Because people pay it
Is there really a demand for webcams nowadays (especially in the pro market and their expensive cameras), or is it Canon trying to mimick phone subscriptions? I’m asking this because I’m not a photographer, but the webcam fad seems to have died decades ago and I’m confused by this.
It came back during Covid, I have a box of webcams now.
They’re much more targeting workers nowadays.
Every professional or amateur streamer or Youtuber is a potential client.
For those of us who are dedicated amateurs, work from home has added the need to attend meetings by video
And if you’ve got a good camera, some studio lights, and a nice portrait lens, you can absolutely outclass all the other people using laptop or phone cameras
So it really is critical to webcamify your digital SLR or mirrorless
Streamers
deleted by creator
I chose the wrong horse. Wtf Canon, I’ve given you fuckers tens of thousands of dollars over the years and you artificially restrict functionality to nickle and dime me?
Guess I’ll sell my lenses and switch to Sony or Nikon then. Sucks to suck!
For what it’s worth, my Sony connects as a webcam no problems at all
Yeah, I’d seriously considered getting an nicer Alpha but I shot Canon for decades so I stuck with them.
The until-very-recently closed off RF mount was another indicator. Their first party glass is great, but it’s not cheap.
Yeah, on my old Canon 7D and 1Dmk2, my favorite lens was actually a Tamron (pretty wide zoom, super sharp, and aperture got down to 2)
I’ve been using Tamron’s 150-500: for a lot of sports and have been really happy with it. Also have two Sigma primes that are also both great.
Huge lens, but a lot of bang for your buck. I’ve got one of those too lol
I’ve been very pleased with it. It renders really nicely, the focus is snappy/reliable and tracks well, it seems well built, etc. My only complaint is that I haven’t figured out how to attach a lanyard to it without the tripod foot.
There aren’t really any smaller options for a FF sensor if you want that kind of reach, or at-least I didn’t find any.
You could try printing or molding a lanyard ring that uses the tripod mount’s ring as a model, but why not just use the tripod mount itself? It’s solidly made and would retain the ability to mount the lens on whatever.
I had considered printing something, but the total weight of the camera + lens combined with the fairly small lanyard pass throughs have been deterring me. I’m sure a print would take the weight statically, but I’m worried about transitory loads from putting the camera down and walking.
The collar has a non-removeable foot and I use the lens hand held. The whole thing weighs 155g/5.5 oz, which isn’t horrible, but the foot gets in the way. I keep it pointing up, which works, but is somewhat clunky.
What do you mean mold a lanyard ring?
Greed
deleted by creator
At the top level, MBAs see brand reputation as value to be cashed in on, nothing more and nothing less
deleted by creator
Boeing? Decades of genius and engineering and a market monopoly? Let’s sell all that into the future by doing share buybacks and starving the rest of the company. Winning!
They saw all the other subscription services and thought, me too!
Probably because the software team is under a different cost center than the hardware/camera team, and they weren’t generating revenue. So the idiot assholes at the top of the SW side said “we can monetize our webcam software” and a bunch of people agreed so they could look relevant and keep their jobs. Capitalism!
I’ve worked in corporate America long enough to know this is exactly what happens. Companies will look at departments by revenue and just consider everything else expenses. They don’t consider that people won’t buy your hardware without good software support.
I stopped by HP long before their hardware went to shit because their drivers went to complete crap. I know I’m not alone on this. So what did HP do when their sales went down? Did they reinvest in good drivers and firmware? Nope, they just loaded their drivers with adware and made things even worse. When they didn’t work they started using cheaper parts in their printers. The LaserJet printers dominated the corporate landscape 20 years ago. Then they all got slowly replaced by Brother because Brother invested in good drivers and firmware.
I’ll remember not to buy or recomend Canon then.
The blockade of third party glass is the only reason I didn’t give them a look when I was looking for a mirrorless camera. Granted, this was a few years ago and things have slightly improved since then. They still can’t touch e-mount glass availability though.
Same thing here. I went with Sony because of how expansive the E-mount lineup was, including 3rd parties (even the lesser known ones like Samyang and Viltrox).
At the time, Canon’s first party lineup was pretty lackluster if you weren’t looking for the L-series professional lenses. It’s gotten better since then, but in terms of value it’s very hard to compete with Sony since third parties are much cheaper, and used availability is much better due to the age of the system.
I was wilIing to give z-mount a shot after spending 10 years shooting a D40 and D5300. I didn’t really like the Z6II and I’m glad I hopped to e-mount. I’ve picked up some truly great third party glass.
Damn, first time I read about that I understood it as 5$ for the app and done, nit 5$ A MONTH.
