# That's my money you are profiting from Canon!!!



## J.R. (Apr 24, 2013)

From the net - http://in.reuters.com/article/2013/04/24/canon-earnings-idINDEE93N05I20130424

"Canon Inc raised its full-year operating profit forecast by $300 million as a weakening yen triggered by Japan's latest deflation-fighting policies inflates its overseas earnings, despite smartphones sapping compact camera sales."

So much for people who were anticipating a fall in prices of Canon products due to JPY devaluation. 

Interestingly smartphones have started eating into the P&S sales. I am not surprised.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 24, 2013)

No. It's not. 

Unless you own stock in Canon, you traded them your money for that long list of toys you so proudly display at the bottom of your post. You own that stuff now and can do whatever you want with it. It's yours. It's also now Canon's money and they are free to do what they want with it. So, No. It's not your money.

Secondly, why do people post stories without bothering to read them? Or in this case, even reading the headline.

Canon is adjusting their earnings estimates because the Japanese government's monetary policies have resulted in some inflation at home and some loss in value of the Yen against other currencies in international trade. It's an accounting adjustment.

Finally, I never understand why people get upset when Canon makes money. Do you think they would have more money to invest in research and development if they were losing money? Do you think they would be able to cut their prices if they were losing money?


----------



## awinphoto (Apr 24, 2013)

unfocused said:


> No. It's not.
> 
> Unless you own stock in Canon, you traded them your money for that long list of toys you so proudly display at the bottom of your post. You own that stuff now and can do whatever you want with it. It's yours. It's also now Canon's money and they are free to do what they want with it. So, No. It's not your money.
> 
> ...



Couldn't agree more... JR if your upset that canon is turning a high profit, stop buying their stuff... simple... i'm sure canon is shaking in their boots... Hell i shoot professionally and I have half your gear... People get hot and bothered with any one company or individual earns a lot of money or capital... Why? They worked their butt off to earn that... Sue Bryce said we need to check our attitudes about money and being rich. If we get offended about those who are rich and big profitable company, we ourselves will carry that same mentality towards money and push it away psychologically. In the mean time I hope to use my gear to make my studio have a profitable year this year... hope you dont get offended by me.


----------



## Efka76 (Apr 24, 2013)

This article shows that Canon is making much more money despite the fact that P&S sales are decreasing (smartphones are occupying P&S cameras market). In this site more than 95% of readers (of course, it is my subjective opinion) are DSLR owners / users. Myself and other readers are really upset as Canon is making profits, however, does not invest such profits into R&D and does not introduce n/.ew cameras or lenses with significant improvements. For example 7D is 4 years old - it means that this model is a cash cow. Newly introduced models lack of really substantial improvements, basically Canon is using old platforms.

Regarding lenses - Canon lenses are good quality, however, they are very expensive comparing to third parties. When looking at Tamron's and Sigma's performance in market we see substantial improvements in their lenses quality (which now approximates to Canon) for significantly lower price. Canon is loosing ground in this area.

Also, many customers really expects reductions of prices of Canon production due to Yen's performance in the market, however, Canon is making significant profits and disappointing customers who would like to buy cheaper Canon cameras or lenses. Such approach is very dangerous as many customers are dissatisfied and are buying third party lenses as well as changing Canon religion to others.

When I look how significant improvements are made in electronics (computer chips, computers, TVs etc.) photography area is lacking innovations. 4-5 year old sensors, DIGIC V are used. What I would really expect that Canon would make really serious investments into sensors, camera chip area, would renew its lenses line and become progressive company. Now I see only stagnant company which is milking the same almost dead cow and enjoying short term profits. 

Also, I did not mention mirrorless cameras market, which is supposed to replace DSLRs in the future. Canon completely lost this market to competitors and passively watching what others are doing. I doubt that somebody knows Canon's brand after 10-15 years if the follow current strategy.


----------



## StepBack (Apr 24, 2013)

to think a multi-national has "your" money is a joke. They wouldn't know if u were dead or alive unless u owned at least 5% of the common. So much for your L list.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 24, 2013)

OMG ... Looks like I've written something blasphemous that given the bible brigade a howling spree. Let's see 



unfocused said:


> No. It's not.



