I don’t get it why people expects to the companies to reinvent the wheel on each release. I’m assisting a top photographer here in Sweden. I’ve been there shooting Vouge covers etc. He uses a 8 year old Canon EOS 5D mark something. A 2015 MBP, 10 year old 100mm macro. But the images are SO GOOD and the sharpest I’ve ever seen. Was a really good wake up for me first session with him. What you can’t buy, is talent. And that’s what it’s all about.
I agree, technology had advanced enough to the point where old cameras are just as adequate as their newer counterparts. New cameras aren't that special when you're not really doing anything serious to justify the large purchase.
Absolutely!! My guess is that he was using the 5D Mark III. What a phenomenal camera! One of my biggest mistakes in life was to sell it for the EOS R. And the R was fine, but I should’ve stayed with the Mark III.
I agree with this. I’m a commercial and fashion photographer, for years I’ve shot with the Canon 7D mark I for fashion shoots, sporting events, weddings, etc… I can still use that camera and come out with amazing results. I have the Canon R5 mark I and I was considering getting the Mark II when I stopped and thought what shots am I missing with the mark I (and making this current one a backup camera to replace my old DSLR), when I stopped to think… what shots am I missing with the Canon R5 mark I? I can’t even justify a new camera. It’s not going to make my work better, it’s not going to change my work flow! It’s not going to help my innovation, it’s not going to give me anything except a new camera body with features I’ll forget to use. So it’s better to use that money elsewhere and focus on what I have. I’ve downsized to only 5 lenses and whenever I’ll need anymore, I can just rent them and keep it moving. I can speak for only myself, but at some point I almost started to lose the fact that this is art! That the reason I loved this is because I get to capture moments and see things from a different perspective, my perspective. That when I’ve captured an old army vet smiling at a surprise birthday party where all of his kids showed up to surprise him and he looked like that happiest man alive, was almost trumped by me worrying what camera I used to get that image. That’s crazy to me.
It's the only way these camera companies can stay in business. They need to market their latest cameras as something you must have. If every Canon user stopped purchashing cameras at the 5dmarkIII point in time. Canon would have gone bankrupted years ago.
But the camera shills youtubers that promote these new products won't get the perks and handouts from sony, canon and nikon. etc. And also the affliate link money so that's why most popular camera channels are about gear than the art itself.
Cameras have gotten so good. Tech has gotten so good in general. Phones, TVs, cameras, even video games…we’ve prioritized consumerism over innovation…releasing things every year. So it’s no wonder that people have become desensitized to new things. Just my opinion 🤷🏾♂️
This is true! The other thing is why would any company want to pay for innovation, because when a company does innovate most can’t receive it or don’t know what to do with it.
Yes we should all be using the pony express. Who in their right mind would make us succumb to airmail, fedex, faxes, pagers, email and now text messages. I am so angry now I have to handle 300+ emails a day (half of them are from Mikehunt’s comments btw ty Mike). Life would be grand if I just had to talk to a horse once a day than all this noise…
The hate on Canon is just tiresome. Many of the complaints are just ridiculous. I am just going to have to stop watching gear reviews. People wanted the R5mii to have 80mp, 12k video, with a global shutter that shoots 240fps electronic, 30 mechanical, with 16 bit, Clog2, with 20 stops of dynamic range at a price point of $3800. Ridiculous
Yeah I’ve honestly unsubscribed from most gear related channels. The only reason I’m responding to this one is because I had RUclips running in the background and needed to take a break from what I was doing. Same thing happened on another channel. It’s ridiculous and I don’t want to be apart of this stuff. I said in another thread when you host photography workshops is so ridiculous how people will go to those to talk about their gear and the brand they love.
@@kevincassar8022leaf shutter is just as effective as a global shutter in almost every aspect. Global shutter is just a marketing term when it comes to photography. Global shutter is more beneficial for video! So whether it has a mechanical shutter or not, it’s irrelevant.
Canon is realizing that too, which is EXACTLY why they don't want third parties selling R lenses! As more photographers are happy with what they have camera wise, lenses is where the profit is.
I think that photography as a profession has reached a point where a photographer needs to look within them and see if they have something to say. There are a hundred people who can take a picture of a flower, but only a few will take a picture that might look memorable in some way. The photographer as poet, or novelist, or historian, or philosopher has a chance to find an audience sufficient to build a living with a future. Without that "something extra", you're just working sandwich to sandwich.
The thing is, photographers don't care that much about the specs (especially since the last decade when it's more difficult to find a bad camera) they are more interested in taking photos.
@@nicolasletellier6162this is correct. The people who are arguing are NOT photographers, they are gearheads and this is the gear they choose to go over the top about. It’s like someone who owns a super computer and just surfs the internet with it. You have all that power at your fingertips and do nothing with it. Most people like that would be better suited with a point and shoot camera.
Saying only photographer should use or buy cameras is like saying only race car drivers need to buy cars. Canon, Nikon, and Sony ALL depend on camera sales to keep in the game. I can only imagine what cameras will become if they continue to lose buyers. No one will innovate and you will have no competition to choose from. Prices will be insane and more than likely many photographers will be forced to work for larger companies that are able to afford the gear. Would not be good regardless for the pros, and they have far more to lose than the whining enthusiasts. Think about it.
@@troypast3589 it sure if you’re addressing MikeHunt Troy. But if you are lemme know. MikeHunt can write out a long response and send you another email. Because that’s the MikeHunt way. 😂
@@troypast3589 insane prices are already happening--it's clearly Nikon's and Fuji's market strategy to move upmarket and abandon the entry level market. For now, Canon and Sony are still there, but time will tell if they find it sustainable.
I'm a Canon user. I like the idea of not having to change equipment with each new release. Because there are few differences between models. I bought a new camera (Canon R7) after almost 10 years. Last weekend I tried to do some work using my Canon 7D MKII after two years without using it. I was surprised to realize that it still performs as well as any new camera. I think this is a trend. Cameras will last longer and even older models will continue to be very relevant.
Another kind of extreme example of that is the fact that we still shoot film today, with cameras made in the 50's; at least i do and with great results.
I have an old Canon 7D mark 1 as a back up camera. Still works fine. I’ve even showed people how that camera made in 2009 has face detection autofocus built into it. Just go into live view mode and select it.
I totally agree with everything you said above. If I shoot a for a client with my 5D Mark III or IV with decent glass they won't be able tell the difference between that and the R5. Maybe I'll get more out of focus photos but then again the client won't know. My only issue is that I love new things and I want the R5 II and the R1 but I don't need them.
Well best of luck in hoping Canon and others will give in to the once every 10 year upgrade thought process. While I think lifespans should be at least a few years, their shareholders will require better performance. If we all stop buying cameras in a declining industry, expect the rumors of subscriptions to get updates to become true, or worse for manufacturers to stop making cameras in the first place. If either happens, you better hope the camera you love will last you a lifetime.
Welcome to the camera community where people will always complain about something. Listen if you need all the latest specs to shoot, then you're not a real photographer or videographer. These people want the camera to do all the work because they lack the skill to operate a camera. If you hand these people a camera from even 4yrs ago they won't even know what to do
@@jrt2792..and last long...because I don't buy a new one every two or three years Fact is, most people don't have a clue all the things their current camera can do, and will never learn. I know a pretty good photographer with the latest technological marvel and he shoots everything in manual, doesn't use the rear LCD, doesn't use or know how to use subject tracking, uses single shot for everything, and single point, manual focusing! I swear! I have asked him why he paid six grand when he could get by with a ten year old DSLR? His answer? He wants the latest! Ok! 😂
Yawn. Nike makes Air Jordans so they can make money not to help him and a few others play better. Canon makes cameras for professionals AND everyone else buying cameras. Canon has been saying for the last couple years they expect their growth to come more from the advanced amateurs than from the pro market. You tube content creators is perhaps one of their largest targets. Suggesting only "artists" are buying cameras is pure folly. Canon - like Nike - needs its Michael Jordans but the reality is they need everyone else to stay in the game. Digital camera sales have dropped about 92% in the last 15 years but are making a comeback (9.3% increase ILC from 2023 to 2024 ytd). Canon needs every sale it can get and it will take more than brand loyalty to get them.
@@bubbajones5905 because what they think is to capture the moment as soon as possible, and as quickly as possible, there's no time for settings and such
I’m in the same boat. My R5 and R6 are both great and no need to upgrade anytime soon. That’s coming from my first digital camera Canon 20D in early 2006.
I was thinking the same thing and waffling on the purchase. I was really sold after it arrived. For myself as a sports and wildlife shooter the pre-capture and autofocus is well worth the cost of entry. For sports (I shoot a lot of soccer) the predictive AI makes the AF without peer. The R5II is crushing my R3 for shooting sports. The camera is tracking my intended subject before I can consider framing. As an occasional macro shooter the focus stacking with flash (finally!) is a very nice addition. You may not be wrong for you. Ultimately it depends on what you shoot.
@@SteveSSBB thanks for the input! I also shoot a lot of soccer/football with the R5 and EF 400 f/2.8 II. I wish I could shoot anti-flicker with electronic as my main high school still has those horrendous old cycling lights.
A lot of tech has reached a plateau. What exactly is left to innovate on a full-frame camera? 8k video, eye-detect AF, 40-50Mp, 40fps, flip-out screens ..etc. I still shoot a 5D mk1 "classic" (that cost 3x the price of an R5 mk2 if you factor in 19 years of inflation). What do consumers want?
Another truth is that Manny isn't as much of a photographer as he is an opportunist with high end camera gear showing off the pretty ladies from his tinder contacts. Dude took the whole 'sex sells' to a new level.
Thanks Manny, I would say this trend is not only related to camera, you can also notice that onto smartphone market. Seriously each year, New iPhone /Samsung Galaxy is released but there is no major changes, i'm wondering Just why are they going on that way ! As you keep your Z6 or Canon R5, you can also keep you iPhone 13/14.. Or Samsung s23 ultra, don't need to spend all your money with latest model, it won't make you a better photographer!
The sensor in the Z5 (old D750 sensor) has more dynamic range at ISO 100 than any Z6 sensor to date, though all the Z6 sensors are better at ISOs above 800, have less noise at higher ISOs, and faster readouts. Still, if you just need a good sensor for general purpose photography at lower ISOs, the 10+ year old Z5 sensor is as good as any new sensor. Advancements have been made, but not across the board.
Thank Manny for starting a discussion with this video. I don’t care about innovation. I just need PRACTICAL features that make my filmaking EASIER and FASTER. It's SAD that these days camera manufacturers justify their price raise by adding flashy but impractical features. For example how many people actually shoot in 8K? If you check the RUclips videos of all the professionals, I'm sure it's 5 percent or lower. Why? First, it's because your camera will overheats very quickly including the Canon R5 II. That's why they sell the cooling grip. Does the cooling grip work? We don't know because it has not been released yet. Second, you'll have to buy more data storage and and a more powerful desktop (Mac or Intel). If you watch RUclips videos of the professionals who try to edit 8K videos on their laptops (both Mac & Intel), you'll see they don't work properly. Third, do your customers really see the difference in 8K video? How many of them has an 8K monitor? And last, imagine you said to your customer "I have to charge you more because I've shot and edit your video in 8K." Will they take it? Why don't Sony & Canon add 32 bit float audio recording to their camera just like Panasonic Lumix GH7? It will help the majority of camera users who are solo shooters. All the pros know audio is worth 50% of their videos. If the audio is bad, then the videos are useless.
