I saw an ad recently from Canon in one of the photo magazines, talking about the difference between in body and in lens IS. I would say, after reading that ad / article, that it would be a cold day in He!! before Canon would go in-body.
In Canons latest UK's EOS Magazine (January-March) there was an interview with Dave Noguchi (senior business co-ordination manager at Canon UK) and Vic Solomon (product intelligence consultant). Here is an interesting question and answer.
The guy at my local pro shop said he'd heard murmurings of a '6D' with the dust shaking thing but not much else exciting, from the Canon people. I wouldn't trust what he said though, he was pretty vague about it and this could be months old knowing him, i.e. just talk about what canon might do among the reps, etc.
Micheal Reichmann who probably has the new bodies for testing already ready to put up a report the moment the embargo has lifted made a rather veiled statement on his forum about a month ago in reply to a question about what to expect from canon:
"Now, who would actually be surprised if Canon didn't take a giant step forward in 2007? In fact, several.
Micheal Reichmann wrote:
Now, who would actually be surprised if Canon didn't take a giant step forward in 2007? In fact, several. Conspiracy theorists unite.
It could be parsed so that the "several" applies to "step" or "who". So it could be parsed to mean nothing or everything. But I'll take it as another straw in the wind that late February / early March could be a lot of fun!
I think Canon must be clearing the decks so that some big PMA announcement upcoming doesn't step on or won't be stepped on by P&S announcements. Apparently Sony announced some P&S after CES and before the PMA, so maybe they are getting ready for something big too.
Alistair101 wrote:
Oh how these 'what is pro versus what is not pro' discussions make me laugh! If you make money from published photography then to my mind it is simple, you are a professional as it is your business. Me simply owning a 1D2N does not a pro make, but I am trying!
The status of whether a photographer is a 'professional' or otherwise is not under debate. We're talking cameras here.
Yet another soul who either can't read or can't comprehend...
It's 2 things: The number of channels a sensor has, coupled to the sampling rate/frequency at which the front-end processing unit operates.
The big guns, both 1DII(N) and 1DsII, have 8 channel output at 16 MHz. From the white paper we know the 5D and 10/20/30D sensors have a 4 channel output. Coupled to the fps numbers, the 5D sensor has to be clocked at about 18 MHz and the 20/30D at a little more, 19 MHz or so.
The xxxD sensors all have a 2 channel output. This means that the 400D sensor clocks in pretty high, around 28 MHz. 350D would sit at 22 or 23 MHz....Show more →
Thanks to everybody for the spell checking, it's an effective way to try to undermine the argument of somebody you disagree with when short on actual facts.
So we're going to determine clock speeds by taking information from a marketing document then backing into the clock speed by the fps numbers? I guess that the 300D was really only 2.5fps while the 10D with the same components was 3fps because it only had 2 channels, and not because they limited that body via software like the 17 other ways it was limited.
Frankly I'm impressed that Canon had the nerve to arrange that every body had a nice tidy whole or half integer fps. Moreover, I'm surprised that nobody has questioned it.
The concept of intentionally throttling performance through firmware isn't new at all... especially in the electronics industry. It's been done for years with processors and graphics cards. Yes, there is legitimate bin sorting that classifies a sub par chip with lower performance. But there are also examples of intentional throttling of performance to create two price tiers while still running a production line without changing out parts. Hell, Apple sold iMacs for years with USB 2.0 chips, but refused to enable the USB 2.0 performance with their software because they wanted to emphasize the benefits of firewire.
I put my faith in the economic reasons Canon has to throttle the performance of certain bodies. They have a hierarchy of products to maintain and if the bodies that are low on the totem pole outperform the ones higher up, who wants the ones up above? My faith is sustained by the fact that Canon has proven the concept by gratuitously demonstrating that they can and will do such a thing. I hope I can be forgiven for not putting blind faith in a white paper that was drafted in the marketing department for the purpose of re-enforcing the position of each individual product within their overall line.
I said it back at the time, and I'll say it again. The 30D was the wrong product for Canon when it hit market. ...
But I'm glad that they put it out !
Canon lost market share at this level precisely because they chose not to compete. ....
I am not sure that this is a Canon phenomenon or a Nikon phenomenon. Nikon, which had a heck of a lot of presence in the SLR world, took a long time to find its footing in the DSLR world. Canon effectively filled a semi-vacuum. Once Nikon got back on track, it recovered share. Given its long history & reputation, that should not have been a surprise.
I do not think that it is realistic to expect Canon to maintain technical superiority of any significance. Computing and imaging technology is being worked on in a number of places for a huge number of applications and most of it is becoming increasingly commoditized over time. If Nikon cannot, or does not want to, invest the resources in such technolgical development, it can buy it and concentrate its energies on lenses (which, I suspect, will undergo a major technological paradigm shift in the not-too-distant future) and camera design.
Geoff Costello wrote: ... some of the better informed postings to grace these parts hereabout ...
Thanks for your postings Geoff. Very informative, well thought out, and generally consistent with other information.
I may have missed it, but I did not notice much on lenses. Was there much discussion of lenses or information you could share with us on that topic?
A persistent rumor has it that Canon delayed introduction of the new cameras half a year because they are preparing a slew of new lenses and the current lens system is not performing well enough for the high end cameras. Many of us are hoping for enhanced primes. Personally, I'd like to see a 19/20/21 mm that is rectilinear and sharp corner to corner. Make it only fast enough to keep the price under $1500. I'd also like to see an improved 24 mm TSE.
Any news on lenses and how they may relate to anticipated cameras?
darknite wrote:
Um, BTW, any chance you can have a dream that I will get one of the 7Ds?
Sorry, I'm not sure about that one. And I'm kicking myself that I didn't pay a bit more attention to the features of the new body...
Monito wrote:
I may have missed it, but I did not notice much on lenses. Was there much discussion of lenses or information you could share with us on that topic?
Any news on lenses and how they may relate to anticipated cameras?
Sorry - my "Source's" mission was to find out about the new cameras. I've rechecked the MSN log I based my post on and there is nothing about lenses (and he isn't due to go back to Japan for a couple of months)... But it would be a sure bet there will be 2-3 or so new / upgraded lenses - My impression is that Canon has always announced at least 2-3 each year So we can all be surprised I guess.... Guranteed though that with all the deamnd / expecations for new lenses there will be as many disappointed as happy...
Guranteed though that with all the deamnd / expecations for new lenses there will be as many disappointed as happy...