So you mean to say that Canon didn't profit from the purchases you and I made in the last year? BTW, did I say I had a problem with it? 



unfocused said:


> Unless you own stock in Canon, you traded them your money for that long list of toys you so proudly display at the bottom of your post. You own that stuff now and can do whatever you want with it. It's yours. It's also now Canon's money and they are free to do what they want with it. So, No. It's not your money.



Did I say I had a problem with Canon making money? Where did you get that from?



unfocused said:


> Secondly, why do people post stories without bothering to read them? Or in this case, even reading the headline.
> 
> Canon is adjusting their earnings estimates because the Japanese government's monetary policies have resulted in some inflation at home and some loss in value of the Yen against other currencies in international trade. It's an accounting adjustment.



Did YOU bother to read that I wrote? I mentioned specifically that the reduction in prices people were expecting due to devaluation of the JPY will not materialize. Why, because Canon has revised its profit guidance.

FWIW, I am a qualified CPA and know fully well what accounting adjustments and guidance means. 



unfocused said:


> Finally, I never understand why people get upset when Canon makes money. Do you think they would have more money to invest in research and development if they were losing money? Do you think they would be able to cut their prices if they were losing money?



Where do you get the idea that I am upset that Canon is making money? I've taken the trouble to re-read my post about 5 times and still can't figure out where you got that from.

*Jeez ... one can't even mention something that appeared in the news without paranoid people trying to find some sort of an angle or intention. For your own sake, I hope you are not so quick to criticize people you actually meet only based on your own assumptions and imagination. *


----------



## J.R. (Apr 24, 2013)

awinphoto said:


> Couldn't agree more... JR if your upset that canon is turning a high profit, stop buying their stuff... simple... i'm sure canon is shaking in their boots... Hell i shoot professionally and I have half your gear... People get hot and bothered with any one company or individual earns a lot of money or capital... Why? They worked their butt off to earn that... Sue Bryce said we need to check our attitudes about money and being rich. If we get offended about those who are rich and big profitable company, we ourselves will carry that same mentality towards money and push it away psychologically. In the mean time I hope to use my gear to make my studio have a profitable year this year...



What gives you the idea that I'm upset? Did I say anywhere in my post that I had a problem that Canon was making a profit? Do you think I expect that Canon would sell their products to me at cost / loss?

It was simply news + humor on my part which probably doesn't go down well with CR posters who come out to defend Canon when it's not even being attacked : : :



awinphoto said:


> hope you dont get offended by me.



No problem. However, I'm sure I offended you by posting the ... well ... news. Sorry if it causes so much angst.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 24, 2013)

StepBack said:


> to think a multi-national has "your" money is a joke. They wouldn't know if u were dead or alive unless u owned at least 5% of the common. So much for your L list.



More evidence of unintelligent life in the CR space. Did you even bother to read what I wrote in the post?

At the cost of repetition, does Canon not make a profit when you buy Canon products? If you think otherwise, you are the "joke". 

Did I say that I have a problem that Canon is making a profit? Did I say that Canon has "my money"??? : : :

Anyhow, what does my L list have to do with it?


----------



## RMC33 (Apr 24, 2013)

Efka76 said:


> This article shows that Canon is making much more money despite the fact that P&S sales are decreasing (smartphones are occupying P&S cameras market). In this site more than 95% of readers (of course, it is my subjective opinion) are DSLR owners / users. Myself and other readers are really upset as Canon is making profits, however, does not invest such profits into R&D and does not introduce n/.ew cameras or lenses with significant improvements. For example 7D is 4 years old - it means that this model is a cash cow. Newly introduced models lack of really substantial improvements, basically Canon is using old platforms.
> 
> Regarding lenses - Canon lenses are good quality, however, they are very expensive comparing to third parties. When looking at Tamron's and Sigma's performance in market we see substantial improvements in their lenses quality (which now approximates to Canon) for significantly lower price. Canon is loosing ground in this area.



