I don't see the point in that. Canon would loose EF-S by switching to 1,5x, I think it's far more reasonable to go for 1,3x crop, which they already use and which has around 100% larger surface.
And there is another problem; no real standard lens for 1,3x crop. If they increase the sensor size in xxD series, a new kit lens should be developed. Something like 20-70 f3.5-4.5. While I'd go for 1,3x 40D (because od all the benefits that Tentacle mentioned), I'd really hate to be forced to use the soft 17-40L, because it really is the only option besides 16-35. That seems to be the only problem regarding lenses. For portraits I'd use 100 f2 and 50 1.4 and maybe a 35mm for all around.
timbop wrote:
you guys are setting yourselves up for a letdown - the 40D will have a 10MP APS-C sensor.
Yup. It will be one more "me too" product in a sea of sameness. In a way, that's not a bad thing though.
Canon has their back against the wall with current technology. They can't reasonably increase the resolution without paying a noise price, nor can they surpass the 1D3 without annoying that crowd more than they are already. I think we've come close to parity after a 5-year run of complete Canon dominance. The XTi provides a 10mp sensor, and Nikon's D200, D80, and D40x are all suitable alternatives to the "casual" crowd that doesn't care about noise.
The 40d is going to be a snoozer IMO. 10MP, better ISO performance, and bigger screen, but that's about it. Yawn.... zz....
Oh, and it won't be announced until late August if it even happens this year.....
timbop wrote:
you guys are setting yourselves up for a letdown - the 40D will have a 10MP APS-C sensor.
You're probably right but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
It's been discussed, somewhat, that any more mp than 10 would probably not be a good thing unless they changed the sensor. So, that really leaves us with 10mp and some new features such as larger screen, lower noise possibly, sensor cleaner, possibly live view. But, even with those changes or some of them it will be worth it in my very humble opinion. Although it's not really what I want.
What I love about rumors is that it gives us the opportunity to dream or be practical or anything else we desire. From live view to GPS to dust thingy to bigger screen, the list is really unlimited.
I think most of us really know that no matter the features, our ability won't change. We still won't be able to take better pictures but the illusion is that we will. I'm still not as good as my 20D so what makes me think I'll be as good as my 40D? I do know that I will be excited with it for a while as I was and still am with my 20D because it's the best camera I've ever had in 50 years or so.
So, bottom line, I want a new toy! and I want it soon........ I also know I'll be disappointed that a certain feature isn't on it but hopefully I'll be happy that another certain feature is!
Most folks seem to be judging the anticipated 30D successor from the point of view of those who already own a 20D or 30D. Fair enough, but there are other considerations. I never moved up from my 10D until the 5D came out. Then I sold the 10D because its pixel density is hardly greater than the 5D -- in short, there was pretty well nothing that I could do with the 10D that I could not do with the 5D. Also, the pixel density of the 20D/30D is not that much higher than the 5D (25% or so on a linear basis), so I have not rushed to buy one of those for use with long lenses. Now I'm waiting for the 40D (or whatever they'll call it) in the hope that it will go to at least 10MP while retaining decent high ISO and DR. I don't care much if it also has dust-shaking and other upgrades from the 30D, but they'd be nice too. For me, I expect the 40D to be a cheaper and lighter alternative to getting even longer lenses than I have now, for wildlife and sports. I suspect this may be the case for others too.
Tentacle wrote:
Yeah yeah, I know. I want the 40D to be a high-ISO APS-H monster. But I know that the chances on that are not very big.
And if not that, then at least that Canon distinguishes itself with the 40D from the D80/D90/D200/D300/K10D/K20D/Alpha100/Alpha200...
So, in that sense, I'm in for an expected let-down. It will not be a hype-inflated balloon that will burst.
I agree with everyone.
