Someone had wrote somewhere on some website that one of his web friends had stumbled upon the 'new canon camera' by changing just one letter in the URL. And that several days later, the link was invalid.
Anyone tried finding a unique canon site by using the same naming convention and just changing one letter in the URL?
The only thing I can see where you could do this would be the japan site for the 1ds when changing the 's' to and ' l ' but nothing comes up
Figured someone else out there must have tried this....
RichWood wrote:
Why? Does the release of a 40D (if it exists) stop your 30D from working? Will your pictures suddenly look terrible? I'm still using a 300D, the fact that it's since been replaced twice doesn't make it act any different from the camera I bought two years ago.
You should always buy a camera (and in fact buy everything) because it does what you want now, and accept that in this fast moving world it will sooner or later be replaced by something else.
'If' was the important word there. I didn't upgrade. My 20D is taking great pictures - and I have a ways to go before I outgrow it, if ever.
You seem to suggest though, that people don't take an interest in upgrading cameras to see what the change may offer them. Most people also look to get best value from the upgrades they make - that's why internet forums like DPReview do well, as people like to reaserch opinions on what they are buying. It's also why threads like this are popular. Once you have the details you can make an informed desision on where several thousands pounds or dollars are going to go.
Canon chose to give the impression when they released the 30D that no further sensor improvements could be made - this was misleading to many who did upgrade.
Nowhere Man wrote:
Someone had wrote somewhere on some website that one of his web friends had stumbled upon the 'new canon camera' by changing just one letter in the URL. And that several days later, the link was invalid.
Anyone tried finding a unique canon site by using the same naming convention and just changing one letter in the URL?
The only thing I can see where you could do this would be the japan site for the 1ds when changing the 's' to and ' l ' but nothing comes up
Figured someone else out there must have tried this....
Haven't tried looking for a new microsite, but the URL schema on consumer.usa.canon.com is pretty easy to figure out, where "categoryid=139" is the code for all DSLR bodies and "modelid=xxxxxxxx" is the sequential number for the product page. The modelid number is not category specific, so a DSLR might be 12929 and a lens might be 12930, and a printer might be 12931, etc...
So find the highest number product page currently on the site and then start counting up the modelid in category 139 from there. You might get lucky and stumble on a page.
timbop wrote:
I do understand your point, and it is absolutely plausible and maybe even likely. The last thing I want to do is start a urinary olmpics, especially since I have no expertise with any of this.
As a beer drinker, I'm more than qualified for this event.
But as Richie S pointed out, there would be a lot of people really pissed about such a stunt, and I really don't think canon would make that kind of a move. They wouldn't have had to. If the sensor or digic 3 weren't available, they would not have had to engineer and begin producing an interim camera for 6 months. They simply could have "pulled a kodak" and announced in Feb for an august or october ship date.
You know a lot more about supply chain management than me, so maybe I am off my rocker or naive.
It just doesn't "feel" like a smart move to me when there was no compelling force to make them do it. The D200 is already outclassed by the 5D, and there just doesn't seem to have been that much of an urgency for the 30D. I think there is much more pressure now to update the 1's, compared to the pressure on the 20D 6 months ago. I know the 1's are in a class by themselves, but if a 10MP 1.6 crop body with digic 3 (>5 fps) is released for $1500 then the 1dm2n would begin to have serious competition from inhouse.
The good news is that we'll find out soon. )
Edited by timbop on Sep 05, 2006 at 01:41 PM GMT...Show more →
I believe that the IQ of the 5D outclasses the D200, but the 5D is also a fair amount more expensive than the D200. Canon's 30D-class camera should be competitive (and in terms of IQ, it is). Nikon has struck the price "gap" between the 20D/30D and the 5D/1-series that many discussed on these forums (forii??) over the last few years. That's a big price hole between $1400 and $2500+.
I lean towards the theory that the 30D was a place-filler camera, designed to hold that market point until Digic III and associated advancements were ready. It wasn't meant to attract 20D users to upgrade, though I'm sure a few did anyway. It was more of a means to hold the market position while development was completed.
I agree, the D200 is very nice value from Nikon. The viewfinder is so much better than the viewfinder of the 30D, the body as a whole is nicer as well.
Nikon is still producing this camera at full capacity without major price reductions... that's almost a year...
