Nill Toulme wrote:
I've been asleep... what is an APS-H sensor?

Originally, APS-H is the wide-screen version of the APS film system. Canon adopted it for the 1D sensor size, aka the 1.3x (1.26x) crop.

Please add ISO info to the viewfinder!!

Tentacle wrote

Hang on

You want the 1DIIN successor to compete against the D200? You can get about two (and one-third) D200 body for the price of a 1DIIN body. Those two are not on the same plane, market wise.

Should Canon offer something to compete against the D200? Yes. Should that be the 1DIII? No.

The 40D can give the D200 a run for its money IF Canon pours on enough special sauce, like weathersealing, or maybe the APS-H crop for better DR and high ISO performance. A 40D with APS-H sensor and the pixel density of a 20D/30D would be awesome.

That's not where I was going (though I recognize that I mislead a bit) - I don't necessarily see moving the 1D2's successor down the price scale that far. Too much to give up for that. The 1-series is clearly the bulletproof leader.

My point is that Canon has nothing in the price/performance range of the D200. I'm not sure that the rumoured 40D would be the one, unless it can compete head-on from a price point of $1200-1400. If it can, that's great. I don't see Canon ignoring this vital price range.

1dmkIII w/ digicIII, 12mp, 1/500 x-sync, ISO6400

that would be perfect

I would like Canon to improve their Bodies in the non-1D Serie.

Steve Spencer wrote:
I agree with Rick that Canon has to do something to try and compete with the D200. The question is does it just want to match the D200 in which case they can come out with a 40D that is just a marginal improvement over the 30D. It could have 10 megapixels, slightly better autofocus, dust cleaner, etc. This should be relatively easy for them to pull off, but is more of an effort to just hold their share of the market. If they really want to compete with the D200, they will come out with a APS-H sensor with 10 megapixels and great ISO performance. A huge upgrade to the autofocus, maybe an automatic ISO adjustment mode like the D200, and put it in a 3D size body and keep it less that $1,500. Now that could really compete with the D200. I suspect they will do the former (i.e., come out with a 40D), but I would love to see them do the latter (i.e., a great 3D).
I wonder how many D200's are actually selling, as compared to 30D's.

I see the 40D being closer to the D200. 10.2 mp with same great noise handling. Slightly beefier than 30/20D with partial weathersealing,dust removal, improved AF and FF viewfinder like the d200. I think the noise handling alone would help outsell the d200. Another plausable idea is a scaled down 5D or even 1D. Same incredible feel,only an APS-C sensor,3 fps, and other features removed to bring the price down. Basically a prosumer camera with the feel of a pro camera.

cactusclay wrote:
Well, it looks like all the stuff predicted is going to be big and heavy anyway. I sure would like to see some of there first AF primes redone(18 years later), with ring USM. I know most everyone else likes the big heavy zooms, but still, I would like to see a 24/2 USM, 35/2 USM an a 50/1.4 or 2.0, with Ring USM and all with internal focusing. An XT size body with 50-3200 ISO, 8000 sec. shutter speed, better AF, more cofortable grip and a 100% viewfinder would be nice as well.

To recoup the development costs they would probably each cost double what the current 24/2.8, 35/2 or 50/1.4 cost (and most likely weight in at twice as much too). These are some of the best value lenses in the range - if you consider price, IQ, size/weight.
Besides, these would then cut into the more lucrative market of L-series primes (24, 35, 50 at least) which perhaps does not make marketing sense.
I agree ring USM and IF are great to have (and affordable in some lenses like EF-S 60 macro) but for me the old lenses are still great value for money, and do everything a prime should.

IraGraham wrote:
roli_bark wrote:
And I think there will be an update to the venerable 1D :

Look at this:
http://skyblue04.egloos.com/2864840

However, must be treated with a Double Grain-Of-Salt ...

I would bet my house that this is legit and correct. it just makes sense.

This is the 100-400 I have been waiting for. It will probably loose the stupid push pull zoom............great. With IS, I will be one of the first to buy it. I will also be in line for the 10-24mm 2.8L. Then my lens line up will be complete! I will keep my 5D until it to will have 22mp like the new 1Dsmark III. I can't wait!



