Canon is pissing me off

Andy · February 23, 2012

1Dx? well, it sounds great, but the new 5DIII that will be announced shortly sounds even better, actually, for this landscaper/portrait guy. I can use quite well my 7D for the wildlife stuff I shoot on safari in Africa.

But what's really pissing me off is Canon's lack of ability to deliver on the 200-400 L they've promised for like a year now, and then the rumors we're seeing is that it'll be a $10K lens? WTF :wxwax

It's hard to ignore the great stuff from Nikon, that's for sure.

Zerodog · February 23, 2012

I sort of feel like that about the D800. For me 36mp is totally over the top. The file size would kill me for even a small event. D4? Maybe we will see. For now, I am really happy with the 12mp workhorses I have now. And where is Nikons update to the 80-400 rumored for years? Canon at least has the 100-400 that is not a bad lens. The Nikon, from what I hear is crawling slow. Their 200-400? Pretty high $$$ too.

Andy I think this year will be a weird one. Serious posturing from all fronts. It will be interesting to see who comes out on top.

Matthew Saville · February 23, 2012

The good news is, that Japanese guy who was testing the 5D mk3, was also testing the 200-400. So chances are we'll see both at relatively the same time.

Canon seems bent on one-upping Nikon with insane prices, that's for sure $2300 for a 24-70 mk2 without IS? Good luck selling that one.

Honestly Andy it sounds like you should just buy yourself a Nikon 200-400 and a D3s. That'll SURELY jinx Canon into releasing the 200-400 a week later!

=Matt=

Matthew Saville · February 23, 2012

Zerodog wrote: »

I sort of feel like that about the D800. For me 36mp is totally over the top. The file size would kill me for even a small event. D4? Maybe we will see. For now, I am really happy with the 12mp workhorses I have now. And where is Nikons update to the 80-400 rumored for years? Canon at least has the 100-400 that is not a bad lens. The Nikon, from what I hear is crawling slow. Their 200-400? Pretty high $$$ too.

Andy I think this year will be a weird one. Serious posturing from all fronts. It will be interesting to see who comes out on top.

This is definitely a "tweener" generation for many Nikon users. Nikon just has to get their megapixel anxiety worked out, kill it with the D800 for a while, and then in 12-18 months we'll see the D4 sensor show up in a more affordable body. Mark my words. Just keep shooting with you D700's / D3s' and bide your time. Personally, I'm more excited to see which LENSES Nikon makes this year...

2012 is going to be a very satisfying year for BOTH brands, I believe. It's just off to a "slow" start for some of us...

=Matt=

Moving Pictures · February 23, 2012

Faugh. If you guys want a pretentious pricy lens, just go after that $24k 500-1,000 f2.8 Sigma in the camo colours I've seen listed on Amazon ...

novicesnapper · February 23, 2012

Andy, I just posted my thoughts on the Nikon vs Cannon thread lmao. If I had it to do over again, no doubt in my mind lol.

cmason · February 23, 2012

Sounds like what the Nikon guys were saying a year ago

time2smile · February 23, 2012

Andy, come to the dark side, we are waiting for you.....

borrowlenses.com · February 23, 2012

At WPPI we asked them where the 200-400 was and they just said "It's not here" and wouldn't say anything else. They had the new 500 and 600 on display too.

JimKarczewski · February 24, 2012

borrowlenses.com wrote: »

At WPPI we asked them where the 200-400 was and they just said "It's not here" and wouldn't say anything else. They had the new 500 and 600 on display too.

Did you also ask them when they were going to pull their heads out of their a$$es? I'd really like to know.

puzzledpaul · February 24, 2012

For normal mortals most high end gear is just a pipe dream anyway imo, whatever the flavour. It's even worse on the rhs of the pond where msp/rrp Nos are often similar - even tho' exchange rates are involved.

pp

Manfr3d · February 24, 2012

Moving Pictures wrote: »

Faugh. If you guys want a pretentious pricy lens, just go after that $24k 500-1,000 f2.8 Sigma in the camo colours I've seen listed on Amazon ...

There was a used one for sale for 5k the other month in my town.

ziggy53 · February 24, 2012

Canon announced Nov 2011 that the EF 200-400mm, f4L USM was "indefinitely delayed", and that status has not changed (officially).

It was not mentioned on the Canon USA site, only the Japan site. "The Digital Picture" translated it on Nov 16, 2011:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/Default.aspx?Cat=Canon-Announcements

"The Canon EF 200-400mm f/4 L IS USM Ext 1.4x Lens was originally expected to be (formally) announced on February 07, 2011 and scheduled for release later this year. This launch has also been delayed indefinitely. A release date for this lens will be announced when it is known.

We appologize for the inconvenience caused by these delays and will continue to make every effort to launch the new lenses. We look forward to your continued patronage."

insanefred · February 26, 2012

Hhahah!

