Jesper
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
RDKirk wrote:
In Canon nomenclature, a smaller number denotes a higher grade of camera. On the film side, the EOS 3 was the lowest level professional grade (high reliability) camera. People might guess that if Canon produces a professional grade digital camera, it might also be a "3" something, hence, 3D.
By the same token, a 20D would be below a the 10D in quality. If Canon produced an update of the 10D, it would be something like a 10Dn.
Personally, I'd rather see a high-reliability professional camera with 10D digital capabilities (in other words, a "crippled" 1D) at $2000-2500 than a 10D with fancier digital capabilities....Show more →
Well, the Canon nomenclature doesn't follow exact rules, but yes, generally a smaller number means more expensive and more professional. Here in Europe you have the EOS 3000 (Rebel G), 300 (300v = Rebel Ti), 30 (Elan 7E, and EOS 33 = Elan 7), 3 and 1-series. If a new version of a specific model comes out, it often had an "n", or more recently a "v" (EOS 300v = Rebel Ti, EOS 30v = Elan 7NE) appended. If it was logical, the 1D Mark II should have been called 1Dv. Probably there was some marketing reason why they didn't choose that name (DV reminds too much of "digital video"??).
In a camera with a single digit (EOS 3, EOS 1-series) you have the fast and accurate 45-point AF system. The two-digit and more digit cameras have 7-point AF.
If the new DSLR would be a 3D, I'd expect 45-point AF, an 1.3x sensor and fast frame rate; if it would be a 10D Mark II, 10Dn, 10Dv, 20D or whatever it's going to be called, I'd expect the same 7-point AF that the current 10D has and an 1.6x sensor and 3fps.
My personal preference would be a new camera in the class of the 10D, with 1.6x, 8.3 MP sensor and the same low-noise characteristics as the 1D Mark II, and I think, since there is already a fast, 8 MP DSLR, it will be more likely that the new DSLR would look more like the 10D than the 1D Mark II.
|