Canon's largest division in terms of revenue is its multifunction copier division, not cameras. If you are so dissatisfied move to Nikon or something else. Also, how can you be upset at a company doing exactly what they are designed to do, Make money.

No improvements in lens or camera tech? Thats a load of hooey, I can Handhold my 400 f/2.8 II for 20-30 minutes before I need to toss it back on the monopod for a quick rest. Losing ground to 3rd party lenses? Does Sigma/Tamron offer a 70-200 2.8 that performs as well as the Canon? Nope. How bout a 24-70? 2.8? Hardly. The cost (R&D, tooling, marketing, advertising etc.) of the 7D was most likely recovered about 12-18 months into the run. The new 7D2 needs all these things so yes, Canon will continue to produce this amazing camera to fund better products. 



Efka76 said:


> Also, many customers really expects reductions of prices of Canon production due to Yen's performance in the market, however, Canon is making significant profits and disappointing customers who would like to buy cheaper Canon cameras or lenses. Such approach is very dangerous as many customers are dissatisfied and are buying third party lenses as well as changing Canon religion to others.



Im not disappointed in the least. The quality is improved, so I expect to pay more. Also, most people don't follow what the currency markets do so the de-valuation is not why they want lower prices. They want lower prices because that is human nature.



Efka76 said:


> When I look how significant improvements are made in electronics (computer chips, computers, TVs etc.) photography area is lacking innovations. 4-5 year old sensors, DIGIC V are used. What I would really expect that Canon would make really serious investments into sensors, camera chip area, would renew its lenses line and become progressive company. Now I see only stagnant company which is milking the same almost dead cow and enjoying short term profits.
> 
> Also, I did not mention mirrorless cameras market, which is supposed to replace DSLRs in the future. Canon completely lost this market to competitors and passively watching what others are doing. I doubt that somebody knows Canon's brand after 10-15 years if the follow current strategy.



Digic 5 is a year old. Pretttttty sure the sensor in the 1dX, 5d3 and 6d are not 4-5 years old~ Renew its lens line? Uh, They do that constantly hence MkII/III versions of some of the glass. See above about my comment on the 400 f/2.8 II.

Mirror-less will not replace DLSR any time soon. Try shooting a moving object with a mirror-less.

Hate to break it to you but Canon is here to stay. As I said, Canon's largest division in terms of revenue is its multifunction copier division, not cameras. If you are so dissatisfied move to Nikon or something else.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 24, 2013)

Efka76 said:


> This article shows that Canon is making much more money despite the fact that P&S sales are decreasing (smartphones are occupying P&S cameras market). In this site more than 95% of readers (of course, it is my subjective opinion) are DSLR owners / users. Myself and other readers are really upset as Canon is making profits, however, does not invest such profits into R&D and does not introduce n/.ew cameras or lenses with significant improvements. For example 7D is 4 years old - it means that this model is a cash cow. Newly introduced models lack of really substantial improvements, basically Canon is using old platforms.



Unless you are employed in the Canon's finance and accounting department how would you know what Canon is spending on R&D? Conjecture? The trouble is that the current generation of DSLRs is quite good and improvement appear insignificant. 



Efka76 said:


> Regarding lenses - Canon lenses are good quality, however, they are very expensive comparing to third parties. When looking at Tamron's and Sigma's performance in market we see substantial improvements in their lenses quality (which now approximates to Canon) for significantly lower price. Canon is loosing ground in this area.



Only the Sigma 35mm comes close to or beats the comparable Canon's L offerings. There is no reason to believe that a 35mm 1.4L II won't be released in future.



Efka76 said:


> Also, *many customers really expects reductions of prices of Canon production due to Yen's performance in the market, *however, Canon is making significant profits and disappointing customers who would like to buy cheaper Canon cameras or lenses. Such approach is very dangerous as many customers are dissatisfied and are buying third party lenses as well as changing Canon religion to others.



As I mentioned in my earlier posts ... WHY? Why do you feel entitled to a price reduction if the USD is translating into more JPY? If it ain't broke, don't fix it. The only reason Canon would reduce prices is if sales were not going strong. 



