JohnJ80 wrote:
Well, I have one here in my hand. (don't tell anyone. It is a secret).
J
Ahh heck I am not the only one and Canon told me I was the first and only so that means they lied to me. Well anyhow this is just what Canon wants and soon they will be laughing all the way to the bank
Don't tell anyone but the 50D will soon be announced in about a year
I agree with you in that. I think we will see the 30D PLUS. Ie. same as 30D but 10MP, antidust, and MAYBE, just MAYBE, Digic 3 processor in it. Not much else.
If 40D is really 30D+, and 30D may be considered 20D II. Does this make the 40D the 20D mark III?
The 2.5"/3" LCD is much bigger than the 1.8" LCD in the 20D. That is a major change.
In all seriousness, I think the nomenclature of this class of Canon dSLRs has become misleading due to the slowing (or maturing) of technology advancement of dSLRs. Was the 20D really that much better than the 10D? More people would say yes to that update compared to the 20D to 30D update. It would be a real yawner if the 40D update is another enlargement of LCD and the addition of the dust-buster.
Maybe this is the reason Nikon is going after the D40X market to increase the pool of lens buyers in order to increase revenue. Perhaps they concluded there is less revenue in small improvements on the higher end cameras compared to increasing the pool of dSLR users by introducing the super cheap dSLR.
EltonTeng wrote:
The 2.5"/3" LCD is much bigger than the 1.8" LCD in the 20D. That is a major change.
In all seriousness, I think the nomenclature of this class of Canon dSLRs has become misleading due to the slowing (or maturing) of technology advancement of dSLRs. Was the 20D really that much better than the 10D? More people would say yes to that update compared to the 20D to 30D update. It would be a real yawner if the 40D update is another enlargement of LCD and the addition of the dust-buster.
Maybe this is the reason Nikon is going after the D40X market to increase the pool of lens buyers in order to increase revenue. Perhaps they concluded there is less revenue in small improvements on the higher end cameras compared to increasing the pool of dSLR users by introducing the super cheap dSLR. ...Show more →
I have been hoping for a 3" screen but doubt there is room for it!
I firmly believe in a major change because the 30D was so minor, not that the 30D is not a great camera, it is, but the change was minor.
I expect the 40D to blow the competition out of the water, so to speak. Gosh, I really hope so. They need to raise the price a little and incorporate all of those changes like 10-12 mp, 5-7 frs, dust thingy, live view, larger viewfinder, quieter, Digic III, 3200 iso, possible weather seal, etc.
I just hope the actual camera will be a big enough change to warrant all of this excitement for almost a year. It would be sad to see a warmed over 30D/20D.
It will be sad to have all of this excitement over! I guess the excitement then will be trying to get on the waiting list/order list.
I think it will most likely be a MAJOR change. It it were only to be a minor update, Canon would have brought it out at around the same time as the 400xti, so as to not have the xti erode the 30D sales. Between the Rebels, and the 20-30Dclass, the 20-30D has always had higher frame rate, larger buffer, better focusing, and better low light capability. Since the xti is now the equal in all these areas, the 40D will have to be clearly superior. I look for higher buffer, better focusing, better low light ability, better dynamic range etc.,- more than likely will be in the middle ground between the xti and the MKIII in these areas. .
I was told yesterday that the 40D will be announced on September 6, that this is a firm date, and that there likely will be no further camera announcements this year .
wimg wrote:
I was told yesterday that the 40D will be announced on September 6, that this is a firm date, and that there likely will be no further camera announcements this year .
So the only difference between the 40D and the XTi is going to be Digi III and an extra 2 frames per second? If that is all you get for the extra 7-800, I am not sure it's worth it.
hfillmore wrote:
I think it will most likely be a MAJOR change. It it were only to be a minor update, Canon would have brought it out at around the same time as the 400xti, so as to not have the xti erode the 30D sales.
Between the Rebels, and the 20-30Dclass, the 20-30D has always had higher frame rate, larger buffer, better focusing, and better low light capability. Since the xti is now the equal in all these areas
I respectfully suggest that you are smoking crack. The XTi now has 5 FPS and equivalent low-light capability? It's certainly news to me. The XTi also has reduced buffering of JPEG, no spot meter, max 1/4000s shutter, and many other minor differences from the 30D.
yesisaidyes wrote:
So the only difference between the 40D and the XTi is going to be Digi III and an extra 2 frames per second? If that is all you get for the extra 7-800, I am not sure it's worth it.
