[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/p/ - Photography

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.
  • There are 20 posters in this thread.

05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
06/20/16New 4chan Banner Contest with a chance to win a 4chan Pass! See the contest page for details.
[Hide] [Show All]


Janitor acceptance emails will be sent out over the coming weeks Make sure to check your spam box!



File: thiskillseveryone.jpg (209 KB, 741x882)
209 KB
209 KB JPG
>>
Are you ready for OP making another shitty gear thread?
>>
>>3448638
70 Mpx could mean only one thing = videotard will get BTFO once again.
Canon IS truly based.
>>
>>3448641
they make video cameras for that
>>
>>3448642
This statement makes Dave McKeegan lose his shit
>>
>>3448643
yeah there are people who can't see the design differences in cameras made to shoot 5 fps or 24 fps you don't want to compromise at
>>
>>3448640
[spoiler]reversepsychologyallpartofmasterplan[/spoiler]
>>
>>3448641
Canon listens to what working tell them they need not what amatards on shitty forums, who wouldn't buy it anyway, say they want.
>>
That's really nice!

now I can only wait for

>banding
>noise
>camera malfunctioning
>dead pixels
>the actual lens line up can't hold the number of pixels
>images are soft
>'JUST DON'T ZOOM OR CROP THE IMAGE'
>jpgs artifacts on .c2r
>>
>>3448649
It's weird, but it's true.
>They stopped supporting vid with mirrorless, and they see disgruntled canon videographers with huge investment in lenses just buy their vid cams.
>They bring out R. It's getting shat on by stupid reviewers. And it outsells both well reviewed Nikon cameras by a mile.
>They bring out RP. It's getting even worse reviews. It becomes the best selling FF mirrorless ever.
Price, lenses, and image quality. They know people buying these cameras are not dumb. The dumb ones listen to reviews and bicker all day on dpreview forums, they don't buy a thing, and they don't shoot a thing. Buyers look at lens quality, body price, takes a deep look at real life raw samples. And then he buys Canon. If he buys FF at all, that is... Crop is seeing healthy dose of influx with even sports photographers moving to it. Saw some new Olympuses at the baselines of last CL game in Rubentus.
>>
>>3448651
>>banding
>>noise
>>camera malfunctioning
>>dead pixels
None of this happens with the 5Ds so why would it happen with the new one?

>>the actual lens line up can't hold the number of pixels
The L mark IIs and newer primes can.

>>images are soft
Nope.

>>'JUST DON'T ZOOM OR CROP THE IMAGE'
LOL the 5Ds became my new sports cam BECAUSE of the ability to make extreme crops and still do 16x20.

>>jpgs artifacts on .c2r
Never seen that.
>>
File: 1994066IL.jpg (95 KB, 1300x951)
95 KB
95 KB JPG
>>3448651
imagine
>s e e t h i n g
this much over shit that isn't real, and wouldn't affect you even if it was, because you're a dyed in the wool sonygger?
>>
>>3448654
Agreed.
>muh 4K@60
>muh 1080@120
>>
>>3448657
>>3448661

small search on google wouldn't hurt, you know?

I remember when the first 5Ds and 5Dsr came out
>>
>>3448654
This. I truly don't understand the almost unanimous collective shitting on the R/RP. First they shit on R as it's not a particularly prestigious intro to FF mirrorless. Which is fair enough; not quite a product that one imagines to spearhead the top of a line. But then the same people act all surprised when the RP is even worse. As if at $1200, it was somehow expected to retain the pros of its bigger brother and add/improve the video features that were missing, or were short of everybody's expectations. Absolutely delusional.

As if the RP was geared towards 'the professional'. As if a """""professional filmmaker"""""" (youtube vlogger) who makes his living out of video cares about whether he spends 1200 or 2500 on a body. Yet they complained as if the RP was for them. As if """professional video""" is what its target market was after. As if everyone is a fucking youtube vlogger or travel instathot. As if an amateur photo-video enthusiast who wants smaller-than-DSLR boxes with good video performance, but doesn't have 3k for a FF mirrorless, doesn't have other options (eg:Fuji) that fill that need. As if the RP isn't in fact designed as a perfectly good intro to FF and the most diverse ecosystem for any enthusiastic amateur photographer.

Canon sure does gypsy out on everyone in that they deliberately hold out on features as to secure their cine-products, but the reaction to R/RP was ridiculously out of proportion. It comes as no surprise that the R's successor will most likely fuck shit up and set a new standard, but at an entirely different price point. And those same """filmmakers""" (ie: vloggers) who shat on the R/RP will most likely queue to get it at 5 times the price.
>>
>>3448654
Pretty much summed it up, you buy canon if you're actually outside and shooting instead of being a gearfag
>>
>>3448664
You’re talking to a dude who actually uses the 5Ds and telling him all of the problems that you think it has—which he hasn’t experienced—based on memories you have of 4chan brand trolling threads from back when it first came out.

