What I love and hate about Canon

[YellowJersey]

Canon's one of those subjects that'll really split a crowd. Some people love it and others snub their noses. It's true for most camera brands, actually. Except, imho, Fuji; everyone loves Fuji.

 

 Anyway, it's a slow work today, so I thought I'd share some musings about my love/hate relationship with Canon.

 

How I love thee, let me count the ways:

Lenses: I generally love Canon glass, especially when we're talking L series red-ring goodness. I shot with the 24-105mm f/4 IS L mkI for nears as my only lens and loved it (we're going back to 2007 here). My next lens was the 17-40mm f/4 L, which was (and still is) a fantastic lens, particularly for the price. I then got the 16-35mm f/4 IS, which I loved even more. For a time, I also had a 70-200mm f/4 L (non-IS) and it was the sharpest lens I'd ever used, and was also incredibly affordable. While the third-parties like Tamron and Sigma have really upped their game in recent years, I've never had anything to complain about with Canon glass.

Build quality and reliability: Absolutely solid. Never had a problem over the four Canon bodies that I owned. It just works. I can see why many pros may be reluctant to switch. My Sony A7rIII can be a bit quirky sometimes. It's not a deal breaker, but it is annoying. But if you were doing mission-critical, time-sensitive, no-second-chances work, you can't go wrong with Canon.

Lossless compressed RAW files, something I miss dearly since having switched to Sony three years ago.

Colour Science: No complaints.

Go to hell you old bastard!

Crippled: Except for the flagship 1D line, it feels like there's always a catch with Canon. The 5D mkII kind of got everyone's hopes up as it was amazing for its day; cutting edge. But since then, cameras like the 7D and 5D series felt limited compared to what the competition was offering. Despite having shot with it for years, the 5DmkIII felt like it didn't offer much over the mkII, except for the AF system. There wasn't anything that excited me and it was just incremental improvements. Canon's attitude towards mirrorless for the longest time was also very off-putting.

Sensors: While not as much of a problem now, Canon sensors seemed subpar compared to what Nikon and Sony were using. DR was always a stop or two behind (something a landscape shooting such as myself found very irritating). Like the bodies, the sensors always seemed one generation behind.

Lazy: Feels like Canon never gives it their all; that they never throw everything and the kitchen sink at their cameras (besides the 1D). The D800 and later the D850 just seemed to outclass the 5DmkIII and 5DmkIV in pretty much every way. They're too worried about cannibalising their own sales to put out something exciting. While the R5 seems like it's something to get excited about, I approach it with caution because I've been burned too many times before. I'm more suspicious than anything else. 

 

 

[GDRRiley]

3 hours ago, YellowJersey said:

Crippled: Except for the flagship 1D line, it feels like there's always a catch with Canon. The 5D mkII kind of got everyone's hopes up as it was amazing for its day; cutting edge. But since then, cameras like the 7D and 5D series felt limited compared to what the competition was offering. Despite having shot with it for years, the 5DmkIII felt like it didn't offer much over the mkII, except for the AF system. There wasn't anything that excited me and it was just incremental improvements. Canon's

Lazy: Feels like Canon never gives it their all; that they never throw everything and the kitchen sink at their cameras (besides the 1D). The D800 and later the D850 just seemed to outclass the 5DmkIII and 5DmkIV in pretty much every way. They're too worried about cannibalising their own sales to put out something exciting. While the R5 seems like it's something to get excited about, I approach it with caution because I've been burned too many times before. I'm more suspicious than anything else.

I agree I only have budget lens but even canons low end for EF-S mount look great.

High schools was all canon and other than kids being stupid and breaking screens they've held up 10 years of high schoolers.

 

yep, they always hold back. Here is a little rant. My GF 60D can set color temp but my newer SL2 can't which is a big pain cus I can't change color temp for video easily in post. Canons been lazy and not pushing it. They've got so much hardware power left on the table but are lazy with firmware, the only cameras that get stuff added are the top end and cine cameras.

 

Yep, can't have a DLSR compete with our cine line which we rarely update. The c100mk 2 is now 6 years old. The C100 was supposed to be an upgrade from the DLSR line with big features like XLR in and better codecs but its never gotten any pro res or raw. I want a C100mk3 that actually is a step up from a a DLSR with 2.5-2.8K recording at 200mbs a second in a h.265 or raw like blackmagic raw or canon raw lite.

 

I'd love to grab an older black magic cine 2.5k or a pocket 4k but I need the autofocus from canons C line which means ether I find a really good deal on a used c200/c200b or I wait for a refresh with a price drop on the old models. I do this as a side gig in college and while I can justify 800-1K canon doesn't give me anything good in that range.

I like the 90D but still no flexibility and it is a lower bitrate then I'd like.

 

EDIT: reminds me I should make another video stating how I feel about the R5 information.

Edited April 23, 2020 by GDRRiley

[LyondellBasell]

6 hours ago, YellowJersey said:

Lazy: Feels like Canon never gives it their all; that they never throw everything and the kitchen sink at their cameras (besides the 1D). The D800 and later the D850 just seemed to outclass the 5DmkIII and 5DmkIV in pretty much every way. They're too worried about cannibalising their own sales to put out something exciting. While the R5 seems like it's something to get excited about, I approach it with caution because I've been burned too many times before. I'm more suspicious than anything else.

Right there with ya. Although, now that they've officially released a lot more of the specs for the R5, I feel much more confident that they've felt the fire that Sony lit under them and came out swinging.

 

I'm hoping that the dynamic range and DPAF live up to the hype of the promo images.

Fingers crossed, we might get the top dog this go-round.

[Fetzie]

17 hours ago, LyondellBasell said:

Right there with ya. Although, now that they've officially released a lot more of the specs for the R5, I feel much more confident that they've felt the fire that Sony lit under them and came out swinging.

