Steve, you've nailed exactly what I was getting at. That Canon will look to bring out either a 'boring' (if I can use that world) upgrade to the 30D. Or they will do as Nikon have done and bring out a mini 1Ds, maintain the 1.6x, not have quite the resolution or fps, and price it above the D200, since it will be a better camera (I will assume).
There's been discussion that Canon wouldn't do this becuase it would eat into 1Ds sales, but Nikon did with the D200 and it certainly hasn't hurt Nikon. In fact, the cameras compliment each other very nicely.
RE IS pricing: Recently the addition of IS has added about $500-$600 to the cost of an existing type of lens.
RE 5D: There is no real competition at this time for a 12MP full frame camera, but it can't be too long before someone else (Nikon?) introduces full frame sensor bodies, at which point simply providing a full frame sensor body will no longer differentiate Canon the was it currently does. At that point (and maybe before?) Canon may want to have a better full frame body. It could be better on price, MP count, other body features, or whatever...
RE 30D: It seems to me that this market niche is where Canon has the biggest problem. While not everyone agrees, the 400D in some ways surpasses it. Even with a sensor upgrade (10MP) and the other features a "40D" would not be clearly a major upgrade over the 400D or above other similar cameras from a number of manufacturers - Nikon, Pentax, Sony. Until recently, Canon's offering in this segment (the 30D) outperformed what little competition there was. Now a 40D with a 10MP sensor, dust reduction, larger display, etc would not be much different from the competition.
(If you think the 20D to 30D "upgrade" was underwhelming, imagine how the market would respond to a me-too upgrade to a 10MP 40D with dust reduction, etc. Ho hum. ;-)
(On the other hand, the 400D is pretty competitive with the other manufactures' offerings - on price and features - and it comes with the Canon reputation (and the white lenses ;-). The 5D obviously has no current competion - it is best in class since it is alone there. More or less the same is true for the 1-series bodies.)
It wouldn't surpise me if before long (though maybe not PMA) Canon decided to move the current 30D segment to full frame. In other words, rather than upgrading to a 40D that isn't much different from the competition, they could leapfrog the competition in this segment with a reasonably prices full frame body. It would cost more than the 30D, but not much more than the inflation adjusted price in this category - perhaps it would list for a bit above $2000 with room for the price to naturally drop below $2000, perhaps even $1800 market price before too long. With such a camera at this price point and an evolved 400D below that, what potential 40D buyer (excepting some wildlife photographers) wouldn't go for the full frame option? And how many 20D/30D owners would be interested in upgrading?
This, by the way, could also allow for a more powerful 400D (less features disabled to differentiate it from the 30D) to be truly best of breed in that category and allow it to be even more competitve against offerings by Nikon and others. It would also make some space for an upgraded full frame camera at about the current list price of the 5D, namely in the low $3000 range. In addition, eventually making the 400D category the "high end" of the APS-C range would leave space for an even less expensive entry level APS-C body.
I think the Digital Rebel XT would serve quite well as the most basic dSLR, I mean its better than the D50 (in most aspects) and they sell for close to the same price. Why not just have a camera of Rebel XT standards (maybe a little stripped off) selling as the beginner camera. Keep the Rebel line for people like me who don't really want to tote around huge cameras and don't want to/or can't drop 2 grand on a dSLR body. I think leaving the xx-D as an upgrade path for us xxx-D users is a smart business plan. Canon has shown through the 17-55 and 10-22 they probably are going to keep the C sized sensor around and honestly if you leave the C sized sensor only to the very basic dSLRs, not too many of the customers are going to buy the $1000 lenses. You can't look at this from only a professional perspective, in the eyes of us hobbyists the xxx-D and xx-D Cameras are plenty. We don't need full frame necessarily, and we don't need a 1D or 5D. We only want a capable camera that doesn't break the bank too much (like the ideal 40D)
While agree with most of what you have said here and in past posts, I do have to disagree with the idea of a FF at about $2K. Basically, the 5D is a 20D with a better sensor but with lower capabilities in certain areas. How could they reduce the feature set of the 5D to create a camera to fit into this niche and still have it accepted?