Every time a new camera comes out, the net is full of talk about some major problem that makes the camera LITERALLY UNUSABLE. For people who actually use the cameras, it almost never turns out to be a big deal.
>>
>>3448670
YouTube and vloggers are to blame, no one else.
>>
>>3448687

Actually I have used a 5Dsr when it first came out, and it was a real pain in my fucking ass to edit the raw files. Noise as fuck at the base ISO and the banding was really annoying when you lift the shadows.

glad they work out and made those cameras usable. but when it first came out, it was utterly garbage.

same stuff about this new 70 megapickles mirrorless camera they are about to release.

now I can only wait for the same issues they had when they though about releasing their high mp count cameras.

One can only imagine how much it hurts to be shooting Canon for photography nowadays, you guys are seething. Go Sony already.
>>
>>3448727
>5ds r
>noisy as fuck at base iso
I think you fucked something up very badly if you were seeing any noise at all on base iso of a 5Ds R. Like, I’m sure it looked noisy if you shot for iso 800 when it was actually set to 100 and then pulled up the shadows, but there should be basically no visible noise (much less enough to be described as “noisy as fuck”) through iso 400. Can you post an example cr2?
>>
>>3448670
The R seems like a great camera, I just think it's 10-20% too expensive.
>>
>>3448727
>Go Sony already.
This is exactly why I will NEVER go Sony, because of the blatant shilling.
>>
>>3448745
Silly to deprive yourself of it because of that, but I have the same temperament unfortunately. Out of the brand tribes, Sonyggers are by far the most tribal and obnoxious. Puts me off.
>>
>>3448734
Wrong. When the a7r2 came out, I was talking to a photographer in San Diego. He has several galleries here, and a fairly high profile photographer. I was telling him about it, and he said he wasn't interested and would get the 5dsr instead because it was higher resolution.

3 months later I came to see him again at a new gallery grand opening, he remembered me and our conversation. I asked how the new 5d was working out for him. He said it wasn't that good. He said exactly what the other anon was saying. Noise in the shadows and no capability to recover the shadows due to this. He said he was going back to the 5dmk3
>>
>>3448747
I acknowledge Sony is good, but it's not THAT good
>>
>>3448775
5DS was made for studio work, afaik
>>
>>3448783
Lmao, a canon camera that you cant use outside of ideal lighting conditions. And I thought sony fans were bad
>>
>>3448775
Yeah, well I know a guy who knows another guy who has a 5Ds who says there’s absolutely zero noise even at iso 25,600, even though it doesn’t have a 25,600 ISO setting.

He also assured me that it’s impossible to make up a fake story on an anonymous message board, so you can rely on this being the truth.
>>
>>3448811
Okay, well, I know what I said is true, and another anon confirmed that it was his experience as well, then a canon fanboi defended its poor shadow performance by claiming its a studio camera. So it sounds like 3 people agree. You're the only one defending canons 5ds noise performance
>>
>>3448842
One guy claims he has personal experience in which he gets significant noise at iso 100. I’m not going to outright call him a liar, but that seems sufficiently unlikely that I’d like some proof before believing him.

The other guy said it was a studio camera “afaik”—ie, he doesn’t have any actual direct experience, he’s just saying that as far as he knows, it’s only designed for studios.

You are repeating a secondhand story from about four years ago. He might have been an idiot. You might be misremembering it.

There’s one dude in this thread who has a 5Ds (and he’s mentioned offhand in a few other threads that he’s got a 5Ds as well, so I’d judge him as less likely to be lying about it), so I’d take his judgment over two people who have not actually used one and one dude who, okay, I’m gonna just come out and say was lying.
>>
>>3448727
>Actually I have used a 5Dsr when it first came out, and it was a real pain in my fucking ass to edit the raw files. Noise as fuck at the base ISO
I've made ISO 1600 and 3200 16x20 prints that don't have a hint of noise. I've got base ISO shots that look like they would still hold up well at 72" (120ppi) for something like a store window display. The limit at base ISO is ppi and NOT any noise.

>and the banding was really annoying when you lift the shadows.
You're a liar and have never touched one of these cameras.

Banding is simply not an issue when you push shadows. Noise is what limits you. If you go past where you normally would based on noise you might find some banding but that's not the limiting factor.

