No guys, this time I am going to be serious with this release because the competence between Canon and Nikon is something that it interests me and I would love to hear your thoughts.

First I just wanted to link to the sample shoots from canon site (please check the butterfly shoot at 3200ISO ?????EOS-1D Mark IV?Sample Images

So here goes my view. I will use car analogies to help me explain my point. I am not a car guy so if you think that I am kicking the mechanics wikipedia please be gentle.

I think that Canon had the early lead in the dslr world and, for a few years, to go on 2nd or 3rd gear was enough for them to keep ahead. Nikon started narrowing the gap but Canon failed to realize the extent of the threat. Then 2 years ago, Nikon engaged the 6th gear all of a sudden and left Canon on the side-road without tires for racing and wondering where the rocket came from.

Now Canon has engaged the 4th and 5th gear while Nikon dropped a little bit and it is on 5th gear. I think that offers from both sides are equally compelling. My feeling is that Canon keep hiding one or two jokers in case of emergency. They have had way too much time and R&D invested before anyone even attempted to enter the FF world. I wonder how far could they realistically go if they needed to release its best right now.

Let us game begin. Your thoughts will be welcomed and I promise to be civil this time

[Gooshin]

*facepalm

i'm not even going to try and deconstruct your argument but your gear analogy fails from the get go, mainly because the gear that you are in is dependent upon what speed you are going, how much acceleration you want, how much fuel economy you want while you are accelerating, and how fast you can take that turn up ahead, which leads to the quesiton of much you need to slow down?

and if you're going to be comparing two different cars, the correlation between which car is in which gear is complicated by the gear ratios themselves. Which is a question of design on behalf of the engineers and the "goal" that they set out for that particular car.

A 2003 audi A4 has its 2nd gear top around at around 95km/h, my Subaru RS takes 2nd gear to 85km and my old VW Golf hit fuel cut off at around 79km/h.

Overall wheel diameters also play a role, a large SUV with 19-20" wheels and another 5-6" of tires has to complete less revolutions than a honda civic riding on 14's with a 1.5" of rubber, which has the direct effect on the requirements of a gearbox the engineers much design to transmit the power for these two cars.

also, 6 gears vs 5 gears vs 4 gears or whatever... hell some things dont have any gears, like a snowmobile, it really has no issue

because what matters are the gear to gear, and final drive RATIOS.

a 6 gear dirt rally prepped car will reach its maximum speed at something silly like 160 or 170km/h, while a car setup for a drag strip will reach 200km+ in 3 shifts or less.

So what good is a 6th gear to a funny car that only has 3?

and dont even get me started on automatics....

Good point.

[pcarfan]

Your gear analogy sort of makes sense, except when you dropped the gear from 6th to 5th for Nikon. But, anyhow, that is irrelevent to the message. But, I think you are right, Canon's got this what seems to be an endless supply of ready to go R&D, that they just pull out of their shelves based on current competition (ie, ONLY Nikon). This camera's specs. are rather nice (once they sort out the IQ and all), except for the 1.3 crop factor and wideangles. But, what a camera! Perfect for me, except for the price, size and the cost of lenses (I know that is pure nonsense )

Your gear analogy sort of makes sense, except when you dropped the gear from 6th to 5th for Nikon. But, anyhow, that is irrelevent to the message. But, I think you are right, Canon's got this what seems to be an endless supply of ready to go R&D, that they just pull out of their shelves based on current competition (ie, ONLY Nikon). This camera's specs. are rather nice (once they sort out the IQ and all), except for the 1.3 crop factor and wideangles. But, what a camera! Perfect for me, except for the price, size and the cost of lenses (I know that is pure nonsense )

You are right. I am considering that Canon have solved some of the issues of the 1dMkIII.

Regarding the cost of the lenses I think that the kind of lenses that matches that camera are not particularly expensive compared to other brands. In the long high-end all the systems are expensive, including Pentax .

