Philippe Arnez wrote:
I think Aussie Geof's suggestions sound very realistic and might be one of the most probable rumour I've read in the past few days... (or even weeks... )
The idea of splitting the 5D into two different models sounds also rational for the reasons mentioned and it would also close the gap between the current 5D and 30D.
It also makes sense of a lot of the things Canon have been saying/hinting at, and DIGICIII being into'd/tested in the G7
I am more doubtful now of any more releases before Photokina - they may be going for some sort of 'big bang' in their anniversary year, and stacking a lot of releases.
A IDsIII replacement at Photokina is still possible though, of course, and that would give them a few months clear to sell more expensive cameras prior to everything else catching up.
My guess would be though that they have delayed it to polish the extended DR and so on, and that in the spring we will see a 5D replacement, one or more likely two models as has been said, along with the 1DsIII, and then either then or a couple of months later the 40D, meaning that the 30D will have lasted about a year, short but not unreasonably so, and that even the 400D will be replaced next fall, with the higher DR, so also giving that a run of about a year and giving a new model for the important Christmas season in this sector.
At some stage I would guess that there would be a sports camera under the 1 series, perhaps using the APS-H sensor, as again Canon have said that they would 'like' to continue using this, and a lot of sprots guys are very fond of the 1.3
So, new thread for rumours for PMA? ;-)
Regards,
DaveMart
DaveMart wrote:
Dream of a rumour, courtesy of Aussie Geof:
'For what it's worth I heard 40D:
* Still 5 FPS - plenty anyway
* Digic III - for lower noise and higher ISO 3200+ as well as better dynamic range (16 bits likely)
* Better AF - more points and faster (courtesy Digic III)
* Anti-Dust,
* CMOS Sensor etc. Interestingly this was either an 'improved' version of the 10.1mp in the 400D or a 12mp one they were testing - but probably reserved for the 'next generation' (50D I guess)
* Still 1.6 Crop
I also heard that Canon are going to split the 5D into two models to test our the demand for prosumer full frame without compromising demand for the 1.6 crop. There was going to be a smaller (closer to 30D size) and cheaper version of the 5D - same sensor, Digic III, wider AF points (given full frame) and probably Anti-Dust (some have suggested this as a 7D). And a upgraded 5D wiith a similar size to the current 5D but 16.2mp (or so) sensor ('very similar' to the 1Ds Mark II) and the samle Digic III, wider AF points, 5 FPS etc.
My source - who visited Canon Japan a couple of months ago (and gave me a very accurate preview of the 400D) said they basically had replacements for their full EOS range in the works and that 'everything would be replaced by February / March 2007'. He said Canon were very excited about the combinaiton of new sensors and Digic III giving better dynamic range and 'much better' high ISO performance.' http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=20067035
Dunno what they mean by 'better DR' - if they are just talking about better tonal gradations by using more bits to represent the range, or if they have managed to fundamentally improve the sensor to give more DR like the Fuji S3.
I am also a bit wary of talk of improved noise via processing - could mean a hideous mush due to compulsory NR.
The extra bits and improved AF do not surprise me - that after all is the point of having more processing power!
Regards,
DaveMart...Show more →
Just thought - if Canon bring out a 16.7 MP 5fps 5D replacement with extended DR and better high ISO in Feb, presumably at around $3k, just how pleased would someone who bought the 1DsII last June be?
Yikes!
Regards,
DaveMart
DaveMart - That's pretty cool info on the 5D split and new extended DR possibilities. If they were to be released in Feb./Mar., when do you think they'd be announced?
DaveMart wrote:
Just thought - if Canon bring out a 16.7 MP 5fps 5D replacement with extended DR and better high ISO in Feb, presumably at around $3k, just how pleased would someone who bought the 1DsII last June be?
Yikes!
Regards,
DaveMart
I guess that fully depends of how useful the 1DsII proves to be during those 9 months this someone can use it before a cheaper alternative, presumably with a less robust build becomes available.
24Peter wrote:
DaveMart - That's pretty cool info on the 5D split and new extended DR possibilities. If they were to be released in Feb./Mar., when do you think they'd be announced?
Not my info - it doesn't carry any DMart guarantee! ;-)
One can only assume from past behaviour that it would come out jsut before PMA - but if they have a bit of a traffic jam of new releases, my guess would be that they would stagger the announcements to get maximum publicity.
A lot depends on what they decide to release for Photokina,. whether the 1DsIII is released then or not until later.
Regards,
DaveMart
Just don't bet the farm on a 1Ds Mk III release for Photokina.
Yes, it is possible that Canon decides to announce the 1Ds Mk III, but I don't see any pressing need for Canon to do so. Even without a product upgrade the Mark II is King of the Hill. There is no real competition from other dSLRs.
Unless Nikon has a substantial DX2s improvements up their collective sleeve.
I can tell those are fake, based purely on ergonomical reasons. The thumb of your right hand needs a place to rest if you want to hold the camera properly. It isn't there. Besides that glaring mistake, I can point to lots of inconsitencies. So this is as fake as a 3 dollar bill.
Oh, and then there's the "20D" logo on the left side view that the creator forgot
Tentacle wrote:
I can tell those are fake, based purely on ergonomical reasons. The thumb of your right hand needs a place to rest if you want to hold the camera properly. It isn't there. Besides that glaring mistake, I can point to lots of inconsitencies. So this is as fake as a 3 dollar bill.
Oh, and then there's the "20D" logo on the left side view that the creator forgot
And, based on the reflections on the lens, they stole Phil Askey's lighting setup.
Philippe Arnez wrote:
Probably the worst photoshop job on a rumor camera I've ever seen...
I like how people slam the photoshop job when they probably couldn't do a nearly as clean job themselves. If you can do better, let's see it.
There is a difference between a poor photoshop job and an excellent photoshop job. And an excellent photoshop job doesn't necessarily mean that it's going to be 'logical' looking. I can't see much in the ways of poor photoshoping on those 40d shots except that 20d icon the person left on the side view.
I don't think the "critique" of the photoshop job was based on the technical merits of the actual photoshopping. It was more a critique of the believability of the final result. It's hard to fall for an image of a ficticious Canon camera when it shares Phil Askey's lighting umbrella reflections on the lens, sports the 20D insignia on the side view, and most importantly of all, is missing the print button.
10DFT wrote:
I don't think the "critique" of the photoshop job was based on the technical merits of the actual photoshopping. It was more a critique of the believability of the final result. [...]
Thanks Tom, you got my point
Nowhere Man wrote: Philippe Arnez wrote:
Probably the worst photoshop job on a rumor camera I've ever seen...
I like how people slam the photoshop job when they probably couldn't do a nearly as clean job themselves.
As said, my 'slamming' was primarily based on the unreal looks of the final result. It just doesn't add up at all.
If you can do better, let's see it.[...]
NM
However I also think the technique is not very good. But hey, if I had too much time in my hands, I would probably even take the challenge, but unfortunately I don't.
10DFT wrote:
And, based on the reflections on the lens, they stole Phil Askey's lighting setup.
they pretend to be phil askey, as you can see on the right bottom, it has the author name which is dpreview (and the interesting thing is we couldnt find it in dpreview website) lol..
Jeff wrote: "'jwil', please don't embed links to copyrighted material."
There is no reason for such a restriction. In fact, every photograph that does not explicitly declare itself to be public domain is automatically "copyrighted" by the author...
... and even such things as Canon's web site information on their products are "copyrighted." Surely it is fine to link to those. So are articles in online newspaper articles, etc.
There is really no precedent for concern about linking to publically posted web sites such as those jwil linked to.
)