The 5Ds is about 1 stop behind the Sony A7r III in shadow latitude as you can see from the attached pic. With some NR work you can push 5 stops. On a Sony you would be able to push 6 with the same NR work.

>glad they work out and made those cameras usable. but when it first came out, it was utterly garbage.
Canon didn't change anything significant from the day they were released. The firmware updates were minor. They certainly didn't change the sensor itself.

The only significant change was that Adobe's initial profiles for ACR and LR were shit so they released an updated set. But they were shit because they crushed blacks which, if anything, would have hidden the noise you're claiming existed. For the record: I use and highly recommend the Huelight profiles for the 5Ds.

>now I can only wait for the same issues they had when they though about releasing their high mp count cameras.
You've never touched a high MP camera so stop posing.

>Go Sony already.
Stop shilling already.
>>
>>3448775
>Wrong. When the a7r2 came out, I was talking to a photographer in San Diego. He has several galleries here, and a fairly high profile photographer. I was telling him about it, and he said he wasn't interested and would get the 5dsr instead because it was higher resolution.
>3 months later I came to see him again at a new gallery grand opening, he remembered me and our conversation. I asked how the new 5d was working out for him. He said it wasn't that good. He said exactly what the other anon was saying. Noise in the shadows and no capability to recover the shadows due to this. He said he was going back to the 5dmk3
Anyone can review test files online at DPReview and Imaging Resource and see that you are a liar.
>>
>>3448670
My take on the R: the lack of FF 4k and 1080 120p are disappointing if you care about video features. If you can live with the 4k crop it does actually produce nice 4k footage that grades well, especially if you use an external recorder. But it's facing off against bodies with FF 4k so it's frustrating that Canon can't or won't deliver equal video specs.

The RP's main problem...for the price...is no 1080 at 24p. Everyone knew it would be severely limited on 4k (crop; no AF) just like the M50, given the sensor lineage and price point. But no 24p at FF 1080? Pants on head retarded move by Canon. Lots of video guys were ready to recommend it as a really good cheap vlogging setup except for that one fucking omission.

As a stills camera, it's a nice entry into FF. Just like the original 6D was.
>>
>>3449079
>As a stills camera, it's a nice entry into FF. Just like the original 6D was.
And 2019 you'll still end up with an equal package where you trade battery life and proper movie modes for evf, dpaf and slightly more pickles. There is no significant improvement to the 6D.
The points are pricing and Canons lag in advancing, plus unreasonable gimping.

Whoever takes the RP into consideration will be equally happy with a used 6D and 1000 bucks more on the bank account. It's not 2013 and Canon should have been realized this after 6 years now.

I'd be very happy with a second hand EOS R without banding issues, at about 70% of the suggested retail price.
>>
>>3449085
>And 2019 you'll still end up with an equal package where you trade battery life and proper movie modes for evf, dpaf and slightly more pickles. There is no significant improvement to the 6D.
Both the 6D2 and RP significantly improve on the 6D in terms of features. I won't shit on any modern ILC because they're all good and provide much better IQ than most photographers have had over the history of photography. But I would personally rather have the 6D2 or RP over the 6D for the improved feature set.

The sensor is not a huge leap forward but those are rare. Speaking strictly about sensor IQ for stills, is the A73 a huge leap over the A72? Or A7? Most of Sony's innovations have come in AF, which was shit in the beginning, and video.

>Whoever takes the RP into consideration will be equally happy with a used 6D and 1000 bucks more on the bank account.
Canon 6D's go for $500-$600 in good condition. The RP is $1,300 brand new, with EF adapter and base plate if that offer is still going.

>I'd be very happy with a second hand EOS R without banding issues, at about 70% of the suggested retail price.
Banding was a 5D3 issue. On any other modern Canon noise limits your base ISO shadow latitude, not banding. The 5D IV is probably Canon's best at base ISO DR (damn close to the D8x0's), with the R slightly behind. (Same sensor but more noise, probably because it's on all the time for the EVF.)

Canon's upper bodies should have lower prices. And I say that as a Canon user and (obviously) huge fan of the 5Ds and their lenses. Looking at gray market prices sometimes I wonder if Canon purposely plays that game. You can get a 5DsR or 5D IV for $2k right now, gray market new. You can get the R for $1,800 and the 5Ds for $1,900 (a steal). Maybe they figure they can inflate the US MSRP and squeeze CPS users while everyone else goes to eBay.
>>
File: 1359202719248.png (74 KB, 210x285)
74 KB
74 KB PNG
Dual Pixel just got destroyed by generic low budget AF technology from Sony.

https://youtu.be/ZUK8652bBno?t=494
>Are you read for another decade of Pure Unadulterated Rape?
Canon AF is already raped by generic 900 cameras for everyday people.
>>
>>3449125
>Dual Pixel just got destroyed by generic low budget AF technology from Sony.
>I'm going to focus on my advantages and ignore the other guys' advantages entirely!
Sony has better AI subject tracking. Canon has better focus pulls. DSLRs have faster acquisition and tracking as long as you can keep an AF point on the subject.