I think that your problem with size, price and cost of lenses is similar to my problem with Megan Fox. She is cute and everything but she is too young, doesnt seem intelligent and has the defect of not answering my anonymous love letters

[nostatic]

I'll avoid deconstructing the car analogy, but offer that lens prices are relative. Look at Leica prices, then look at L glass. The Canon stuff is cheap

Also, don't forget that Canon has a much larger imaging background to draw upon. They make video cameras, printers, copiers, etc. Nikon isn't nearly as diverse, and you're seeing the result of that, particularly when it comes to video implementation in dSLR.

Both companies make a compelling product. Assuming that the global economy doesn't completely collapse, I think there is room for niche players, but it will take a log to knock Canikon out of 1-2. The only way that will happen is if there is a shift toward EVIL or whatever is next and one of the smaller players *really* innovates.

I'll avoid deconstructing the car analogy, but offer that lens prices are relative. Look at Leica prices, then look at L glass. The Canon stuff is cheap

Also, don't forget that Canon has a much larger imaging background to draw upon. They make video cameras, printers, copiers, etc. Nikon isn't nearly as diverse, and you're seeing the result of that, particularly when it comes to video implementation in dSLR.

Both companies make a compelling product. Assuming that the global economy doesn't completely collapse, I think there is room for niche players, but it will take a log to knock Canikon out of 1-2. The only way that will happen is if there is a shift toward EVIL or whatever is next and one of the smaller players *really* innovates.

I am glad you bring the video implementation up. I also have the feeling that Nikon is struggling in that department quite a bit.

I also think that none of them will go down anytime soon either. I guess that the thing that intrigues me the most is to understand how Canon let themselves be surpassed when they (supposedly) had (and I think that they still have) most of the aces on their sleeves. Or maybe I am overestimating their capabilities.

I think it would be commercial suicide to produce the best they could. If they do have innovations sitting on the shelf, they are going to leave them there and get them down as and when they need to.
If they produce the best, they are back to square one with their R&D and if someone trumps them, they fall behind again.
It's only the small guy who might try something like that because they might be in a 'shit or bust' situation.

The gear analogy was fine, Gooshin over analyses in an idiotic way.

[lithos]

You know what? I think Pentax has shaken things up with the K-7, if only because before that, Nikon and Canon probably didn't rate Pentax at all. It's small, weather-sealed, mag-alloy, high-res, and got that whole crazy "Hey, why don't we actually put some effort into our expensive primes?" thing going. And the camera's only $1200. I'm betting they were just waiting for Pentax to die like KM.

I think it would be commercial suicide to produce the best they could. If they do have innovations sitting on the shelf, they are going to leave them there and get them down as and when they need to.
If they produce the best, they are back to square one with their R&D and if someone trumps them, they fall behind again.
It's only the small guy who might try something like that because they might be in a 'shit or bust' situation.

The gear analogy was fine, Gooshin over analyses in an idiotic way.

That is very true, but it seems that the sensor that Canon releases are several generations behind from what the R&D department does at present. I guess that they can afford to give some extra advances before loosing the amount of market they did. I think that even Chuck Westfall is critical with the retention policy of new features. Still, they are in a fairly good position. Maybe what they do now is more profitable and they have preferred to sacrifice market.

[Gooshin]

I think it would be commercial suicide to produce the best they could. If they do have innovations sitting on the shelf, they are going to leave them there and get them down as and when they need to.
If they produce the best, they are back to square one with their R&D and if someone trumps them, they fall behind again.
It's only the small guy who might try something like that because they might be in a 'shit or bust' situation.

The gear analogy was fine, Gooshin over analyses in an idiotic way.

i take driving and automotive related concepts very seriously.. most people dont know where their coolant goes, so it irks me when the glorious machine is misused in context during arguments (which happens quite often)

the argumentative style of using metaphors is not anything new..., but when you dont understand what you are metaphorising it only complicates things for those that do.

i cannot read for the black when the red is glaring into my eyes.

You know what? I think Pentax has shaken things up with the K-7, if only because before that, Nikon and Canon probably didn't rate Pentax at all. It's small, weather-sealed, mag-alloy, high-res, and got that whole crazy "Hey, why don't we actually put some effort into our expensive primes?" thing going. And the camera's only $1200. I'm betting they were just waiting for Pentax to die like KM.

