why are you guys still guessing, I have a product sku For the EOS 20D. ok, just remember that I told you so in about 2 months. ok, remember I told you so.
skasol wrote:
why are you guys still guessing, I have a product sku For the EOS 20D. ok, just remember that I told you so in about 2 months. ok, remember I told you so.
One problem is that the price of $1599 doesn't fit comfortably into either theory. It is too low for a 1.3 crop sensor, and too high for a conceivable 10D replacement with 1.6 sensor.
A 1.6 sensor 10D at $1599 would be great news for Nikon and their very successful D70. Few people would buy a 10D at this price.
A 1.3 sensor 10D at $1599 would strain the fab capacities of Canon until this time next year, and hurt sales of the 1D Mk II. Profits would be a little thin per unit as well.
It's possible that the next 10D will have some very different technology, like a Foveon-type sensor, that makes it a different product entirely, but I think we would have heard something definitive about this by now.
Btw, I disagree with Arka's assessment of potential DSLR buyers. They seem very aware of the value of larger sensors. Even if they don't know all the reasons why a larger sensor is a plus, they know enough to want them.
drumminj wrote:
Isca - I believe it's merely an issue of having wide angle lenses be truly wide-angle. If you want wide on a 1.6 crop camera, there aren't many options. On a 1.3 or FF camera, the 17-40 is wide enough (or even too wide). On a 1.6, you probably need the Sigma 12-24. However, on the opposite end, with a 1.6 you get more reach from your lenses. It all depends what you shoot.
Also, if the sensor gets bumped to 8MP, you may get too much density on a 1.6x sensor. You get more interference from neighboring pixels, and thus more noise, blooming, etc.
Another issue is the viewfinder size. Because of the 1.6x crop, the 10D viewfinder is pretty small compared to a FF camera.
Yep, and the vast majority of DSLR buyers who have any experience at all with SLR cameras will be aware of at least one of these factors. Those with no experience or knowledge of SLRs will be more likely to start off in the sub-$1000 range.
drumminj wrote:
Isca - I believe it's merely an issue of having wide angle lenses be truly wide-angle. If you want wide on a 1.6 crop camera, there aren't many options. On a 1.3 or FF camera, the 17-40 is wide enough (or even too wide). On a 1.6, you probably need the Sigma 12-24. However, on the opposite end, with a 1.6 you get more reach from your lenses. It all depends what you shoot.
Also, if the sensor gets bumped to 8MP, you may get too much density on a 1.6x sensor. You get more interference from neighboring pixels, and thus more noise, blooming, etc.
Another issue is the viewfinder size. Because of the 1.6x crop, the 10D viewfinder is pretty small compared to a FF camera.
That about sums it up - noise, wide, tiny viewfinder that makes manual focus nearly impossible. Not that the 10D is noisy, but making the sensor more dense is going to have a negative effect on that situation. The 10D/Digirebel already sports the highest pixel density of any DSLR.
PKuglin wrote:
Arka who said the 1.3 crop was a selling feature and your opinion of the buying public is sad. I would give people more credit.
I think the issue is the "cost of goods sold" and if using the same sensor in the 1DMkII and the 10D allows to reduction in the COGS of both then it might make since. Unless we know the numbers who is to say. Intel can make between $80 and $500 for the exact same silicon design when in is binned for preformance. Same could be true for CMOS sensors - it really depends on what is causing the yield loss. Now I really think it is remote, but not as absolute as you put it. ...Show more →
With a fair amount of experience in retail sales, I can speak from my experience on this point, and not much more. I also spend a a lot of time in the camera stores, and can see what kinds of questions people ask about technology. If you think that this estimation is sad, you should spend some time selling this stuff in retail. I used to sell computers and technology in retail, and at my University, and the degree of ignorance that exists among new users is borderline appaling. And really, who can blame the new consumer? I didn't know what crop factor was when I started on this process. I could've cared less, and you would not have been able to sell me on a smaller factor without a LOT of explanation. Many of the people contemplating the jump to dSLR photgraphy are entering it with an even more limited and less enthusiast background, especially at this level. You can't assume what people are looking for on these forums represent the consumer/prosumer public at large, because they don't. In selling mass volume, the item with the higher commission sells, and the product that is easiest to pitch sells. And if the added expense of the larger sensor/smaller crop is not a 'selling feature' as you ask, then why would Canon even contemplate putting it in there? It is by necessity more expensive than the 1.6x 6MP fab because it require more raw material. If they can't use it as a selling point, better to stick with the cheaper sensor, no?
skasol wrote:
Arka I only have one question for you and please take in mind that I think you're an educated person with great manners and helpful.
what exactly do you mean by "Maybe the (WAGE SLAVE) at Best Buy?"