Choose the one you want for your needs.
>>
>>3449126
>Canon has better focus pulls.
It turns out you're just repeating a meme.

See the video, the AF is hunting back and forst before it finds the target.
>>
>>3449125
Hey I know you don't get a lot of love around these parts but I really enjoy reading your posts and having you throw insults and arguments at me, I want you to know that.
The sheer amount of butthurt a single sonyfag can cause is fantastic.
>>
File: 1452891585760.gif (592 KB, 480x270)
592 KB
592 KB GIF
>>3449129
>and having you throw insults and arguments at me
I usually don't mean ill will, so don't worry about that.

Let's hope Canon can somehow pull off a new Organic sensor tech using their age old 500nm foundry from 1992.
We know it's impossible, but who knows.
>>
>>3449102
Apart from dpaf and for the 6D2 advanced af, which features are you specifically talking about? I guess you're underestimating the original 6D.

>Canon 6D's go for $500-$600 in good condition. The RP is $1,300 brand new, with EF adapter and base plate if that offer is still going.
For Germany it's 500 EUR for a top condition second hand 6D and 1500 EUR for the RP package

>>3449102
Banding is an issue with Canon EOS R cameras in certain light conditions, still not fixed with firmware 1.1.0. Theres an inaicnifant type of banding that can be forced with exposure correction on underexposed shots, and banding that can't be reproduced that affects proper exposed shots on mild shadow lifting
>>
>>3449128
>HURR HURR LOOK AT MUH ONE EXAMPLE
I've seen dozens of video AF comparisons. I've been looking at video-centric reviews recently because I plan on buying a cinema orientated camera soon.

OVERALL Canon DPAF provides the best focus pulls with decent (not best) acquisition and tracking. Sony provides mind-reader like tracking but with jumpier focus pulls. Your one example under one set of conditions isn't going to change reality. Life is not that simple and neither are these machines.

Note that I'm almost certainly...at this point...going to end up with an X-T3 for cinema. So I'm not shilling "muh brand." From what I've seen the X-T3 has meh focus pulls and good, but not Sony level acquisition and tracking. But it's winning me over on footage quality (10-bit 400 Mbps) and color science (Eterna profile and insane ability to grade with that bitrate).

>>3449131
>old meme is old
Several Canon sensors are already produced on a new fab line.
>>
>>3449133
>footage quality
I heard that one applies crop factor on top of APS-C Crop factor so it gets pretty bad.

>Several Canon sensors are already produced on a new fab line
You mean they upgraded from ancient to old.
*new* by canon standard isn't actually new in the rest of the world.
>>
>>3449132
>Apart from dpaf and for the 6D2 advanced af, which features are you specifically talking about?
The AF alone would make me want to go for the others.

>I guess you're underestimating the original 6D.
The 6D is a fine camera capable of making great images and prints. On a tight budget I would have no hesitation recommending it. For someone with the spare cash I think the 6D2 or RP are better. But again, at the end of the day, you can make great prints with a 6D.

>>Canon 6D's go for $500-$600 in good condition. The RP is $1,300 brand new, with EF adapter and base plate if that offer is still going.
>For Germany it's 500 EUR for a top condition second hand 6D and 1500 EUR for the RP package
Fair enough. And I could understand that tipping the scales to the 6D for more people/budgets. 1,000 EUR is certainly a nice lens.

>>>3449102
>Banding is an issue with Canon EOS R cameras in certain light conditions, still not fixed with firmware 1.1.0. Theres an inaicnifant type of banding that can be forced with exposure correction on underexposed shots, and banding that can't be reproduced that affects proper exposed shots on mild shadow lifting
Is it ADC banding like in the 5D3, or something else? I ask because striping is an issue with the Sony A7's and Nikon Z's and becomes more evident when pushing shadows, but it's also related to their AF pixels and not their sensor readout.

Also: I don't see it in DPReview's studio scene so wondering what the conditions are and what the cause is.
>>
>>3449134
>>footage quality
>I heard that one applies crop factor on top of APS-C Crop factor so it gets pretty bad.
X-T3 is full sensor width 6k-to-4k up to 30p, with a small crop at 60p. 120p FHD has a more significant crop but the quality looks good.