They could probably drop the price of the 5D and bring in a new FF above it (at current 5D prices) but two things will happen 1.) 1Ds sales (even assuming that the 1Ds goes to 20+ MP) will take a very serious hit and be confined largely to those who are looking at saving some money by not going to MF. 2.) People like me who want a well rounded camera for multi-purpose applications will be even more tempted to head toward Nikon. I don't care how "good" they make the 400D, I am not buying one; nor am I buying a FF for $2K while it remains at 3 FPS and has the same basic AF system as their entry level DSLR.
Canon needs a robust body with good AF and FPS at an affordable price point. If they don't do it, Nikon or Sony will. Everybody seems to assume that Canon needs to answer the D200 but the reality is that Canon needs an answer to the "next" D200.
Good #1:
The new products for first half of 2007 might be unveiled earlier than expected, as early as Feb 20 (current extended EOS 5D rebate in USA ends on Feb 19) SHOULD Canon decides to participate at UK's Focus in Imaging '07 photo trade show (from Feb 25-28), hence moving the pre-hype excitement generated for PMA in USA over to Europe instead.
Not-so-Great #1:
If Canon choose to participate only in PMA Show 2007, then the original date of unveiling the new products will come after March 1 instead.
Last year, the organisers of Focus '06 held the event on same dates/weekend as PMA 2006 but most major camera makers including Canon decided not to participate in the former. EOS 30D had its first public viewing at PMA instead.
Not so Great #2:
Neither the EOS 5D nor the EOS-1Ds MK II will see any successor at either Focus '07 or in PMA 2007 - these two are still being offered as current EOS System line-up for first half of 2007.
Great:
There will be only 1 new EOS DSLR for first half of 2007 - guess which of the current line-up gets to be replaced?
I don't believe Canon will update the 30D anytime soon but they will introduce a camera above the 30D and below the 5D that would compete with the Nikon D200 much better than the current camera. Think about it.
danmitchell wrote:
It wouldn't surpise me if before long (though maybe not PMA) Canon decided to move the current 30D segment to full frame. In other words, rather than upgrading to a 40D that isn't much different from the competition, they could leapfrog the competition in this segment with a reasonably prices full frame body. It would cost more than the 30D, but not much more than the inflation adjusted price in this category
Isen't the 5D pritty much a 20D/30D with a full frame sensor and no built in flash!?
Josef Isayo wrote:
I don't believe Canon will update the 30D anytime soon but they will introduce a camera above the 30D and below the 5D that would compete with the Nikon D200 much better than the current camera. Think about it.
Sincerely hope you are right. This is the camera that I have been waiting for.
I write: "It wouldn't surpise me if before long (though maybe not PMA) Canon decided to move the current 30D segment to full frame. In other words, rather than upgrading to a 40D that isn't much different from the competition, they could leapfrog the competition in this segment with a reasonably prices full frame body. It would cost more than the 30D, but not much more than the inflation adjusted price in this category"
And ESO20 asked: "Isen't the 5D pritty much a 20D/30D with a full frame sensor and no built in flash!?"
Yup. :-)
My wild speculation and raving depends upon changes at other places in the lineup as well. Using current model numbers but imagining the replacement cameras might have different names:
350XT --> 400D
30D --> 5D (but really some new model with similar specs - e.g. 12 PM)
5D --> 3D/5DII (or whatever people have called it in their speculation :-)
1-Series --> Good guess. I happen to subscribe to the 22MP theory, but I'm not sure about the higher frame rate model.
I share the doubts of many who can't see all of this happening at PMA. I'm thinking about a longer term change.
They won't make 40D a full frame for quite a while. They didn't introduce 17-55 IS a year ago to die make it obsolete.Not to mention,that a lot of people do prefer 1.6 crop.
DmitriM wrote:
They won't make 40D a full frame for quite a while. They didn't introduce 17-55 IS a year ago to die make it obsolete. Not to mention, that a lot of people do prefer 1.6 crop.
Canon is between a rock and a hard place. They want to move to full frame for anything except entry level. That makes sense, because they know they can't crank up pixel densities forever without hitting some serious limits. But the average consumer happily sits in APS-C Lala Land and doesn't care about future limits. So, Canon will have to force FF on consumers eventually. That will push back EF-S to the entry level market.
