Rongnongno Loc: FL

Newer cameras are coming out and these seem to beat the doo-doo out of the 'older generation'.

Nikon and others are starting to implement newer technologies and faster.

It seems that Canon is left in the geriatric dust.

Will Canon and other pick-up the gauntlet and finally come with an adequate answer?

You see this thread is not about who is the best but who implements the best technology and when.

Have at it.

repleo Loc: Boston

I am a self confessed Sony fan. I think Sony has been in the lead for the last couple of years in terms of technology advancement. DxoMark only lists two Canons in the top thirty. Nevertheless, I think a good Canon in the right hands is a beautiful thing.

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

It may well depend upon which company came out best after the Sunnami.....R and D....and the next developments in robotics.......the need to recognise emotions rather than a personal matrix etc.

I think that the 'specifications' of 'the average' top end camera has exceeded both the tech most people can use and the 'needs' of all but a few specialists.

'The camera' will broaden its base by being part and parcel of more things than your phone. Car entry, braking distance, GPS etc. home security, home access. Use of shared equipment in large offices, Artificial Inteligence instead of personal contact in MOST of our lives. Then people might start distrusting photographers, thinking that they are 'stealing your identity'.

3d is dead untill we can home produce hollogrammes - then the whole photography game is dead except for the Amateur and Artist.

It will be one of the Big names...But Nikon seems to have the edge on 'Science and Space' requirements. But no doubt there will continue to be a market share opportunity for copycat developments by the rest.

Whatever happens...My camera investment is modest (probably final) so not a problem

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Totally agree on cameras. Nikon is king. But I do really like Canon, Zeiss, Leitz and a few other odds and ends glass over Nikon. I wish I could have a Nikon that would accept either Canon or Nikon lenses.

Mephistopheles

Things change, but not all change persists. Technology has the shelf life of a banana, yet systems remain and frequently survive them all, while change is the only constant. Managing change is a balancing act, move too fast or too slowly you can lose balance and fall off. Canon is the market leader, and still appears to be innovating. We will see where it goes...

We have Canon and balls, to conquer them all! Happy Christmas (or whatever celebration you follow).

Attached file:
(Download)

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Cameras are a system. Canon seems to have problems with their bodies, but their lenses are a strength - and since they haven't made a substantial change in their EF system in thirty years, all those lenses in circulation will drag demand for Canon bodies for a while.

Bugfan Loc: Toronto, Canada

I was a Canon user in the seventies until they obsoleted my lenses to move to AF. I became a Nikon user when I finally went digital. I remain a Nikon user and fan still and will not switch any more.

Now what I learned in the past forty years was that if you are in the camera business you have to remain competitive or die. Canon and Nikon have been around for a while, probably since when we carved selfies in cave walls. When I was a Canon user i was really envious of Nikon, they had a lens I desperately wanted. Today as a Nikon user I am sometimes envious of Canon, they too have a lens I would love to own.

That said I find that given time each maker catches up to the other. I remember a talk I attended one time. The photographer waxed on eloquently as to why she was a Canon user. Apparently when she was ready to buy she investigated and found that Canon had a gizmo or a capability that Nikon lacked so she bought into Canon. What she didn't seem to realize though is that Nikon eventually came out with the same goods.

I think that when it comes to the Canon vs Nikon question it's not what they have today that is the issue. It's clear they will continue to evolve and each will catch up on the other. I think the same can be said about any other camera makers who are determined to stay in the businss, Sony comes to mind in this regard.

I think when you're looking at a camera the question are simple enough... does the camera you want do what is has to do? Will the camera maker provide you with new capabilities when you eventually need them? Does the camera feel good in the hand and are the controls well placed? Those are the kinds of things to think about I think. As to which is the best? There is no best. All makers sometimes have a dud, all serious makers also have incredible high quality products too. There is no best, there are only a bunch of competing camera makers who try their best to remain competitive.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

There is nothing to have at. I still love my aging Canon 7D Mark II because I am very comfortable with it and know the ins and outs of getting the best from it. I have a cadre of Canon mount lenses that meet all my needs. Regardless of newer technology, it takes the same great pictures it did when it was new. Newer cameras with increased features or improved IQ don't negate the great pictures that came before. I don't jump ship just because of newer technology. There is more to photography than that. Most pros are still happily shooting Canon more than all other brands, including Nikon, combined. I'm not making that up. It just the facts. I'm not a Canon zealot. I wouldn't care what I used if it gets me the results I want. While not intended as an example of great composition, in what significant and meaningful ways would a newer more "capable" APS-C body improve on this raw file exposure taken with a Canon 7D Mark II and a Sigma 18-35mm f/1,8 ART?

(Download)

Haydon

Ron post some of your personal images illustrating superiority and then look at this woman's work and tell me if you are even 10%. She uses aged equipment to the gear hounds yet few are any better. A rotten photographer who shoots with the best gear still makes rotten images. Do not pass go. Yes I did read your posting ;)

https://www.flickr.com/photos/75571860@N06/

Rongnongno Loc: FL

Instead of using the usual 'prove it' I see all over UHH, check my posting on the D500... More exactly seek 'Playing with a D500'.

There you will see what the newer cameras are able to do when under and over exposed, just using the DR.

There is another thread where I showed an under exposed image and pulled all the details out as a demo. I do not have the time to look for it but you are free to so in my profile.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

She is good!

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

And here I thought this thread was about camera technology.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

For now, it seems Sony is leading the way with their R&D. Nikon has recently made a major goal to improve their technology. The D850 with focus stacking. Sony proposed 10 to 15 stop HDR is in the works.
WITH THAT SAID IT IS STILL THE PHOTOGRAPHER THAT TAKES THE SHOTS AND MAKES THE DIFFERENCE REGARDLESS OF THE ADVANCES IN TECHNOLOGY.

Rongnongno Loc: FL

And there is no need to use caps, please.

Still you are correct with one caveat:
If a photographer wants to improve the use of newer technology does not hurt - something folks who yell do not quite accept or understand -.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Of course new technology usually doesn't hurt, and in the hands of somebody who knows what they're doing, and depending on the circumstances it's used in, there is the potential for superior results. But the latest and greatest cameras by themselves are not a panacea for achieving better results. That's mostly in the minds of gearheads.