Rich Swanner wrote:
You are using a 300D . What year were you planning on getting something newer? A lot of shots are passing you by . You could re-sell the newer(20D) camera when the 40D or whatever comes out,and sell your 300D now as I did and purchase something for now.
Yeah, fraid his logic doesn't make much sense to me either.
RikWriter wrote:
Yeah, fraid his logic doesn't make much sense to me either.
Ditto
Might as well either get a mid-range camera thats used and wait til a newer one is out, or just go balls to the wall and get a new camera. Sitting around waiting for the next best thing to arrive while shooting with a pretty old camera is crazy. Well of course it all depends on your monetary situation
I am pretty certain that there will be ways to price FF below $2000 before too long. It is true that FF will be more expensive than a comparable crop sensor body, but the sensor costs of both become less of an issue over time. Canon could probably afford to let this gap be somewhat larger now that the 400D seems like a more capable performer - perhaps large enough that there is room to position a sub-$2000 FF body (I do think this will be viable before long) above the 400D.
I feel sure this is correct. The weak-spec of the 30D is almost a sign from Canon that we should skip it and save our pennies for the coming FF revolution.
Rich Swanner wrote:
You are using a 300D . What year were you planning on getting something newer? A lot of shots are passing you by .
Yeah ok I understand the sentiment that it's not THAT hard or expensive to upgrade to something better but shots passing you by? Give me a break. The 300D is still a good camera and can take good photos, if it's working still and he's shooting with it, how exactly are shots passing by?
danmitchell wrote:
I still have to think that Canon is intending to move this market segment towards full frame before too much longer. That would differentiate Canon from the competition in this market segment - no one else has this feature - and it would also compell quite a few current Canon users to upgrade.
I have a feeling that might actually backfire. My collection of lenses means I'm essentially vendor locked to Canon. When it's time to upgrade my body, a required significant investment in lenses (losing 1.6 crop on the tele end, EF-S no longer useful) might actually make me look seriously at other brands...
Marek Paju wrote:
but how to explane the fact there was an blank 40D template page on HongKong Canon website?
40D is just a 0 away from the existing 400D....
johnhopkins wrote:
Peope want a cheap camera (400D) or desire a full-frame camera (5D),
Do that many people actually, deliberately want FF? Enough to justify
johnhopkins wrote:
I feel sure this is correct. The weak-spec of the 30D is almost a sign from Canon that we should skip it and save our pennies for the coming FF revolution.
There is nothing particularly weak about the 30D at that price. There are many claims that it isn't selling well, but does anyone have published figures for it for, say, at least an 8-month interval ? And I don't understand why FF is a "revolution." The long-term trend in image technology from the very beginning has been a reduction in image capture size, of which 35mm film was a significant development back 40(?) years ago, no ? FF seems like a regression in that context.
Yes, I'm still using a 300D, and for most of my needs, it's just fine.... it is getting old, and with 15,000 shots on it, I'm afraid the shutter/mirror could fail at anytime now... I am not a pro, don't sell anything related to photography.... I don't want to buy a 20D or 30D, or even a 400D... ( I briefly owned a 400D and decided it wasn't really much of a upgrade from my 300D, and didn't like the way it exposed things (under exposure))....
When I buy a car, or most anything that cost more then a few hundred $$$... I like to buy it for the long haul, and don't typically like to buy older models if I can help it... I do not really want to buy any of the current Canon cameras, and I don't want the hassle of buying and selling, only to try and upgrade a few months from now, etc...
You can agree or disagree with my logic all you want... this is the way I am, and I can tell you that if Canon came out with a 40D tomorrow, and it had even a few of the new features of the 1DMIII, I would buy it sometime in the next two months if it were available... One feature I'd really like to see in a affordable (sub $1500) is this ability to tweak the AF like is on this newly announced MDIII... faster write speed to memory cards would also be nice... as would many of the other features that are clearly possible with current technology.
Actually the 35 mm film for still cameras is A LOT older development than 40 years ago: "The film format was introduced into still photography as early as 1913 (the Tourist Multiple) but first became popular with the launch of the Leica camera, created by Oskar Barnack in 1925." Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/35_mm_film
So depending on which year you choose, it is either 94 or 82 years old development.
There have been very small film formats within the last 40 years, the popular 110 and the even smaller Minox spy camera format. BTW, Adorama has the Minox film spy camera on sale ...
Do that many people actually, deliberately want FF?
I think that a significant number want FF, most of whom now use crop sensor cameras. Witness the number who were willing to pay over $3000 when the 5D came out, the number who have more recently been willing to pay low- to mid-$2000 prices, and the number waiting impatiently for the price to come down a bit more.
For many who haven't made the switch, it isn't that they prefer crop sensor cameras over full frame.* The issue is simply that the cost differential is too great for them still. I have no doubt that if we lived in a world where the cost of full frame and crop sensor cameras was the same we would see full frame predominate quickly. Obviously the prices are not going to be the same, but as the cost comes down for full frame - as it has already done to some extent - more and more people will decide that the cost value equation favors full frame and the number of people switching will continue to increase.