Efka76 said:


> When I look how significant improvements are made in electronics (computer chips, computers, TVs etc.) photography area is lacking innovations. 4-5 year old sensors, DIGIC V are used. What I would really expect that Canon would make really serious investments into sensors, camera chip area, would renew its lenses line and become progressive company. Now I see only stagnant company which is milking the same almost dead cow and enjoying short term profits.



Tried the 1DX and the 24-70 II / 600mm II?


----------



## Efka76 (Apr 24, 2013)

Does Sigma/Tamron offer a 70-200 2.8 that performs as well as the Canon? Nope. How bout a 24-70? 2.8? Hardly. The cost (R&D, tooling, marketing, advertising etc.) of the 7D was most likely recovered about 12-18 months into the run. The new 7D2 needs all these things so yes, Canon will continue to produce this amazing camera to fund better products. 

Answer is yes! Take a look at Tamron SP 24-70 2.8 which is direct competitor of Canon EF 24-70 2.8L MKII. Tamron's quality is slighty less worse than Canon's, however, Tamron has stabilisation. Also, try Tamron SP 70-200 2.8 which quality is very good as well. Both Tamron lenses are much cheaper. That why I told that third party manufacturers are taking quite significant part of Canon's lens market.

Also, most people don't follow what the currency markets do so the de-valuation is not why they want lower prices. They want lower prices because that is human nature.

Here you are also wrong. Everybody is looking what competitors are doing. If competitors can offer similar quality products for much lower price that means that Canon is doing something wrong: 1) Maybe they have issues in supply chain 2) Maybe they invest very heavily into R&D (which is not the case) 3) Using Yen's devaluation for their own profit (when competitors using this factor for lowering prices and increasing market share). Also, if you are not well educated and do not understand how changes in currencies rates affect different economies, please do not comment on matters which you do not understand (by the way, are you American? )

Mirror-less will not replace DLSR any time soon. Try shooting a moving object with a mirror-less.

Here you might be wrong as well. Take a look how quckly digital cameras overtook film cameras. The same could happen with DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. You are stating your very subjective opinion based on emotions and not facts.

I hope that I clearly explained everything to you.


----------



## emag (Apr 24, 2013)

Now you've done it, J.R. You smacked that fire ant mound with a shovel.


----------



## Sporgon (Apr 24, 2013)

Yes you do have to be careful with off beat humour humor on CR. 

What we need is a little 'tongue-in-cheek' face icon !


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 24, 2013)

Efka76 said:


> I hope that I clearly explained everything to you.



Well, you did clearly explain that you apparently have a poor understanding of the relevant facts. Beyond that... :


----------



## Efka76 (Apr 24, 2013)

Neuro, I value your opinion very much! Could you please explain where I was wrong. By the way, I am qualified CPA (FCCA) and not photographer. Accounting and financial statement analysis are the areas where I have really deep understanding


----------



## nebugeater (Apr 24, 2013)

Yur subject line sort of indicates this
Copied here for Referance.


> *That's my money you are profiting from Canon!!!  *





J.R. said:


> StepBack said:
> 
> 
> > to think a multi-national has "your" money is a joke. They wouldn't know if u were dead or alive unless u owned at least 5% of the common. So much for your L list.
> ...


----------



## J.R. (Apr 24, 2013)

nebugeater said:


> Yur subject line sort of indicates this
> Copied here for Referance.
> 
> 
> ...



Given the context of the post ... "PROFITS" ... Doesn't it mean that "spending my money" has RESULTED in Canon's profit? It's not like I say that I've deposited some interest free money with Canon who are using it to make a profit. How does it become the equivalent of ... Canon "has" my money? ... maybe I'm poor with my English. 

@ Sporgon ... dude you are right ... we do need a "tongue in cheek icon". People out here will believe anything.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 24, 2013)

Efka76 said:


> please do not comment on matters which you do not understand
> 
> I hope that I clearly explained everything to you.



Do you know who you sound like? 

I think I need to put in the [/humor] tag right here.


----------



## thepancakeman (Apr 24, 2013)

@J.R. I guess I am confused--how can they profit from your money if they don't have it? ???