One thing I can say is that so far I have not seen bad 4k footage from an X-T3. It has all been good. I was initially leaning A73 for FF but the XT3's footage is winning me over. Especially the 60p-to-24p slowmo at 4k. It's subtle but so damn nice and I'll be damned if I can see any IQ loss from the 1.18 crop at that frame rate.

>>Several Canon sensors are already produced on a new fab line
>You mean they upgraded from ancient to old.
Oh stop it. Judge a camera by what it can do in the real world, not by whatever rumor you heard some where on the Internet.
>>
>>3449125
Based sonychad.

I just pre-ordered the Sony 135mm GM. Feels good.
>>
File: Sony2-700x412.jpg (37 KB, 700x412)
37 KB
37 KB JPG
>>3449137
>Oh stop it. Judge a camera by what it can do
We're not talking about a camera.

We're talking about a rumor which claims canon will dominate the next decade.
For this to realistically happen they would need to be ahead of Sony and Panasonic in Organic sensor tech.

(Spoiler: they aren't)
>>
File: 1383459412733.png (162 KB, 284x281)
162 KB
162 KB PNG
>>3448638
>If you want Dual card slots you need to buy our 70MP camera
Is this really how Canon is going to roll?
>>
>>3448685
He is lying to you. The Z6 is outselling the R.
>>
>>3449150
No it isn't and even if it was it would be because it's been shilled to hell and back by reviewers who don't do any photography while the Canon got shat on for well, admittingly having bad video but that's only for 4k which is pointless for most people.
>>
>>3449144
It really doesn't matter how many card slot a camera has, it's not like you'll even need it since you don't even leave your basement to take photos.
The only photos you take are of your anime figures with the aperture wide open
>>
>>3449152
>but that's only for 4k
Actually Canon video is especially horrendous at 1080P.

See this one: https://youtu.be/Ijy8vX0Jw5E?t=204
>>
>>3449158
Most people won't notice and the Canon EOS R is a photography camera, not a video camera.
>>
>>3449163
I know, but he said the 4K sucked more than 1080P.

It's a misconception.
>>
>>3449135
It's more of a striping, yes. I didn't test any of this and didn't follow the discussion lately. There are assumptions that high contrast areas - sometimes tied to lihgt sources - in the frame lead to problems for exposure corrections of +5EV. Apparently, this is the reproducible one and it can be mitigated with the DualPixel Raw option. Pictures show stripes at the same height in varying width, color and intensity. Some said this is reproducible with even the 5D4.
in addition to this (I'm just repeating what I understood so far) only the R has another striping issue that's rather unrelated to exposure corrections not narrowed down yet in a trial of different settings, on different production charges and other stuff. Not repeatable, but several people claim it's there very rarely.
A German source, unfortunately
https://www.dslr-forum.de/showthread.php?t=1918465&page=111
>>
>>3449141
>We're talking about a rumor which claims canon will dominate the next decade.
>For this to realistically happen they would need to be ahead of Sony and Panasonic in Organic sensor tech.
Canon has been "behind in sensor fab tech" for a decade yet they hold #1 marketshare by a wide margin. Judging from the lenses they are releasing for RF they are going to continue to dominate.

It's not all about "muh spec sheet!"
>>
File: 1347160786502.gif (124 KB, 590x333)
124 KB
124 KB GIF
>>3449205
>they hold #1 marketshare by a wide margin
By a continuously shrinking margin.

They already lost the Full Frame crown completely.
The Canon of Today is just a Crop sensor company, on par with Fujifilm.
>>
>>3449167
A couple things I noticed looking at video reviews from professional cinematographers.

1) The specs that matter to them aren't necessarily the specs that matter to amateurs on forums.

2) They seem to get good sharp footage out of Canon at 4k or 1080p regardless of what other people claim about Canon in their reviews.

That's not to say there aren't differences. But there are reviewers who absolutely blow it (poor lens or focus) then blame "muh shitty Canon video."

Fuck, I've seen really good video from the EOS M with Magic Lantern.
>>
>>3449182
Interesting. I'll try to find out more about it.

Well...possible R issues aside...banding has not been an issue for Canons after the 5D3. Noise is what caps your DR.
>>
>>3449207
and the worst crop sensors on the market
and don't shit on fujifilm, they thrive on being a crop sensor company
>>
>>3449208
Obviously, if you're a blind fan of the gear, you can make anything work out.
>>
>>3449207
>By a continuously shrinking margin.
Nope. They've held pretty steady while Sony has been bleeding Nikon marketshare.

>They already lost the Full Frame crown completely.
LOL not even close.

