I wasn't the sportive type, too busy doing drugs ;)

When not engaged in student riots (I remember the smell of CS gas in Sproul Hall) I was studying theater arts there, which did not much please my professional parents.

Anyway, I think we're locked in a small world here. My peeps are talking about 360 degree images and the like. Lytro has their light field camera. New platforms are coming that will make our present images as dated as daguerreotypes. "Prints? How quaint!"

Anyway, I do agree with you that Nikon and Canon operate on different philosophies, generally speaking. They both have limited resources to play with in a shrinking market. Nikon is conservative. They do not move until forced to do so. Their focus seems to be reflected in their slogan "At the heart of the image". They are certainly at the forefront in terms of sensor quality, and in fact some of my pictures could not have been taken with a Canon--or at least they would have been a lot worse (talking here about dynamic range), just as I can't do them with my Sonys with equivalent DR to Canon. But of course we are talking only about a small percentage of shots. And Canon sensors are definitely improving.

Canon does seem more willing to experiment with novel technologies. I do think that changing their mount was a smart move. I envy tremendously the fact that Canon can mount old Exakta, M42 and other lenses with adapters and have infinity focus. On the other hand, I am tremendously happy that I am able to mount and use DX lenses on my D800. This is a Yuge advantage for me, both in stills and in video. And I have Nikon lenses and accessories going back to the 60s that I use regularly with my D800, and I do appreciate that. I guess I will never have a 50mm f1.2 AF Nikon lens, but then neither will Canon have a f0.95 AF lens for EOS. Canon scores a point or two there; Nikon scores some others in other areas.

But speaking strictly about innovation, I think we have to give the crown to Sony. I have long criticized Sony for throwing every half-baked idea into a commercial product to see how it flies. They are like Japanese soft drink manufacturers. That is in itself an interesting story. US soft drink makers spend years developing new soft drinks--Japanese makers often introduce many new drinks every year. They disappear almost as quickly, with only a few gaining any lasting traction. It's the same with chocolates. I am often nonplussed to find a great new chocolate, only to see it disappear forever after a couple of months on the shelves.

Sony drives me nuts. There were reports of the mounts breaking on the first A7 models, and all kinds of stupid stuff that they would only fix with the next iteration. But now, for instance, with the Mk II versions of the A7 series, they seem to have ironed out a lot of the bugs in the design. Their new AF (in good light at least) blows away both Canon and Nikon DSLRs which are not doing it at all points in real time on the chip.

And now we have the Pentax K1 with pixel shift, which by all accounts is awesome for landscape photographers and in the studio. I'd love to have that technology on my camera!

In terms of lenses, Canon is on a big roll. It frustrates the hell out of me that Nikon, with a few exceptions, seems content to roll out lenses with mediocre optical performance. I don't know what they are thinking, with Sigma creaming them big time. That being said, the introduction of the 105mm f1.4 and the 19mm T&S perhaps herald a return to better days. Don't forget that it wasn't so many years ago that the optical design of the 14-24 was revolutionary. I do laud Canon for picking up the ball and running with it with their 11-24, and now Sigma has a new 12-24 that is as good or better at half the price...

What I would love to see from Canikon would be in-body stabilization. Easy enough to switch it off when using a long stabilized lens, and Nikon has it in their little Coolpix cameras. I'm guessing it might be a reliability question for those two, and I'd be surprised if they were not working on it.

And from both I would love to see a FF or even crop sensor mirrorless offering. For Nikon it could be the opportunity to move forward from the F mount. Easy enough (more or less) to offer an adapter to retain full function with F mount lenses (though it would still need some mechanical couplings) while giving them room to develop some new lenses with a much bigger mount. As to mount size, though, it is really important to remember that there are physics constraints dealing with the angle at which light strikes the sensor, which--by the way--has hobbled the development of decent fast lenses for the A7 series. Canon, with their already-modern mount, would have much less of a time with a large mirrorless.

Just my two cents about the subject at hand.

Toby, thanks for a detailed reply.
I think we have more than a few similarities. Yes, I know the smell of tear gas pretty well. I was at both Peoples Park marches. I was fortunate to not have gotten hurt or shot at the first one, what a disaster. What I remember most about the second one was the gorgeous day and all the girls dancing topless on the flatbeds!! Heady stuff for a 17 year old.
I almost missed a final because I got myself lost in Dwinelle Hall. I got myself into the courtyard to study in peace and quiet and literally could not figure out how to get out!!! LoL
I think a lot of the companies are at a crossroads right now.
Both Canikan are still perfecting their big nature/sports rigs which they both do so well while PanaSony are trying to corner the masses with smaller, easier to use and cheaper cameras.
Where these smaller companies are running into a wall is that their up against Canikons arsenal of lenses developed over a half a century.
Too many are saying just get Canon lenses and use an adapter. You can't get ahead by making a camera fully compatible with the competitions lenses! That's a bandaid, not a solution.
I'm glad to see Canon enter the ML market. I've read that in some areas the M5 is actually an industry leader. When you can use the full arsenal of lenses, from T/S to super fast, that gets you to the front, even if the body is still lagging a bit. To sell any camera to Pros, you've gotta have the lenses to back it up and not have to wait ten years for them to be developed, let alone, many users already own Canikon glass!!
By super-fast f.95 50, I assume you're differentiating between .95 and 1.0? Personally, I'd gladly give up f.05 to shoot with AF!!! AF is the difference between just creating Art and shooting professionally in any situation, to me!
I don't know anything about video but I hear a lot of good things about the dual pixel tech and AF, at least at the amatuer lever.
The new pixel shift is interesting but in not sure if it's really all software or actually increasing IQ at a native level. Maybe I'm just having trouble seeing how just shifting a sensor around can actually increase area. But if it works well it's only a matter of time before its std. on every sensor from every company.
Thanks
SS

Yes, there are advantages to Canon's mount, to be sure. In the video realm only amateurs use AF and AE, so those things are of no interest to me. In comparing Nikon and Canon video--interestingly enough--Nikon comes out way on top with the controls and implementation. Also, the back LCD is sharper, making it much easier to focus than the Canon--though I haven't tried the new Mk 4. And I have read that Nikon video quality leapfrogged Canon's in the D810. The only thing Canon has really got going for it is Magic Lantern, which is 3rd party and which Canon hates.

But neither of them, honestly, can hold a candle to Sony, especially the A7s. It has become, by a large margin, the pro choice for shooting DSLR video, followed by the GH4 (though that's not FF of course).

But even the Sony uses wonky codecs and only shoots 8 bit without an external recorder.

I just finished two prime-time documentaries that called for high quality output, and I very stupidly decided to go with the new Canon C300 Mk 2. What a POS! The output is lovely but the ergonomics just suck big time. This is so typically Canon: Make a great camera that is impossible to hold and does not even have a proper viewfinder, and that does not even have a rubber eyecup to keep out the light. Shooting in the Taclomecan desert in Xinjiang was torture in the bright sun. Our Singapore team was using the Sony FS7, which is a proper videocamera with well-thought-out controls. The new Metabones adapter allows mounting of Canon lenses retaining full functionality. It's no wonder the price of the Canon has dropped by almost half since it was introduced...

Canon and Nikon both better watch their back--there are now adapterscoming to market that also allow full Auro function of Nikon lenses on Sony bodies...

That being said, I'm still a fan of DSLRs in the world of stills. Mirrorless is OK for mounting vintage glass, but the DSLR is king for quick and professional work in the field.