This is wishful thinking, (because I will more than likely endup buying the 40D whatever is in it) but isn't it possible that the xxD series moves to APS-H, and Canon introduces a lower end Rebel that uses the EF-S line of lenses: call this the Digital Rebel LXTi: L for light. ...light in weight and light on the budget at the $699 price point. There will be then be 2 camera bodies that use the EF-S lenses, and a camera priced to lure costumers who are interested in a Nikon D40.
If we're thinking about how Canon is going to really distinguish itself from other manufacturers and separate the 40D from the D200 and most other DSLRs then the 1.3 crop is their ace in the whole.
I think Canon's only real danger in making the 40D a APS-H sensor, is that they would make 20D and/or 30D owners with the 17-55mm f2.8 IS lens kinda unhappy... or anyone else who has eyes on the 40D and has a significant investment in EF-S glass.
There are birders who want higher pixel density and probably don't care too much if the sensor is bigger then APS-C... but I think the people who'd really be upset is those with heavy investment in EF-S lenses.
I for one, have just one $450 Tamron EF-S lens that I would hate to loose the use of if/when I upgrade to a 40D. If there was a APS-H sensor on the 40D, and had IQ and high ISO performance that was attractive enough, I would probably just sell the Tamron and upgrade to the 40D... (in other words the switch to APS-H would not be a deal breaker for me to upgrade, but it would not necesasarlly make me jump for joy either).
In all honesty, a 10MP APS-C with better IQ then the Xti's, would be my preference, if that is truly possible... Add better AF then the 30D has, better fps, larger frame buffer, better view finder, micro AF adjustment, and I'd probably be a happy buyer... I don't think 12MP in APS-C would be of any real use to anyone, and would likely make me think Canon is just playing along with the MP race game...
Either way... my 300D is getting old... and I'm really interested in what Canon will have available this fall for around $1500 USD. I hope all the people say Canon will only offer minor changes are wrong... but then, I'd probably be better off keeping my expectations low, rather then be disappointed in the end. But then I could always buy a 30D and buy more glass with the cash I saved over buying the potentially disappointing new Canon camera...
a lot of people said something like:
Canon absolutely should add weather sealing to the 40D...for new users this is an area where Canon will be lacking on the spec sheet.
Does anyone know the target market for the 10, 20, 30, 40D?
I am guessing here, but I'll bet the target market is the P-n-S crowd that's sick of missing shots due to shutter delay. The P-n-S crowd that wants to zoom a lot further than the limits of their optical zoom, without broaching on the dreaded and fuzzy digital zoom.
That said, you've got to look at the feature set that GETS that crowd. Lenses. Lots of 'em. Cheap ones, expensive ones. Burst rates. Speed. Image Quality. Megapixels (it's true).
A lot of the people that are buying the XXD's may not even fully understand the relationship between ISO/Aperture/Shutter Speed. Many of them will live in 'auto' mode for quite a while. Then they will cautiously move on to the more manual settings, on to eventually better understand photography and their camera.
At that point, they will either realize that they are happy with their purchase (and therefore stick with the XXD system as a value priced performer), truly upgrade to something like a 5D or a 1-series (because they "need" more, as I currently have myself fooled to believe), or they will start rumor threads on why the XXD needs to be weather sealed, 20FPS, ISO50-12,800, noiseless, 3,000pt autofocus, etc., etc., etc. If you want THAT camera... get a 1-series. Otherwise, realize what the XXD's are - AWESOME prosumer cameras. Not professional. That's a 1 series. Not coonsumer. That's an XT. In between... in a very good spot.
Edited by sskoutas on Jul 25, 2007 at 03:43 PM GMT
DynoMoHum wrote:
I think Canon's only real danger in making the 40D a APS-H sensor, is that they would make 20D and/or 30D owners with the 17-55mm f2.8 IS lens kinda unhappy... or anyone else who has eyes on the 40D and has a significant investment in EF-S glass.
[...]
There is an important distiction that you fail to make.
EF-s really can not fit an APS-H camera. This is because EF-s allows for a deeper penetration of the rear element into the mirror box, in addition to projecting an image circle that is smaller than full frame.
