Wouldn't it be both smarter and more conservative to keep the buttons at the left and then move the screen a bit to the right. Which again means move the wheel a bit too.
Yes, and it seems there is 6 or 7 buttons. Perhaps another 'print button'?
Can anyone see the screen size from the image? Is it 3" or 3½"?
Oh year btw notice that it seems that it will show ISO all the time (see northern light link shown above). That is a bit strange though. It wouldn't be able to write 3200 (but it could show H), - but in that case what will it show for 6400 or is that not for the xxD yet?
If this is true: No APS-H (well, that was what I was hoping for, but I sort of knew it wouldn't happen anyway.) The lens is an EF-s one. Looks like the EF-s 17-55/2.8 IS.
No true native ISO3200 either, it'll be extended, because it appears that the display can not show the '3'.
sRAW is available. And 3 custom programs at the dial, which would be really nice.
Can't imagine anyone actually thought Canon were going to release anything but a 1.6x crop sensor. I'm pretty sure they'd like to make their cameras affordable for its target market audience and actually sell some.
Do you really think Canon will make the 30D mistake twice? Sadly the market apparently still measures camera performance in Megapixels, 'cause the 30D is a mighty fine camera as it stands.
While the info/photos look real... I think I'd hesitate just a bit from assuming these are 100% accurate...
But anyway... why would Canon save some penny on making the LCD so it could not display a full digit on that ISO display? I mean, even if the camera can't be set to 3200 ISO, Why not just make the full digit there on the screen... Seems like it might be more expensive to produce a crippled digit then a real one. Anyway, it seems odd to me.
Tentacle wrote:
No true native ISO3200 either, it'll be extended, because it appears that the display can not show the '3'.
But anyway... why would Canon save some penny on making the LCD so it could not display a full digit on that ISO display? I mean, even if the camera can't be set to 3200 ISO, Why not just make the full digit there on the screen... Seems like it might be more expensive to produce a crippled digit then a real one. Anyway, it seems odd to me.
With LCD displays like these, every unit (so every element that can change state independently of other elements) needs it's own wire to the display controller.
So if Canon is making a custom screen to fit all the functions, and "1" (from "1600") or "A" (from "AUTO", who knows?) is all it needs at the first of the four digits, it takes just a tiny bit more resources to include the bottom element, rather than to leave it out.
