Recommendations for formally submitting an idea to Canon

[ChrisPBacon]

Over the past few months, I've been polling members of the local astrophotography community and have a general consensus for an idea that many of us would like to see incorporated in a full-frame EOS camera, along the lines of less-is-more, but having some very useful options.  I'd like to formally propose the idea to Canon.

I've telephoned Canon to discuss the idea, getting a rather lukewarm or tepid response from those I've talked with; I've even approached managers at the San Francisco Canon learning center and have been given a polite audience, but get the idea they'd rather have teeth pulled than to forward my suggestion formally to Canon.  I've asked those I've spoken with about formally proposing this to Canon and have been told they'd research this and call me back, but months have gone by without any information being sent to me regarding making formal proposal to them.

While I have extensive professional experience dealing with the Japanese corporate culture — even speaking both kyōtsūgo and kansai — I know that such proposals made by gaijin are not generally well-regarded. 

Any ideas of what might get Canon's attention?

[Waddizzle]

What is the idea?  

I do not know where Canon has their ear to ground.  But there was a significant public outcry regarding their latest camera bodies lacking 24 FPS video.  Canon was excoriated on YouTube by one video after another.

[ChrisPBacon]

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

What is the idea?

---

Whatever the idea—and I'm understandably reluctant to discuss it—I've spent months polling photographers, astrophotographers, scientists, and astronomers about my ideas, and what I have to offer (with an open hand) to Canon, and it's gained a consensus among those I've talked with.  One thing I learned about doing business in Japan: they don't like good ideas coming from gaijin:  owning an Acura, I've learned the hard way that suggestions fall on deaf ears.  However, hopefully, Canon might realize that good ideas aren't the exclusive intellectual property of Japanese engineers, as we all learned in 2011.

I'm focusing on the process, not content.  

[Waddizzle]

Introducing the EOS Ra.

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/cameras/eos-dslr-and-mirrorless-c... 

[ebiggs1]

"Any ideas of what might get Canon's attention?"

For one thing you probably need a topic that isn't such a limited part of the photography market. I doubt a purpose built camera for astrophography or even one with astro settings would garner enough interest or sales to make it profitable.

Canon did make the Canon EOS 60Da DSLR Astrophotography Camera. I don't know if it is still available.  It was a limited camera and I doubt very many were made and sold.

[ChrisPBacon]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

For one thing you probably need a topic that isn't such a limited part of the photography market...

Canon did make the Canon EOS 60Da DSLR Astrophotography Camera...

---

You're quite correct, of course, especially if the features, etc, are specific to astrophotography.  

There are two issues here: one, the utility of cameras to do one job very well and two, overcoming a cultural bias deeply ingrained within the corporation.

I love my Fuji XT1 and yet, it's emblematic of the trend of camera manufacturers to compete with other companies to provide new, flashy features.  I don't need a camera that can get my text messages, play my favorite music, get stock quotes, and split the atom.  I don't think very much of the reviewers that compare a plethora of useless features of cameras made by competitors, which adds to the frenzy of both engineers and marketeers. Cameras don't take photographs: photographers do.  It's all about the subject; light appropriate to the subject; and the decisive moment.  I know that I'm preaching to choir when I say that cameras do one thing, and that's to create data files, very good data files.  A growing number of international photography professionals that I've polled agree with me.

In many companies, there is a cultural "not-invented-here" bias: I have a technology-package Acura which is loaded with so many features, they have to restrict their use to when the vehicle is not moving — which assumes that a passenger isn't available to operate the restricted feature while moving; it boils down to the self-defeating least common denominator (the driver can't be trusted to use common sense) controlling the technology — especially in this day-and-age of modern electronics.  Cameras are the opposite extreme: manufacturers are equipping their cameras with features of increasing complexity, making them more prone to failure and decreasing their dependability/accessibility, and exacerbate the ability of the individual to troubleshoot problems.  In this process, manufacturers run off on tangents that feed the feature frenzy, tasking their engineers with meeting marketing priorities, not focusing on technical excellence — and yet, as someone has pointed out, Canon has been eviscerated in recent years as the company has failed to meet the expectations of its customers: companies that fail to meet the needs and expectations of its customers lose market share — exactly what has happened to Canon: I wonder what priorities are driving the company, and who is citing what those priorities are.  It was precisely this complexity and lack of accessibility that caused my to purchase my Fuji XT1, my first non-Canon camera purchased in 22 years.