However... All the third party "crop optimised" lenses, Tamron's Di II, Sigma's DC and Tokina's DX, only have a smaller image projection circle. They do not penetrate the mirror box like Canon EF-s lenses do.
As a result, you can put all those DC, DX and Di II lenses on APS-H cameras. For instance, the Tokina fisheye 10-17 zoom will work fine on the 1D. So does the Sigma 10-22 ultrawide. Tokina's 12-24 will work from 16 mm (or so) and upwards. You can even put them on a 5D or 1Ds, if you're willing to crop out some extreme vignetting/black border.
It's only the true EF-s glass that will not fit an EF-only mount.
kapytalyst wrote:
I also expect to see a new EF-S kit lens to compete with Nikon's 18-200 VR.
Canon has to be licking their chops.
Nikon, maybe, but what about Sigma? Sigma's new OS 18-200 is poised to take a bigger bite out of Canon than that of Nikon. That lens is a direct competitor to Canon's own 17-85. Canon needs to answer this with an affordable IS, USM lens.
My concern is that when Nikon, Sony, and Pentax all release their 12 mpx APS-C cameras this fall, Canon will be licking their wounds.
Maybe someone already said this, theres way too many posts in this thread for me to read them all. I don't see why canon would make the 40D an APS-H sensor. They released the 17-55 f2.8 fairly recently and with the $1000 price tag I doubt that they would make a lens like that just for users of the digital rebel series, most of whom are probably perfectly happy with their 18-55 kit lens. I just don't see any reason why canon would be phasing out the APS-C sensor unless we started seeing lenses designed for the APS-H sensor.
Even though I would really like an APS-H sensor, I can't see Canon doing it. If the 40D had an APS-H sensor I think it would be too similar to the 1DMKIII. I expect the 40D to have a 10MP APS-C and I hope it has improved autofocus, improved high ISO performance, and a better viewfinder than the 30D. These three improvements are tops on my list and would make me want to buy it. It also nicely positions the camera between the 400D and the 1DMKIII. A 10MP APS-C camera with significantly better autofocus (say 15 point AF with 5 high sensitivity points), high ISO performance (real 3200 ISO but probably not as clean as the 1DMKII), viewfinder (95% and brighter than the 30D), and fps (say 5 or 6) than the 400D yet clearly worse performance than the 1DMKIII should be possible for a $1,100 to $1,200 price tag. This camera would make most 400D owners long to upgrade, but would still leave people with a lot to hope for in upgrading to a 1DMKIII. My two cents.
sskoutas wrote:
Does anyone know the target market for the 10, 20, 30, 40D?
I am guessing here, but I'll bet the target market is the P-n-S crowd that's sick of missing shots due to shutter delay. The P-n-S crowd that wants to zoom a lot further than the limits of their optical zoom, without broaching on the dreaded and fuzzy digital zoom.
Based on prsonal experience, that is a false assumption. There are currently 2 canon bodies below the 30D that the PnS crowd will look at: Xt and Xti. They are budget priced so you can get a 2 lens kit for $1000 or less. The 30D series is a prosumer cam, meaning it's target is the amateur who has grown and wants to be "more serious", and the semipro or pro on a budget looking for a great camera in a reasonable price bracket. I work with a wedding photog who has been a pro - meaning that's how he makes his living - for 20 years and when he went digital he went 20D. He has upgraded to several 30D's, but has no plans to move up to FF or 1 series. He's not the only one; I know several more pros that shoot with 30D's or D200's as well.
The last wedding I went to there were 2 pro photogs... one used a 16-35L on a 5D + 70-200/2.8IS on a 30D, and the other used a 24-70L on a 20D and a 70-200/2.8IS on a 30D. The pictures turned out great. There are definitely a lot of pros using 20D/30D bodies.
and I want it soon........ I also know I'll be disappointed that a certain feature isn't on it but hopefully I'll be happy that another certain feature is!