I doubt they'd make a 100-400 f/4 IS, but a 200-400 f/4 would be much more likely. Note how that would pair perfectly with their line of 70-200's. Also with less focal range it could be lighter, lose the push/pull, gain weather sealing, and be sharper.

Also I doubt we'll see a 400 f/4 IS, as that would cripple the DO's sales. Maybe a 400 f/5.6 IS?

I'd find it hard to believe they could make a 10-24 f/2.8 for a full frame sensor, though it sure would be pretty.

Cactusclay wrote:

I wonder how many D200's are actually selling, as compared to 30D's.

It is of course hard to find these numbers. The ones I could find are not that rosy for the 30D. For Q1 of 2006 the D200 was the 7th best selling digital camera and the 30D was the 14th. Of course these numbers are advantageous for the D200 given it is the quarter after its introduction.

I also found one analysis of the 2006 Japan market share for dslr's that had the D200 at 9.1% of the market and the 30D at just 2.5%.

It is always hard to know what to do with such numbers and to get any sort of real or meaningful analysis you have to pay a fair bit of money, but if these numbers are even in the ballpark it suggests that Canon needs to take the competition with the D200 pretty seriously.

IMHO there is no way Canon would switch 40D to APS-H. The proof was in 17-55/2.8 lens. Who would really think that Canon relerased it for sub-$1000 400D bosy It is definitely for $10Mp+ mid-range DSLR!
Also no doubt in Digic III. Something tells me that 40D Af is going to be same (or adoption) as 5D one. Could be also 6fps to show some "improvement" over 200D.

10-24/2.8?

Mine! Mine! Mine!

Why would a 400mm f/4L IS cost more than a 100-400mm f/4L IS? (The latter sounds *really* nice...)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net

vyanush wrote:
IMHO there is no way Canon would switch 40D to APS-H. The proof was in 17-55/2.8 lens. Who would really think that Canon relerased it for sub-$1000 400D bosy It is definitely for $10Mp+ mid-range DSLR!
Also no doubt in Digic III. Something tells me that 40D Af is going to be same (or adoption) as 5D one. Could be also 6fps to show some "improvement" over 200D.

Agreed, the EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS is a pretty strong indication of commitment, but in the greater picture, if Canon wants to push towards full frame (which they do) then EF-S will be relegated to entry level.

Don't forget that the price of the EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS is considerably lower than the EF 24-105/4L IS or the EF 24-70/2.8L. It's not that expensive. In the end, it's just one argument against a 40D going APS-H, but not a be-all end-all argument.

Tentacle wrote:

Agreed, the EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS is a pretty strong indication of commitment, but in the greater picture, if Canon wants to push towards full frame (which they do) then EF-S will be relegated to entry level.

Don't forget that the price of the EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS is considerably lower than the EF 24-105/4L IS or the EF 24-70/2.8L. It's not that expensive. In the end, it's just one argument against a 40D going APS-H, but not a be-all end-all argument.

I think that Canon will keep two price levels at the APS-C size. I can't imagine people wanting to splurge for a nice 10-22 or 17-55 EF-S lens and have it only useable on the digital Rebel/400D. There needs to be an upgrade path, or Canon will be stranding (and eventually abandoning) its entry-level shooters. For that reason, I would expect any replacement for the 30D to be a 1.6X camera.

I agree that Canon seems to want to broaden the full-frame lineup but I don't see any reason to eliminate the intermediate-level APS-C body. It's possible to have some overlap even. Imagine a 400D ($700) & 40D ($1300) at 1.6X, a 70D ($1500), 5D II ($2500), and 1Ds III ($6000) at full-frame, and possible a 1D III or 3D ($3000) sports camera. (I'm speculating here, obviously - I don't know what's coming).

To compete with the D200 the 40D will need more than just 10 megapixels, the D200 is a lot more body than the 30D never mind the sensor. Here is me hoping that weather sealing and a serious AF upgrade comes to the 5D!

fotographa wrote:

To recoup the development costs they would probably each cost double what the current 24/2.8, 35/2 or 50/1.4 cost (and most likely weight in at twice as much too). These are some of the best value lenses in the range - if you consider price, IQ, size/weight.
Besides, these would then cut into the more lucrative market of L-series primes (24, 35, 50 at least) which perhaps does not make marketing sense.
I agree ring USM and IF are great to have (and affordable in some lenses like EF-S 60 macro) but for me the old lenses are still great value for money, and do everything a prime should.