Canon is trolling Andy.

jmphotocraft · February 27, 2012

I'd be pissed if I was a Nikon shooter right now. Because now there is a giant gaping hole in their FF lineup that is only filled by the $6000 D4. And the APS-C line tops out at the old D300s or the 6fps D7000.

Andy I don't think there is a major difference in resolution from 18 to 22mp, and the 1DX will still be the winner for FPS and build.

Price out your lens bag in Nikkor terms and you may feel better.

Matthew Saville · February 27, 2012

jmphotocraft wrote: »

I'd be pissed if I was a Nikon shooter right now. Because now there is a giant gaping hole in their FF lineup that is only filled by the $6000 D4. And the APS-C line tops out at the old D300s or the 6fps D7000.

Andy I don't think there is a major difference in resolution from 18 to 22mp, and the 1DX will still be the winner for FPS and build.

Price out your lens bag in Nikkor terms and you may feel better.

If you were a Nikon shooter, you'd realize just how satisfied 99% of us are with the D700 already. Many of us are just flat-out buying a 2nd / new D700 now, we're *thrilled*!

;-)

Harryb · February 27, 2012

The key word here is patience. The camera companies are just getting back into stride after last year's catastrophic events. Nikon has announced two extremely capable new cameras and Canon has the 1Dx coming out. Nikon has dropped the price of the D700 by $500 with no MAP so it will probably be selling for less than $2k. The D400 should also be announced in a few more months. Additionally Sony, Fuji, Panasonic and even Olympus have very capable offerings. Hell, Nokia has announced a 41 MP smartphone.

The last time I looked folks here are producing stunning results with their current gear. Just a few years ago I was shooting with a 6mp D100 and a 4 MP D2h. I didn't dare take either camera over ISO 400 and still somehow managed to get good results. With my current gear and a D4 on order I'm in hog heaven. I would love a high end DX camera from Nikon and I'm willing to bet that I will see one before the end of the year. :lurk

Stuart-M · February 27, 2012

Matthew Saville wrote: »

If you were a Nikon shooter, you'd realize just how satisfied 99% of us are with the D700 already. Many of us are just flat-out buying a 2nd / new D700 now, we're *thrilled*!

;-)

At least until you get your hands on a 5D3, then :cry

DeVerm · February 27, 2012

Okay, so I have a 7D and a 5D2... what exactly do I need a 5D3 for? To replace both camera's I have? Is it for the second tier what the 1Dx is for the first tier... combining full frame and crop sensor offerings into a single model?

The 5D2 I use in studio like conditions... it's often on manual everything. The 5D3 is not going to add anything to it in that scenario. Okay, in natural light it has promise for better ISO performance.

For telephoto reach, fast shooting the 7D might well work better than the 5D3, especially if I don't want to buy longer glass. I guess the 1Dx would outperform the 7D but it's full frame so needs longer glass or more pixels.

I'm just gonna enjoy the two camera's I have and invest in some extra glass (eying the 300mm f/2.8L mk.II with both new mk.III extenders as a nice kit for 300/420/600mm, as well as the 8-15mm f4L fisheye zoom). Those lenses will work well on whatever body I put them on. But I would love to see the comparison shots and keeper rate comparisons for wildlife shooting etc.

Matthew Saville · February 27, 2012

Stuart-M wrote: »

At least until you get your hands on a 5D3, then :cry

But then the 5 D mk3 is a "tweener" again. Is it a D800 competitor? Is it a D700 competitor? All I know is that there are very few features on the 5D mk3 that I don't already have on the D700. Flagship AF and more FPS might be exciting for 5D mk2 users, but it's old news to me. ;-)

(/poke dead horse)

=Matt=

ziggy53 · February 27, 2012

I cannot recommend that people make plans based on a rumor site's specifications. Let's just wait and see what gets announced first.

As far as Canon and Nikon "competitor" cameras, if you're already committed to one brand or the other it's extremely expensive to switch systems, so specifications and performance for cameras in "your" brand are the primary consideration for a purchase.

W.W. Webster · February 27, 2012

Andy wrote: »

Canon is pissing me off

Listen up, Apple!

Get your next-gen MacPro sorted and to market, or it won't be just Canon that has a key strategic customer relationship at risk!

David_S85 · February 27, 2012

W.W. Webster wrote: »

Listen up, Apple!

Get your next-gen MacPro sorted and to market, or it won't be just Canon that has a key strategic customer relationship at risk!

Have you been reading Mac Rumors?

Never plan your next system based on a rumor site. Best to wait and see what is or isn't officially announced first.

jmphotocraft · February 27, 2012

Matthew Saville wrote: »

If you were a Nikon shooter, you'd realize just how satisfied 99% of us are with the D700 already. Many of us are just flat-out buying a 2nd / new D700 now, we're *thrilled*!

