To quote the article, 80% of all SLR (not digital SLR specifically) sales are under $1000. If that includes film, which that article obviously isn't about but the statistic reasonably well may be, then I'd say the 20D / 30D market is right in that same ballpark as the $1000 figure may be distorted lower than it should be.
timbop wrote:
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....Show more →
You won't catch me disagreeing that Pros will use 20D's/30D's/40D's (re-read the ending to my previous post of which you quoted part above), however I hear the term Prosumer a bit differently. Inexpensive enough to appeal to the consumer market, and offering enough performance to appeal to the pro market.
FWIW, the last wedding I was at was shot by a photog using a 20D and a 30D. I was using my 20D, and there were several guests there with XTi's (at least 2), 20D's (2 more) and a few Nikons (don't know the models). On the other side of the coin, I look at several of my friends who don't make a penny off of photography, and they are shooting 20D's and XT's/XTi's.
That's exactly the beauty of the 20D/ 30D / and presumably the 40D - for about a thousand dollars, a pro can keep his business running with a proven piece of equipment. For about a thousand dollars, a consumer can buy a camera that is going to deliver good results right out of the box, and yet offer them the chance to "grow into" the camera and get their talents in line with their equipment.
Go to Best Buy or your local consumer electronics store. They will have 30D's, not 1-series... and they will be selling them to moms and dads with cute kids, and people who want to take better pictures of their dogs.
Tentacle wrote:
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.
Do you mean the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6? Can anyone verify that? Doesn't it already vignette heavily on a 1.6 crop?
cogitech wrote:
No. But the 5D MkII will have ISO 6.
I heard the 1D4 will have a completely new sensor which will render all this low ISO talk obsolete. This is based on a conversation with a guy at my store who is absolutely reliable.
Steve Spencer wrote:
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....Show more →
The issue with a brighter viewfinder is the mirror size, and since it's the size of the sensor it's never going to be as bright as a 1D body.
They won't but the 1.3 sensor in a 40D, but perhaps a 7D or something - but for what reason? At about the same price you have the 5D FF..so what's the point to it?
As to it 'being too similar to the 1D mk3" - ? Is the 400 too similar to the 30D? The 5D too similar to the 1Ds mk2?
prof_fate wrote:
The issue with a brighter viewfinder is the mirror size, and since it's the size of the sensor it's never going to be as bright as a 1D body.
They won't but the 1.3 sensor in a 40D, but perhaps a 7D or something - but for what reason? At about the same price you have the 5D FF..so what's the point to it?
As to it 'being too similar to the 1D mk3" - ? Is the 400 too similar to the 30D? The 5D too similar to the 1Ds mk2?
Nobody's suggesting it be as bright as a 5D, but as bright as a Nikon with a greater magnification would be fine. The 400D would be a lot nicer with a pentaprism rather than the cheap and nasty pentamirror.
OSev wrote:
Do you mean the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6? Can anyone verify that? Doesn't it already vignette heavily on a 1.6 crop?
You can use it, but it will vignette heavily. I took a few shots with 1D mkII N and Sigma 10-20. Vignetting can be cool sometimes, for artistic effect etc. To be honest, vignetting never bothered me, but it's true that I shoot people, mostly B&W and in that cases vignetting can come out pretty interesting.
Jul 26, 2007 at 03:03 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
They won't but the 1.3 sensor in a 40D, but perhaps a 7D or something - but for what reason? At about the same price you have the 5D FF..so what's the point to it?
As to it 'being too similar to the 1D mk3" - ? Is the 400 too similar to the 30D? The 5D too similar to the 1Ds mk2?
Canon has always had a better sensor (bigger or more megapixels) in their 1D series cameras than the prosumer cameras. The 5D is great, but the 1DsMKII has quite a bit more resolution. The 20D and 30D had 8 megapixels like the 1DMKII and IIn, but the 1DMKII had a bigger sensor. I don't think it is very likely that the 40D would have a 10 megapixel APS-H sensor like the 1DMKIII. Maybe an 8 megapixel APS-H, but I think they will want to go to 10 megapixel and to me this means a APS-C sensor. In contrast the consumer and prosumer cameras have typically had very similar sensors. For example the 350D had a pretty similar sensor to the 20D and 30D. I expect history to repeat itself here and the 40D to have pretty much the same sensor as the 400D. In addition, a big part of the advantage of the 20D and 30D over the 350D is that the XXD's had better autofocus. Now the 400D has the same autofocus as the 30D, so I expect that the 40D will move up a step in this area. I hope they also make some advances in high ISO and improve the viewfinder, which would be pretty easy as Pixel Perfect points out. Of course we will have to see. Hopefully before too long.
They won't but the 1.3 sensor in a 40D, but perhaps a 7D or something - but for what reason? At about the same price you have the 5D FF..so what's the point to it?
[...]
The point? APS-H is the largest slab of silicon that can be processed in single lithographic exposure passes. At full frame size, the lithography equipment has to do field stitching, which means that it has to carefully align litho masks in order to "print" the patterns onto the silicon. This will hike up production costs because it greatly reduces the yield of the process.
As a result, field-stitched full frame sensors are 10 to 20 times more expensive than APS-C sensors. (Read Canon's Full Frame white paper for more information.) In contrast, APS-H is only about 60% bigger in surface than APS-C, so it will cost less than twice as much, as opposed to 10 to 20 times as much. So a full frame 5D would still be considerably more expensive to produce than a 10 Mpixel APS-H camera.
All specific 40D speculation aside ... Canon would make a very wise move by going to APS-H, it's the sweet spot in sensor size, it's the largest they can make without incurring a large production cost penalty. And a bigger sensor means better DR and lower noise.
.
? Is the 400 too similar to the 30D? The 5D too similar to the 1Ds mk2?