's more to do with making it idiot proof so that they don't get swamped with people who have made errors in the process and are now convinced their camera / lens is faulty. You can imagine the number of "But it looks fine on my friend's camera" incidents they would get!


----------



## fragilesi (Mar 30, 2015)

sanj said:


> Incorrect! I am incapable? Me?? I was the one to who offered peace. But you did not bother to respond. I still want to make peace. Hope you do too. Really hope you do. But if you think it is below you to make peace, it will be indeed sad. I never called you any names - I just said: "You seriously think that them improving technology for betterment of photography and ease of photography is a bad thing? Is it all only about sales for you? I find this mentality so regressive."
> 
> Do note: I did not say YOU were regressive, just that that kind of mentality is. I hope you can see the difference.



sanj, don't want to get caught in the crossfire. I see the distinction you are trying to make but in ending the question with "you" and then going on to say that you find "this mentality so regressive." You are at best being very disparaging and there is high potential for worse implications being construed. It's at least a fairly aggressive way to describe someone's argument. Food for thought?

On the particular point though you do have to take sales / profit into account, without them we don't get any cameras.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 30, 2015)

sanj said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > sanj said:
> ...



Yes, you were the one who suggested we 'forget and move on'...and that was what I did. Apparently you were expecting a response, and when you did not receive one by the next day, you chose to insult me. Now you're back to calling for 'peace', despite behavior which clearly contradicts that attitude.

As for 'Pollyanna', that connotes an eternal optimist who always sees the best side of things...to the point of naïveté. While I acknowledge and apologize for the negative connotation with immaturity, I'd argue that the concept applies to anyone who believes that diversified corporations that make camera gear do so 'for the betterment of photography', or that oil companies extract the Earth's natural resources to 'help people get where they want to go,' etc. Corporations are about making money, and as another literary Pollyanna implied, the leopard shall not change his spots. 

I'm going back to forgetting and moving on, hopefully you can do the same this time.


----------



## sanj (Mar 30, 2015)

Done mate.


----------



## Foxdude (Apr 3, 2015)

RGF said:


> Foxdude said:
> 
> 
> > How is this possible with this crap Canon sensors/bodies, Sony is soooo much better in every way...
> ...



Yes, I was joking. It was sarcasm. 
Seriously, I'm really satisfied with my Canon gear. Not even thinking switching.


----------