I would tell you that I think that you are right if Pentax had released the K-7 and K-X at the moment of the K20 and K200. They gained a lot of momentum with the K10-100D combo when Nikon and Canon were simply releasing mild improvements. I think that Pentax did several bad movements after that. They speed up the release of the DA* zooms before the factory and QC system were well implemented. It took them too much to release the 200 and 300 lenses. And I think that they should have made a better job with the K20d. They made a good job with it, but they needed something extraordinary. I think that a K-7 without video would have gone much better. And a K-M/K with the tweaked 12MP sony sensor would have been the icing on the cake. If they would have added video at that time it would have been killing. Instead, they released an evolution after Canon released the 40D and Nikon the D300, the K20d just felt behind in some departments and they were not in the best moment to fall behind.

Pentax situation is kind of unfair. They dont have a well-greased marketing machinery and they have to give an extra-mile to get noticed. Even if Pentax shows the same level of evolution than Canon-Nikon-Sony have, they will keep falling behind. I think that the K10d might have worried Canon and Nikon mildly but I dont think that the K20d or K-7 have even made a ripple on their pond.

[woof]

*facepalm

if you're going to be comparing two different cars, the correlation between which car is in which gear is complicated by the gear ratios themselves. Which is a question of design on behalf of the engineers and the "goal" that they set out for that particular car.

blah blah woof woof

He ISN'T comparing two cars. That's the point. Metaphors are not exact. If the metaphor he was using was exact it would run something like this...

Canon released the [fill model here] with the following features. Nikon released [fill model here].

In other words, it would cease to be a metaphor, and would be nothing more than the actual facts. Latitude is usually given where metaphor is in play. If he had said ... "It's JUST like cars," you could hold him to a higher standard perhaps, but then it would be simile, not metaphor.

Nice exposition of just how much you know about cars though.

I've taken more than a few turns around several tracks as an SCCA driver. I'll wager that overall I know more than you about ALL of the car crap. Even in that arena, there were those who TALKED about equipment and those who raced. Perhaps that is the correct metaphor HERE.

Good point.

Heh. That's actually the better part of valor Gruoso.

woof!

[Gooshin]

He ISN'T comparing two cars. That's the point. Metaphors are not exact. If the metaphor he was using was exact it would run something like this...

Canon released the [fill model here] with the following features. Nikon released [fill model here].

In other words, it would cease to be a metaphor, and would be nothing more than the actual facts. Latitude is usually given where metaphor is in play. If he had said ... "It's JUST like cars," you could hold him to a higher standard perhaps, but then it would be simile, not metaphor.

Nice exposition of just how much you know about cars though.

I've taken more than a few turns around several tracks as an SCCA driver. I'll wager that overall I know more than you about ALL of the car crap. Even in that arena, there were those who TALKED about equipment and those who raced. Perhaps that is the correct metaphor HERE.



Heh. That's actually the better part of valor Gruoso.

woof!

stop talking woof, you couldn't make sense if you quoted Shakespeare.

ps. I'm on the car classification committee for Solosprint here in Ontario, which is a step above autocross. I'm the competition director for the Toronto Autosport Club. Ive been in the sport 5 years now, and even organized a few events.

you want to race? come get some, i'll humiliate you so bad you'll go home crying.

[séamuis]

stop talking woof, you couldn't make sense if you quoted Shakespeare.

ps. I'm on the car classification committee for Solosprint here in Ontario, which is a step above autocross. I'm the competition director for the Toronto Autosport Club. Ive been in the sport 5 years now, and even organized a few events.

you want to race? come get some, i'll humiliate you so bad you'll go home crying.

its the one with the biggest mouth and baddest attitude that ends up being the most pitiful driver. I learned that real fast when I competed in the SCCA amateur rally series. (before it became Rally America) I wont claim to know anything about you when it comes to being behind the wheel, just stating an observation.