>The Canon of Today is just a Crop sensor company, on par with Fujifilm.
You're an idiot.
>>
>>3449212
>Obviously, if you're a blind fan of the gear, you can make anything work out.
And obviously if you're a blind hater who doesn't know what he's doing you can make it look like shit.
>>
File: 1407168537720.jpg (32 KB, 600x600)
32 KB
32 KB JPG
>>3449215
Just because I say it B is worse than A doesn't mean I hate it.

But it means you blindly love B, even though it sucks.
>>
>>3449214
Full Frame no longer belongs to Canon.

They are a crop camera maker now. (Just shows how ignorant you were, they always sold way more crap Rabals than Full Frames)
>>
>>3449218
>they always sold way more crap Rabals than Full Frames
I’d wager that Sony sells a heck of a lot more a6000s than they do A7IIIs, too.
>>
>>3449219
True.

Canon sells more APS-C than Sony.
Sony sells more FF than Canon.
>>
>>3449215
Potato Jet likes several Canon cameras for cinema. Show me your best video that's better than his average video or STFU.

>>3449218
>Full Frame no longer belongs to Canon.
[citation needed]

No, one sales period in one country before anyone else released their hotly anticipated FF MILCs does not count.

>new FF bodies now and coming
>lots of new FF lenses
>including best of class in several cases
>"they are a crop camera maker now."
Holy shit....
>>
>>3449225
>before anyone else released their hotly anticipated FF MILCs
Sony increased their total sales volume after Canon showed their disappointment.

>Holy shit....
I know. It really wrecks with your understanding of your identity to be called a crop camera maker.
>>
>>3449218
Not the best source of data since Flickr has gone downhill a lot in recent years, but:

The most used Canon camera on Flickr is the 5d3. Average daily users, 1591.

By comparison, the top Sony camera was the a6000, with 656 users each day on average. Sony’s #1 full frame body on Flickr is the a7 ii, which averages 392 users per day (although its sister the a7r ii averages another 346, so one could make the argument that Sony full frames would get more traffic than Sony crops if they hadn’t split the line up so much).

Granted, a lot of the arguments I made about using amazon sales rankings apply here too—there’s a decent chance that the subset of photographers who still use Flickr is not a representative set, for instance—but at least it’s a better organized data set to look at, and Instagram and Facebook don’t let you search for stats by camera brand.

http://flickr.com/cameras
>>
>>3449230
>Sony’s #1 full frame body on Flickr is the a7 ii
That should already tell you it's the wrong place to look.

The latest marketshare shift is caused by the mark 3. The mark 2 has increased a bit due to it pricing, but its sales is substantially below the mark 3.
>>
>>3449228
>>>3449225
>>before anyone else released their hotly anticipated FF MILCs
>Sony increased their total sales volume after Canon showed their disappointment.
LOL is that when Canon captured >20% of the FF MILC market a few days after the R's release?

>>Holy shit....
>I know. It really wrecks with your understanding of your identity to be called a crop camera maker.
I'm not Canon. And unlike Sony fags my whole identity and life is not caught up in a camera company.

Join a cult, at least that would make more sense.
>>
>>3449264
>captured
The mirrorless pie got bigger, they captured from their DSLR sales.
Canon won over Canon, but it's not as impressive as you make it sound.

And they had exactly 0 impact on sony which kept increasing its sales despot having lowered percentage.
>>
>>3449144
>He fell for the dual card slot marketing hype
>>
>>3449267
Marketing hype started by canon many years ago, by the way.

But now it's suddenly not important anymore.
>>
>>3449207
the fact that you are anime avatarfagging and using crop sensor as a derogatory term shows that you are an autistic /g/earfag, Canon and Nikon still dominate full frame, sure Sony dominates mirrorless full frame currently, but Canon/Nikon only entered within the last year and already have around 30% market share, the writing is on the wall unless Sony drastically changes something.
>>
>>3449270
>sure Sony dominates mirrorless full frame currently
No, they lead the overall Full Frame sales.

The moment you feared has already happened.
>>
>>3449211
>thrive

>less than 8% market share

>>3449264
>boasting that a brand hit 20% market share of sales when there's only 3 companies competing

Maybe go learn fractions buddy.

>>3449270
>canikon have 30%

No they don't, neither nikon sku is in the amazon top 50, canon have one sku each, both appearing below 4 sony ff sku's. At the very best canon has 20% right now.
>>
>>3449264
>>3449265
>>3449267
>>3449269
>>3449270
>>3449271
Show your photos, motherfuckers.
>>
>>3449265
[so many fucking citations needed]

>>3449270
facts

>>3449279
>MUH AMAZON SKUs!!!
Go somewhere else with your autism.
>>
>>3449284
>Please stop bringing up amazon skus, I have no counter argument to them, nor do I have a more reliable/insightful source of sales figures. I realise that I can't really call it shilling due to the fact I've argued that they change every hour...