Based on your followup posts it sounds to me like what you intended in this thread is not what others are interpreting based on the thread title. Keep in mind that this is the CR forums, where the "canon stole my money" posts are quite frequent, so that is the light that this title is going to come across in.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 24, 2013)

thepancakeman said:


> @J.R. I guess I am confused--how can they profit from your money if they don't have it? ???
> 
> Based on your followup posts it sounds to me like what you intended in this thread is not what others are interpreting based on the thread title. Keep in mind that this is the CR forums, where the "canon stole my money" posts are quite frequent, so that is the light that this title is going to come across in.



They surely are making a profit with my money with each purchase I make ... no? I'm not complaining so why is everyone jumping at that conclusion? 

Thanks for the heads up though. I'll take care in future - humor doesn't go well on CR it seems. Given the responses of unfocused, awinphoto and StepBack ... I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry


----------



## unfocused (Apr 24, 2013)

I think I've discovered a new internet corollary.

Those who begin threads by posting outrageous statements that have no factual basis will eventually claim to have been joking. 

Or perhaps it is just true what they say about accountants not having any idea what humor is.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 24, 2013)

unfocused said:


> I think I've discovered a new internet corollary.
> 
> Those who begin threads by posting outrageous statements that have no factual basis will eventually claim to have been joking.
> 
> Or perhaps it is just true what they say about accountants not having any idea what humor is.



Probably yes ... If you didn't read what was posted


----------



## J.R. (Apr 24, 2013)

unfocused said:


> I think I've discovered a new internet corollary.
> 
> Those who begin threads by posting outrageous statements that have no factual basis will eventually claim to have been joking.
> 
> Or perhaps it is just true what they say about accountants not having any idea what humor is.



Stating that my purchases of Canon products didn't add to Canon's bottom line is an outrageous statement and has no factual basis???

If I don't have an idea of what humor is, neither do you


----------



## ishdakuteb (Apr 24, 2013)

Efka76 said:


> Neuro, I value your opinion very much! Could you please explain where I was wrong. By the way, I am qualified CPA (FCCA) and not photographer. Accounting and financial statement analysis are the areas where I have really deep understanding



1. "accounting and financial statement analysis are the areas where I have really deep understanding". yes, that is true but this is not required to have cpa license to perform unless generating an official document such as 10k (i am not an accountant but have worked for a cpa firm during college period.)

2. a company is launched to look for profit, not for public services (as an accountant, you should know this...)
3. tamron, sigma lens are cheaper than canon and nikon but SHALL not perform consistently as canon (as i have previously stated in other post. this is due to proprietary interface contnrol designs. this is the reason why zeiss refuse to make autofocus for both nikon and canon lens. source of this information, i do not have it since this is my personal conclusion.)

4. as an accountant, one thing that you have forgotten to account is the cost of manufacture and r&d overhead (this sometimes costs more than you have thought...)


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 24, 2013)

J.R. said:


> They surely are making a profit with my money with each purchase I make ... no? I'm not complaining so why is everyone jumping at that conclusion?
> 
> Thanks for the heads up though. I'll take care in future - humor doesn't go well on CR it seems. Given the responses of unfocused, awinphoto and StepBack ... I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry



Everyone is "jumping to that conclusion" because you titled this post "That's my money you're profiting from Canon!!!" I think most people would get the impression that you were upset based on that. If you didn't mean to imply that you were upset then are you suggesting that Canon owes you something? If it's not a complaint then I'm not sure what your intentions were in posting this.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 24, 2013)

Efka76 said:


> Neuro, I value your opinion very much! Could you please explain where I was wrong.





Efka76 said:


> Myself and other readers are really upset as Canon is making profits, however, does not invest such profits into R&D and does not introduce n/.ew cameras or lenses with significant improvements.


You can speak for yourself, of course. Not sure how many people are actually upset that Canon is making a profit. How anyone feels is pretty much irrelevant, anyway - Canon is a public company, and as such is legally obligated (in most jurisdictions) to maximize profits. 



