Why is Canikon so afraid to give us a high quality compact ff

>>3140608
Actually Nikon seems to be kinda ready to do it pretty soon.

they are still feeling save in their comfort zone with their DSLRs. but it's a bit strange because the sonys and mirrorless cameras with interchangeable lenses in general sell pretty good from what i've heard.

Canon lacks the high-end mirrorless AF technology, and so does Nikon.

They are afraid they will appear as inferior.

>>3140613
What about canon's dual-pixel-something-shit af? I heard it quite decent.

>>3140608
Canikon will dey make dey new camera for dey sell good good?

>>3140638
If has a fancy name that impress you people, and good marketing behind it.

But if it's as good as the marketing says, then why did it lose focus here? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xo9qKPVhEk&feature=youtu.be&t=1020
The subject moves a little bit, and it loses focus.

That doesn't exactly scream of "high end" to me.

>>3140608
>Why is Canikon so afraid to give us a high quality compact ff mirrorless?
Dunno. Why is Sony so afraid to offer high quality customer support?

>>3140608
They'd have to spend millions in r&d to make a good lens lineup that would make the system viable
Sony's already tried this and their system still hasn't been adopted by pros
Mirrorless will be stuck at the enthusiast level for the next 5 years
>inb4 muh a9
it's still not viable as a pro platform no matter what your stats sheets say

>>3140780
A9 is just the beginning. There will be more of its kind, more advanced, more sophisticated.

And Canon won't be in the running against them.

>>3140638
Super slow compared to OVF. there was an official Canon video with 4s ovf acquisition compared to 14s dp-pdaf or something but I'm too lazy to find it right now.

>>3140809
>There will be more of its kind
Oh crikey no, back off you rotter

Sony wont be in the running against either Canon or Nikon until they get their act together with regards to service and support. A company that backs up its products is far more valuable to a professional than an extra smidgin of dynamic range

>>3140882
>A company that backs up its products is far more valuable to a professional
you have obviously never dealt with Canon CPS or Nikon NPS, I swear people stick with these companies because of something like battered wife syndrome. Or that they just know the other side isn't any better.

>>3140921
>Canon CPS
You've got your head up your arse. I have dealt with CPS lots of times and found they really go the extra mile to help. Nikon I can't comment on because I don't use their equipment. Sony treat their third party service centres with the same contempt that they treat their customers.

>>3140987
CPS is great if you are in a major centre, a customer of mine frequently got better service sending his camera to California than dealing with Canon in Seattle or Vancouver. Once Canon lost a customers camera and dented even receiving it, they found it 3 months later in a box under some shit in their loading dock

>>3140997
>hey found it 3 months later in a box under some shit in their loading dock
And you were there to witness this no doubt

>>3140987

>Sony treat their third party service centres with the same contempt that they treat their customers

I thought we were talking about CPS. Sony does all their CPS stuff in house. Only the regular customers have to deal with third party service centers.

>>3141003
no that was their excuse, The store I worked at sent it in for the customer, I did the initial paperwork for the work order and spent a lot of time on the phone with Canon trying to find out where the camera was.

>>3141010
CPS = Canon Professional Services

File: 1492343124744.png (448KB, 846x900px) Image search: [Google]

448KB, 846x900px

>>Canikon so afraid

Cute. Enjoy your form over function.

>>3141183
Blackout-free EVF is a great function.

When will Blackout-free DSLRs ever be invented?

File: 800px-Canon_pellix.jpg (98KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 800x600px

>>3141186
>When will Blackout-free DSLRs ever be invented?

I dunno, in 1965?

>>3141206
When the mirror goes up, it blocks the OVF. That's not blackout-free.

>>3141209
The mirror doesn't go up in the Pellix, bruh.

>>3141216
Then it's not really a DSLR, more like the A99 thingy.

>>3141217
Before Sony invented the term "SLT" in the 2000s, those were referred to as SLRs because the term doesn't specify a flippy mirror.

Also, it's not a DSLR simply because it's not Digital.

>>3141186
>When will Blackout-free DSLRs ever be invented?
Who the fuck cares about blackout free? it's just another of Sony's non-feature features hyped up to impress the gullible

>>3141382
It's a good feature which is pretty much praised by anyone who tried it.

>>3141384
>by anyone who tried it
>WOW my kamerruh didn't black out for an imperceptible fraction of a second during exposure

It's a non feature you dozy pratt. It makes absolutely no difference to the photo taking process

>>3141390
Flickering isn't nice or pleasant thing if you can avoid it, and at no loss of light penalty.

>>3141392
>Flickering isn't nice
Anon scrapes barrel

>>3141390
It makes a difference when you're machine-gunning sports, especially since the AF system also gets momentarily cut off every time. But then, nobody on /p/ shoots sports.

>>3141636
>nobody on /p/ shoots sports
nor does anyone with a Sony

File: 132A3671 (Custom).jpg (493KB, 1000x1500px) Image search: [Google]

493KB, 1000x1500px

>>3141636
>machine-gunning sports
Unless you want a million files to go through, you shouldn't be shooting bursts longer than 3~5.

Follow the action through finder eye, keep tabs on positions with other eye, track with AF, and pump the shutter when the action peaks.

>But then, nobody on /p/ shoots sports.
u wot

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	Canon
Camera Model	Canon EOS 7D Mark II
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 5.7.1 (Windows)
Maximum Lens Aperture	f/2.8
Image-Specific Properties:
Horizontal Resolution	300 dpi
Vertical Resolution	300 dpi
Image Created	2017:02:09 23:54:57
Exposure Time	1/1250 sec
F-Number	f/3.5
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	2000
Lens Aperture	f/3.5
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Pattern
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	90.00 mm
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard

>>3140638

Falls short of cdaf on older Sony mirrorless models.

>>3141157

No shit. Sony has their own equivalent to CPS.

It is pretty serious unlike thier consumer stuff (which sucks for EVERY manufacturer).

>>3142221
>Unless you want a million files to go through, you shouldn't be shooting bursts longer than 3~5.

Why not? That's what pro cameras are made for with their ridiculous buffer depth, and picking one best shot out of a series of 50 isn't hard.

>>3142363
>pro cameras are made for with their ridiculous buffer depth

They were made for durability and reliability, fuck hueg buffer depth only became a thing when digital photography lowered the bar in terms of skill and cost required, and"semi-skilled machine operator" types that came about as a result kept whining about the buffer never being deep enough online. Of course a decent sized buffer is always nice, but if you need a hundred frames, you're doing something wrong.

A few hundred frames for a sporting event was perfectly fine.
Anyone can see sports photography declined after the 2000s.

>>3140608
>>3140609
>>3140611
>>3140613
>>3140638
>>3140639
>>3140640
>>3140731
>>3140780
>>3140809
>>3140848
>>3140882
>>3140921
>>3140987
>>3140997
>>3141003
>>3141010
>>3141124
>>3141157
>>3141183
>>3141186
>>3141206
>>3141209
>>3141216
>>3141217
>>3141220
>>3141382
>>3141384
>>3141390
>>3141392
>>3141402
>>3141636
>>3141645
>>3142221
>>3142227
>>3142229
>>3142363
>>3142686
General FUD thread. Consider most arguments to be subjective, cherry-picked, made by fanboys or at least not in direct comparison.

Gaze upon >>3144251, the most useless of all shitposters.