# Canon/Nikon should embrace "product cannibalism"



## Taemobig (Jan 26, 2013)

Here's the link to an article about Apple CEO Tim Cook's view about "product cannibalism" that I think Canon/Nikon should adopt: 
http://qz.com/47728/tim-cook-is-absolutely-right-apple-must-embrace-cannibalism/

Tim Cook had an interesting take on their own products taking away sales from their other lines of product. Such as the Ipad mini vs Ipad. He basically says, if they don't cannibalize their own products, someone else will.

I can see how its happening right now, with Sony releasing RX1, RX100, A99 and other companies selling a ton of different micro 4/3 cameras. Canon and Nikon should basically stop crippling their mid to high end cameras. For Canon's example: such a simple thing like not including spot metering on the active AF point on the 5d Mk3. Less crippling means less people switching to brands that would meet or exceed people's needs/wants. And even if someone buys the 5D mk3 thats not crippled instead of a 1DX, at least that person is now locked into the Canon brand, which would translate to more sales in the future when that person's needs exceeds what the 5D Mk3 can do and needs to purchase a 1D level camera.


----------



## Efka76 (Jan 26, 2013)

I also, think that if you buy camera that means that you are choosing Canon or Nikon religion (sorry, but I do not accept other brands in cameras). Then camera producer can make really huge profits on lens sales. However, currently I see 2 problems with Canon:

1) They are not spending sufficient money on R&D comparing to other manufacturers (e.g. Sony) and also they are producing crippled cameras. In my opinion, all Canon marketing department should be fired. The latest example with Canon EOS 6D shows, that they did not meet high customer satisfactions as autofocus system is even worse as EOS 7D (which is 3 year old model!!!!). In my opinion it is much better to have less variety in cameras but produce super high quality products where cutting edge technology is applied. What we see now? GPS and Wifi included in very expensive camera when such features are standard in P&S cameras.

2) Canon's new lenses are extremely expensive, however, the third party manufacturers (e.g. Tamron, Sigma) started producing really high quality lenses for much lower price.

When I look how computer technology fastly evolves I am very dissatisfied with camera manufacturers response. The market is waiting for really high tech technologies but Canon updates camera line every 3 - 4 years. What would you say if Dell, Lenovo, Apple would update their technology on 3-4 year time span????


----------



## HarryWintergreen (Jan 26, 2013)

Very difficult question. If we learned something about the digital age then it should be that manipulating the market and hoping for a slow motion change is dumb. Preventing customers from benefitting of cutting edge technology to me seems risky. The lid of Pandora's box has been lifted by Olympus, Fuji and Sony. I personally will stick with my DSLRs (albeit complemented by mirror-less cams) but if there is a broad bunch of things mirror-less cameras can do as well, even better or simply differently, why trying to keep the time wheel from moving? What I see is Canon's dilemma when it comes to discussing the question that a non-trendsetting company Canon means a company on the losing track. 
Those who cannot move will be moved. Let's see what Canon's moves will be like.


----------



## Efka76 (Jan 26, 2013)

IMHO Canon should follow similar strategy as Apple (created by S. Jobs) - to get rid of many models in DSLR area and produce only few and apply the top technology.

Also, i think that application of APS-C sensors can not be justified in 2013 as they initially were created due to significant costs of FF sensors. During few years sensor production technology had to become much cheaper. Also, Canon is not making any efforts in distinguishing themselves in the current market. Many consumers are not able to change firm as they already invested in expensive lenses. However, if the same trend will happen for few more years many people might switch to other manufacturers. Now it seems that Canon is sleeping and tries to follow Nikon.

I can not understand why Canon is not mowing to Medium Format cameras? Also, it is very obvious that in mirrorless camera area they are off-competition. It seems that they strategy guys are too old and not able even to follow market trends (from Canon I would expect to be market maker). Currently they are trying to squeeze all possible money from loyal customers and thinking how NOT to produce good camera in order to protect big line of camers. If they put FF sensor, they cripple autofocus, produce good camera 1Dx C however as for it too significant premium compared to almost the same camera 1Dx. 

oh, i forgot that strange P&S camera, which they recently introduced. It seems that they do not understand words "customer expectations" (where is Canon 7D Mark II and etc.). Few more years and people will talk about Sony, Tamron, Sigma.... when Canon guys will try to catch up.