Just wondering what that paragraph means to you.
Without stoking any political or social debate, I will state that I am no using that term as a means of denoting socioeconomic class or any sort of inferiority. I was simply implying that the people who work at Best Buy are, for the most part, not going to work there for the rest of their lives. The pay is low, the training is lousy, and the store policies are exploitative in general. As such, the environment is not always conducive to having dedicated and knowledgable people to explain products. Commission sales for technology and retail are better, and are the retail stores that pay better (Apple store, etc) but only marginally so. I've been there, and I worked at some of their competitors in commission sales while in college, so I can speak with some field experience on this point. Most of the guys there are looking to move on, and are only using Best Buy as a stop along the way to bigger things. How much in depth knowledge would you expect them to have at $7.00-9.00 an hour?
I may have used a classist and derogatory remark casually there, so I apologize if I did. It was not my intent to offend anyone.
[That about sums it up - noise, wide, tiny viewfinder that makes manual focus nearly impossible. Not that the 10D is noisy, but making the sensor more dense is going to have a negative effect on that situation. The 10D/Digirebel already sports the highest pixel density of any DSLR.
Why does everyone keep assuming no technology change? The D60 had the same size sensor and twice as many pixels as the D30, yet the noise didn't go through the roof. Yes, if we crammed twice as many 10D pixels into the 10D sensor, chances are it would be noisier; but I don't think that Canon would cram 10D pixels in there.
Same for pixel density. The D1 used to be the highest density DSLR, yet Nikon themselves upped it with the D1x. Just because the 10D is now the king it doesn't mean it will never change. The question is when, and I think that enough time has passed since the D60 that something could happen to the sensor.
Arka, the basic matter is that the 10D is not Canon's entry-level DSLR, so it does not have be the barest bones value proposition. If the buying public at large were as uninformed as you suggest, then the 10D would barely sell at all, nor would the D70 being do so well relative to the Digital Rebel, even though it costs $100 more even before you get into lenses. Unless you were to assume that people are buying the D70 because they like black better than silver.
I could have easily been one of the people you thought knew nothing about computers, though I have worked with them and on them for a number of years. I usually don't bother to correct salespeople, mainly because I don't care what they know or don't know. If a salesman tells me the latest Pentium is the most powerful processor you can buy, I don't explain things like IPC or memory latency to him or her. I politely ignore them....
Look guys. "Joe Consumer" cares about (1) the amount of money that will have to leave his pocket, (2) the number of megapixels in his new camera (a direct measure of quality in his mind, and an easy one at that), and (3) the number in front of the X when they describe the zoom. 12x is not as good as 20x.
If you doubt this, go hang out at Best Buy for a while and listen to the salesman pitch cameras. The "Joe Consumer" camera buyer is not even close to the same level as the members of this forum, but you have to understand that for every one of us, there are at least 20 of them. THEY are driving the market, not us.
but if $ 8,000 montly (take home) is slave driving
Really. $8000/month take home working at Best Buy. Lets see at 35% tax base (28% fed, 7% state and that is very light) that would be:
gross = 8000/.65 = 12,300/month
at 160 hours/month that would be about $78/hour. Not sure I believe that.
Bearcat - you bring-up an interesting point. It is quite often that the saleman knows less about the product than I do. I tend to do research before I buy especially if it cost in the multiple digits.
stanj wrote:
Why does everyone keep assuming no technology change? The D60 had the same size sensor and twice as many pixels as the D30, yet the noise didn't go through the roof. Yes, if we crammed twice as many 10D pixels into the 10D sensor, chances are it would be noisier; but I don't think that Canon would cram 10D pixels in there.
Same for pixel density. The D1 used to be the highest density DSLR, yet Nikon themselves upped it with the D1x. Just because the 10D is now the king it doesn't mean it will never change. The question is when, and I think that enough time has passed since the D60 that something could happen to the sensor.
I agree with you, and I think that Canon even could make a 8 MP at 1.6 that would be about as noise-free as their current 10D sensor. But, that's not the direction I'd like to see the manufacturers go in, and I wouldn't be in a rush to support it. There is a silly MP race going on with P&S digicams at the expense of image quality, and I'd hate to see the same thing happen with DSLRs. With every new generation, I want to see less noise, better DR, and optimally more resolution. I don't want it to be more resolution, and "barely more noise than the current model."
I think we might see a 8 MP 1.6 crop sensor in the next Digital Rebel in February.