Efka76 said:


> Canon is making significant profits and disappointing customers who would like to buy cheaper Canon cameras or lenses. Such approach is very dangerous as many customers are dissatisfied and are buying third party lenses as well as changing Canon religion to others.


Again, Canon's goal is to profit from sales, not to make people happy by lowering prices. Given that Canon revised their profit forcast upwards, and they are have held the top position in terms of market share for dSLRs and lenses for 10 years now, I don't think they're 'in danger'.



Efka76 said:


> > Does Sigma/Tamron offer a 70-200 2.8 that performs as well as the Canon? Nope. How bout a 24-70? 2.8? Hardly.
> 
> 
> Answer is yes! Take a look at Tamron SP 24-70 2.8 which is direct competitor of Canon EF 24-70 2.8L MKII. Tamron's quality is slighty less worse than Canon's, however, Tamron has stabilisation. Also, try Tamron SP 70-200 2.8 which quality is very good as well. Both Tamron lenses are much cheaper. That why I told that third party manufacturers are taking quite significant part of Canon's lens market.


This is the main error. The answer is clearly not "yes". Even in your post, you acknowledge that the Tamron 24-70 is not quite as good as the Canon 24-70 II in terms of IQ. Is it a good lens at a decent price? Sure. But not a better lens. As for the 70-200 comparison, although they seem similar at 70mm, at 200mm I have a hard time calling the Tamron's quality 'very good' as it seems closer to a 'soft mess' to me (TDP comparison at 200mm).



Efka76 said:


> Here you are also wrong. Everybody is looking what competitors are doing. If competitors can offer similar quality products for much lower price that means that Canon is doing something wrong: 1) Maybe they have issues in supply chain 2) Maybe they invest very heavily into R&D (which is not the case) 3) Using Yen's devaluation for their own profit (when competitors using this factor for lowering prices and increasing market share).


Yes, companies look at their competition. But to suggest that their competitors can offer similar quality (arguable) for much lower price means that Canon is 'doing something wrong' is ludicrous and shows a lack of the understanding you claim to have. Issues in supply chain? Not relevant (and even so, low supply for an in-demand product keep prices high). How do you know that their R&D investment is not heavy? Have you seen their complete budget breakdown? Are their competitors increasing market share? What's your evidence for that? If they are, is it enough to even matter? The reality is that Canon sets their prices to maximize profit - they charge what the market will bear, and the cost of goods has almost nothing to do with those prices.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 24, 2013)

Axilrod said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > They surely are making a profit with my money with each purchase I make ... no? I'm not complaining so why is everyone jumping at that conclusion?
> ...



Ok ... I think I understand when you put it this way - the title of the post could have been better. Thanks!

Cheers ... J.R.


----------



## RMC33 (Apr 24, 2013)

Efka76 said:


> Does Sigma/Tamron offer a 70-200 2.8 that performs as well as the Canon? Nope. How bout a 24-70? 2.8? Hardly. The cost (R&D, tooling, marketing, advertising etc.) of the 7D was most likely recovered about 12-18 months into the run. The new 7D2 needs all these things so yes, Canon will continue to produce this amazing camera to fund better products.
> 
> Answer is yes! Take a look at Tamron SP 24-70 2.8 which is direct competitor of Canon EF 24-70 2.8L MKII. Tamron's quality is slighty less worse than Canon's, however, Tamron has stabilisation. Also, try Tamron SP 70-200 2.8 which quality is very good as well. Both Tamron lenses are much cheaper. That why I told that third party manufacturers are taking quite significant part of Canon's lens market.



Sorry, but as neuro said, and I have observed comparing them for my photography business, Canon won every time. Shooting test charts, working, etc. The softness of the tamron 70-200 @ 200 is laughable at best and ruined a Kayaking session I used it for. 