I had heard a rumor last fall that Canon was updating a few of the micro-motor wide-angle lenses like the 24/2.8, 35/2, and possibly the 50/1.4 with USM. If they revise them all as a group and don't make major changes to the optics, I don't see a major cost change. Of course, none would be cheaper, but I would hpe that the increase wouldn't be huge. These are bargain lenses in terms of cost vs. performance.

my speculation is that in 2007 we will see a 1Ds mkIII with 22-24 mp.
im hoping for a merged 1D/1Ds that will have 24mp and can shoot at 8.5 fps in reduced res mode. but i dont think we will see a merged camera in 07.
being im a wide wide angle shooter ive heard some rumblings about a canon ef 10-24 F/2.8 L
if this lens is released and its sharp across the board that will be heaven sent, even an updated 14L thats sharp across the board would be great.

But ... Even the EF-S 10-22mm, with its smaller projection circle only manages f/3.5-4.5. The only thing that comes close is the Sigma 12-24 f/4.5-5.6 and that one aint small, even at those slow apertures. So, appreciate the optical challenges that you have to take.

A Full frame ultra wide rectilineair 10-24 mm zoom with constant max f/2.8 will make the "Handgrenade Class" 50/1L and 85/1.2L look compact and feel lightweight.

As much as I understand how great a lens like this would be, I don't see anything with those specifications happen anytime soon. If it is possible, you may end up in 50/1L or 200/1.8L price territory because an optical challenge like this will be big and heavy. And very pricey.

yes i can appreciate the huge challeges involved to make an ultra wide recilinear sharp across the board, im sure canon can make a 14mm just as sharp as the famous zeiss 15mm but what it would cost the consumer would be too much to justify in canon's eyes

Re EF-S: Canon need two 'entry' level cameras both of which will support EF-S. They have this in place already - the xxxD and the xxD range. I don't think that's going to change - anyone wanting their 30D to be considered above entry (as in consumer) is dreaming! Therefore the 40D (and 50D, 60D etc) will stick to an APS-C sensor. At least for the forseable future.

Canon has relied on sensor leadership to sell bodies (at least to many first time DSLR owners - myself included). The competition is catching up fast though. As such, Canon needs to stop playing at body upgrades and give the users what they want. Unfortuantely, we all have different requirements!

What I'd like to see, would be the 40D and the 5DmkII being essentially the same camera, with only the sensor differing, and both offering at least the following: (in no particular order)

~21 point AF (no hidden points) with f2.8's around the 1/3 intersections.
Spot metering linked to active focus point.
5 FPS for both models.
Built in GPS.
Built in wireless flash transmitter.
Custom front & rear dials (I hate changing Aperture with the rear dial in M - too confusing)
Customise the print button (obviously!)
Partial weather sealing (at least round the built in flash which is an obvious water trap, and the top buttons)
MORE DR!!!!!

Things that would be nice:
Focus distance in EXIF (that'll test the AF accuracy!).
Wireless image transfer.
Built in flash memory for about 20 shots (when card runs out)

Somehow, I doubt that any of the above will happen Shame on Canon...

I cant believe a 10-24L f2.8. It would have to be a fisheye zoom to be possible, wouldn´t it?
But I will sell my 15 fish and 16-35L to get it, fisheye or not, if it actually turns out to be true somehow.

Mark Shaxted wrote:
Custom front & rear dials (I hate changing Aperture with the rear dial in M - too


I thought there was a custom function that let you swap those around...

As much as I like to read the semi-technical musings of others, this thread is about what can be expected for PMA. And with the total lack of any solid information, we'll have to do with educated guesswork. But educated guesswork IS NOT NECESSARILY the same as a wish-list.

This isn't directly about what we would like to have. This pre-PMA speculation is, ultimately, about what Canon thinks its in their own best interest for us to be able to have. That's quite a subtile big difference

thedigitalbean wrote:
Mark Shaxted wrote:
Custom front & rear dials (I hate changing Aperture with the rear dial in M - too


I thought there was a custom function that let you swap those around...

Not on the 30D... (probably not on the 5D either, at a guess). Although I *think* the 1 Series has this feature.