Tentacle Offline Image Upload: Off
|
'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread | |
nikt wrote:
[...]
They were unconvinced by my initial explanation thats its not solely about megapixels. I told them that the 1Dn has 8MP and the price, and the Nikon D2Hs' 4MP and the price. It does frustrate me, I must admit, it shouldn't.
[...]
There is hope... For a long time "Megahertz" was king. After that "Gigahertz" was king. Intel tried to milk that for what it was worth and its upper management decided to build a processor from the ground up with high frequencies in mind. The small print would be that the number of instructions per cycle would drop, but that was fine, the speed would more than compensate...
AMD couldn't keep up the frequencies and introduced a rating number system, to indicate that its CPUs could keep up with the higher clocked Intel processors. Because its performance would keep up. Intel said "it would never use a rating system." Then Intel ran headlong into the thermal barrier with their Netburst (aka Pentium 4) architecture...
End of the story? Intel is using performance numbers as well now. Because the generation after the P4/Netburst line of processors is clocked slower yet is more powerful. (And they now whoop AMD's rear section pretty hard.) The industry, and the buying public, has caught up, or at least is in the process of catching up, with this new idea.
danmitchell wrote:
[...]
The 30D and its replacement (should there be one) might be even more problematic for Canon. Yes, the 30D is a fine crop sensor camera body. However, it no longer surpasses all of the competitors in the way that it (and the 10D and the 20D) did in this category in the past. It still sits at 8MP while the competition has moved on to 10MP, and it doesn't have additional features (whose value we could debate, but again, let's not) like dust reduction, etc. In fact, there are quite a few people who feel that Canon's own 400D beats the 30D in certain areas and for certain types of use.
[...]
I still feel that some reorganization of the product line might be coming. If so, while we are unlikely to see a wholesale introduction of all new cameras this spring, I'd bet that Canon sees a path forward and new introductions might be seen in light of such changes.
I'm still of the opinion that the only way for Canon to retain strong differentiation between its products in the 30D segment and those of the competition is to move that model level to full frame before too long. For some time I have felt that it would be possible and desirable for Canon to push a 5D-like 12MP full frame body into a price range where it could appeal to current 30D buyers.To my way of thinking, the initial price should be within a few hundred dollars of the inflation adjusted original list price of, say, the 20D. (Upgrading the 400D may have helped make this possible.) In addition, this would permit the introduction of a more capable (sealed, etc.) 16 MP body at about the original price of the 5D - though this probaby can't happen before the 1-series bodies are updatd.
I'll float this up again: How about getting the 40D a APS-H sized sensor?
Accept for now that the dreaded field stitching (which definately isn't a Canon PR fable, ask any large IC manufactuter) is wrecking yields, and as a result full frame sensors are 10 to 20 times more expensive than APS-C sized parts. Funnily enough, APS-H sits right at the limit of stich-less sensor size. Do the math: If Canon wants to get their Unique Selling Point for the 30D successor, then APS-H COULD do nicely. A 50% increase in sensor suface area can be put to good use. Do I need to elaborate on those benefits ? 
(Btw, nice and insightfull post Dan.)
|