Either way, it takes a hit. From my perspective, the hit taken from not pushing full frame seems worse than the hit taken from EF-S sales if full frame is pushed. There is plenty of room in the entry level for the EF-S line-up to make a decent return of investment, because even the most expensive EF-S, the praised 17-55 IS, doesn't really break the bank. An EF 24-105L or 24-70L costs more.
I don't think the 40D will go full frame. If Canon plays it (too) safe it will stay with APS-C and get mauled by the D200, K10D, D80 and the D200 successor. If Canon moves the 40D to 1.3x crop it will strike two birds with one stone: It will beat all competition because it will have a lower pixel density and thus better IQ and it will push EOS users towards full frame. While at the same time not take the big price penalty that comes with full frame sensor production. APS-H (1.3x crop) is a sweet spot, cost-wise.
I rekon Canon will eventually add new lines to there digital range and follow a similar lineup as they use to have in the film days.
My predictions for the future digital lineup:
*EOS 3000D - Entry level APS-C to compeate against Nikon D40
*EOS 400D/500D - A mid range entry level model
*EOS 40D/50D - A Premium APS-C camera
*EOS 6D/7D - Entry/Mid range Full frame model
*EOS 3D - Premium semi pro full frame. Or APS-H sensor (If Canon continues with APS-H).
*EOS 1Ds/1D2n merge into one camera - Flagship pro full frame camera
I would also like to see a pellicle mirror 1D for sports/action shooters with 10-12 f/ps shutter and huge RAW Buffer and high speed crop mode and good high ISO performance!
I posted on this topic in August 2007 way back in the old Photokina Rumour thread. My ‘source” has just come back from one of his regular business trips to Japan (days ago) where he again met his old colleague buddy now involved in DSLR marketing at Canon at their favourite Sushi bar…
Summarising the previous post Canon was going to replace all their DSLR range in 2007 except for the 400D. There would be:
30D Replacement (40D?) with
• Anti-dust
• 5D like AF
• 10.2mp 4 channel sensor (though they were testing a 12 mp one)
• Still 1.6 crop for those EF-S lenses
• DIGIC III and sensor changes to give better high ISO and lower noise (especially at 1600 and 3200 ISO)
• Very similar appearance to 30D
5D would be split into FF two lines to create full frame demand
• Low end – similar to current 12 Mp sensor but with a more 30D like body (could be a 7D?) and DIGIC III. This low end and xxD series were meant to provide a more cost effective choice between 1.6 and FF for the advance amateur and allow a gradual migration to more full frame over time driven by the market.
• High end with more MP (16mp but not the 1D sensor), improved AF for the full frame, DIGIC III etc. (could be a 3D?)
The 1 Series was being replaced as well
• Canon were very excited by this replacement
• A different division markets these to the normal DSLRs so details were more sketchy (DIGIC III and much better ISO and dynamic range mentioned)
• There had been some late changes which back then (August 2006) were risking the 1 series not making Photokina.
• Canon were working on two new 1 series abut would probably only release one of them for now.
History shows that the 1 series replacment was not announced at Photokina. So that leaves a lot of cameras for 2007
Anyway, according to my “source” this is all still true and Canon is ready to produce these cameras (technology finalised). Indeed 1 series samples are apparently out there (Jeff / Fred?). But the 1 series delay has meant that they need to select what to announce at the PMA – they don’t want to announce all 4 cameras as the dealer channels would complain (too much change / obsolete product at once.) Canon’s thinking (as far as my sources contact was ‘on the inside” was to announce 2 cameras at PMA and 2 later in the year.
This is where it gets interesting - the dilemma for Canon here is:
• The 1 series should be announced first for pride / reputation with the new features
• Even though the 1 series sells in very limited quantities, the professional camera division in Canon has a lot of clout - seen as creating a brand image leadership in the whole camera space.
• The 30D replacement is badly required as the 20D/30D’s combined market share has dropped radically over the last few months due to a combination of internal competition from the 400D and the market impact of the Nikon D80 and Sony A100 etc.
• The 30D series segment is seen as important to Canon because of lens on-sell. This market and upwards tends to buy extra lenses, including high value lenses (I interpret that to be “high profit”).
• The two 5D replacements make the most sense if sold together. Though they could announce the high end one first (as a 5D replacment) and then follow with the low end (entry level FF). The low end 5D repalcement is thought too similar to the 5D to be released while the 5D is in the market.