The 32-bit float audio system will cost you more than a Canon EOS R5. Just upgrade DAC inside camera is useless. If you need 32-bit float audio, you must need to upgrade your microphones and signal lines.
The reality is that the performance of the top Canon (R3/R1), Nikon (Z8/Z9) and Sony (a1/a9III) cameras are so close to be irrelevant. The value lies in the lenses, native, 3rd party and adapted lenses.
I switched to Sony when I went mirrorless (from the Nikon D850). I only went to Sony for the lenses that were available at the time. I'm still shooting the A7iv and have no intentions of 'upgrading' in the near future because it does everything I need. For lenses Sony is still the best choice out there. I have no regrets and can't see me moving from Sony unless something massively changes.
@@antwilk1981 to me the only 3 Sony lenses I find slightly superior to their Nikon Z counter parts is the 50mm f1.2 GM (only because it is more compact), 35mm f1.4 GM (until Nikon finally releases their 35mm f1.2 S) and 300mm f2.8 (but I find a 100/120-300mm f2.8 way more useful than a fixed 300mm f2.8, be it very light). For the rest I prefer the Nikon line up and I can adapt any Sony FE mount on my Nikon bodies with near native AF. Huge advantage.
@@bernardlanguillier65 forgot that one. One thing that has surprised me is sticking with a basic flip out screen. I hated the one on my A7iv. It would have to be a very special camera to make me buy one with that type of screen again. I much prefer the one on my A1 and the Z9 Z8 A9MKiii A7RV have even better screens. I some like the flip out which is why Sony's newest screens are the best as they offer both.
To the individual that originally left that comment on Manny's page about Canon: People that complain incessantly about "no innovation" are simply full of hot air and love to hear themselves speak. Here's a great idea. If you know "how" to innovate new features in upcoming camera bodies instead of just flapping your gums, then do it. Apply for a job at Canon if you're a next level genius, and prove all the engineers wrong. Until then, just learn to take better photos and stop expecting the camera to do all the work for you.
I have a background in engineering, and it always makes me laugh when people ask for all the features with no compromises. We call that "unobtainium." There are limits to the technology and tradeoffs to acheive certain features. Not only that, it takes a lot of time, effort, and money to come up with something truly novel. Expecting mind-blowing performance or feature increases every few years is entitlement. Manny's spot on - we're really only going to see incremental updates and iteration as the current technology gets pushed to it's theoretical limit. Until something ground-breaking happens, this is the state of the industry and technology advancement we should expect to see for a while.
What's so wild to me, as an R3 user is that the R1 probably has the best autofocus ever on any interchangeable lens camera, definitely the best ever on a Canon, as well as the fastest sensor readout on a rolling shutter so far, yet 90% of fhe comments I've seen about it are negative. If someone asked myself or any other wildlife or sports photographer I know if they wanted a camera that would give them a better hit rate and keeper percentage than anything previously from Canon, the answer would be yes, without even worrying about the other specs. The problem is so many people built up their own fantasy expectations of what they wanted the camera to be, without considering that they were never rhe target audience. Unfortunately it's not surprising, in almost every industry now, so many newly released products are hit with waves of negativity on forums and even in actual reviews by people who will never buy these things or use them for fheir intended purpose.
One thing to keep in mind is that innovation is not simple, or cheap. Otherwise, every camera manufacturer (or any tech company) would create revolutionary products every year. People forget that R&D is expensive and doesn't even necessarily lead to workable products. All of this to say, that canon and others are not lazy. They are trying hard, but results take time and money
The name of the game now in the camera world is “how much of our top technology can we shove into our lower level bodies and still keep the price low?” For us consumers that is fantastic since it makes prices more competitive for great cameras
Honestly I feel like Leica and Fuji figured this out early: don't even bother innovating, even if you're worse than other brands in most ways; just focus on user experience and desirability. Appealing to the new features bleeding edge tech crowd is pretty much a guaranteed way to disappoint in the long run.
But you're wrong though, it's very possible the a7R VI will have a stacked 61MP sensor. The Mk IV/V of that camera is already BSI 61MP, and that sensor hasn't changed since 2019. It would be very reasonable to see them go stacked sometime late next year or early 2026.
@@Wildridefilms I agree. They may beef up the mp for the a1mkii and add the global shutter from the a9iii while making improvements. BUT that may cannibalize their R series
@@mr.j5526 I don't see them increasing the MP on the A1ii as it is meant to be a hybrid and it is already an 8k sensor. They'll probably make it a GS sensor and make it capable of 8k60p.
@@Wildridefilms it does depend on the exact configuration of the stacked sensor, if they actually increase the photodiode volume, it will be more dynamic range which is typically how that works in smaller sensors, but so far most FF stacked sensors have gone for purely speed focused tradeoffs. Also a lot of the stacked sensor cameras that we've seen (Z8/Z9) do not have mechanical shutters which hurts dynamic range because you don't get as clean of a reset at the beginning of the frame. Point being, it's not that simple, it doesn't have to be a zero-sum tradeoff.
No one ever complained about the printer side of photography. I am a print preferred person. 20 some years ago, 6 Mega pixels were good enough for a normal full page 8 1/2 x 11 print. Today, the printer resolution is the same as 20 some years ago. Why are people so crazy about high Mega pixel count? How often did they make a big print to justify their complaints about the camera's resolution. And why the phone makers put a 2 Mega pixel camera along with their high Mega pixel camera?
No innovation ??? someone needs to try the new Canon R5 Mk2, the focus is truly stunning, 8k stabilised video The problem is the public, as they think they want a 300MP Sensor with 20 stops of dynamic range and Focus that always captures what you are thinking about and all for $400. The reality is that cameras are designed to take photographs at a price point, which last many years, weatherproof etc. We should be grateful for what are truly stunning pieces of technology !!
True, also people complain too much for everything. These modern cameras are so capable of capturing amazing photographs. Some people take photos, some people talk about gear.
Im happy to use my old A6000, XT3 and 70s OM1. I work full time as a professional, and I perform regardless of whats in my hand. Far too many people spending 4k on a set up to post to 1080p compressed reels. Spec sheet warriors often know more about numbers than actually running a camera. Its so exhausting and I teach a lot of shooters pitfalls that new cameras still dont prevent.
Manny, not sure if I agree with you. The advent of mirrorless cameras has brought about significant levels of new features and improvements. I use the Nikon Z9(s) for sports and action and the X2D for most other things. I think both of these cameras have made significant improvements over their predecessors. In fact, I don't really see where improvements are coming from since these cameras are so packed with features and capability and I don't use half what's in them. I am not a big believer in AI generated images. I mean, if your going to let AI perform your work, why even bother owning a camera. I avoid using AI in post production because I want my images to me mine not some engineers and if you need AI you are not developing your own aesthetic. Well that's my take - admittedly it's a personal perspective and might be flawed but as an older guy that's how I see it. Always enjoy listening to you and thanks for putting your thoughts online - kinda risky these days.
It's insane how GOOD the cameras have gotten in terms of technical specs. I always see "pro photogs" spew out the pamphlet specs and it is cooool but at the same time, talking about specs is not photography. It's amazing to see how far cameras have come from just 15 years ago.
What it comes down to is the tech is so good across every manufacturer that we’re seeing a real separation of great photographers and everyone else in different ways now. There seems to be an infinite number of mid photographers out there who can pick up a new camera and get in-focus subjects and a decent exposure using exposure sim but are completely lost on the fundamentals and artistic choices that make truly great photos, it’s pretty sad if you ask me.
@Mike1984-lc9rh 😂 that’s a little extreme and to be honest, the Hasselblad X2D-100c makes the Sony A7RV look terrible by comparison! Especially in large format. But both the A7RV and the R1 can photo stack and get more resolution.
You do know that modern phones are in excess of 48 mega pixels and even have attachable lens. Apple ran a very successful ad campaign with photos on freeway billboards the size of buildings simply saying shot on an iPhone. The whole reason so many people are having a melt down on Canon’s latest products, is it leaves many feeling that Camera progression has peaked and we may be seeing the end of the camera industry as we know it. I applaud companies that are continuing to spend in R&D and innovate. You have to ask yourself would Canon even made an R5 if it was not for Sony making Mirrorless so good? No, they would not and we would like be on the 5d mk whatever with incremental enhancements. While some may be ok eating the same Luke warm oatmeal everyday, I prefer to have some choices. I value a free market economy with competition and the luxury of options and applaud the pundits that have risked their own wallet by making the largest camera manufacturer mad by being honest. Sure some will hop on the bandwagon, but there are some very good and appear to be honest reviews that are not going to have the Canon money truck visiting them any time soon.
Hi Manny, Good topic to discuss. One man’s own opinion I would like to add on to what you’ve shared in this video into two-fold: 1) higher expectations and/or change is constant and permanent. Otherwise the belief is that it becomes irrelevant/obsolete. For example, movie industry sets the gold standards and shoots in 2K resolution while camera companies are pushing 4K (now 8K, 12K, and so on) to consumers. So when cameras release new cameras with less than 4K, consumers are not happy. Their expectations has been set and/or influence that they need it to create, while paid professionals are not needing it to create. Nice to have, but not necessary (as an example). What needs to be understood is that technology disruption happens once in a while and then there’s incremental enhancement thereafter. See Apple first iphone. It was disruptive. Thereafter it’s incremental enhancement as it is expensive to make silicon chips and takes time to iron out and release fully functional and finished products. As well as it takes a lot of time, R&D work, and money/investments. And consumer expectations come without these perspectives. Smartphone computing power today has surpassed the computing used on Apollo 11 that was used to land on the moon. And yet the general mass consumers want more and barely use more than 10-30% of it, minus the power users. 2) marketing and business performance pressures forces these higher expectations by doing yearly releases to compete, make good returns, and gain market share. But in reality consumers will probably buy and/or upgrade every 3-5yrs or so. The pros who get paid and photography and videography/cinema work can rationalize yearly upgrades.
If anyone studies how cars are made, you learn that cars need to be APPROVED to be made. This is to prevent disruption of the market. The canon R5 is a camera that completely disrupted the market, and it has made every camera that has been released since then, basically rendered subpar. It's difficult to improve on near perfection. The only problems the camera has is usability. Overheating, Ibis wobble, etc.... An improvement over that camera would've been the same specs, but in a much more reliable state. Advancement of cameras is changing. I don't think it's any longer about resolution and frame rates. The R5 came out in 2020.... 4 years ago.... And only FLAGSHIPS have barely been beat this camera.
99% of photographers don't need over half the tech cameras come with now but global shutter will be awesome for photographers once some kinks are worked out.
This is absolutely not true. When taking a photograph of a hockey player hitting the puck, a baseball player swinging a bat, or the most infamous - a golfer swinging a golf club, a standard photograph will show the "stick, bat, golf club" as curving due to the slow readout of a standard stacked sensor. This is 100% eliminated by a global shutter, so this is actually a factually incorrect statement.