Dude, stop being a faggot and accept the facts.
>>
File: 1490973286694.jpg (74 KB, 320x454)
74 KB
74 KB JPG
>>3449284
The citation needed is on you.
The natural assumption is Canon converted Canon users.
But you claimed Canon converted Sony users.

I can give you a different point of view though.
Sony is record breaking quarterly profits while canon profits are getting ass raped.
This suggest to me that Canon never stole any sales from Sony, they merely cannibalized themselves.

So basically, canonfags spent 2400 dollars on the R instead of spending 3100 dollars on the 5D4. And this hurt Canon's financials.
>>
>>3449290
Why do you care so much about defending Sony? Do you have any reason other than zealous brandfaggotry? Mirrorless was a mistake, the gear/spec brandfaggotry was no where near this bad before.
>>
>>3449297
I care about truth.
And you are manipulating people.
>>
>>3449299
All I see is a bunch of unsubstantiated claims about which camera you think stole sales from which camera, a bunch of far reached conspiracy like theories in order to defend your preferred brand of cameras.
>>
>>3449301
>All I see is a bunch of unsubstantiated claims
They are public financials of the companies.

Sony increasingly profiting more and more every year make your claim impossible.
Canon increasingly losing profit year over year leads credence to my claim: Canonfags bought the R instead of 5D4 => Canon made less money
>>
>>3449306
Yeah that is what you said before, rewording it doesn't make it valid.
>>
>>3449307
For the dumb people: Less revenue = less cameras sold
Or
Less revenue = cheaper cameras sold

Pick your poison. Whatever you choose, I will rape you afterwards.
>>
>>3449290
>citations needed
Can’t get you all the way, but

https://petapixel.com/2018/11/08/canon-already-has-22-of-full-frame-mirrorless-sales-in-japan/

(Caveat: Numbers only for Japan, and only from stores that report them to BCN)

Those are percentages, though, so the next step would be to see how much mirrorless market share grew vs. DSLRs during that period. If DSLRs dropped by the same number that Canon mirrorless share grew, they cannibalized themselves. Otherwise, they cannibalized Sony.

But I think the real question is: why do you give a shit? Do you think you can take better pictures if there are more other people buying the camera brand you bought?
>>
>>3449309
Please rewording your unsubstantiated theory again, maybe then I will understand.
>>
>>3449313
I knew you would be too piss scared to pick either of them. Because your argument would be destroyed.
>>
>>3449316
Calm down Ben Shapiro.
>>
>>3449311
>If DSLRs dropped by the same number that Canon mirrorless share grew, they cannibalized themselves.
There is another way, you can look at the Canon revenue dropping off a cliff.

This suggests Canon fans purchased the R over the 5D4.
>>
>>3449288
>>Please stop bringing up amazon skus, I have no counter argument to them,
Only one counter argument is needed: they do not in any way represent national much less global sales marketshare. Period.

>>3449290
>I can give you a different point of view though.
>Sony is record breaking quarterly profits
The vast majority of Sony's income is from gaming.

>while canon profits are getting ass raped.
Canon's profits grew in 2018.

>So basically, canonfags spent 2400 dollars on the R instead of spending 3100 dollars on the 5D4. And this hurt Canon's financials.
Canon's profits GREW in Q4 2018, the time period which would have been affected.
>>
>>3449318
>Canon revenue dropping off a cliff.
What are you smoking? Year-over-year revenue changed by -1.15 million USD. That's barely a blip.

Is there any way to get the mods to just completely ban Sony shills?
>>
File: 1549345753841.png (39 KB, 1170x620)
39 KB
39 KB PNG
>>3449319
>income is from gaming
That's lie number one.
Sony Imaging only sells camera equipment.

>Canon's profits grew in 2018.
That's lie number two.
Canon's profit dropped by 32%.

>>3449320
See this chart. It's from Canon.
>>
>>3449321
>Sony Imaging only sells camera equipment.
lol no, that's like saying Ricoh is one of the most successful camera companies because of their medical camera equipment sales.
>>
>>3449324
It's still not an argument, because the Imaging division doesn't sell games.

And yet they profits are growing, again, and again, and again.
>>
>>3449318
>There is another way, you can look at the Canon revenue dropping off a cliff.
Looking at canon’s 3q financial report for 2018, they sold 1.06m interchangeable lens cameras (vs 1.31 that quarter the previous year)

Same quarter, Sony sold 1.10m (vs 1.35m Q3 2017). Note that Sony doesn’t break theirs out by compact vs. interchangeable lens, so that includes their point & shoots and things like the RX1 too.