• The 5D has not sold as well as hoped in most markets except when rebates are offered. However Canon still sell lots more of them that the 1 series and they are nicely profitable. They also have excellent resell on high value lenses.
• The combination of Nikon's aggressive D40 / D80 / D200 range, with the Sony A100 is taking more DSLR market share than Canon predicted. The 400D is selling very well but Canon know they need to regain more of the midrange DLR market quickly to maintain the lens sales and ‘own’ the system for the advanced amateur and semi-pro etc.
• Sony is known to be working on CMOS sensors at 1.6 and FF for their DSLR range and are expected to continue to complete aggressively on features. (Interesting to see what this does for Nikon who currently buy their CCD sensor from Sony) (Also interesting to see no mention of Pentax, which seems stange..).
• Hence the big dilemma – 30D replacement and 1 series replacement now or 30D and one of the 5D replacements now and leave the other 5D and 1 series for later. Or do they upset their channels (never a good idea) and issue 3 cammeras to give the market at knockout puch. In terms of revenue and immediate market share protection delaying the 1 series further makes sense. But the new high end 5D replacement to very close to the 1 series performance (16mp etc), and in terms of prestige, the 1 series should be the best… (Note, no mention of delaying the 30D replacement so I guess that is a given?)
Apparently the internal discussions at Canon have been “very vigorous”. As far as my “source’s” contact was concerned it was 99% likely to be the 1 series and 30D replacement for PMA, the 5D replacements being left to later this year and potentially even split into 2 years.
Anyway – still a grain of salt needed – these are Sushi and Saki conversations in Japan and my “source’s” colleague buddy may be boasting / trying to impress etc… But it makes some sense..
Interesting that there is no mention of a Nikon D40 competitor… Maybe too soon for Canon to react…. Regardless it would seem that the free market is working with Nikon and Sony likely to force a faster pace out of Canon than we have had over the last few years where they have dominated the DSLR market. This can only be good!
More fuel for the fire…
(Oh and after Photokina I bought a new 5D as I felt that 6+ months of great photos with a fantastic camera was better than waiting and waiting for rumours and promises. And I haven’t regretted this for 1 second! After whatever actually is announced and released comes on sale the 5D will be just as good…)
Hello Geoff,
the rumor seems plausible, but for me the 5d works well enough to completely ignore the future developments and just use it as a permanent, instead of just temporary solution. It's the first time I feel comfortable with that since starting to shoot digital. In a sense, I think "we have arrived", the technology is good enough and now it's more-less about packaging it in different shapes, sizes and colors, as with 35mm film cameras.
I 100% agree re the 5D. I love my 5D and the pictures I take with it are just natural extensions of my desires (like 35mm film was many years ago). It also lead me down an expensive, but rewarding path of L series lenses - as I can now really see the extra "value" these lenses deliver and I like them at the (again 35mm comfortaable) focal lengths...So in many ways I don't care anymore about the rumours... Since I have no intention of upgrading the 5D for many years. For me to upgrade the 5D I'd need 2 stops equivalent better high ISO (as 99% of my photography is under available light) and the 5D is already outstanding in this area - having exceeded my expecations. I am happily expecintg the 5D to be a keeper for 5 years (I'd say 10 but the way I am taking pictures with it I'll hit the 100,000 shutter actualtions well before then! I do want / need a second body though could be tempted by the 40D or 50D or whatever if it gets a step up in image quality to approach (or even beat) the 5D. It would give me some extra reach for sports etc. Otherwise one of the 5D replacements for me...
But, more than anything, I do hope Canon are (as the rumour would sujest is starting to happen) prompted to respond agressively with new product etc this year and for the forseable future, as I want to remain having bought into a winning system for the next 10-20 years that my lenses last (and I love thoses lenses too) and be able to upgrade bodies every few years to remain contempory as technology delivers a real jump in image visible performance in FF cameras.
I've been shooting with a borrowed 5D which is a much more solid camera than my 20D but the images don't have the clarity or vividness of my Leica DMR images. Some of that is the result of very high quality glass but there is considerable room for improvement in sensor design and software. I'm hoping Canon is up to the challenge. I suspect they want their flagship camera to be regarded as the best 35mm in the world. Period. I hope it will be.