At photography conventions in the UK and UAE, photography professionals I polled expressed that they are growing increasingly dissatisfied with the countless layers and layers of features new cameras are being equipped with.  There's a growing gap in the market created by increasing complexity on the one hand and the need for relatively simple cameras stripped of the useless layers of features for the sake of simplicity and ease in using—and functionality of—accessible controls that would easily change the basic options all photographers need to capture the light. I actually, at one of these conventions, watched a manufacturer's representative hunt almost 40 minutes through countless layers of features when the camera didn't function as expected: I saw a professional photographer, who has used the EOS 5D Mk IV since it came out, hunt almost 17 minutes when the camera didn't function as expected.

The EOS 60Da isn't what I'm looking for.

[ebiggs1]

"I wonder what priorities are driving the company,..."

Simple----> profits. It drives all companies or they will not be in business long.  I actually agree with some of your points. However, I believe Canon and all the rest of the camera producing industry missed to boat on camera design and totally ruined the P&S market.  Young folks today are used to electronic working a different way than us older folks do.  Canon didn't think so and the low end market vanished or at minimum decreased dramatically.

"The EOS 60Da isn't what I'm looking for."

The 60Da was not a suggestion it was an example.  I doubt it was a finical success and proves the point. If there was a real market in any astro capable camera, there would be more.

[kvbarkley]

If it is a software change, talk to the magic lantern folks.

[Stephen · Accepted solution]

Hello!

If you have a suggestion for improving an existing product or software, please start a new topic for discussion.  

If you're interested in submitting an idea for a new product, please see the following from the Terms of Use section of our site under section 4. User Generated Content here:

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/about/legal/terms-of-use

Unsolicited Ideas: Canon U.S.A. and its parent company, subsidiaries and affiliates have been actively engaged in research and development in diversified scientific and business areas for many years. In order to protect the interests of Canon U.S.A., its parent company, affiliates and subsidiaries in the ideas and information which have been conceived or developed internally, and to avoid possible future misunderstandings with you or others, Canon U.S.A. does not solicit ideas, inventions, work samples, materials, demos, and the like or agree to receive any confidential information from persons or entities outside the Canon Group. Canon U.S.A. maintains a strict policy of not accepting or considering any creative ideas, suggestions or materials from the public ("Unsolicited Idea(s)") and therefore you should not submit any Unsolicited Idea(s) to Canon U.S.A. in any User Generated Content through this Services or otherwise. Canon U.S.A. does not wish to receive Unsolicited Idea(s) from you and has expressly advised you not to submit them. If you nonetheless intend to submit an Unsolicited Idea, Canon U.S.A. strongly recommends that you first consult an attorney in order to evaluate the effect that submitting such an Unsolicited Idea would have on any rights that you might otherwise have.

Nonetheless, if you do send Canon U.S.A. an Unsolicited Idea that is not already protected by a United States patent or is not public information, it immediately becomes the property of Canon U.S.A. By submitting an Unsolicited Idea to Canon U.S.A., you agree to convey your ownership interest in the Unsolicited Idea to Canon U.S.A., and that Canon U.S.A. will exclusively own all rights, title and interest therein. Furthermore, Canon U.S.A. and its designees will be free to use, without any compensation to you whatsoever, any concepts, ideas, know-how or techniques contained in any Unsolicited Idea for any purpose whatsoever, including but not limited to developing, manufacturing, and marketing products using such information. Neither Canon U.S.A. nor the Canon Group will be liable for such use or disclosure of such Unsolicited Idea or for any similarities in the Unsolicited Idea and any future uses or activities.

[ChrisPBacon]

Thank you for your response.