there just isn't much of a market for this kind of camera. knock canon all you want, but most people that are going to spend this kind of money on a camera are pros that will spend the extra on a 1d series
Whatever they name it, the "missing" camera could sit at $4000. There's no need to discount. The people that want it will buy it. They're not going to jump ship to Nikon if Canon don't release it $500 cheaper than a D700.
Many pro's I know want a 3D type camera. They are frustrated that their backup camera has to be another 1DMKIII (or IIn or whatever), or a 40D. Nikon did it, why not Canon.
So, they can't increase resolution - that's Ds territory. They can't increase speed much - that's MkIII territory. So what could they do, for $5,000 (intermediate price between the 5D and the Ds)? Admitedly, probably nothing, since there's not much point in doing yet another incremental tweak that could siphon sales away from a 1 series camera.
But if they did:
-full frame
-full weather sealing
-no video
-flash controller built-in
-hot swappable hard drive (think slipping a160GB iPod into a space under the body)... wait! This should be on the Ds.
- get rid of the print button, replace it with a user-defined function button (mirror lock-up anyone?)
- New sensor with higher dynamic range?
- X-sync above 1/200th?
___
Or something entirely different - a modular "studio camera" format based on existing canon technology: sensor backs for current sensors, focal plane & leaf shutters, EF and EF-s lens modules... Nah. No way! Canon builds SLR's...
___
Speaking of SLR's, maybe it will be mirrorless and shutterless (lose the "reflex). Sensor based focus, sample the data coming off the sensor at different durations for shutter speeds (think of the x-sync speeds you could get!). Throw out the old paradigm entirely, lose all that mechanical stuff that moves around and wears out. Put a giant touch screen in the back, no buttons except shutter release, on/off, control wheels, and user defined tactile buttons. Think of iPhone functionality on a camera where the whole back of the camera is a display. Put Wi-Fi into the thing so you can work wirelessly (and send/receive e-mail)...
Forget high end digital video - Red seems to be doing a fine job of that already.
I guess negative refraction technology isn't quite ready yet...
So, that's all the rumor generating ideas I can think of for now, although since I made them all up myself, they probably don't qualify as genuine rumors until they circulate around a bit.
the canon apologists don't get it. we know about the 1-series, and yes it's fantastic. the problem is that it's large and heavy. if canon made a "3d" they could charge whatever they want, because there is a huge segment crying out for it.
you people need to try shooting with a 1v or eos 3 (really really old cameras that used "film"), then see if you can keep a straight face when you tell us there is no reason for 1-series performance in a xxD form factor.
Maybe I should start a 7D thread. The only thing that the 5D interest me is the full frame. Otherwise i would be jumping on the 50D instead. I'm waiting for a 50D with full frame; that'll be more intersting than a 3D compromise between the 1D/5D.
The people that are disappointed are those that thought the 5D was going to transform into a 3D. But realistically, that was never going to happen. It is still a 5D, just updated to all the latest features. It still serves the original market very well. It is a great studio, landscape and wedding camera. It was never meant to be a great sports or wildlife camera. The 3D will take care of that if and when it ever appears. But I don't expect that to happen anytime soon, certainly not this year anyway.
5D (and 5DII) is NOT a great wedding camera if you do a photojurnalistic approach to weddings and work with available light on top of that. In such a case, you would use large apertures and thus the focus-recompose technique does not work well and if you try to take action shots of people dancing or so, the 5D AF is a PITA. For me the 5D is a one-point AF Camera (and that is in the center). The outer points would not even focus in low light (and I use only 2.8 or faster aperture lenses).
So for me, as the 5D II is a bit of dissapointment, another 3D/7D camera with better AF and the same form-factor, without video and stupid print button would be something really exciting.
I simply can't regard the 5d2 as an anemic upgrade. It may not have all we wish for, but overal I think that it is a pretty significant upgrade. Time will tell if it really is.
The pricing, although very aggressive, hardly makes it a consumer upgrade as the OP suggests.
But I do agree that the initial pricing and old AF-system might suggest that Canon has a surprise up its sleeve.
To put things in perspective, I'd LOVE to have the new 5D2, but I'll be damned if I not wait 6 months before going out and buying one.
OTOH, I really want a new 300/2.8, which will demand a serious investment
Nate Greuel wrote:
there just isn't much of a market for this kind of camera. knock canon all you want, but most people that are going to spend this kind of money on a camera are pros that will spend the extra on a 1d series
I'd love a D series or semi D series camera that was full frame and would work as a backup. What pro wants to spend $16K on a camera and a backup. This is what the 3D would be. Same build quality & shutter live, no built-in grip, fewer AF points, not as many fps, .75 the number of mpxls, same battery & access, etc. Every pro out there who wasn't going to lay out for 2X Ds would buy the camera. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
WShotton wrote:
The people that are disappointed are those that thought the 5D was going to transform into a 3D. But realistically, that was never going to happen. It is still a 5D, just updated to all the latest features. It still serves the original market very well. It is a great studio, landscape and wedding camera. It was never meant to be a great sports or wildlife camera. The 3D will take care of that if and when it ever appears. But I don't expect that to happen anytime soon, certainly not this year anyway.