(I can cite my sources later when I’m not on my phone if anyone needs them)

So it looks like they both dropped off pretty much the same cliff.
>>
>>3449327
>So it looks like they both dropped off pretty much the same cliff.
The difference is Sony increased the revenue compared to last year.
That suggest a shift in sales towards expensive cameras.
Which is perfectly in like for my Argument of Sony leading FF.

Canon had both dropped quantities as well as dropped earning.
>>
>>3449323
>>>3449319
>>income is from gaming
>That's lie number one.
>Sony Imaging only sells camera equipment.
You didn't say SONY IMAGING you said SONY which is bait-n-switch #1 for you.

>>Canon's profits grew in 2018.
>That's lie number two.
>Canon's profit dropped by 32%.
No, CANON'S profits grew year over year.
2018 Q4 Profit: $636.18 million
2017 Q4 Profit: $483.78 million

https://amigobulls.com/stocks/CAJ/income-statement/quarterly

>>>3449320
>See this chart. It's from Canon.
It's PART of Canon. Bait-n-switch #2 for you.
>>
File: 1505839418434.jpg (77 KB, 690x720)
77 KB
77 KB JPG
>>3449346
>It's PART of Canon
The part that makes cameras. The one relevant to this discussion.

That camera producing part of Canon lost 32% profit compared to 2017.

>You didn't say SONY IMAGING
We are in /p/, not in /v/.
Every Sony related discussion in /p/ is naturally about Sony Imaging.

I see you got so butthurt that you ended up manipulating the data to compare the overall company instead of the Imaging division, just to conceal your loss.
>>
>>3449349
>i'll speak as if i'm talking about the entire company
>then i'll switch to one division
>that will show them!
You are one of the worst brand/gear shilling faggots I've ever seen on /p/.
>>
>>3449355
>i'll speak as if i'm talking about the entire company
Show me where.

The only one who talked about the entire company is you.
>>
>>3449356
>Show me where.
Right here: >>3449290

English 101: if you say the company name and NOT the division, people assume you are speaking about the company as a whole.
>>
>>3449368
This doesn't make any sense.

Nobody here suggested Canon stealing sales from the Playstation 4.
Likewise, nobody suggested Sony Semiconductor stole all of Canon's photocopy business.

^If someone actually did the above, I would have sided with you, but at this point you just gained a ticket to the asylum for weird people.
>>
>https://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/latest/photo-news/cp-interview-canon-combine-body-lens-stabilisation-127019
RAPE IS COMING
>As you may know, Canon has a history of not always being first in the market with new technology, but we are very good at catching up, going beyond and becoming the leader.
>>
>>3449979
>necrobumping your shitty thread
>>
>>3449979
IBIS didn't help Pentax, it didn't help Sony either (a7 2 only sold well due to pricing), and it didn't really help Nikon all that much.

It's the Autofocus Canon needs to make faster>>3449125
>>
>>3450015
With the RF glass Canon is introducing they will absolutely rape Sony once they introduce a sensor architecture with:
* FF 4k
* Fast DPAF

It's stupid to believe this isn't coming soon. They've basically said it's coming (along with IBIS) in interviews.
>>
>>3450107
>Fast DPAF
But it's too slow to be fat.
https://youtu.be/ZUK8652bBno?t=494
>>
>>3450108
>It's stupid to believe this isn't coming soon.
>It's stupid to believe this isn't coming soon.
>It's stupid
>stupid
>>
File: 1401215216545.gif (87 KB, 200x200)
87 KB
87 KB GIF
>>3450131
Dual pixel isn't 'coming soon'.

It's already here and it's slow as fuck.
>>
>>3450133
>* Fast DPAF
>It's stupid to believe this isn't coming soon.
>* Fast DPAF
>It's stupid to believe this isn't coming soon.
>* Fast DPAF
>It's stupid to believe this isn't coming soon.
>* Fast DPAF
>It's stupid to believe this isn't coming soon.
Learn to read.
>>
File: 1522278976076.jpg (443 KB, 1550x1080)
443 KB
443 KB JPG
>>3450152
Nah, it's smart to believe Canon will cuck you again and deny you AF in 4K recording.

Like they are doing right now.
>>
>>3450153
The 1DX mk II, 5D mk IV, and R all literally DPAF in 4k.
>>
>>3450167
So it's about 50/50 whether you get cucked or not. Nice statistics right there.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.