----------



## V8Beast (Jan 27, 2013)

Product cannibalism? How about human cannibalism. Yummy ;D


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Jan 27, 2013)

> When I look how computer technology fastly evolves I am very dissatisfied with camera manufacturers response. The market is waiting for really high tech technologies but Canon updates camera line every 3 - 4 years. What would you say if Dell, Lenovo, Apple would update their technology on 3-4 year time span????



Shift from Digic 4 to Digic 5 is proportionatly a bigger increase that we've seen from computer chips over the same period.

Canon may not have upped the MP, but they have upped the ISO. I don't need to shoot at 36MP or ISO 108'000 so I can't decide which superflous feature I'd rather do without.



> IMHO Canon should follow similar strategy as Apple (created by S. Jobs) - to get rid of many models in DSLR area and produce only few and apply the top technology.



Apple are now dumbing down. their top line MacPros are limping along on an 2008 template. They make chitloads selling phones now. Who cares about the top technology? Certainly not the creative industries who have found that Adobe CS runs far better on a much cheaper PC.



> Also, i think that application of APS-C sensors can not be justified in 2013 as they initially were created due to significant costs of FF sensors. During few years sensor production technology had to become much cheaper. Also, Canon is not making any efforts in distinguishing themselves in the current market. Many consumers are not able to change firm as they already invested in expensive lenses. However, if the same trend will happen for few more years many people might switch to other manufacturers. Now it seems that Canon is sleeping and tries to follow Nikon.



Except that the entry point for an APS-C camera is £300 and the entry point for a full frame camera is £1600.

Thats a huge market you would surrender to Nikon. And probably the market where the big bucks are made. Sure Canon could be like Leica or Hasselblad. How many folk on here started on, or still are on rebels, but have bought better bodies, lenses or flashguns?



> I can not understand why Canon is not mowing to Medium Format cameras? Also, it is very obvious that in mirrorless camera area they are off-competition. It seems that they strategy guys are too old and not able even to follow market trends (from Canon I would expect to be market maker). Currently they are trying to squeeze all possible money from loyal customers and thinking how NOT to produce good camera in order to protect big line of camers. If they put FF sensor, they cripple autofocus, produce good camera 1Dx C however as for it too significant premium compared to almost the same camera 1Dx.



What history do Canon have in medium format. They key to Canons success over the last 25 years is the EF mount, and it is the Ef mount that is the key to their future success.

Canon have trumped Nikon and Pentax in terms of their mirrorless offerings, Olympus and Panasonic have kind of made this segment their own, but even they need adaptors to use their 'older' four thirds lenses on the MFT bodies.


----------



## HarryWintergreen (Jan 27, 2013)

Efka76 said:


> I also, think that if you buy camera that means that you are choosing Canon or Nikon religion (sorry, but I do not accept other brands in cameras). Then camera producer can make really huge profits on lens sales. However, currently I see 2 problems with Canon:
> 
> 1) They are not spending sufficient money on R&D comparing to other manufacturers (e.g. Sony) and also they are producing crippled cameras. In my opinion, all Canon marketing department should be fired. The latest example with Canon EOS 6D shows, that they did not meet high customer satisfactions as autofocus system is even worse as EOS 7D (which is 3 year old model!!!!). In my opinion it is much better to have less variety in cameras but produce super high quality products where cutting edge technology is applied. What we see now? GPS and Wifi included in very expensive camera when such features are standard in P&S cameras.
> 
> ...