 

I'm hoping that the dynamic range and DPAF live up to the hype of the promo images.

Fingers crossed, we might get the top dog this go-round.

I'm a little concerned about how hot that sensor is going to be getting when recording video, in particular on longer takes. Hot sensors die faster and can introduce artifacts.

[YellowJersey]

18 minutes ago, Fetzie said:

I'm a little concerned about how hot that sensor is going to be getting when recording video, in particular on longer takes. Hot sensors die faster and can introduce artifacts.

I'm honestly skeptical of how Canon intends to pull this off. They've created some awfully high expectations.

[GDRRiley]

1 minute ago, Fetzie said:

I'm a little concerned about how hot that sensor is going to be getting when recording video, in particular on longer takes.

this entire camera is going to be very temp sensitive.

 

4 minutes ago, YellowJersey said:

I'm honestly skeptical of how Canon intends to pull this off. They've created some awfully high expectations.

give it a max op temp of 20C and have the entire body be filled with heat sinks.

 

its going to be amazing if they pull it off.

[YellowJersey]

18 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

this entire camera is going to be very temp sensitive.

 

give it a max op temp of 20C and have the entire body be filled with heat sinks.

 

its going to be amazing if they pull it off.

"If"

[Fetzie]

18 minutes ago, YellowJersey said:

I'm honestly skeptical of how Canon intends to pull this off. They've created some awfully high expectations.

"awfully high expectations" is understating what photography hype generators like Tony Northrup and Jared Polin are creating about the R5 quite significantly IMO.

[GDRRiley]

1 hour ago, YellowJersey said:

"If"

canon is going to try and work magic.

[YellowJersey]

2 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

canon is going to try and work magic.

 Even if they do pull it off, I'm still suspicious. Like I said above, the 5DmkII was amazing for its day and then Canon decided to rest on its laurels for over a decade with it's only innovation being DPAF. I'd need to see a consistent pattern of behaviour. It'll be interesting to see if Canon keeps pushing the edge after the R5 or if it'll relapse into its old habits for another decade.

[GDRRiley]

1 hour ago, YellowJersey said:

 Even if they do pull it off, I'm still suspicious. Like I said above, the 5DmkII was amazing for its day and then Canon decided to rest on its laurels for over a decade with it's only innovation being DPAF. I'd need to see a consistent pattern of behaviour. It'll be interesting to see if Canon keeps pushing the edge after the R5 or if it'll relapse into its old habits for another decade.

If they don't they will be wiped out Sony, Panasonic and Blackmagic will clean up.

[YellowJersey]

2 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

If they don't they will be wiped out Sony, Panasonic and Blackmagic will clean up.

Fuji is practically alone in the mirrorless APS-C market, and I think they're killing it. I think they made the right move with going APS-C as it really seems like a sweet spot between full frame and MFT in terms of size, weight, image quality, and price.

 

[GDRRiley]

8 minutes ago, YellowJersey said:

Fuji is practically alone in the mirrorless APS-C market, and I think they're killing it. I think they made the right move with going APS-C as it really seems like a sweet spot between full frame and MFT in terms of size, weight, image quality, and price.

 

yeah I forgot to mention them. the EF-m mount is mostly dead and they've got no fast or even constant aperture like F4 zooms which means you got to adapt to the EF mount, which ruins the point of a small body.

The one issue I have is no one seems to be making lenses for them so you are stuck with their expensive lenses.

[Stagea]

17 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

yeah I forgot to mention them. the EF-m mount is mostly dead and they've got no fast or even constant aperture like F4 zooms which means you got to adapt to the EF mount, which ruins the point of a small body.

The one issue I have is no one seems to be making lenses for them so you are stuck with their expensive lenses.

Sigma is giving it some love with their new prime lenses. Let's hope that they make some more. 

 

[GDRRiley]

1 hour ago, Stagea said:

Sigma is giving it some love with their new prime lenses. Let's hope that they make some more. 

 

yeah sigmas got a nice 3 set but there is 0 good zooms on that mount, all are slow.

[YellowJersey]

10 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

yeah sigmas got a nice 3 set but there is 0 good zooms on that mount, all are slow.

Given that Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, and Sony seem more focused on full frame, I suspect that they're devoting more resources to that. Only Fuji seems to take APS-C seriously and they already have a very well fleshed out lens lineup. The others, save for Sony, don't have much.

 

 

[Fetzie]

14 hours ago, YellowJersey said:

Given that Canon, Nikon, Panasonic, and Sony seem more focused on full frame, I suspect that they're devoting more resources to that. Only Fuji seems to take APS-C seriously and they already have a very well fleshed out lens lineup. The others, save for Sony, don't have much.

 

 

As you can use every FX lens on a DX camera with the right mount (and you can adapt pretty much every DSLR lens to mirrorless), there really isn't much point for Nikon, Canon or Sony dedicating resources to making more than kit lenses for DX. I only really have the DX equivalent of the 24-70 2.8 (I got a relatively cheap one on ebay), everything else is FX glass, and if the customers already have a collection of FX glass then they can swap to a full-format camera without needing to replace a load of glass.

[YellowJersey]

12 hours ago, Fetzie said:

As you can use every FX lens on a DX camera with the right mount (and you can adapt pretty much every DSLR lens to mirrorless), there really isn't much point for Nikon, Canon or Sony dedicating resources to making more than kit lenses for DX. I only really have the DX equivalent of the 24-70 2.8 (I got a relatively cheap one on ebay), everything else is FX glass, and if the customers already have a collection of FX glass then they can swap to a full-format camera without needing to replace a load of glass.

Size, weight, and cost are the big problem with using FX glass on DX cameras. DX lenses can be made smaller, lighter, cheaper *plays Daft Punk*.