Here’s something funny to think about that I explained to someone else. All mirrorless SLR technology is, is the merger of the SLR with the Point and Shoot digital cameras. That’s all Sony did was take the technology from a digital point and shoot, and made it so photographers could attach a larger optical lens to it. When you stop and think about point and shoot cameras, they had an Electronic viewfinder because they had to have one because after the optical zoom ran out, you’d be on digital zoom which required an EVF. Phase detection was in most digital point and shoot cameras because they couldn’t use the same AF in DSLR’s and the list goes on and on. But that’s all mirrorless technology really is!
@@TigerWould2 Most digital point and shoot cameras only had contrast detection AF, which gave them the reputation of being slow focusing and hopeless for tracking AF. What made mirrorless cameras a practical replacement for DSLRs was (1) high-speed, high-resolution OLED displays (my DVD camcorder had 200k pixels; modern EVFs have 6 times more), and (2) PDAF which made tracking fast action and sports practical.
I don’t understand people that complain and are so negative about the current camera models from all the main camera companies - they’re all fantastic. There are currently no bad cameras, they all produce amazing images and video. Compared to 10 or 20 years ago, all contemporary imaging technologies are truly amazing. Stop whining and shoot.
Fast sensor readout directly leads to fast/accurate autofocus and high refresh rate viewfinders. Mirrorless cameras are video cameras that happen to be able to take single frames.
i feel like your vids were at a peak about 2 years ago creatively. lately they felt different. i still enjoy but the vibes changed a bit. would love to see you just filming shoots and showing what you do
I think this "problem" of a little upgrade on the R5 mkII is brought by a loud minority on RUclips and forums who are more interested in gear specs than taking photos with a huge problem of FOMO. To me, it's not even a subject, if no upgrade in the MKII interests you, don't buy the new one, the R5 is still one of the best cameras on the market.
Imagine I literally looked on your page this morning and thought “manny hasn’t uploaded in a while.. I wonder if he’s feeling the burnout like me” then you just uploaded 😂👍🏾
I think people complain too much. Cameras and lenses today are so much better than even 5-6 years ago. Autofocus is getting close to 100% hit rate, even when shooting fast action. Even $200 cheap Chinese lenses are very good.
Amen. Gosh, look back at the 60s and 70s film camera era. Improvements were incremental, with TTL metering being one of the truly big improvements in the late 60s. Then in the early 70s, electronics got practical and affordable, then suddenly everyone is moving to electric shutter speed controls and the introduction of Aperture priority modes. Then... years of refining that till Minolta added Program mode with the X700, and everyone tinkered with that until Minolta figured out in-body autofocus, and then another big flurry of consolidation. The cameras of the 90s saw a terrible price battle that ruined camera quality because, for a decade, there was little practical innovation while digital was worked out behind the scenes (and was costly as heck). Then we got on another roller-coaster for a good 15 years, and now things are consolidating again. We keep mistaking the wild years as the *normal* status, when instead what's normal is years of stability, with only occasional flurries of rapid improvements.
I can’t believe you didn’t mention Lumix. They got 32 bit float, Arri Log in camera, shutter angle, any desqueeze you need, false color, Pro Res and Pro Res Raw in camera, vectorscopes, all in camera in a mirrorless body. Nobody brings as much to the table as Lumix when it comes to hybrids.
and at a price that the competition can't come close to either. Hell their normal L mount f1.8 lenses are what dreams are made of, all the same size and weight so that you don't have to re-balance a gimbal during a video shoot when you swap anything from a 18mm to 85mm lens and the 105 is only a slight bit different
100% facts. We as photographers are pretty spoiled with the current gear from all of the Camera companies out there. I ordered the R5ii as well as the R1 (for Sports purposes). Unless something absolutely mind blowing and Workflow altering comes out, there after, those are the last 2 cameras I plan to purchase for the foreseeable future (unless one breaks). The current climate is “Stat chasers” it seems. As long as the camera can fulfill your needs comfortably, why cry about what it DOESNT have? 🤷🏾♂️
People are spoiled. Next, they will want cameras to take the pictures for them. Photographers used to be required to have an eye and talent. Now, anyone can jump in...
It's not just cameras. Take a look at smartphones. We may not be getting huge leaps of improvement but now is the time where we will be getting into cheap cameras that are good and good cameras that will get cheap.
Stagnation of innovation for years? What are you guys even talking about?! Backlit Sensors, enormous sensor sizes with an unbelievable noise ratio, image stabilization, Dual ISO, internal RAW video, video quality that rivals the big players, afordable and super powerful high speed flash systems, battery powered COB lighting, IBIS... and the list goes on. This is the stuff we would have dreamed about 10 years ago!
Here is an idea: All cameras must have a motor to vibrate, especially for long lenses... And in combination with the lens VR to vibrate even more. This is for people that complain, so they can duck themselves!
I don’t know what people want. Today’s cameras are very good. Everyone can take a technically good photo. People want a camera that can take pictures for them while they are just sitting there?
This strikes me as a strawman response. I have not heard any complaints about the R5 Mark II, nor do I see anything but innovation. What are people missing that it doesn't have? It has the best AF on the planet (according to some who have used it), eye control, stacked sensor, and they didn't even move/eliminate any dials.
I’ve been talking to other photographers about this for the last 4 years. For most photographers who work professionally, any camera brand can give you the results your clients want. In fact, camera brands Canon and Nikon allowed other brands to catch up to them many years ago. We see the same things happening with other tech: wireless mics, cell phones, flashes etc…
I would love to see the implementation of some type of security features placed into camera bodies that will help discourage theft. At least on the higher end models if not all.
I do not update a camera for at least 5 years, and the upgrade then always matters. Meanwhile, I'll be enjoying my R7 and R6 mkII while others stress about what they think ought to be. I just want to get out and shoot, but darn my day job!
If someone complains and is so dissatisfied even with the camera like canon R5 Mark 2 it’s outside of adequacy and outside of rationality, it’s a mental disease. It has nothing to do with photography or with a camera’s capacity. I know people who take award winning photos with a 15 years old beginner camera canon 600D, I know people who take garbage pictures with flagship cameras. It’s all about the head not about a camera.
I think you're absolutely right. It's not just the camera space. Gaming, cell phones, cars, TVs... almost everywhere you look in tech or tech related products... there is stagnation. especially when many of these companies try to release tech every year or every other year. It's not enough time in most cases to make a giant leap. I think we as consumers are spoiled in many cases. Canon has spent the last few years beefing out their RF lineup, and constantly releasing solid cameras at every price point.
The good thing about times of stagnation and little innovation is that it allows beginners a big window to enter the field. You can get a high quality camera for non-premium price.
The biggest reason why people complain about lack of innovation is that they think they can buy their way to great photos. 99% of the world's greatest tphotographs were done with tecnically 'inferior' gear compared to today. Many of them are still better than today's efforts. Still, people bitch and moan to hide their lack of skill and/or creativity. The art, the craft, the thinking, the philosophy behind how you do what you do is HARD and takes years, and a maturity most people don't have. The cheapest, most useful camera is the one you take 1000s & 1000s of photos on every year.
Camera technology is at a stage of incremental improvements for all major manufacturers for several years now. My opinion is the with any camera from a major manufacturer it's the meatsack behind the camera that is critical not the gear.
I'm very impressed with the new R1's ball and face recognition for sports, and the Z63's 6K/120 video. Image quality is so high for all the top brands, it's coming down to what tool you need to do the best work in your field of photography or videography.
I have a z8 and can safely say it won’t need replacing for years even with the arrival of a mkii. The small steps with each generation of camera are all that’s needed and you wait until there’s something you need.
There are still many areas the respective camera companies can improve/add features but seem unwilling to. Zebras in photo mode for Canon & Nikon. Fully articulating screen to tilt and flip out for Canon & Nikon. Real joystick instead of a little nub and option to change af point movement speed for Sony.
In next few years people may expect camera to go itself and have shoot done, come back and deliver the edited images or videos to them, and drop message to client for payment😂😂
5:48 I don’t believe Global shutters are the new wave. I think this will be forced on us, but it won’t make things better for us photographers. Global shutters are great for video! The only photographers that can say global shutters are good for them is bird wildlife /sports photographers (that’s 1-2% of photographers). There’s no other benefits to having it. And as for flash technology, there’s no where to go with that either. But a leaf shutter on a stack BSI medium format camera has better performance than a global shutter sensor. That’s not me bashing, it’s just a fact (part of the reason is because most medium format cameras have 16bit color).
We are now in stage where film cameras were - you have a mature system with most of the tech increments are now in the workflow/ui/interface. We are now in a 4/5 year product cycle.
Still shoot CANON - I have NEVER bailed. They never fail me. My 5Ds of old and now my R5 -yes it overheated in video at first but they fixed that. Canon plays the long game and I am here. I only wish I could get a photo centric R5 with no AA filter like an R5R That would be a dream but the r5ii is WAY better than people realize. The 50mm 1.2 RF is still the BEST 3d pop ive ever seen from modern Canon and rarely leaves my R5
Bunch a nonsense…current cameras show 12Stops of dynamic range max, the human eye can do 20-22…lets maybe try and reach that threshold first before we say „theres nothing more to improve upon“… also, z6iii: internal 6k60 raw for that price with af and Ibis for THAT Price? That in my book IS meaningful innovation, also Canons „Action Prio“ Autofocus fills the same requirement… i believe people need to stop complaining so much about everything, we are so blessed these days.
A lot of thank yous here, but mostly, thank you for not taking my comment as a personal attack to you as a creator bc it wasn't. Also, you making this video has increased my respect for you, which you already had as I have supported this channel for many years. And I agree with you, we have been spoiled for years, and was probably expecting more for these camera models, which are already very good.
Agree, I'm looking forward to security features. Just an FYI because i know how to do this, I've disassemble an Airtag so it can fit into my Sony and wired it to the camera battery so as long as the camera has a battery in it (on or off) i will be able to locate the camera. Yes PPA/home insurance is good but i just want that added insurance. I just wish i could Airtag my lenses but I'm not confident in disassembling/reassembling a $2k+ lens.
I do not agree that Global Shutter is an innovative feature, because Canon already had this technology in the Cinema EOS C700 series. The question is whether Canon is willing to incorporate this feature into their mirrorless camera series.
It’s amazing how people rail hard on canon constantly, saying they whip out the cripple hammer, while praising Sony as they artificially limit the fps of their cameras to 10 compressed fps unless you pay well over $4k. Canon allows high fps in their cameras that are thousands of dollars less than Sony. Sony also artificially limits third party lenses to 15fps. That’s a huuuuuuge cripple hammer. But since almost none of their cameras go above 10fps, it doesn’t affect most users. That’s still a bad look and move that people overlook when talking about the different companies.
Like golf clubs... don't make the mistake of thinking better equipment is the key to everything. The latest and greatest can make a difference at the margins for experts but probably isn't needed for beginners and hobbyists.
OMG try selling that concept to Callaway, Cobra, Titleist etc. The golf industry is well over 150 BILLION a year (vs about 9 billion for Cameras). Humans more often make purchases based on their emotions than their true needs. We could all still be using flip phones right? Does not mean we want to.
