The most interesting thing to me in this round of camera releases is what happens to the 30D line - as others have remarked, sales of this are lousy - I am wondering if Canon will do something with the EOS 3 design - in the 5D, the main barrier to better sales is cost, so they want to be taking expence out, not putting in more features, but in the 30D line they need something special to counteract the D200.
Regards,
I expect the EOS 5D's price to be lowered to $1600-2000 after Sept to take its new position as the D200 beater once the new 1D is officially announced and available in the market - after all, most websites seem keen to compare the D200 with the 5D as opposed to the 30D despite Canon positioning it the category above 30D/D200 following its annoucement in Sept 2005.
Sept 07 may see the 30D being discontinued with no apparent replacement other than the 5D taking over as its temporarily "successor", which in turn complementing the latter's successor - a possible EOS 3D.
BTW, my source in Japan told me that Canon was requested by the Japanese Camera Inspection Council (or something like that) to refrain from introducing newer, ground-breaking EOS DSLRs throughout 2006 to give the competitions some breathing space or else they may go the way of Bronica, Yashica-Contax, Konica-Minolta, etc.
Geoff Costello wrote:
...................
Interesting re his suggestion of the high speed crop mode on the Big Erwin… (and no mention of the small Erwin)... But this IMO is typical of verbal leaks with partial information...
....................
No reason Big Erwin crop mode can't run at the same fps as small Erwin, if the crop is the same file size. If small Erwin is FF, what we really end up with is two levels of 1 series. An extra $4K USD buys 10 extra megapixels.
Edited by dcmiller on Feb 13, 2007 at 06:45 PM GMT
lordcarl wrote:
BTW, my source in Japan told me that Canon was requested by the Japanese Camera Inspection Council (or something like that) to refrain from introducing newer, ground-breaking EOS DSLRs throughout 2006 to give the competitions some breathing space or else they may go the way of Bronica, Yashica-Contax, Konica-Minolta, etc.
Too bad!
Looking at all the innovation before and the fact that it's EOS anniversary I was hoping for 2 print buttons on the 1 series and a display showing the ink levels....
lordcarl wrote:
BTW, my source in Japan told me that Canon was requested by the Japanese Camera Inspection Council (or something like that) to refrain from introducing newer, ground-breaking EOS DSLRs throughout 2006 to give the competitions some breathing space or else they may go the way of Bronica, Yashica-Contax, Konica-Minolta, etc.
That is freaking un-American.
Canon should think about 50,000 American troops in Osaka and an insane president. Need I say more.
(I must leave the computer now and go down stairs to wait for the FBI. Goodbye.)
I found the original image from which the supposed 1DRs was doctored. I know you will all appreciate that this is the original and the one presented is clearly a fake.
Tentacle wrote:
I hate to squeal on you Jim, but can you use the quote tags next time to isolate your own reply from the part you are quoting? And please stay away from the bold tags and marker tags unless something is really really vital. Now you just appear to be doing the equivalent of screaming your lungs out.
But, once more, DIGIC processing capacity has little to do with cropfactor and little to do with framerate.
An 8 Mpixel APS-C sensor will spew out its data as fast as an 8 Mpixel full frame sensor, if they both have the same number of output channels and if the front-end processing circuit runs at the same clockspeed. The sensor dimensions do not matter.
(A 1DsII sensor has 8 channels and is clocked at 16 Mhz. A 1DII(N) sensor also has 8 channels, also clocked at 16 MHz. The number of pixels per second they put out is as good as identical.)...Show more →
Having trouble understanding what your reply has to do with my comment.
The 1.3x imager is or will be over sooner rather han later, and that has NOTHING to do with frame-rates. The 1.3x imager was developed because Canon did not have an affordable FF imager, coupled with the fact that the DIGIC-II processor and related bandwith, could not handle more than 8MP of data at 8.5fps.
Using a bit of extrapolation on this line of thinking,,, if the DIGIC-III handles 22MP of data at 4 or 5 fps, then it follows that the next version of the 1D2N with the DIGIC-III could be enhanced with a 5D type FF imager, at 8 to 10 fps.
I found the original image from which the supposed 1DRs was doctored. I know you will all appreciate that this is the original and the one presented is clearly a fake.
FAU4U wrote: Having trouble understanding what your reply has to do with my comment.
The 1.3x imager is or will be over sooner rather han later, and that has NOTHING to do with frame-rates. The 1.3x imager was developed because Canon did not have an affordable FF imager, coupled with the fact that the DIGIC-II processor and related bandwith, could not handle more than 8MP of data at 8.5fps.
Using a bit of extrapolation on this line of thinking,,, if the DIGIC-III handles 22MP of data at 4 or 5 fps, then it follows that the next version of the 1D2N with the DIGIC-III could be enhanced with a 5D type FF imager, at 8 to 10 fps.
Honestly guys, there are going to be some nice announcements and some good feature upgrades, but I don't honestly see a huge shakeup. Contrary to personal opinion, the canon imaging division's earnings statement supports the conclusion that the current product line was quite succesful in 2006. There are no massive breakthroughs in manufacturing, so FF cost is still enough that a prosumer cam will need to be aps-c. Yes, we gearheads are disapponted but that's the way it goes. My personal guess is the DSLR lineup will be along the lines of:
$500 350D - entry level camera that has more capability than D40
$800 400D - really nice entry level camera with better AF priced to compete with d70s/d80
$1400 40D - lower end prosumer camera with even better AF, 10MP 1.6 crop sensor and 5fps, cheaper than D200 but not as robust. Doesn't need to be FF; it is the cheaper alternative to D200 and the choice of serious amateur sports/wildlife photogs. If they weatherseal it add $400.
< $3000 5Dm2 - higher end prosumer FF camera, 12 - 16 MP w/5fps. Still in a class by itself, better loved and adored than the D200 or even D2X. Won't have AF or build of 1 series.
$3k - $4k 1Dm3 - 12 (aps-h) to 16MP(FF) 8+ fps, superior AF, build, and performance. sports/wildlife camera extrardanaire; may or may not be FF.
$6k - $8k 1Dsm3 - 22 to 24MP FF. King of the hill. They cannot abandon the ~$3500 price bracket, nor are they going to stop selling the 1Ds for less than $6000. Sorry, but simple market economics stops a merger of 2 highly successful and profitable lines.
timbop wrote:
$1400 40D - lower end prosumer camera with even better AF, 10MP 1.6 crop sensor and 5fps, cheaper than D200 but not as robust. Doesn't need to be FF; it is the cheaper alternative to D200 and the choice of serious amateur sports/wildlife photogs. If they weatherseal it add $400.
Sounds like a no brainer for Canon then... charge $400 for $4 worth of rubber that doesn't even have to be waterproof.
I wonder how this $1800 camera would look next to Pentax on the store shelf
MikeZ wrote:
Sounds like a no brainer for Canon then... charge $400 for $4 worth of rubber that doesn't even have to be waterproof.
I wonder how this $1800 camera would look next to Pentax on the store shelf
There won't be room on the shelf for the pentax with all the different canon bodies