;-)

Haha. Yes the D700 is great, but I do a significant amount of printing at sizes larger than 12x18". 16x24" is only 177dpi, assuming no cropping. And I like to crop. 12mp is sooo 4 years ago. 200dpi is the limit for fine detail, imo.

W.W. Webster · February 27, 2012

David_S85 wrote: »

Have you been reading Mac Rumors?

No. But something must be in the works for users whose needs are beyond the iMac, surely?

jmphotocraft · February 27, 2012

DeVerm wrote: »

Okay, so I have a 7D and a 5D2... what exactly do I need a 5D3 for? To replace both camera's I have?

That's what I plan to do.

I'm just gonna enjoy the two camera's I have and invest in some extra glass

Sure, that's a fine approach. But on the other hand you'll probably have to run those cameras into the ground because they won't have much resale value for long. So then when you do buy a new body you'll be paying mostly out of pocket.

I'm just tired of the two body thing. The sheer fact that my 7D is APS-C makes me not want to use it for anything but sports. Great camera, but my lenses don't make much sense on it. To me anyway.

jmphotocraft · February 27, 2012

Matthew Saville wrote: »

But then the 5 D mk3 is a "tweener" again. Is it a D800 competitor? Is it a D700 competitor?

This is classic Canikon collusion. Making staggered bodies that don't directly compete.

In 2008 21mp was outrageous resolution. 22mp will hold its own just fine. I certainly don't want to shoot 36mp raws all day and deal with the mountain of data afterwards.

All I know is that there are very few features on the 5D mk3 that I don't already have on the D700. Flagship AF and more FPS might be exciting for 5D mk2 users, but it's old news to me. ;-)

Har har. What news is older than 12mp? I couldn't go back there after working with 21mp files. It's nice. If only you had an upgrade path to 16mp with pro AF and more FPS that didn't cost $6000. But you don't.

DeVerm · February 27, 2012

jmphotocraft wrote: »

But on the other hand you'll probably have to run those cameras into the ground because they won't have much resale value for long. So then when you do buy a new body you'll be paying mostly out of pocket.

I see a lot of 7D's being offered lately... I do not see the benefit of that. If you need to sell your 7D to buy a 5D3 then maybe it's better to keep the 7D and not spend the money.

Matthew Saville · February 28, 2012

jmphotocraft wrote: »

Haha. Yes the D700 is great, but I do a significant amount of printing at sizes larger than 12x18". 16x24" is only 177dpi, assuming no cropping. And I like to crop. 12mp is sooo 4 years ago. 200dpi is the limit for fine detail, imo.

...So then for you the 5D mk3 compares not with the D700, but with the D800 / D800E. And might lose, in some respects... ;-)

(/dead horse)

=Matt=

Matthew Saville · February 28, 2012

jmphotocraft wrote: »

This is classic Canikon collusion. Making staggered bodies that don't directly compete.

In 2008 21mp was outrageous resolution. 22mp will hold its own just fine. I certainly don't want to shoot 36mp raws all day and deal with the mountain of data afterwards.

Har har. What news is older than 12mp? I couldn't go back there after working with 21mp files. It's nice. If only you had an upgrade path to 16mp with pro AF and more FPS that didn't cost $6000. But you don't.

12 MP is wonderful for anyone who doesn't need / want megapixels. I am eternally grateful that Nikon made the tough decision to stick with 12 MP. And thanks to RAW compression and the option of 12-bits instead of 14-bits, our 12 MP files are even smaller than the 5D mk2 in sRAW1 at 9.9 megapixels. In fact they're almost as small as the largest quality JPG's. I wouldn't trade my D700 for a 5D 2 or a 5D3, for what I do.

BTW when you talk about 36 megapixel RAW files being huge- As I mentioned, Nikon offers full RAW compression (Canon's only option is lossless) and both 12-bit vs 14-bit, so I bet the 36 megapixel files are just about the same file size as a 22 MP Canon file. ;-)

But as I was originally trying to say, it's not that the D700 or the D800 are superior, or which competes directly with which. I was just saying that for most Nikon shooters, there's a good chance they're not jealous of what the 5D mk2 / 5D mk3 can offer. Yeah, there's plenty of us who wish we could get a D800 with a D4 sensor, but again I've already said this is a "gap" period for Nikon- In that mid-range, Canon wins for a year or two...

=Matt=

oakfieldphotography.com · February 28, 2012

Matthew Saville wrote: »

But then the 5 D mk3 is a "tweener" again. Is it a D800 competitor? Is it a D700 competitor? All I know is that there are very few features on the 5D mk3 that I don't already have on the D700. Flagship AF and more FPS might be exciting for 5D mk2 users, but it's old news to me. ;-)

(/poke dead horse)

=Matt=

I have to agree with you there Matt.

Canon is pissing me off

Comments