Well, I agree that the existing L primes are all great, but as you pointed out the wide non-L's are already bested by some fine fast zooms. My fear is that when they do replace these, that they will continue the pattern of charging >$1000 for the privelege. The 85/1.8 is a fantastic value, but I don't see canon bothering to make a new USM 20/1.8 for $500 or less. A new 20/1.8L for >$1500, yes.
10DFT wrote:
Canon has a weakness in the middle - that step above the XTi/400D - which needs to be addressed/ In my opinion, the sooner, the better. I don't know better than any other speculator as to Canon's next move, but I think that they need to move with the 40D class next.
Of course, a new flagship is coming within 6 months, but I don't think that there's nearly the market pace at that end of the spectrum that there is in the more affordable range.
Your point is a good one... So taken to the 'chess game' stage, this would make Photokina the 40D and '7D' with PMA the ‘surprise’ high spec 5D replacement and the 1Dx" or whatever the new flagship is called. Could explain why there have been several European sites / magazines advertising the 40D without prices etc. Leaves PMA for the high end + new lenses + consumer non SLRs...
There would (perhaps) be a minor twist where the 7D was delayed to December or January (or the 1Dx was brought forward to December or January) to provide a more even spacing of new releases, maintaining market excitement (and keeping these forums in a frenzy!)
On a related (and relatively pointless) note, I was wondering what the high spec 5D would be called (5Dx or 4D). But this led me to the more interestign question of is the ‘second pro camera’ (that wasn’t going to be released 'now') a cancelled 1.3 crop sports (merged into the 1Dx bby having it do 1.0 and 1.3 crop via software) or is it (say) the much rumoured 3D. Or is the High spec 5D now the 3D… The joy of it! Just when I thought I had enough information to know what was going to be released - DAM
Geoff
Edited by Geoff Costello on Sep 22, 2006 at 11:07 AM GMT
Edited by Geoff Costello on Sep 22, 2006 at 11:08 AM GMT
Edited by Geoff Costello on Sep 22, 2006 at 11:12 AM GMT
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I wonder why Canon have never used single digit even numbers for cameras?
Most likely a marketing thing. Ask anyone around you and chances are their favorite number is an odd number, like 1 or 3, or 7. Mine happens to be 11. I've never heard anyone say their favorite number is 2 or 6.
I just read the interview you linked to (https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/453159) with one of the 400D engineers. I've come across the statement he makes that "in-body IS isn't visible in the viewfinder" several times, and it never really clicked until just now: you won't see the effect, 'cause the image in the viewfinder is off of the mirror, rather than off of the sensor (which is doing the compensating).
However, if we start thinking about an EVF, where the image in the viewfinder is off the sensor, then suddenly in-body IS is visible. I predict we'll start to see Canon changing their tune about in-body IS when they go to EVF.
DaveEP wrote:
It really does not matter what Canon do or do not launch, some one will post that :
"this camera is not for me"
"Canon really screwed up here"
"No one will want to buy that because it's too expensive"
"Canon aren't listening - I'm moving to Nikon!"
Just wait and see....
Absolutely. People will also fail to see half of the benefits, purely because it isn't what they wanted... case in point; the 30D. It might have been a stop-gap, but the addition of spot metering, larger LCD, larger buffer etc are useful. Not enough to upgrade, but enough to decide for you if you're buying a new one anyway and are comparing a 20D with 30D.
Personally, I'm still waiting for a higher resolution, higher fps 1D N to be released. 1.6x crop would be nice too, but I can't see that happening!
1) Pixel peeping
2) A slew of new, inexperienced users
3) The internet amplification effect for squeaky wheels
Any "serious plunge" is illusory.
I believe that Canon has tightened QC over the last year or two. It's simply too easy for today's shooter to stare at 100% crops, whereas yesterday, very few had 10X loupes. I believe that this ability is driving QC to a higher level. Consumers demand it. It's almost as though the new circle of confusion is the diameter of a pixel on the screen.
I agree with Monito here. There is also a misunderstanding about how "tolerances" come into play. When you start examining industrial output at a level greatly exceeding the specifications, you begin to see the tolerance variations that all industrial output has to have--unless you're willing to pay the price for "handmade."
In Lens Work III, Canon calls an 11x14 print from an APS-C image an "extreme enlargement." That tells you where they painted the limits of their specifications. At 100% of the native pixel resolution, you're looking at an enlargement of 30x40, which is far more than what Canon calls "extreme."
When you see a difference between two lenses at that level (and don't see it in an 11x14 print), you're seeing allowable tolerance variations, not poor QC.
As always: there is a balance here. I have bought six Canon lenses during the last 12 months and have had to return three: In two cases [coincidentally the 24mm and 45mm TS-E lenses] because the lens cells were so far out of alignment that one side of their images were obviously blurred. I do find it hard to accept that it is reasonable to pay close to £1,000 for a product then get only a 50% chance that its free of such a serious defect that its not fit for its purpose. My first 5D had a blob of optical cement in the sensor pack which was obvious at small apertures.
I assume that its simple economics: Its cheaper to replace the defective products spotted by critical users than implement the QC strategies needed to reduce the duds. If most users don't even notice the duds then that's a very profitable bonus.
I'm not picking on Canon: In the end their products have been excellent: It would just be nice not to have to assume [as I now do] that I'll probably have to try twice to get one that's been assembled properly. My own experience has certainly been that QC is a practical issue.
greenfields wrote:
As always: there is a balance here. I have bought six Canon lenses during the last 12 months and have had to return three: In two cases [coincidentally the 24mm and 45mm TS-E lenses] because the lens cells were so far out of alignment that one side of their images were obviously blurred. I do find it hard to accept that it is reasonable to pay close to £1,000 for a product then get only a 50% chance that its free of such a serious defect that its not fit for its purpose. My first 5D had a blob of optical cement in the sensor pack which was obvious at small apertures.
I assume that its simple economics: Its cheaper to replace the defective products spotted by critical users than implement the QC strategies needed to reduce the duds. If most users don't even notice the duds then that's a very profitable bonus.
I'm not picking on Canon: In the end their products have been excellent: It would just be nice not to have to assume [as I now do] that I'll probably have to try twice to get one that's been assembled properly. My own experience has certainly been that QC is a practical issue....Show more →
Yes, that does sound like a string of bad luck. In may case, I have bought 2 bodies and 4 canon lenses in the last year, and all were just fine. Well, except for the design flaw in the 70-300. Lucky for me they bought it back, and the bonus was that my wife agreed I should move up to the next "better" model. hehehe
My wife LOVES her new 30D over the 20D. The larger screen and the spot metering. I too have had very good luck with the lenses and bodies I have purchased. The last item I had to send back to Canon was the 20D when it first came out. They adjusted the focus and it has been perfect ever since.
The primes I have gotten recently are tack sharp and I am very pleased with the 70-300 DO I recently purchased. It rivals my 70-200 f4 and seems to produce even better contrast. I am really looking forward to what Canon will release next.
Anybody else concerned that it's the end of the week before photokina and nothing new has been announced? They usually spill the beans early, so either they are going for a big splash on the first day or there is nothing else.
Just when I thought I had enough information to know what was going to be released - DAM 