I am sure it's not worth it. Certainly very few people would spend that much extra for a different grip and two extra frames per second. Now, if the 30D had a 10MP sensor with some of the low-light capability of the 1DIII built in, it would probably be worth it. Improved AF (even just dropping in the 5D AF) would make it certainly worth it, to me.
yesisaidyes wrote:
So the only difference between the 40D and the XTi is going to be Digi III and an extra 2 frames per second? If that is all you get for the extra 7-800, I am not sure it's worth it.
jvarszegi wrote:
I respectfully suggest that you are smoking crack. The XTi now has 5 FPS and equivalent low-light capability? It's certainly news to me. The XTi also has reduced buffering of JPEG, no spot meter, max 1/4000s shutter, and many other minor differences from the 30D.
OOPS..... Forgot about the 2fps diff. To me, that's the only significant diff except for the quicker handling on the 30D. The RAW buffer is the same. The focusing is now the same. Those were the 2 deal makers for me when I went from the 350 to the 30D. I thought the spot meter was going to be a big deal, but it's not really too "spotty" you know, and although I used a 2 degree spot meter extensively in the old film days, I find that in the real world the histogram pretty much relegates the 30D's "spot" meter to the realm of just another nicety that is rarely used. To me, major improvements would involve at least a greatly increased RAW buffer, much better AI servo, and dynamic range and low noise capability similar to the MKIII.
I really can't imagine Canon would make a camera and make the mistake of only a minor update again. The 30D was simply underwhelming after the 20D and with the XTi there is no reason to simply make a 10mp 30D and think it would sell well. Canon didn't get to where it was making stupid decisions such as another minor upgrade would be.
EltonTeng wrote:
The 2.5"/3" LCD is much bigger than the 1.8" LCD in the 20D. That is a major change.
In all seriousness, I think the nomenclature of this class of Canon dSLRs has become misleading due to the slowing (or maturing) of technology advancement of dSLRs. Was the 20D really that much better than the 10D? More people would say yes to that update compared to the 20D to 30D update. It would be a real yawner if the 40D update is another enlargement of LCD and the addition of the dust-buster.
Maybe this is the reason Nikon is going after the D40X market to increase the pool of lens buyers in order to increase revenue. Perhaps they concluded there is less revenue in small improvements on the higher end cameras compared to increasing the pool of dSLR users by introducing the super cheap dSLR. ...Show more →
Nikon should worry more about moving to CMOS and lowering their noise and offering FF and adding VR to their supertele photo lenses
It used to be Canon was miles ahead on IQ and even pixels and could get away with offering far less features; those days are well past. The 40D must not just update the 30D it must also be a strategy against what Nikon might offer on the D300 as well as Olympus with the E-1 replacement (very impressive from the leaked pdf) and what ever Sony and Pentax are cooking up.
Apart from the usual taken for granted stuff like dust-buster, 10.XMP, digic III, they have to improve several areas:
1) faster card writes and support for UDMA transfers
2) wider AF coverage, with more x-type points (assist points), improved AI servo
3) Higher res LCD, with more faithful colour reproduction, 3" preferably
4) improved evaluative metering - it is still hopeless with backlighting and bright subjects.
5) sealing of major openings and lcd's.
6) bigger buffer, 15 RAW, 60 jpg
7) Brighter VF with greater magnification
8) Greater exposure compensation range: -3 to +3
9) Improved WB
10) A C mode like the 5D
11) Built-in wireless flash triggering
12) Improved shadow noise performance (especially chroma noise where Nikon is better) and weaker AA filter.
13) 50% improvement in battery performance and improved battery level meter.
14) A new EF-S 50-150 f/2.8 IS 1:3 macro to be available as a kit lens. Weight 1.1kg, with a MFD of 0.75m
Price $1699 for the 40D and $1399 for the lens. This camera would be a crop EOS 3D; a birders delight and put a lot of pressure on the competition.
I expect about 2 or 3 of these to come true
Edited by Pixel Perfect on Jul 23, 2007 at 11:49 AM GMT
Strid3r wrote:
I really can't imagine Canon would make a camera and make the mistake of only a minor update again. The 30D was simply underwhelming after the 20D and with the XTi there is no reason to simply make a 10mp 30D and think it would sell well. Canon didn't get to where it was making stupid decisions such as another minor upgrade would be.
I sure hope not but they did with the 30D!
The 30D is a great camera but that's because it's a 20D with a few minor changes. The 20D is also a great camera.
I want the 40D to be revolutionary but Canon may think differently. They may think another 30D type update will work.
Before the 30D was announced, I had thought about buying one and selling my 20D. The word was that a replacement was coming. Because the 30D was a warmed over 20D I felt I wouldn't gain anything by buying it so Canon lost a sale. If the 40D is the same, they'll lose another one. I expect I would stay with Canon at that point but honestly, I'm not sure. The Nikon D200 is a great camera, let's face it.
If Canon doesn't answer the D200, they will lose that part of the market or it will be severely impacted and I will start looking harder at Nikon. I figure if Canon doesn't want my business, then Nikon probably will.
.