Dan
*I do recognize that there are those with solid reasons for preferring crop sensor bodies, among them being folks doing a lot of work with big telephotos, and folks who really want a smaller camera body. I'm not convinced though that these consititute anything like a majority of the market for DSLR bodies.
JohnnyGCanon wrote:
That is a well thought out statement about the current position of Canon in the 5D and below market. I agree with timbop totally. He really tells it like it is.
Someone else recently said that Canon's business wasn't pleasing the consumer but their stockholders! While I agree with the stockholder statement, I totally disagree with the idea that Canon shouldn't please us too. After all, the market starts with the consumer. True, we generally stay with a system because of our investment in lenses and other equipment but we don't buy the next body if we're not sold on it's merit.
When I saw that the new Mark III was 1.3X, I thought that was a great compromise between the FF and 1.6X and I still believe it is. However, the camera is more suited to the professional who needs the rapid fire shooting and other fine features it has. It's not generally suited to the photographer who wants a great DSLR but not at the price of $4000.00 or so. Something around $1400 to $2200 would suit me just fine as long as it had the features I want and maybe 1.3X is the feature I want. Maybe FF is what I want but I would have to be convinced of that first. I think I could step down to the 1.3X easier than FF. I love the long lenses and FF is not kind to them.
What I don't want is another warmed over 20D/30D. I want a NEW camera with the features that are important to me. I also don't care what the number on the camera is like 40D or 5D or whatever.
One more thing: the more I read and drool over the Mark III, the more awesome I think the camera is. It is truly a huge breakthrough in camera technology. Too bad it isn't in my price range but one can dream!...Show more →
I wonder if Canon isn't holding off on the 40D, because they want to see how the 1DMkIII sensor is going to work, in real world application. The 40D may then come out as a 1.3 crop rather then a 1.6 crop, so that the progression is 1.6 -> 1.3 -FF rather then 1..6->1.6->1.3->FF.
I wonder if Canon isn't holding off on the 40D, because they want to see how the 1DMkIII sensor is going to work, in real world application. The 40D may then come out as a 1.3 crop rather then a 1.6 crop, so that the progression is 1.6 -> 1.3 -FF rather then 1..6->1.6->1.3->FF.
I'm not the only one thinking along these lines. It would make sense to me for the 40D to have an APS-H sensor. It would certainly help with DR and IQ to differentiate from the 400D. Economically, full frame does not make sense on a sub $2k camera. But APS-H does. The only fly in the ointment is that APS-H precludes the use of those silly EF-S mount lenses. I wouldn't care, because I don't see them as being a worthwhile investment anyway (and have actively avoided them because for sure at some point I'll be full frame.) My other issue with the EF-S line is that supposedly they are cheaper to manufacture due to the smaller image circle needed, but Canon has not been passing that savings onto the consumer.
Erik Barzeski wrote:
Wow, talk about a quickly dying thread. 50 pages a day at one point, now down to about one or two only one day after the announcement. Wow.
I really don't think the 40D is a viable option for Canon right now. The 30D has only been out for just about a year or so. The announcement of a 10MP Rebel did not disuade any 30D buyers. MPs are not the end all be all. The sensor is proven to be a very good sensor and really does not need to be tweaked. If anything, the 30D is probably the end of the road for Canon's mid-priced APS-C sensor line. I forsee Canon upping the ante and moving there mid-line cameras to the 1.3 crop APS-H size sensor or possibly even a full frame sensor similar to that found in the 5D. The price of the 5D has come down significantly enough to prompt 30D buyers to spend the extra cash on a used body. What will happen next is an upgraded 5DN with Dual Digic III processors, faster FPS and burst-rate and a more robust MP @13 million pixels. The new mid-line will be the Elan/7D sporting the 1.3 crop factor or full frame 10MP chip and feature set similar to the 5D. Just some musings on my part. Of course, a new wide angle lens for 1.3 x factor chips has long been a hole in the canon line-up, so a special 14-28 F/4 L will fill in the void.
Lytton wrote:
I really don't think the 40D is a viable option for Canon right now. The 30D has only been out for just about a year or so. The announcement of a 10MP Rebel did not disuade any 30D buyers. MPs are not the end all be all. The sensor is proven to be a very good sensor and really does not need to be tweaked. If anything, the 30D is probably the end of the road for Canon's mid-priced APS-C sensor line. I forsee Canon upping the ante and moving there mid-line cameras to the 1.3 crop APS-H size sensor or possibly even a full frame sensor similar to that found in the 5D. The price of the 5D has come down significantly enough to prompt 30D buyers to spend the extra cash on a used body. What will happen next is an upgraded 5DN with Dual Digic III processors, faster FPS and burst-rate and a more robust MP @13 million pixels. The new mid-line will be the Elan/7D sporting the 1.3 crop factor or full frame 10MP chip and feature set similar to the 5D. Just some musings on my part. Of course, a new wide angle lens for 1.3 x factor chips has long been a hole in the canon line-up, so a special 14-28 F/4 L will fill in the void....Show more →
I hope you are correct!! Exactly my thought too....
Hmmmm.... if they didn't upgrade the 1.6.... I would have to hate canon for, lets say forever.
I have 3 expensive ef-s lenses. Maybe I should have bought L's... so I can have a red ring... and no wide angle.