It's a major innovation. Not many photographers need stacked sensors, massive resolution, CF Express style slots, HSS, advanced network features, etc. Yet, these are still innovations and majorly benefit those who do need it. Global shutter is just getting started.
i hate that people complain about video features, it's a photo camera that can do video, now the makers focus on video more than photography and we could have much better photo camera if they focus on photography again for a bit.
Great response to the question Manny. When you talked bout Image Quality only, I still like my Canon 5D Mark IV, yes the R5 is great and has a lot of new features, especially image stabilization and improved auto focus but dam, I look back at some of my 5D Mark IV images and actually still think there great. Personally I think Canon did a great job with the R5 Mark II, like you said the R5 is a great camera and didn't need big changes to begin with. It doesn't need a thousand megapixels or a global shutter IMO. Canon improved on some of the things that people wanted, like a full size HDMI port, I can't believe how many people I have heard bitch about a port that I swear 90% of people probably don't care about. Due to a shaky financial market, I can see why a lot of camera manufactures are not going all out at the moment and investing funds into research and development, maybe they have been looking into the crystal ball 🔮😂
Honestly I don’t know how much more people expect companies to push cameras. Anything from the past 10 years is good enough to make high quality photos. The cameras these days basically do the job for you. 80% of these people complaining don’t even print their work so in my opinion if all you’re work is just on a digital screen all these upgrades don’t even matter. A complete waste of money if you aren’t printing.
Ask Intel, Blackberry, blockbuster, or any other rockstar product/service companies that dominated an industry why the hype is important. Perception can and does become reality even for number one. Thomas Paine said it best back in the 1770s (not Lee Iacocca) - you either Lead, Follow, or get out of the way. Canon is still a great product, but many are worried that their future is in jeopardy by the industry, competition, the global economy as a whole, and Canon’s strategy to combat them. Canon depends on mass appeal of cameras by pros and enthusiasts alike. Without wide acceptance of their products, they will decline. So while the haters are indeed generating a lot of negative energy, Canon would be most unwise not to listen.
Эти конкуренты, о которых вы пишите, пока что проигрывают почти по всем показателям камерам Canon! А пользователи других брендов переживают, что камеры Canon лучше, чем их камеры. Отсюда и желчь! 😀
This was a very helpful commentary for me, as a newb, just learning and not wanting to get caught up in the arms race of which camera is going to be better. It basically allows me to research and select a current or recently produced camera that has the functions and capability I think I need, and not worry about what’s coming next. Hopefully it will just allow me to learn what I’m doing better, and the camera I have/get instead of holding off for the next best thing coming down the road, that maybe won’t really be any better
Where can cameras go from here to innovate though? All of these cameras are so dang good. Refinements. Yes. I just don’t think there’s much to innovate on. We all want a 18 stop DR sensor but let’s get real.
You are so right Manny There is very few new features that can be added to most high end and enthusiast cameras now. Its like Microsoft Word or Excel or Windows there is nothing they can add. So all they can do it tweak the UI with nice menus and icons etc. As an older guy I 'd like to see A two tiered menu system. One is the menu we have now Two is a stripped down simple menu system with way less options to wade through And of course better connectivity to our phones and the internet
Well said Manny. I feel that cameras are just getting gimmicky these days. I used to shoot full fame but changed to m43 4 years ago for my travel needs. I was almost thinking of switching back but out of curiosity I used my Vizio 4k and viewed pics I took in Europe with my E-M1 mkii (an 8 year old model) and was convinced I do not need another camera or lens. The improvements to me are no longer valued and I prefer to travel with my money than spend it on gear I really don't need. Sorry manufacturers...when my camera breaks I buy another.
canon has its principal, u can tell from their mirrorless line, their appearances look just like their DSLRs, they refuse to go the direction other manufacturers are going for a compact, retro, smaller bodies, Canon is the leader not followers...if it isnt broken, dont fix it...
People forget that Canon invented the modern body design starting with the T-90. Everyone else followed suit, well except Sony that wanted a sharp edged box that cuts into your hands.
I'm not sure I get the arguments/hate against "Trickle Down Tech". To me that seems like how most consumer electronics work. Halo/Flagship product gets new features like stacked/back-illuminated sensor, eye-controlled-focus, connectivity, sensor speed, more controls, customization, better storage options, etc... Then new lower tier products eventually get those improvements as well. There are multiple tiers Pro, Prosumer, Enthusiast, Consumer, etc... and there's some trickle down within that as well. Who is complaining about lower tier products eventually receiving features that originated on higher tier products? I wouldn't think it's the people buying those lower tier cameras? IMO it's camera geeks and pundits that seem upset when a new camera, one they likely won't even use and isn't aimed at them, doesn't meet their expectations.
Long time Canon user here. Since 2012, I've had a T2i, C100's, C200's, 5D Mark III, and I've used EF glass on my R6 and 2 GH5s' (M4/3 sensors mind you) for the past 4 years. I will finally be switching to Sony completely to revamp my ecosystem. There has been great innovation in camera tech these past few years from all brands. What I'm looking for is reliability and value. When I see Sony allowing fantastic 3rd party lenses (like Sigma) for their cameras, along with autofocus implementation across photo/video, it's a no brainer where the value is going forward. Canon makes fantastic cameras, but I want more value lens options going forward, and confining their ecosystem is getting me to jump ship.
This, but also Sony is just ahead in terms of sensors (not the global shutter, just all the other stuff). Their usability still sucks a bit, but if it gets you the shot that you want, then that's all that really matters? I've been hoping, crossing my fingers that Canon could bring something that caught up and then some, but they just didn't. They barely caught up to aging models from everyone else.
@@JMurph2015it’s interesting that you think canon hasn’t caught up. The only thing missing in the R5 mark 1 was a stacked sensor. Had it had a stacked sensor when it was initially released, it would have beat the Sony A1 and Nikon Z9 at a Fraction of the cost of both of those models. The only argument for the R1 is the megapixel count that contributes to the camera not having 8K (or 12k). Outside of a high megapixel and 8k for the R1, what else could people want? Global shutter? Pros aren’t really buying Sonys a9 iii and the people who purchased the A1 are staying put! Only those who have a huge disposable income are buying the a9 iii. So basically with the Canon R5 mark II, you have a camera that’s now better than the Sony A1 and Nikon Z9 capabilities, but costs less. Both of those cameras are flagship cameras! Yes they might have more capabilities when the mark II versions come out, but are either one of those camera going to have eye autofocus? Or be in the same price range as the R5 mark II or will those cameras cost $5,500 and $6,500 respectively with slightly better performance that’s not noticeable?
@@TigerWould2 the R5ii's sensor is twice as slow as the Z8/Z9, has worse DR than those two, and is substantially lower MP than the equivalent Sony camera (a7R). The R5 Mk 1 quietly had a 2/3 of a stop DR disadvantage to almost every other similar camera, only masked by Canon applying baked-in NR to the RAWs. It is quite conceivable (I won't say that it's definitely going to happen though) that the next a7R has a stacked sensor that reads out faster than the R5ii, but is also 61MP with similar or better DR to the current stuff.
I came from r5 and r8. I was bothered by their L series lens for the RF mount for a while. Not only they are priced very high, but also massive. The last straw was 1 month ago when I went for a trip, I carried my Canon with 15-35L, and 50L 1.2. I ended up leaving all at the hotel and brought my fuji xt1 with tt artisan 27mm with me everywhere instead. Went back home, questioning my decisions and finally braved myself to sell all my Canon gear and moved to Sony. Not only that their lenses are great, but abundant of choices and most importantly, small sizes, had me excited. So now I'm a happy owner of Sony a7cii+24mm f2.8G+55mm f1.8 zeiss+20mm G. They are all tiny and wonderful. I carry them all everywhere I go now, and it's a full frame quality on my disposal at any time. I can put it on the restaurant table without people staring. One stranger even thought I was carrying Leica (i used the silver grip and silver top plate version). Never going back again. Bye Canon, I only miss the ergonomic, but in the end what's the use if I leave it at the hotel/home.
@@torakun3573 Agreed. I feel the same way - Canon's lenses are big and heavy, and I'm starting to dislike using them. However, I've invested a lot in the L-lens and can't afford to take a big loss by switching to Sony.
Canon put out the first 8K mirrorless, and the first camera with 4k120.... before Sony and long before Nikon. Nikon basically just plays the copy/catch up game. The R5 II is now leading the industry in what it does and gives everybody what they've been wanting for years now. Global shutter offers way more negatives than it does positives. The z6III has nice specs for the price, but in real world it lags behind even the R6 II when it comes to autofocus and dynamic range and EVEN rolling shutter surprisingly (esp in 4k60 as Tony Northrup showed).
Serious talk from your south-end ^^ regarding most of what you say about the Nikon. Copying, really? Z6iii lagging R6ii in AF? Please, go and use the equipment and compare yourself before feeding the clickbait RUclipsrs. Go read Thom Hogan’s review of the z6iii and his comparison to Canon and Sony wrt the AF. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but man, so much misinformation.
I don’t get it why people expects to the companies to reinvent the wheel on each release. I’m assisting a top photographer here in Sweden. I’ve been there shooting Vouge covers etc. He uses a 8 year old Canon EOS 5D mark something. A 2015 MBP, 10 year old 100mm macro. But the images are SO GOOD and the sharpest I’ve ever seen. Was a really good wake up for me first session with him. What you can’t buy, is talent. And that’s what it’s all about.
I agree, technology had advanced enough to the point where old cameras are just as adequate as their newer counterparts. New cameras aren't that special when you're not really doing anything serious to justify the large purchase.
Totally agree. For all the people complaining about a lack of “innovation”, what images are you somehow not able to capture with the current cameras?
Absolutely!! My guess is that he was using the 5D Mark III. What a phenomenal camera! One of my biggest mistakes in life was to sell it for the EOS R. And the R was fine, but I should’ve stayed with the Mark III.
I agree with this. I’m a commercial and fashion photographer, for years I’ve shot with the Canon 7D mark I for fashion shoots, sporting events, weddings, etc… I can still use that camera and come out with amazing results. I have the Canon R5 mark I and I was considering getting the Mark II when I stopped and thought what shots am I missing with the mark I (and making this current one a backup camera to replace my old DSLR), when I stopped to think… what shots am I missing with the Canon R5 mark I? I can’t even justify a new camera. It’s not going to make my work better, it’s not going to change my work flow! It’s not going to help my innovation, it’s not going to give me anything except a new camera body with features I’ll forget to use. So it’s better to use that money elsewhere and focus on what I have. I’ve downsized to only 5 lenses and whenever I’ll need anymore, I can just rent them and keep it moving. I can speak for only myself, but at some point I almost started to lose the fact that this is art! That the reason I loved this is because I get to capture moments and see things from a different perspective, my perspective. That when I’ve captured an old army vet smiling at a surprise birthday party where all of his kids showed up to surprise him and he looked like that happiest man alive, was almost trumped by me worrying what camera I used to get that image. That’s crazy to me.
It's the only way these camera companies can stay in business. They need to market their latest cameras as something you must have. If every Canon user stopped purchashing cameras at the 5dmarkIII point in time. Canon would have gone bankrupted years ago.