Efka76 said:


> Also, most people don't follow what the currency markets do so the de-valuation is not why they want lower prices. They want lower prices because that is human nature.
> 
> Here you are also wrong. Everybody is looking what competitors are doing. If competitors can offer similar quality products for much lower price that means that Canon is doing something wrong: 1) Maybe they have issues in supply chain 2) Maybe they invest very heavily into R&D (which is not the case) 3) Using Yen's devaluation for their own profit (when competitors using this factor for lowering prices and increasing market share). Also, if you are not well educated and do not understand how changes in currencies rates affect different economies, please do not comment on matters which you do not understand (by the way, are you American? )



People look at what their competition does because of, wait for it, Human nature. Competitors are not offering similar quality, they are offering lower quality cheaper equipment. Supply chain? Nope, other then the 600 f/4 II and 400 f/2.8 II but they are specialty lenses. R&D? Canon does not invest in this? Are you daft? Did you read what I posted about the 400 f/2.8? Optically better, lighter weight, faster focus, power assist focus for people doing movie related things, the list goes on. Canon 24-70 II, MUCH better sealing, Lighter, better IQ (better then some primes), a Lock switch so the lens barrel stays in place (my personal fav), much better overall design compared to the Mk1. 

Not that it matters, but I have a Masters Degree in Mechanical Engineering, minors in photography and Material sciences, I read the economist every week and follow the currency markets closely as my job is tied very close to these markets. So yes, it is not because of the markets it is human nature that people want things at lower prices. 



Efka76 said:


> Mirror-less will not replace DLSR any time soon. Try shooting a moving object with a mirror-less.
> 
> Here you might be wrong as well. Take a look how quckly digital cameras overtook film cameras. The same could happen with DSLRs and mirrorless cameras. You are stating your very subjective opinion based on emotions and not facts.
> 
> I hope that I clearly explained everything to you.



Focus is the issue here, not film vs digital. I have an EOS M (honestly, love it for travel) and have tried to toss my 500 f/4 II on it for birding, its terrible, even if the bird is sitting still. Toss the 1Dx on and I nail focus 99% of the time. Mirror-less and SLR use two entirely different methods of focus at current. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autofocus Read this and it should explain what your looking for.


----------



## awinphoto (Apr 24, 2013)

J.R. said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Couldn't agree more... JR if your upset that canon is turning a high profit, stop buying their stuff... simple... i'm sure canon is shaking in their boots... Hell i shoot professionally and I have half your gear... People get hot and bothered with any one company or individual earns a lot of money or capital... Why? They worked their butt off to earn that... Sue Bryce said we need to check our attitudes about money and being rich. If we get offended about those who are rich and big profitable company, we ourselves will carry that same mentality towards money and push it away psychologically. In the mean time I hope to use my gear to make my studio have a profitable year this year...
> ...



Naw... not offended by you... just tired of hearing all the whining and complaining on CR over the last 12 months... Used to check out CR often but not any more... too many downers here.


----------



## thepancakeman (Apr 25, 2013)

awinphoto said:


> Naw... not offended by you... just tired of hearing all the whining and complaining on CR over the last 12 months... Used to check out CR often but not any more... too many downers here.



Yes, this is off topic, but I agree with you. It's been debated before, but I still see a strong correlation between the increasingly hostile and combative environment and the loss of the karma system. It wasn't a perfect system, but I think it did manage to keep it more civilized around here.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 25, 2013)

thepancakeman said:


> awinphoto said:
> 
> 
> > Naw... not offended by you... just tired of hearing all the whining and complaining on CR over the last 12 months... Used to check out CR often but not any more... too many downers here.
> ...



Smite.


----------



## unfocused (Apr 25, 2013)

thepancakeman said:


> Yes, this is off topic, but I agree with you. It's been debated before, but I still see a strong correlation between the increasingly hostile and combative environment and the loss of the karma system. It wasn't a perfect system, but I think it did manage to keep it more civilized around here.



Absolutely agree. As flawed as the Karma system was, it served as a powerful feedback to participants as to how their overall behavior was being perceived by other forum participants. Karma has now been too often replaced by personal attacks and drive-by comments.


----------



## distant.star (Apr 25, 2013)

.
I could not disagree more.

Hostile and combative rarely characterize discussions I read here these days. I do have a bias toward thinking most people are simply too sensitive. They are easily offended, and somehow they acquired the wrongheaded idea that they should go through life without anyone offending them.