+1


----------



## AprilForever (Jan 27, 2013)

Efka76 said:


> IMHO Canon should follow similar strategy as Apple (created by S. Jobs) - to get rid of many models in DSLR area and produce only few and apply the top technology.
> 
> Also, i think that application of APS-C sensors can not be justified in 2013 as they initially were created due to significant costs of FF sensors. During few years sensor production technology had to become much cheaper. Also, Canon is not making any efforts in distinguishing themselves in the current market. Many consumers are not able to change firm as they already invested in expensive lenses. However, if the same trend will happen for few more years many people might switch to other manufacturers. Now it seems that Canon is sleeping and tries to follow Nikon.
> 
> ...



Medium format would require an entirely new array of lenses. Also, worse still, an entirely new array of techniques. 

APS-C has piles of applications. APS-C and FF are two different tools for two different purposes. APS-C is very valid.


----------



## m (Jan 27, 2013)

Efka76 said:


> When I look how computer technology fastly evolves I am very dissatisfied with camera manufacturers response. The market is waiting for really high tech technologies but Canon updates camera line every 3 - 4 years. What would you say if Dell, Lenovo, Apple would update their technology on 3-4 year time span????



If you want to buy a new camera more often, use disposable ones. ;D

My 50mm from the beginning of EOS works nicely. Would you want to work with a laptop of that time?
But that's a joke compared to something like a recent Leica 50mm/0.95 on a '54 M3.
I'm not sure if you can find an adapter for your USB3 hard drive to punched card reader.
Cameras are quality products. They are built to last and - more importantly - to be used,
while a lot of consumer electronics rely on lifestyle products.

Camera manufacturers do follow certain hypes, for sure, but less committed than the companies you mentioned. 
Speaking of that, Apple even changed its name due to its shift in products. 
While printers are important, I'd be sad to see the announcement on CR that Canon now focuses on them and pretty much drops the camera market.

I don't think it's save to connect "really high tech technologies" with product updates in less than every 3-4 years.
Airplanes are in construction for 30 years. Would you consider them "really low tech technologies"? Probably not.
Cameras and computers are different products and so are their live cycles.


----------



## rs (Jan 27, 2013)

AprilForever said:


> Efka76 said:
> 
> 
> > IMHO Canon should follow similar strategy as Apple (created by S. Jobs) - to get rid of many models in DSLR area and produce only few and apply the top technology.
> ...


I can see the need for APS-C SLR's diminishing in the future. The crop sensor line up is starting to get eaten into at both ends - cheaper FF SLR's are being introduced, and we'll no doubt see even cheaper FF bodies introduced in the future - and the cheaper end of crop SLR's has mirrorless cameras to compete with, including Canon's own EOS M.

For the first two years of the 7D's life, there were no FF cameras in Canon's line up that could really be seen as an alternative for sports or wildlife - the 1Ds III was much more expensive and was only 5fps, the 5D II had under 4fps with much worse AF, leaving just the 1.3x crop 1D IV. Now we have the 1D X and 5D III - the 1D X is better in every single way except cost, and the 5D III is cheaper, has a faster frame rate and has better AF than the 1Ds III, so it is a viable upgrade for 7D users.

When FF bodies can be made for comparable prices to today's rebels (not impossible - when the sensor becomes as cheap to make as today's APS-C sensors, just package it in a plastic body with a pentamirror), the only need anyone would have for a crop body SLR and not a crop body mirrorless is to get a small camera with a real OVF. That can be covered with just two models - a high end crop camera for birders who only want to carry around a 500/4 instead of an 800/5.6, and something for people that don't want to lug around a big DSLR, but they still want an optical viewfinder.

Having said that, birders can get very good results cropping with FF, or simply throw on a 1.4x TC (or use a 2x instead of a 1.4x). And for the people that want a small normal zoom camera with an OVF, the body could be made very light with plastic construction and a pentamirror, and there's no reason why they couldn't release a lens much like the old 28-90 lens - it weighed in at just 190g - 10g less than the EF-S 18-55.

So, why carry on with crop SLR's at all if full frame sensors drop in price sufficiently? The only real place where it makes sense is mirrorless cameras, and there's still an argument for FF there.


----------