If you're correct Photokina is going to be pretty anti-climatic.
calvillo wrote:
I'd love a D series or semi D series camera that was full frame and would work as a backup. What pro wants to spend $16K on a camera and a backup. This is what the 3D would be. Same build quality & shutter live, no built-in grip, fewer AF points, not as many fps, .75 the number of mpxls, same battery & access, etc. Every pro out there who wasn't going to lay out for 2X Ds would buy the camera. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
That's exactly what I'm talking about. -And this same camera would be considered a serious step-up for the current 5D owners, MANY of whom are not going to buy the 5DII.
Let's see, how much was the original 5D when it came out? Over $3k, street price.
That's at least $3200 - $3300 in 2008 dollars. Sold pretty well, too.
With recent cash back deals it's been possible to buy a 5D in a mainstream shop for £1149. The MKII is £2299. I'd say Canon could rock with something like the MKII but with 12-16MP, maybe ditching stuff like video, priced near the 1149/1299 the 5D has been selling for recently.
The 1Ds is not bought by default by pros. I'm an editor on a business magazine and I had some freelance files arrive on a D100 just this week from a well-known press photographer. In the film days, a jobbing pro could spend £800 or less on a pro camera, which is why the 20D is/was a fairly popular pro camera - it came in at around traditional fim price points.
I myself would love to have a 1DsIII body with a FF sensor @10-12 mp w/iso up to 6400 and big improvements in DR plus 4fps. I'd pay $5grand for that in a heart beat!!!!!!
To the OP, I think this thread got off the track with the very negative tone directed toward 5D and 5D MKII users, but according to your profile you have a 5D and I know from frequenting the alternative forum that you have a fair bit of alternative manual focus glass, so perhaps you got a bit carried away. For you personally the 5D MKII could be a very nice camera and ought to be terrific when using manual focus glass and I doubt you think of yourself as just a Rebel user (another point in which you were unnecessarily derisive--many of us started off as Rebel users and there are some really good photographer that still are).
Now back to the point of the thread which was speculation on a 3D. I don't expect a 3D exactly, but I wouldn't be surprised if Canon changed their lineup of professional 1D series cameras. It seems likely to me that when Canon replaces the 1D3 they will no longer make a pro crop camera, but go full frame. If they make 2 full frame pro cameras, then how will they differentiate them? I would assume there will still be one higher speed, lower resolution camera and one higher resolution lower speed camera. One other way they may differentiate the two camera is to make one a smaller form factor like the 1V. So one intriguing possibility is that when they replace the 1D3, they may make this a full frame camera with a small form factor and high speed with a bit lower resolution. It might even be smart to change the naming convention as they have damaged the 1D label a bit and a 1D MK IV would bring back memories of a 1D MkIII, so let's say they name it a 1Dv, and let's say it shoots at 10 fps and has a 21.1 megapixel full frame sensor (which ought to be possible with dual Digic IV chips), and they fix the pro autofocus, and add the new features developed since the 1D MKIII. Now that would be a camera not too far from what people want in a 3D and they could price this at about $4,000 or so or the typical price for the 1D models. Then they could still have the higher resolution, lower speed full size model and maybe this would come down in price a little to $7000 or so, but basically they could maintain their price structure. To me this seems like a reasonable way for Canon to go with their pro line.
Jman13 wrote:
The camera you describe exists. It's called the 1D mark III, and it's available for only a few hundred more than your asking price. Not too bad.
True, the 1D mark III is a great camera, and in the right price bracket, but it's not the camera I described. It's still a 1.3 crop, designed expressly for sports. I'm absolutely committed to full frame.
A FF version of the 1D mark III is not what I envision (though it's what I personally want) as I think Canon needs to keep the battery grip as a separate option. There are a lot of people who want to keep it lightweight.
To the OP, I think this thread got off the track with the very negative tone directed toward 5D and 5D MKII users, but according to your profile you have a 5D and I know from frequenting the alternative forum that you have a fair bit of alternative manual focus glass, so perhaps you got a bit carried away.
I never denigrated either 5D owners (I am one) nor Rebel owners. That was just the idiots that posted immediately after my OP. What's offensive about noting the absolute fact that the vast majority of 5D owners who have posted about this, have said they don't plan on upgrading to the 5DII? And what's negative about saying, correctly for the most part, that this camera has been marketed at Rebel owners, who might be able to spend a little more than for the 50D?
Just how much do we have to walk on tiptoes around here to have a discussion?
I'm sorry...there needs to be a reality check here. Canon can't design a camera made for every individual.
Canon has:
A great lineup of consumer grade SLRs in the Rebel series
A high image quality, relatively high FPS, high MP prosumer 1.6x body in the 50D.
An extremely high image quality full frame, small form factor body with weathersealing, HD video, but prosumer AF.
A very high image quality pro sports camera with great high ISO, pro AF, weathersealing, 1.3x
And an extremely high image quality full frame, pro form factor body with pro AF, weather sealing.
And people are complaining because there aren't all sorts of bodies in between these. There's already a huge selection of bodies to choose from, and one that caters to nearly every need.
Canon is a business. Releasing another camera to fit between the 5DII and the 1DIII, and another to fit between the 1DIII and the 1DsIII would result in deminished returns...lots more R&D cost, lots more cost in production (due to multiple models), and likely decreased profit because they'll sell the same amount of cameras...just divided between 3 models instead of 1.