In the "karma" days, people seemed inclined to respond to the silly "smite" with more of their own smites. That escalated, people assumed they knew who bad marked them and then they tended to respond with some nasty remark -- sort of a passive aggressive response to real or imagined disrespects.

We do pretty well around here for being in a world where we have no verbal cues, no body language and almost no social history with the other posters.

I think this perspective is a little more balanced, so I disagree soundly.





unfocused said:


> thepancakeman said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, this is off topic, but I agree with you. It's been debated before, but I still see a strong correlation between the increasingly hostile and combative environment and the loss of the karma system. It wasn't a perfect system, but I think it did manage to keep it more civilized around here.
> ...


----------



## scottkinfw (Apr 25, 2013)

I have too many Canon toys. Nobody put a gun to my head to buy them. In fact, this week I purchased a 24-70 2.8L II. I anticipate a long relationship with it. No buyers remorse here. So, what is your point?



awinphoto said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > No. It's not.
> ...


----------



## bycostello (Apr 25, 2013)

300 mil for a company that size ain't much....


----------



## expatinasia (Apr 25, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> Hostile and combative rarely characterize discussions I read here these days. I do have a bias toward thinking most people are simply too sensitive. They are easily offended, and somehow they acquired the wrongheaded idea that they should go through life without anyone offending them.
> 
> We do pretty well around here for being in a world where we have no verbal cues, no body language and almost no social history with the other posters.



I agree.


----------



## dizeaz (Apr 25, 2013)

Aren't we tired of these whining posts? If it is your money Canon didn't force you to spend it. 
It's your choice. You probably don't live in a weird autocratic country where they force you to buy from one brand.


----------



## J.R. (Apr 25, 2013)

dizeaz said:


> Aren't we tired of these whining posts? If it is your money Canon didn't force you to spend it.
> It's your choice. You probably don't live in a weird autocratic country where they force you to buy from one brand.



I guess I'm more tired of posts like yours who read only one line and start whining about an alleged whine (in the original post) when there was none. 

Did you really care to read the posts at all? If not, go back, read and stop trolling.


----------



## Hillsilly (Apr 25, 2013)

Anyways, after waiting for a while to see how the Eos-M system developed (or more accurately...didn't), I've been looking around for another smaller / high image quality camera system to supplement my Canon gear and am jumping on the Fuji bandwagon. I'm giving all my cash to Fuji for a while to see what they can do with it. I hear they've got some very sharp currency traders and it will be interesting to see if they can make good profits with my money. I'm hoping that if I give them enough cash, they might be keen to enter some sort of profit-share arrangement.


----------



## RGF (May 3, 2013)

J.R. said:


> So much for people who were anticipating a fall in prices of Canon products due to JPY devaluation.



Weaker Yen may yet lead to reduction in the average price of Canon products. Most likely this will not be everyday shelf price (MAP price) but average price reflecting discounts and promotional $ available to retailers.


----------



## AprilForever (May 3, 2013)

distant.star said:


> .
> I could not disagree more.
> 
> Hostile and combative rarely characterize discussions I read here these days. I do have a bias toward thinking most people are simply too sensitive. They are easily offended, and somehow they acquired the wrongheaded idea that they should go through life without anyone offending them.
> ...



I would have to agree. I think that the smiting thing really went out of hand shortly before they cancelled it! Things to me actually do seem more civil than they were. This isn't really too hostile a forum... there's one rock climbing forum I was reading, where for three pages no one did anything but call eachother junior-high insults... everything from calling each other feminine hygiene products to questioning eachother's masculinity. And, being a rock climbing forum, most of there were probably well past high school...


----------



## wickidwombat (May 3, 2013)

i just wish they would release a camera already 

the natives are getting restless


----------



## J.R. (May 3, 2013)

RGF said:


> J.R. said:
> 
> 
> > So much for people who were anticipating a fall in prices of Canon products due to JPY devaluation.
> ...



That was really the point I was trying to make. It is because Canon has revised its profit guidance upwards (due to a weaker JPY) means that it is increasingly unlikely that the USD prices will be reduced.


----------