Maybe it's time to stop talking about cameras and start talking about photography and videography. Let's create!
^nothing to add here, spot on comment!
Agreed - create versus describe features
But the camera shills youtubers that promote these new products won't get the perks and handouts from sony, canon and nikon. etc. And also the affliate link money so that's why most popular camera channels are about gear than the art itself.
aman
well said
Cameras have gotten so good. Tech has gotten so good in general. Phones, TVs, cameras, even video games…we’ve prioritized consumerism over innovation…releasing things every year. So it’s no wonder that people have become desensitized to new things. Just my opinion 🤷🏾♂️
no reason to add "just my opinion" we know.
Some people don't take them that way though, specification helps clarify for any of those people. @@mavfan1
This is true! The other thing is why would any company want to pay for innovation, because when a company does innovate most can’t receive it or don’t know what to do with it.
Yes we should all be using the pony express. Who in their right mind would make us succumb to airmail, fedex, faxes, pagers, email and now text messages. I am so angry now I have to handle 300+ emails a day (half of them are from Mikehunt’s comments btw ty Mike). Life would be grand if I just had to talk to a horse once a day than all this noise…
@@troypast3589no problem. Everyone needs to love MikeHunt! 😂
If you can not take a great photo with a 10 year old camera, then you are not going to take a great picture with a fancy pants one.
The hate on Canon is just tiresome. Many of the complaints are just ridiculous. I am just going to have to stop watching gear reviews. People wanted the R5mii to have 80mp, 12k video, with a global shutter that shoots 240fps electronic, 30 mechanical, with 16 bit, Clog2, with 20 stops of dynamic range at a price point of $3800. Ridiculous
A global shutter camera would not have a mechanical one 😉
@@kevincassar8022 I don't know if you understand sarcasm, but I was using it....
@@anthonyk27 nice try
Yeah I’ve honestly unsubscribed from most gear related channels. The only reason I’m responding to this one is because I had RUclips running in the background and needed to take a break from what I was doing. Same thing happened on another channel. It’s ridiculous and I don’t want to be apart of this stuff. I said in another thread when you host photography workshops is so ridiculous how people will go to those to talk about their gear and the brand they love.
@@kevincassar8022leaf shutter is just as effective as a global shutter in almost every aspect. Global shutter is just a marketing term when it comes to photography. Global shutter is more beneficial for video! So whether it has a mechanical shutter or not, it’s irrelevant.
I am beginning to see now why we invest in lenses first...camera bodies second....
Canon is realizing that too, which is EXACTLY why they don't want third parties selling R lenses! As more photographers are happy with what they have camera wise, lenses is where the profit is.
I think that photography as a profession has reached a point where a photographer needs to look within them and see if they have something to say. There are a hundred people who can take a picture of a flower, but only a few will take a picture that might look memorable in some way. The photographer as poet, or novelist, or historian, or philosopher has a chance to find an audience sufficient to build a living with a future. Without that "something extra", you're just working sandwich to sandwich.
The thing is, photographers don't care that much about the specs (especially since the last decade when it's more difficult to find a bad camera) they are more interested in taking photos.
@@nicolasletellier6162this is correct. The people who are arguing are NOT photographers, they are gearheads and this is the gear they choose to go over the top about. It’s like someone who owns a super computer and just surfs the internet with it. You have all that power at your fingertips and do nothing with it. Most people like that would be better suited with a point and shoot camera.
Saying only photographer should use or buy cameras is like saying only race car drivers need to buy cars. Canon, Nikon, and Sony ALL depend on camera sales to keep in the game. I can only imagine what cameras will become if they continue to lose buyers. No one will innovate and you will have no competition to choose from. Prices will be insane and more than likely many photographers will be forced to work for larger companies that are able to afford the gear. Would not be good regardless for the pros, and they have far more to lose than the whining enthusiasts. Think about it.
@@troypast3589 it sure if you’re addressing MikeHunt Troy. But if you are lemme know. MikeHunt can write out a long response and send you another email. Because that’s the MikeHunt way. 😂
@@troypast3589 insane prices are already happening--it's clearly Nikon's and Fuji's market strategy to move upmarket and abandon the entry level market. For now, Canon and Sony are still there, but time will tell if they find it sustainable.
I'm a Canon user. I like the idea of not having to change equipment with each new release. Because there are few differences between models. I bought a new camera (Canon R7) after almost 10 years. Last weekend I tried to do some work using my Canon 7D MKII after two years without using it. I was surprised to realize that it still performs as well as any new camera. I think this is a trend. Cameras will last longer and even older models will continue to be very relevant.
Another kind of extreme example of that is the fact that we still shoot film today, with cameras made in the 50's; at least i do and with great results.
@@wildechapthat’s awesome!
I have an old Canon 7D mark 1 as a back up camera. Still works fine. I’ve even showed people how that camera made in 2009 has face detection autofocus built into it. Just go into live view mode and select it.
I totally agree with everything you said above. If I shoot a for a client with my 5D Mark III or IV with decent glass they won't be able tell the difference between that and the R5. Maybe I'll get more out of focus photos but then again the client won't know. My only issue is that I love new things and I want the R5 II and the R1 but I don't need them.
Well best of luck in hoping Canon and others will give in to the once every 10 year upgrade thought process. While I think lifespans should be at least a few years, their shareholders will require better performance. If we all stop buying cameras in a declining industry, expect the rumors of subscriptions to get updates to become true, or worse for manufacturers to stop making cameras in the first place. If either happens, you better hope the camera you love will last you a lifetime.
Welcome to the camera community where people will always complain about something. Listen if you need all the latest specs to shoot, then you're not a real photographer or videographer. These people want the camera to do all the work because they lack the skill to operate a camera. If you hand these people a camera from even 4yrs ago they won't even know what to do
The only thing I want my camera to do is: function, autofocus quickly and last long on a single battery.
@@jrt2792..and last long...because I don't buy a new one every two or three years Fact is, most people don't have a clue all the things their current camera can do, and will never learn. I know a pretty good photographer with the latest technological marvel and he shoots everything in manual, doesn't use the rear LCD, doesn't use or know how to use subject tracking, uses single shot for everything, and single point, manual focusing! I swear! I have asked him why he paid six grand when he could get by with a ten year old DSLR? His answer? He wants the latest! Ok! 😂
Yawn. Nike makes Air Jordans so they can make money not to help him and a few others play better. Canon makes cameras for professionals AND everyone else buying cameras. Canon has been saying for the last couple years they expect their growth to come more from the advanced amateurs than from the pro market. You tube content creators is perhaps one of their largest targets. Suggesting only "artists" are buying cameras is pure folly. Canon - like Nike - needs its Michael Jordans but the reality is they need everyone else to stay in the game. Digital camera sales have dropped about 92% in the last 15 years but are making a comeback (9.3% increase ILC from 2023 to 2024 ytd). Canon needs every sale it can get and it will take more than brand loyalty to get them.
Photographers are now using a lot of electronic gadgetry to do what used to be done by technique. Is technology just making us dumb and lazy?
@@bubbajones5905 because what they think is to capture the moment as soon as possible, and as quickly as possible, there's no time for settings and such
I have an R5. If I was going to buy another camera, I would just buy another R5, not the Mk II.
I’m in the same boat. My R5 and R6 are both great and no need to upgrade anytime soon.
That’s coming from my first digital camera Canon 20D in early 2006.
@@derrickcleveland1681 My first DSLR was a D60 in 2002, and it was a lot of money.
I was thinking the same thing and waffling on the purchase. I was really sold after it arrived. For myself as a sports and wildlife shooter the pre-capture and autofocus is well worth the cost of entry. For sports (I shoot a lot of soccer) the predictive AI makes the AF without peer. The R5II is crushing my R3 for shooting sports. The camera is tracking my intended subject before I can consider framing. As an occasional macro shooter the focus stacking with flash (finally!) is a very nice addition. You may not be wrong for you. Ultimately it depends on what you shoot.
@@SteveSSBB It will make sense for some people, not others, I get that.
@@SteveSSBB thanks for the input! I also shoot a lot of soccer/football with the R5 and EF 400 f/2.8 II.
I wish I could shoot anti-flicker with electronic as my main high school still has those horrendous old cycling lights.
A lot of tech has reached a plateau. What exactly is left to innovate on a full-frame camera? 8k video, eye-detect AF, 40-50Mp, 40fps, flip-out screens ..etc.
I still shoot a 5D mk1 "classic" (that cost 3x the price of an R5 mk2 if you factor in 19 years of inflation).
What do consumers want?
Another truth is that Manny isn't as much of a photographer as he is an opportunist with high end camera gear showing off the pretty ladies from his tinder contacts. Dude took the whole 'sex sells' to a new level.
Thanks Manny, I would say this trend is not only related to camera, you can also notice that onto smartphone market.
Seriously each year, New iPhone /Samsung Galaxy is released but there is no major changes, i'm wondering Just why are they going on that way !
As you keep your Z6 or Canon R5, you can also keep you iPhone 13/14.. Or Samsung s23 ultra, don't need to spend all your money with latest model, it won't make you a better photographer!
The sensor in the Z5 (old D750 sensor) has more dynamic range at ISO 100 than any Z6 sensor to date, though all the Z6 sensors are better at ISOs above 800, have less noise at higher ISOs, and faster readouts. Still, if you just need a good sensor for general purpose photography at lower ISOs, the 10+ year old Z5 sensor is as good as any new sensor. Advancements have been made, but not across the board.
Thank Manny for starting a discussion with this video. I don’t care about innovation. I just need PRACTICAL features that make my filmaking EASIER and FASTER. It's SAD that these days camera manufacturers justify their price raise by adding flashy but impractical features. For example how many people actually shoot in 8K? If you check the RUclips videos of all the professionals, I'm sure it's 5 percent or lower. Why? First, it's because your camera will overheats very quickly including the Canon R5 II. That's why they sell the cooling grip. Does the cooling grip work? We don't know because it has not been released yet.
Second, you'll have to buy more data storage and and a more powerful desktop (Mac or Intel). If you watch RUclips videos of the professionals who try to edit 8K videos on their laptops (both Mac & Intel), you'll see they don't work properly.
Third, do your customers really see the difference in 8K video? How many of them has an 8K monitor?
And last, imagine you said to your customer "I have to charge you more because I've shot and edit your video in 8K." Will they take it?
Why don't Sony & Canon add 32 bit float audio recording to their camera just like Panasonic Lumix GH7? It will help the majority of camera users who are solo shooters. All the pros know audio is worth 50% of their videos. If the audio is bad, then the videos are useless.
The 32-bit float audio system will cost you more than a Canon EOS R5.
Just upgrade DAC inside camera is useless.
If you need 32-bit float audio, you must need to upgrade your microphones and signal lines.
The reality is that the performance of the top Canon (R3/R1), Nikon (Z8/Z9) and Sony (a1/a9III) cameras are so close to be irrelevant. The value lies in the lenses, native, 3rd party and adapted lenses.
I switched to Sony when I went mirrorless (from the Nikon D850). I only went to Sony for the lenses that were available at the time. I'm still shooting the A7iv and have no intentions of 'upgrading' in the near future because it does everything I need. For lenses Sony is still the best choice out there. I have no regrets and can't see me moving from Sony unless something massively changes.