Chuck Westfall, Canon USA's Director of Media and Customer Relationship, says that dynamic range and noise levels with the Rebel XTi/400D are nearly identical to the camera it replaces, despite the smaller pixel size of the new model (5.7µm square vs 6.4µm square for the Rebel XT/350D).
and what he said back in February
We are always working to advance image quality, but at current technology levels, any reduction in pixel pitch lower than 6.4 microns would result in lower image quality at high ISO speed settings compared to our current design.
Amazing what they managed in between February and August
I guess that nearly makes them not completely contradictory.... but well.
Richie S wrote:
Canon chose to give the impression when they released the 30D that no further sensor improvements could be made - this was misleading to many who did upgrade.
Well, it's a matter of interpretation, and different people will read differently. I personally don't recall anything as being misleading, but I can see why some would think otherwise. Here is what Chuck Westfall said in an interview:
IR: The 20D stands as one of the cleanest performing sensors on the market for the money, especially at high ISO. How much of this decision to stick
with the same sensor is related to Canon's tendency to want to keep pixel pitch at an optimum size?
Westfall: Our top priority with every EOS Digital SLR is maximum image quality according to product category. The image qualities of the EOS 30D, 20D and even the EOS Digital Rebel XT remain unsurpassed at their price points. We are always working to advance image quality, but at current technology levels, any reduction in pixel pitch lower than 6.4 microns would result in lower image quality at high ISO speed settings compared to our current design....Show more →
Does that language mean no further improvements could be made, or only that no further improvements could be made in time for the 30D's release? Given that the 400d sensor was undoubtedly well into development, did he mislead? You make the call!
I basically think they should have called it a 20Dn and not gone through the routine they did of pitching it as a major camera release when they knew it would be replaced again in six months time.
if the rumored release proves to be fake then I take all this back btw
Richie S wrote:
Chuck Westfall, Canon USA's Director of Media and Customer Relationship, says that dynamic range and noise levels with the Rebel XTi/400D are nearly identical to the camera it replaces, despite the smaller pixel size of the new model (5.7µm square vs 6.4µm square for the Rebel XT/350D).
and what he said back in February
We are always working to advance image quality, but at current technology levels, any reduction in pixel pitch lower than 6.4 microns would result in lower image quality at high ISO speed settings compared to our current design.
Amazing what they managed in between February and August
I guess that nearly makes them not completely contradictory.... but well....Show more →
I believe that the results have yet to be seen (though some preliminary tests are afloat around the net from which one may draw their own conclusions) in terms of maintaining noise levels and DR. My feelings based on what I've seen with the 400D (and I'd still like to wait for controlled testing) are that Canon has done a couple of things to maintain noise levels, and that one of those things is to compromise detail at high ISO settings.
Also, "nearly" maintaining noise and DR levels is not the same thing as maintaining image quality. As Nikon has shown, softening a high-ISO image is very effective in reducing noise without hampering DR, but it also has a very negative effect on IQ in terms of the loss of detail. We'll soon know if the 400D's smaller pixel pitch does, in fact, lower image quality at high ISO settings in a similar manner.
Richie S wrote:
I basically think they should have called it a 20Dn and not gone through the routine they did of pitching it as a major camera release when they new it would be replaced again in six months time.
if the rumored release proves to be fake then I take all this back btw
Yeah. The 30D does have some nice new stuff on it, although the "engine" is unchanged. Perhaps a compromise and call it the 25D. I personally think it unlikely that we see a 40D at Photokina, but we are all working off the same rumors and speculations. We'll see.
BTW, I just upgraded to a 20D this past weekend, from a 300d. ISO 1600, very, very nice!
10DFT wrote:
Also, "nearly" maintaining noise and DR levels is not the same thing as maintaining image quality. As Nikon has shown, softening a high-ISO image is very effective in reducing noise without hampering DR, but it also has a very negative effect on IQ in terms of the loss of detail. We'll soon know if the 400D's smaller pixel pitch does, in fact, lower image quality at high ISO settings in a similar manner.
Yes, agree. But also, the issue of image quality depends on print size. At 4x6 or 1024x683 there may be no loss of quality. In which case the 400d is well positioned to maintain market share in the low end, competing with a "10mp" designation like everyone else, while leaving those who care more about image quality with an inducement to get into the xxD range. Canon may be willing to sacrifice some high-end-user market share on the low end to keep the mass market appeal of 10mp.
JRMDC wrote:
Yes, agree. But also, the issue of image quality depends on print size. At 4x6 or 1024x683 there may be no loss of quality. In which case the 400d is well positioned to maintain market share in the low end, competing with a "10mp" designation like everyone else, while leaving those who care more about image quality with an inducement to get into the xxD range. Canon may be willing to sacrifice some high-end-user market share on the low end to keep the mass market appeal of 10mp.