JCDoss wrote:
Look guys. "Joe Consumer" cares about (1) the amount of money that will have to leave his pocket, (2) the number of megapixels in his new camera (a direct measure of quality in his mind, and an easy one at that), and (3) the number in front of the X when they describe the zoom. 12x is not as good as 20x.
Given your argument, nobody would buy a DSLR, much less a 10D, when you could have a higher-MP, deeper zoom camera like the Sony 828. In which case
a) DSLR manufacture is not feasible
b) The purchasing protocol of your hypothetical Joe Consumer is not germane to the DSLR marketplace.
Why does the 10D need to be replaced now? The Canon A2 was introduced in late 1991 and it was not discontinued until 2000. It enjoyed an 8 to 9 year life span. The A2 was succeeded by the EOS 3 and it seems to be enjoying a similar life span. The EOS 3, A2E and 10D all had very similar price points throughout their product lives. Why couldn't a new camera be introduced and the 10D stay in the product line?
Jeff, let me guess, you own a 10D and don't want a new kid on the block, right?
My personal guess is that at the point of A2's arrival, SLRs had been around for nearly half a century. Thus, improvements would have a tendency to even out after a long time. I'd speculate that most EOS 1V and Nik F5 users would say those cameras, re: film, would consider them just about perfect. I don't think most 10D users would say the same about their units; we are still in the infancy of digital. And, digital seems to have the same mindset as Manifest Destiny - go go go go go. Thus, we will see plenty of improvements now. IMHO, of course.
stanj wrote:
Why does everyone keep assuming no technology change? The D60 had the same size sensor and twice as many pixels as the D30, yet the noise didn't go through the roof. Yes, if we crammed twice as many 10D pixels into the 10D sensor, chances are it would be noisier; but I don't think that Canon would cram 10D pixels in there.
Same for pixel density. The D1 used to be the highest density DSLR, yet Nikon themselves upped it with the D1x. Just because the 10D is now the king it doesn't mean it will never change. The question is when, and I think that enough time has passed since the D60 that something could happen to the sensor.
I'm not saying that a lower noise denser sensor (almost poetic) can't be made. What I'm saying is that making the sensor more dense, in and of itself will introduce more noise to the image. Look at the Pro-1. Very dense and very noisy. Its just a matter of whether the technology can accomodate that increase and still produce low-noise.
As well, eventually, we'll bump up against the physical limitations of both the ability to build sensors that precise, and against the physical characteristics of light itself.
Jeff Donald wrote:
Why does the 10D need to be replaced now? The Canon A2 was introduced in late 1991 and it was not discontinued until 2000. It enjoyed an 8 to 9 year life span. The A2 was succeeded by the EOS 3 and it seems to be enjoying a similar life span. The EOS 3, A2E and 10D all had very similar price points throughout their product lives. Why couldn't a new camera be introduced and the 10D stay in the product line?
Either Canon takes a leading step or Nikon will take it. Its a very moving, young, competitive market right now. 35 mm is pretty mature by comparison.
From a post on Photo.net
(post might be deleted, so I am giving the full quote)):
"Hi everybody,
I just went to a camera shop to buy a PowerShot S50 for my wife. A friend of mine introduced me to a local Canon dealer. He just came back from some dealers meeting, where they have been informed about new products for the next season:
EOS D20 body: 8.? Mpix (I think 8.3), 1.6 crop sensor, EF-S mount, 5frames/sec, larger buffer (he forgot how large)...
EF-S 10-22mm lens
EF-S 18-85 IS lens
some other lenses...
I'm not sure if this is really true, but I think that the official embargo is untill some time in August.
So we have to wait and see!"
.
.
.
The above info sorta confirms what Art (skasol) posted here:
"well here it is guys, I work for a trusty retail store, and the only info that I have so far is a "sku" # and a model # so here it is canon eos 20D with a EF-s18-55MM lens. I have a stock date of october 10 2004 I have weight width and height but I don't think that is important. so I have 2 more months to wait.
forgot the price, I have a listed price of 1599.99 "
.
.
.
Art, I just want to clarify - Does the $1600 20D price include the 18-55/EF-S lens?
skasol wrote:
well here it is guys, I work for a trusty retail store, and the only info that I have so far is a "sku" # and a model # so here it is canon eos 20D with a EF-s18-55MM lens. I have a stock date of october 10 2004 I have weight width and height but I don't think that is important. so I have 2 more months to wait.
forgot the price, I have a listed price of 1599.99
Are the weight width and height the same as the 10D, if they are different that would indicate a new body, so they probably are significant.
who said the 1.3 crop was a selling feature and your opinion of the buying public is sad. I would give people more credit.