@@antwilk1981 Sony is the best up to 200mm then Nikon take over . Canon have two unique lenses the 28-70 f2 and 100-300 f2.8
@@nickwilliams7867 their 24-105mm f2.8 is also unique. Nikon has a brilliant 120-300mm f2.8.
@@antwilk1981 to me the only 3 Sony lenses I find slightly superior to their Nikon Z counter parts is the 50mm f1.2 GM (only because it is more compact), 35mm f1.4 GM (until Nikon finally releases their 35mm f1.2 S) and 300mm f2.8 (but I find a 100/120-300mm f2.8 way more useful than a fixed 300mm f2.8, be it very light). For the rest I prefer the Nikon line up and I can adapt any Sony FE mount on my Nikon bodies with near native AF. Huge advantage.
@@bernardlanguillier65 forgot that one. One thing that has surprised me is sticking with a basic flip out screen. I hated the one on my A7iv. It would have to be a very special camera to make me buy one with that type of screen again. I much prefer the one on my A1 and the Z9 Z8 A9MKiii A7RV have even better screens. I some like the flip out which is why Sony's newest screens are the best as they offer both.
To the individual that originally left that comment on Manny's page about Canon: People that complain incessantly about "no innovation" are simply full of hot air and love to hear themselves speak. Here's a great idea. If you know "how" to innovate new features in upcoming camera bodies instead of just flapping your gums, then do it. Apply for a job at Canon if you're a next level genius, and prove all the engineers wrong. Until then, just learn to take better photos and stop expecting the camera to do all the work for you.
I have a background in engineering, and it always makes me laugh when people ask for all the features with no compromises. We call that "unobtainium." There are limits to the technology and tradeoffs to acheive certain features. Not only that, it takes a lot of time, effort, and money to come up with something truly novel. Expecting mind-blowing performance or feature increases every few years is entitlement. Manny's spot on - we're really only going to see incremental updates and iteration as the current technology gets pushed to it's theoretical limit. Until something ground-breaking happens, this is the state of the industry and technology advancement we should expect to see for a while.
What's so wild to me, as an R3 user is that the R1 probably has the best autofocus ever on any interchangeable lens camera, definitely the best ever on a Canon, as well as the fastest sensor readout on a rolling shutter so far, yet 90% of fhe comments I've seen about it are negative. If someone asked myself or any other wildlife or sports photographer I know if they wanted a camera that would give them a better hit rate and keeper percentage than anything previously from Canon, the answer would be yes, without even worrying about the other specs. The problem is so many people built up their own fantasy expectations of what they wanted the camera to be, without considering that they were never rhe target audience. Unfortunately it's not surprising, in almost every industry now, so many newly released products are hit with waves of negativity on forums and even in actual reviews by people who will never buy these things or use them for fheir intended purpose.
What is lacking, isn’t tech. It’s the photographer.
One thing to keep in mind is that innovation is not simple, or cheap. Otherwise, every camera manufacturer (or any tech company) would create revolutionary products every year. People forget that R&D is expensive and doesn't even necessarily lead to workable products.
All of this to say, that canon and others are not lazy. They are trying hard, but results take time and money
The name of the game now in the camera world is “how much of our top technology can we shove into our lower level bodies and still keep the price low?” For us consumers that is fantastic since it makes prices more competitive for great cameras
Honestly I feel like Leica and Fuji figured this out early: don't even bother innovating, even if you're worse than other brands in most ways; just focus on user experience and desirability. Appealing to the new features bleeding edge tech crowd is pretty much a guaranteed way to disappoint in the long run.
The ONLY innovation camera companies can do now is price. For example, a new Sony a7r6 for $2800. I know, cold day in hell😂😂😂
But you're wrong though, it's very possible the a7R VI will have a stacked 61MP sensor. The Mk IV/V of that camera is already BSI 61MP, and that sensor hasn't changed since 2019. It would be very reasonable to see them go stacked sometime late next year or early 2026.
@@JMurph2015 stacked sensors introduce noise and sacrifices DR. I doubt Sony would opt for a stacked sensor in their high resolution flagship.
@@Wildridefilms I agree. They may beef up the mp for the a1mkii and add the global shutter from the a9iii while making improvements. BUT that may cannibalize their R series
@@mr.j5526 I don't see them increasing the MP on the A1ii as it is meant to be a hybrid and it is already an 8k sensor. They'll probably make it a GS sensor and make it capable of 8k60p.
@@Wildridefilms it does depend on the exact configuration of the stacked sensor, if they actually increase the photodiode volume, it will be more dynamic range which is typically how that works in smaller sensors, but so far most FF stacked sensors have gone for purely speed focused tradeoffs. Also a lot of the stacked sensor cameras that we've seen (Z8/Z9) do not have mechanical shutters which hurts dynamic range because you don't get as clean of a reset at the beginning of the frame. Point being, it's not that simple, it doesn't have to be a zero-sum tradeoff.
No one ever complained about the printer side of photography. I am a print preferred person. 20 some years ago, 6 Mega pixels were good enough for a normal full page 8 1/2 x 11 print. Today, the printer resolution is the same as 20 some years ago. Why are people so crazy about high Mega pixel count? How often did they make a big print to justify their complaints about the camera's resolution. And why the phone makers put a 2 Mega pixel camera along with their high Mega pixel camera?
No innovation ??? someone needs to try the new Canon R5 Mk2, the focus is truly stunning, 8k stabilised video The problem is the public, as they think they want a 300MP Sensor with 20 stops of dynamic range and Focus that always captures what you are thinking about and all for $400. The reality is that cameras are designed to take photographs at a price point, which last many years, weatherproof etc. We should be grateful for what are truly stunning pieces of technology !!
True, also people complain too much for everything. These modern cameras are so capable of capturing amazing photographs. Some people take photos, some people talk about gear.
Im happy to use my old A6000, XT3 and 70s OM1.
I work full time as a professional, and I perform regardless of whats in my hand. Far too many people spending 4k on a set up to post to 1080p compressed reels.
Spec sheet warriors often know more about numbers than actually running a camera. Its so exhausting and I teach a lot of shooters pitfalls that new cameras still dont prevent.
Manny, not sure if I agree with you. The advent of mirrorless cameras has brought about significant levels of new features and improvements. I use the Nikon Z9(s) for sports and action and the X2D for most other things. I think both of these cameras have made significant improvements over their predecessors. In fact, I don't really see where improvements are coming from since these cameras are so packed with features and capability and I don't use half what's in them.
I am not a big believer in AI generated images. I mean, if your going to let AI perform your work, why even bother owning a camera. I avoid using AI in post production because I want my images to me mine not some engineers and if you need AI you are not developing your own aesthetic. Well that's my take - admittedly it's a personal perspective and might be flawed but as an older guy that's how I see it. Always enjoy listening to you and thanks for putting your thoughts online - kinda risky these days.
It's insane how GOOD the cameras have gotten in terms of technical specs. I always see "pro photogs" spew out the pamphlet specs and it is cooool but at the same time, talking about specs is not photography.
It's amazing to see how far cameras have come from just 15 years ago.
In Fuji land it took 3 years to increase readout speed and add prores, and it came with a 50% increase in price and some autofocus bugs.
What it comes down to is the tech is so good across every manufacturer that we’re seeing a real separation of great photographers and everyone else in different ways now. There seems to be an infinite number of mid photographers out there who can pick up a new camera and get in-focus subjects and a decent exposure using exposure sim but are completely lost on the fundamentals and artistic choices that make truly great photos, it’s pretty sad if you ask me.
Well said. "You can get the same shots with any of these cameras "
@Mike1984-lc9rh 😂 that’s a little extreme and to be honest, the Hasselblad X2D-100c makes the Sony A7RV look terrible by comparison! Especially in large format. But both the A7RV and the R1 can photo stack and get more resolution.
1. A9 III does not support CF Express II Type B but no one talked about it.
2. Do I need 120fps? No.
I'm still waiting for a camera that I can use to make calls
You do know that modern phones are in excess of 48 mega pixels and even have attachable lens. Apple ran a very successful ad campaign with photos on freeway billboards the size of buildings simply saying shot on an iPhone. The whole reason so many people are having a melt down on Canon’s latest products, is it leaves many feeling that Camera progression has peaked and we may be seeing the end of the camera industry as we know it. I applaud companies that are continuing to spend in R&D and innovate. You have to ask yourself would Canon even made an R5 if it was not for Sony making Mirrorless so good? No, they would not and we would like be on the 5d mk whatever with incremental enhancements. While some may be ok eating the same Luke warm oatmeal everyday, I prefer to have some choices. I value a free market economy with competition and the luxury of options and applaud the pundits that have risked their own wallet by making the largest camera manufacturer mad by being honest. Sure some will hop on the bandwagon, but there are some very good and appear to be honest reviews that are not going to have the Canon money truck visiting them any time soon.
@@troypast3589so you take Apple's marketing as bread and butter?
…..Who’s gonna tell em?
The old Samsung phone might be for you 👀
Nikon does that long ago
Hi Manny,
Good topic to discuss.
One man’s own opinion I would like to add on to what you’ve shared in this video into two-fold:
1) higher expectations and/or change is constant and permanent. Otherwise the belief is that it becomes irrelevant/obsolete.
For example, movie industry sets the gold standards and shoots in 2K resolution while camera companies are pushing 4K (now 8K, 12K, and so on) to consumers. So when cameras release new cameras with less than 4K, consumers are not happy. Their expectations has been set and/or influence that they need it to create, while paid professionals are not needing it to create. Nice to have, but not necessary (as an example).
What needs to be understood is that technology disruption happens once in a while and then there’s incremental enhancement thereafter. See Apple first iphone. It was disruptive. Thereafter it’s incremental enhancement as it is expensive to make silicon chips and takes time to iron out and release fully functional and finished products. As well as it takes a lot of time, R&D work, and money/investments.
And consumer expectations come without these perspectives.
Smartphone computing power today has surpassed the computing used on Apollo 11 that was used to land on the moon. And yet the general mass consumers want more and barely use more than 10-30% of it, minus the power users.
2) marketing and business performance pressures forces these higher expectations by doing yearly releases to compete, make good returns, and gain market share.
But in reality consumers will probably buy and/or upgrade every 3-5yrs or so. The pros who get paid and photography and videography/cinema work can rationalize yearly upgrades.
If anyone studies how cars are made, you learn that cars need to be APPROVED to be made. This is to prevent disruption of the market. The canon R5 is a camera that completely disrupted the market, and it has made every camera that has been released since then, basically rendered subpar. It's difficult to improve on near perfection. The only problems the camera has is usability. Overheating, Ibis wobble, etc.... An improvement over that camera would've been the same specs, but in a much more reliable state. Advancement of cameras is changing. I don't think it's any longer about resolution and frame rates. The R5 came out in 2020.... 4 years ago.... And only FLAGSHIPS have barely been beat this camera.
3:17 global shutter isn’t the start of the future. 99% of photographer don’t need global shutter. The global shutter is built for video.
99% of photographers don't need over half the tech cameras come with now but global shutter will be awesome for photographers once some kinks are worked out.