It is true that the smaller prints most used in the normal consumer world rarely exceed 4X6 or 5X7 and in those cases, the difference between 8 and 10 mpx won't be apparent in terms of noticeable resolution or in terms of visible noise at ISO 1600. But I don't want the market trend to be in the direction of giving up anything simply to gain megapixels.
Of course I'm aware that market pressures are real, and Canon has to respond to 10 mpx with its own 10 mpx regardless of the consequences (if any). It's the real world, and 10 will sell over 8 even if 8 is better.
The XT/XTi is a remarkable opportunity for a shooter to gain the flexibility of the DSLR system either way.
Relating all this to the alleged 40D, as I stated before, I don't want a simple increase in megapixels if it doesn't come with an increase in image quality. Especially at that level, where plenty of pros are using the equipment to earn a living.
Regarding the angst on the part of some who "upgraded" from a 20D to a 30D because the model number was different rather than, apparently, based on any significant difference in specifications, and who are now fearful that Canon might introduce a 40D:
Are you saying that you would not have done the exact same upgrade from the 20D if the 30D with the same specs had been called a 20DII?
... and that it is Canon's fault that you upgraded because the number was different?
danmitchell wrote:
Regarding the angst on the part of some who "upgraded" from a 20D to a 30D because the model number was different rather than, apparently, based on any significant difference in specifications, and who are now fearful that Canon might introduce a 40D:
Are you saying that you would not have done the exact same upgrade from the 20D if the 30D with the same specs had been called a 20DII?
... and that it is Canon's fault that you upgraded because the number was different?
but seriously, I'm sure some did upgrade and would have been less likely so had the 30D not been marketed to them as a whole new Camera with a 'normal' Canon lifespan (18 months). I mean I'd like spot metering, ISO in the viewfinder and all that. It wasn't enough to make me upgrade, but I'm sure some did - I've seen them on here and on other sites.
You've only got to look at the questions on all these sites to know that potential upgrade releases do play into people's buying decisions.
Im my humble opinion Canon 40D is still a rumor. Why would Canon upgrade the 350D with new features and then upgrade the 30D with the same features as their entry level Slr.
If they wanted to implement new features I think they would start with the prosumer SLR and then copy those features to the entry level.
Yes, i´m angry with Canon because i just ordered my 30D today, just before this rumor.
tiagomiguel wrote:
Im my humble opinion Canon 40D is still a rumor. Why would Canon upgrade the 350D with new features and then upgrade the 30D with the same features as their entry level Slr.
If they wanted to implement new features I think they would start with the prosumer SLR and then copy those features to the entry level.
Yes, i´m angry with Canon because i just ordered my 30D today, just before this rumor.
You are right, this is still a rumor and all thoughts are speculation, like you mention above it would be foolish (at first glance) for Canon to introduce a 30D replacement that seemingly had the same specs of the 400D; however, this is close to what we had with the 350D and the 30D so it wouldn't be too far fetched. One would hope that the 30D replacement, if true, would have added features, most obviously it would have ISO 3200 or greater capability, could possible have digic III with faster write speeds, increased DR, potentially faster AF performance etc. But again, this is all just speculation and maybe it's a challenge for some to see if they can figure out what Canon may or may not introduce, for others, it is an opportunity to gripe and complain about currently non-existant products
tiagomiguel wrote:
Yes, i´m angry with Canon because i just ordered my 30D today, just before this rumor.
Well, I understand your frustration, but remember that these rumors have been going on for some time; they didn't start today. Also, I don't know what price you have paid, but here in the US the 30d came out at 1499, and I see the Amazon price now is 1215. A pretty substantial drop in price for only 6 months or so. Presumably the price from your chosen outlet has also fallen, to your benefit, in part because of buyer anticipation for the 40d.
And you are getting a great camera, and you are getting it now...
Nikon - the 70D to D70s upgrade. They didn't call it a new model number and they offered a free firmware upgrade to add some of the features of the update to the older camera.
One of my biggest disappointments with Canon has always been the complete ignoring of previous models on release of a new one. It would've made Canon a lot of friends to implement many of the 30D upgrades into a firmware release for the 20D, indeed the 1D2n as well, but they simply chose the usual route.
Its a shame and indicative of Canon, more so than any other camera maker, being aloof from its users and overly greedy. They used to be so much more accessible but thats success for you.