This is absolutely not true. When taking a photograph of a hockey player hitting the puck, a baseball player swinging a bat, or the most infamous - a golfer swinging a golf club, a standard photograph will show the "stick, bat, golf club" as curving due to the slow readout of a standard stacked sensor. This is 100% eliminated by a global shutter, so this is actually a factually incorrect statement.
There was very little innovation in the pre digital years too.
Here’s something funny to think about that I explained to someone else. All mirrorless SLR technology is, is the merger of the SLR with the Point and Shoot digital cameras. That’s all Sony did was take the technology from a digital point and shoot, and made it so photographers could attach a larger optical lens to it. When you stop and think about point and shoot cameras, they had an Electronic viewfinder because they had to have one because after the optical zoom ran out, you’d be on digital zoom which required an EVF. Phase detection was in most digital point and shoot cameras because they couldn’t use the same AF in DSLR’s and the list goes on and on. But that’s all mirrorless technology really is!
@@TigerWould2 Most digital point and shoot cameras only had contrast detection AF, which gave them the reputation of being slow focusing and hopeless for tracking AF. What made mirrorless cameras a practical replacement for DSLRs was (1) high-speed, high-resolution OLED displays (my DVD camcorder had 200k pixels; modern EVFs have 6 times more), and (2) PDAF which made tracking fast action and sports practical.
I don’t understand people that complain and are so negative about the current camera models from all the main camera companies - they’re all fantastic. There are currently no bad cameras, they all produce amazing images and video. Compared to 10 or 20 years ago, all contemporary imaging technologies are truly amazing. Stop whining and shoot.
Funny how video guys want top notch video specs in photo cam bodies, forcing photo guys to have to buy cameras with video features they never use.
Fast sensor readout directly leads to fast/accurate autofocus and high refresh rate viewfinders. Mirrorless cameras are video cameras that happen to be able to take single frames.
i feel like your vids were at a peak about 2 years ago creatively. lately they felt different. i still enjoy but the vibes changed a bit. would love to see you just filming shoots and showing what you do
I think this "problem" of a little upgrade on the R5 mkII is brought by a loud minority on RUclips and forums who are more interested in gear specs than taking photos with a huge problem of FOMO.
To me, it's not even a subject, if no upgrade in the MKII interests you, don't buy the new one, the R5 is still one of the best cameras on the market.
Imagine I literally looked on your page this morning and thought “manny hasn’t uploaded in a while.. I wonder if he’s feeling the burnout like me” then you just uploaded 😂👍🏾
imagine you figuratively looked on his page....
I think people complain too much. Cameras and lenses today are so much better than even 5-6 years ago. Autofocus is getting close to 100% hit rate, even when shooting fast action. Even $200 cheap Chinese lenses are very good.
Amen. Gosh, look back at the 60s and 70s film camera era. Improvements were incremental, with TTL metering being one of the truly big improvements in the late 60s. Then in the early 70s, electronics got practical and affordable, then suddenly everyone is moving to electric shutter speed controls and the introduction of Aperture priority modes. Then... years of refining that till Minolta added Program mode with the X700, and everyone tinkered with that until Minolta figured out in-body autofocus, and then another big flurry of consolidation. The cameras of the 90s saw a terrible price battle that ruined camera quality because, for a decade, there was little practical innovation while digital was worked out behind the scenes (and was costly as heck). Then we got on another roller-coaster for a good 15 years, and now things are consolidating again. We keep mistaking the wild years as the *normal* status, when instead what's normal is years of stability, with only occasional flurries of rapid improvements.
I can’t believe you didn’t mention Lumix. They got 32 bit float, Arri Log in camera, shutter angle, any desqueeze you need, false color, Pro Res and Pro Res Raw in camera, vectorscopes, all in camera in a mirrorless body. Nobody brings as much to the table as Lumix when it comes to hybrids.
and at a price that the competition can't come close to either. Hell their normal L mount f1.8 lenses are what dreams are made of, all the same size and weight so that you don't have to re-balance a gimbal during a video shoot when you swap anything from a 18mm to 85mm lens and the 105 is only a slight bit different
What more do people want? If you need all that technology to take a photo you really need to rethink photography.
100% facts. We as photographers are pretty spoiled with the current gear from all of the Camera companies out there. I ordered the R5ii as well as the R1 (for Sports purposes). Unless something absolutely mind blowing and Workflow altering comes out, there after, those are the last 2 cameras I plan to purchase for the foreseeable future (unless one breaks).
The current climate is “Stat chasers” it seems. As long as the camera can fulfill your needs comfortably, why cry about what it DOESNT have? 🤷🏾♂️
People are spoiled. Next, they will want cameras to take the pictures for them. Photographers used to be required to have an eye and talent. Now, anyone can jump in...
It's not just cameras. Take a look at smartphones. We may not be getting huge leaps of improvement but now is the time where we will be getting into cheap cameras that are good and good cameras that will get cheap.
Stagnation of innovation for years? What are you guys even talking about?! Backlit Sensors, enormous sensor sizes with an unbelievable noise ratio, image stabilization, Dual ISO, internal RAW video, video quality that rivals the big players, afordable and super powerful high speed flash systems, battery powered COB lighting, IBIS... and the list goes on. This is the stuff we would have dreamed about 10 years ago!
Here is an idea: All cameras must have a motor to vibrate, especially for long lenses... And in combination with the lens VR to vibrate even more. This is for people that complain, so they can duck themselves!
I don’t know what people want. Today’s cameras are very good. Everyone can take a technically good photo. People want a camera that can take pictures for them while they are just sitting there?
This strikes me as a strawman response. I have not heard any complaints about the R5 Mark II, nor do I see anything but innovation. What are people missing that it doesn't have? It has the best AF on the planet (according to some who have used it), eye control, stacked sensor, and they didn't even move/eliminate any dials.
I’ve been talking to other photographers about this for the last 4 years. For most photographers who work professionally, any camera brand can give you the results your clients want. In fact, camera brands Canon and Nikon allowed other brands to catch up to them many years ago. We see the same things happening with other tech: wireless mics, cell phones, flashes etc…
I would love to see the implementation of some type of security features placed into camera bodies that will help discourage theft. At least on the higher end models if not all.
I do not update a camera for at least 5 years, and the upgrade then always matters. Meanwhile, I'll be enjoying my R7 and R6 mkII while others stress about what they think ought to be. I just want to get out and shoot, but darn my day job!
If someone complains and is so dissatisfied even with the camera like canon R5 Mark 2 it’s outside of adequacy and outside of rationality, it’s a mental disease. It has nothing to do with photography or with a camera’s capacity. I know people who take award winning photos with a 15 years old beginner camera canon 600D, I know people who take garbage pictures with flagship cameras. It’s all about the head not about a camera.
Cameras have never ever been so good. Diminishing returns at this point.
I think you're absolutely right. It's not just the camera space. Gaming, cell phones, cars, TVs... almost everywhere you look in tech or tech related products... there is stagnation. especially when many of these companies try to release tech every year or every other year. It's not enough time in most cases to make a giant leap. I think we as consumers are spoiled in many cases. Canon has spent the last few years beefing out their RF lineup, and constantly releasing solid cameras at every price point.
The good thing about times of stagnation and little innovation is that it allows beginners a big window to enter the field. You can get a high quality camera for non-premium price.
will say, the harshness & skepticism being put on a camera that doesn't even exist yet is a bit juvenile.
The jump in AF from the sony a73 to my a93 is HUGE
The biggest reason why people complain about lack of innovation is that they think they can buy their way to great photos. 99% of the world's greatest tphotographs were done with tecnically 'inferior' gear compared to today. Many of them are still better than today's efforts. Still, people bitch and moan to hide their lack of skill and/or creativity. The art, the craft, the thinking, the philosophy behind how you do what you do is HARD and takes years, and a maturity most people don't have. The cheapest, most useful camera is the one you take 1000s & 1000s of photos on every year.
Camera technology is at a stage of incremental improvements for all major manufacturers for several years now. My opinion is the with any camera from a major manufacturer it's the meatsack behind the camera that is critical not the gear.
I'm very impressed with the new R1's ball and face recognition for sports, and the Z63's 6K/120 video. Image quality is so high for all the top brands, it's coming down to what tool you need to do the best work in your field of photography or videography.
I have a z8 and can safely say it won’t need replacing for years even with the arrival of a mkii. The small steps with each generation of camera are all that’s needed and you wait until there’s something you need.
Agreed!
There are still many areas the respective camera companies can improve/add features but seem unwilling to. Zebras in photo mode for Canon & Nikon. Fully articulating screen to tilt and flip out for Canon & Nikon. Real joystick instead of a little nub and option to change af point movement speed for Sony.
In next few years people may expect camera to go itself and have shoot done, come back and deliver the edited images or videos to them, and drop message to client for payment😂😂
5:48 I don’t believe Global shutters are the new wave. I think this will be forced on us, but it won’t make things better for us photographers. Global shutters are great for video! The only photographers that can say global shutters are good for them is bird wildlife /sports photographers (that’s 1-2% of photographers). There’s no other benefits to having it. And as for flash technology, there’s no where to go with that either. But a leaf shutter on a stack BSI medium format camera has better performance than a global shutter sensor. That’s not me bashing, it’s just a fact (part of the reason is because most medium format cameras have 16bit color).
We are now in stage where film cameras were - you have a mature system with most of the tech increments are now in the workflow/ui/interface. We are now in a 4/5 year product cycle.
I don't get it.....
What could be a photographer expectations today to complain about modern cameras?
Well said Manny. I'm on an R8 and only looking to get a used R5 some day for MP.
Still shoot CANON - I have NEVER bailed. They never fail me. My 5Ds of old and now my R5 -yes it overheated in video at first but they fixed that. Canon plays the long game and I am here. I only wish I could get a photo centric R5 with no AA filter like an R5R That would be a dream but the r5ii is WAY better than people realize. The 50mm 1.2 RF is still the BEST 3d pop ive ever seen from modern Canon and rarely leaves my R5
Bunch a nonsense…current cameras show 12Stops of dynamic range max, the human eye can do 20-22…lets maybe try and reach that threshold first before we say „theres nothing more to improve upon“… also, z6iii: internal 6k60 raw for that price with af and Ibis for THAT Price? That in my book IS meaningful innovation, also Canons „Action Prio“ Autofocus fills the same requirement… i believe people need to stop complaining so much about everything, we are so blessed these days.
A lot of thank yous here, but mostly, thank you for not taking my comment as a personal attack to you as a creator bc it wasn't. Also, you making this video has increased my respect for you, which you already had as I have supported this channel for many years. And I agree with you, we have been spoiled for years, and was probably expecting more for these camera models, which are already very good.
Agree, I'm looking forward to security features. Just an FYI because i know how to do this, I've disassemble an Airtag so it can fit into my Sony and wired it to the camera battery so as long as the camera has a battery in it (on or off) i will be able to locate the camera. Yes PPA/home insurance is good but i just want that added insurance. I just wish i could Airtag my lenses but I'm not confident in disassembling/reassembling a $2k+ lens.
I do not agree that Global Shutter is an innovative feature, because Canon already had this technology in the Cinema EOS C700 series. The question is whether Canon is willing to incorporate this feature into their mirrorless camera series.
I’d call it “peaked” over “stagnated”… the demand for higher specs at a low price point is getting quite ridiculous
It’s amazing how people rail hard on canon constantly, saying they whip out the cripple hammer, while praising Sony as they artificially limit the fps of their cameras to 10 compressed fps unless you pay well over $4k.
Canon allows high fps in their cameras that are thousands of dollars less than Sony. Sony also artificially limits third party lenses to 15fps. That’s a huuuuuuge cripple hammer. But since almost none of their cameras go above 10fps, it doesn’t affect most users. That’s still a bad look and move that people overlook when talking about the different companies.
Like golf clubs... don't make the mistake of thinking better equipment is the key to everything. The latest and greatest can make a difference at the margins for experts but probably isn't needed for beginners and hobbyists.
OMG try selling that concept to Callaway, Cobra, Titleist etc. The golf industry is well over 150 BILLION a year (vs about 9 billion for Cameras). Humans more often make purchases based on their emotions than their true needs. We could all still be using flip phones right? Does not mean we want to.
Truth is Im glad to have gone back to Sony from Canon. The only innovation I want is a tilt up screen in vertical mode instead of flip out screens...
I mentioned it again. I have said it before: most of the new specs that are being added to cameras are nothing but nonsense to charge you more money.
Even a global shutter is not that big of an innovation and for a lot of types of photography it would make little difference.
It would help with flash sync speed. Strobists would get a great benefit, allowing more creativity.
It's a major innovation. Not many photographers need stacked sensors, massive resolution, CF Express style slots, HSS, advanced network features, etc. Yet, these are still innovations and majorly benefit those who do need it. Global shutter is just getting started.
i hate that people complain about video features, it's a photo camera that can do video, now the makers focus on video more than photography and we could have much better photo camera if they focus on photography again for a bit.
If there are "higher tier cameras", we have those innovations! We never had innovations in lower tier models...
Not sure what you wanted to say...
Great response to the question Manny. When you talked bout Image Quality only, I still like my Canon 5D Mark IV, yes the R5 is great and has a lot of new features, especially image stabilization and improved auto focus but dam, I look back at some of my 5D Mark IV images and actually still think there great. Personally I think Canon did a great job with the R5 Mark II, like you said the R5 is a great camera and didn't need big changes to begin with. It doesn't need a thousand megapixels or a global shutter IMO. Canon improved on some of the things that people wanted, like a full size HDMI port, I can't believe how many people I have heard bitch about a port that I swear 90% of people probably don't care about. Due to a shaky financial market, I can see why a lot of camera manufactures are not going all out at the moment and investing funds into research and development, maybe they have been looking into the crystal ball 🔮😂
Imagine if these complainers were actually innovators themselves and contributed to the industry or society in general!
BET
Half of them bedroom shooters
We aren’t allowed to contribute to society, because we are shadow banned and not allowed to exercise Free Speech
Even Sony with the A7 series it took 10 years to put a flip-out lcd veiwfinder from 2013 to 2021 all that time wasted.
Honestly I don’t know how much more people expect companies to push cameras. Anything from the past 10 years is good enough to make high quality photos. The cameras these days basically do the job for you. 80% of these people complaining don’t even print their work so in my opinion if all you’re work is just on a digital screen all these upgrades don’t even matter. A complete waste of money if you aren’t printing.
Ask Intel, Blackberry, blockbuster, or any other rockstar product/service companies that dominated an industry why the hype is important. Perception can and does become reality even for number one. Thomas Paine said it best back in the 1770s (not Lee Iacocca) - you either Lead, Follow, or get out of the way. Canon is still a great product, but many are worried that their future is in jeopardy by the industry, competition, the global economy as a whole, and Canon’s strategy to combat them. Canon depends on mass appeal of cameras by pros and enthusiasts alike. Without wide acceptance of their products, they will decline. So while the haters are indeed generating a lot of negative energy, Canon would be most unwise not to listen.
Эти конкуренты, о которых вы пишите, пока что проигрывают почти по всем показателям камерам Canon! А пользователи других брендов переживают, что камеры Canon лучше, чем их камеры. Отсюда и желчь! 😀
This was a very helpful commentary for me, as a newb, just learning and not wanting to get caught up in the arms race of which camera is going to be better. It basically allows me to research and select a current or recently produced camera that has the functions and capability I think I need, and not worry about what’s coming next. Hopefully it will just allow me to learn what I’m doing better, and the camera I have/get instead of holding off for the next best thing coming down the road, that maybe won’t really be any better
Where can cameras go from here to innovate though? All of these cameras are so dang good. Refinements. Yes. I just don’t think there’s much to innovate on. We all want a 18 stop DR sensor but let’s get real.
You are so right Manny
There is very few new features that can be added to most high end and enthusiast cameras now.
Its like Microsoft Word or Excel or Windows there is nothing they can add. So all they can do it tweak the UI with nice menus and icons etc.
As an older guy I 'd like to see A two tiered menu system.
One is the menu we have now
Two is a stripped down simple menu system with way less options to wade through
And of course better connectivity to our phones and the internet
Oh don't say that or Canon will start charging a subscription fee for their upgrades
Well said Manny. I feel that cameras are just getting gimmicky these days. I used to shoot full fame but changed to m43 4 years ago for my travel needs. I was almost thinking of switching back but out of curiosity I used my Vizio 4k and viewed pics I took in Europe with my E-M1 mkii (an 8 year old model) and was convinced I do not need another camera or lens. The improvements to me are no longer valued and I prefer to travel with my money than spend it on gear I really don't need. Sorry manufacturers...when my camera breaks I buy another.
canon has its principal, u can tell from their mirrorless line, their appearances look just like their DSLRs, they refuse to go the direction other manufacturers are going for a compact, retro, smaller bodies, Canon is the leader not followers...if it isnt broken, dont fix it...
People forget that Canon invented the modern body design starting with the T-90. Everyone else followed suit, well except Sony that wanted a sharp edged box that cuts into your hands.
@@silbay that boxy body is the proof sony lack in RnD , it doesnt feel fantastic in the hand while holding itu for a long period of time
I'm not sure I get the arguments/hate against "Trickle Down Tech". To me that seems like how most consumer electronics work. Halo/Flagship product gets new features like stacked/back-illuminated sensor, eye-controlled-focus, connectivity, sensor speed, more controls, customization, better storage options, etc...
Then new lower tier products eventually get those improvements as well. There are multiple tiers Pro, Prosumer, Enthusiast, Consumer, etc... and there's some trickle down within that as well. Who is complaining about lower tier products eventually receiving features that originated on higher tier products? I wouldn't think it's the people buying those lower tier cameras?
IMO it's camera geeks and pundits that seem upset when a new camera, one they likely won't even use and isn't aimed at them, doesn't meet their expectations.
Long time Canon user here. Since 2012, I've had a T2i, C100's, C200's, 5D Mark III, and I've used EF glass on my R6 and 2 GH5s' (M4/3 sensors mind you) for the past 4 years. I will finally be switching to Sony completely to revamp my ecosystem. There has been great innovation in camera tech these past few years from all brands. What I'm looking for is reliability and value. When I see Sony allowing fantastic 3rd party lenses (like Sigma) for their cameras, along with autofocus implementation across photo/video, it's a no brainer where the value is going forward. Canon makes fantastic cameras, but I want more value lens options going forward, and confining their ecosystem is getting me to jump ship.
This, but also Sony is just ahead in terms of sensors (not the global shutter, just all the other stuff). Their usability still sucks a bit, but if it gets you the shot that you want, then that's all that really matters? I've been hoping, crossing my fingers that Canon could bring something that caught up and then some, but they just didn't. They barely caught up to aging models from everyone else.
@@JMurph2015it’s interesting that you think canon hasn’t caught up. The only thing missing in the R5 mark 1 was a stacked sensor. Had it had a stacked sensor when it was initially released, it would have beat the Sony A1 and Nikon Z9 at a Fraction of the cost of both of those models. The only argument for the R1 is the megapixel count that contributes to the camera not having 8K (or 12k). Outside of a high megapixel and 8k for the R1, what else could people want? Global shutter? Pros aren’t really buying Sonys a9 iii and the people who purchased the A1 are staying put! Only those who have a huge disposable income are buying the a9 iii.
So basically with the Canon R5 mark II, you have a camera that’s now better than the Sony A1 and Nikon Z9 capabilities, but costs less. Both of those cameras are flagship cameras! Yes they might have more capabilities when the mark II versions come out, but are either one of those camera going to have eye autofocus? Or be in the same price range as the R5 mark II or will those cameras cost $5,500 and $6,500 respectively with slightly better performance that’s not noticeable?
@@TigerWould2 the R5ii's sensor is twice as slow as the Z8/Z9, has worse DR than those two, and is substantially lower MP than the equivalent Sony camera (a7R). The R5 Mk 1 quietly had a 2/3 of a stop DR disadvantage to almost every other similar camera, only masked by Canon applying baked-in NR to the RAWs. It is quite conceivable (I won't say that it's definitely going to happen though) that the next a7R has a stacked sensor that reads out faster than the R5ii, but is also 61MP with similar or better DR to the current stuff.
I came from r5 and r8. I was bothered by their L series lens for the RF mount for a while. Not only they are priced very high, but also massive.
The last straw was 1 month ago when I went for a trip, I carried my Canon with 15-35L, and 50L 1.2. I ended up leaving all at the hotel and brought my fuji xt1 with tt artisan 27mm with me everywhere instead.
Went back home, questioning my decisions and finally braved myself to sell all my Canon gear and moved to Sony. Not only that their lenses are great, but abundant of choices and most importantly, small sizes, had me excited.
So now I'm a happy owner of Sony a7cii+24mm f2.8G+55mm f1.8 zeiss+20mm G. They are all tiny and wonderful. I carry them all everywhere I go now, and it's a full frame quality on my disposal at any time. I can put it on the restaurant table without people staring. One stranger even thought I was carrying Leica (i used the silver grip and silver top plate version).
Never going back again. Bye Canon, I only miss the ergonomic, but in the end what's the use if I leave it at the hotel/home.
@@torakun3573 Agreed. I feel the same way - Canon's lenses are big and heavy, and I'm starting to dislike using them. However, I've invested a lot in the L-lens and can't afford to take a big loss by switching to Sony.
Canon put out the first 8K mirrorless, and the first camera with 4k120.... before Sony and long before Nikon. Nikon basically just plays the copy/catch up game. The R5 II is now leading the industry in what it does and gives everybody what they've been wanting for years now. Global shutter offers way more negatives than it does positives. The z6III has nice specs for the price, but in real world it lags behind even the R6 II when it comes to autofocus and dynamic range and EVEN rolling shutter surprisingly (esp in 4k60 as Tony Northrup showed).
Serious talk from your south-end ^^ regarding most of what you say about the Nikon. Copying, really? Z6iii lagging R6ii in AF? Please, go and use the equipment and compare yourself before feeding the clickbait RUclipsrs.
Go read Thom Hogan’s review of the z6iii and his comparison to Canon and Sony wrt the AF. I don’t have a dog in this fight, but man, so much misinformation.