Most are x-type, centre cluster is high precision for f/4 or faster, all are x-type to f/5.6 and centre cluster allows AF for f/8. Yes AF at more than one point for f/8.
Specs should be:
FF with 16.4MP
Improved AA filter
7fps for 21 RAW, jpg only limited by card size
enhanced digic IIIA,
Improved WB sensor
WideGamut RGB support, since DSLRs can capture colours outside AdobeRGB
14 bit
ISO 100-3200 standard 50, 6400 via CF
real gaskets around all buttons and doors and an o-ring built-into lens mount
3" 1MP LCD, with wide colour gamut and protective coating
-/+ 3EV exposure scale
2.5% spot meter
2, 5, 10 or 20s self timer
Wireless flash transmitter built in
97% VF coverage with 0.78x magnification, 21mm eyepoint
3, 5 or 7 bracket shots.
MLU button
Live view with AF available like Nikon
29 pt AF system as described above
AF can use colour and distance information
Joystick selection option for AF points
47 zone matrix metering
Three setting highlight tone adjustment (similar to Fuji)
voice annotation
800g
2300mAh Li Ion battery - 1200 RAW shots
BG-E5W - Wifi grip, with vertical controls, second battery, sealing,
more curvaceous and integrated design
No built-in flash
New goodies also announced at same time:
ETTL III, new 600 EX (GN 60), 280 (GN 28) EX flash and MT-34 EX (wireless)
17-40 f/4L II improved at all FL and designed for improved corner performance and centre sharpness, spectra coatings. Still 77mm since it's f/4.
Breitling65 wrote:
Don't know why 40D is example of your poll, did you saw any other bodies?
I'll edit my post to clarify - by 40D body I meant to say latest and greatest non-weather sealed, no-integrated grip body (as opposed to weather sealed, integrated grip body – ala 1D) .
Tentacle wrote:
Full frame 35 mm digital rangefinder? That will take a while. Probably a long while. It's easy to see how good the 1.33x crop Leica M8 is doing. In the sense that it's very tricky to get a full frame sensor to work properly on a rangefinder camera because the angle of incidence.
Well, the M8 suffers from a combination of imperfect design and exorbitant price. An APS-C Leica camera would fetch higher prices than a full frame Canon or Nikon with otherwise comparable features.
Do you think the microlens technology can solve the angle of incidence problem?
Finally someone else who doesn't think that the SLR is the only good camera design out there.
Full frame 35 mm digital rangefinder? That will take a while. Probably a long while. It's easy to see how good the 1.33x crop Leica M8 is doing. In the sense that it's very tricky to get a full frame sensor to work properly on a rangefinder camera because the angle of incidence.
I think that if it's a "canonette" then the one lens would be designed to work PERFECTLY with the sensor and the whole system wouldn't be limited by a host of previously designed lenses that were made for film. That's the one reason why I think that a p/s rangefinder with a fixed lens would actually work- it would be build from the ground up with new technology and no backwards compatibility to factor into the design.
I think that if it's a "canonette" then the one lens would be designed to work PERFECTLY with the sensor and the whole system wouldn't be limited by a host of previously designed lenses that were made for film. That's the one reason why I think that a p/s rangefinder with a fixed lens would actually work- it would be build from the ground up with new technology and no backwards compatibility to factor into the design.
I have to to a 180 to what I said about the Canonet. It has a fixed lens. A fixed lens rangefinder will have a fixed angle of incidence at the edge of the sensor, so in that case an offset microlens grid will work a lot better than with the Leica M8. That camera has to deal with varying angles because it takes multiple lenses.
The replacement for the 5D will be next, and who really cares what the name is?
I really don't think it matters what we speculate in this thread, but in the event Canon are watching;
- same focusing as 40D (45pt would be great, but unrealistic)
- keep the hidden focusing assist points and make them useful on ONE SHOT
- weather sealing as in the 40D would be an improvement, but should be better
- 16mp is realistic, but someone should end the MP race.
- dust shaker will certainly be there
- 14 bit
- Highlight priority
- ISO safety shift (not like 40D but like 1D series, please!)
- 4fps would be fine
- built-in wireless trigger would be nice, but unlikely
The deal maker to me would be ISO safety shift up to at least ISO 1600 in 1/3 steps with user controlled parameters. Otherwise, a current 5D will be plenty of camera.
Does anyone know if Canon watches forums? Does it really matter what we say?
I want 45 pt AF, 5 fps, 12 MP, iso 6400 or 12800, FULL weather sealing and FULL FRAME. I don't want a built in grip, it should be based on the 511 battery size. I know I am dreaming but we will not see this for at least 5 years.
We have to look at the tradition of Canon and the market they are hitting. If we also look at the history of upgrades, I think Canon will come out with pretty close to what David Manning is saying. It will be around the $3500 as before, it will be 14 bit and therefore put the MP at 16. It will have the same focus as the 40D except the additional hidden assist.
The real reason to come out with a new model is to standardize with, dustbuster, 3" screen, live view and 14 bit.
Gerry Szarek wrote:
I want 45 pt AF, 5 fps, 12 MP, iso 6400 or 12800, FULL weather sealing and FULL FRAME. I don't want a built in grip, it should be based on the 511 battery size. I know I am dreaming but we will not see this for at least 5 years.
Gerry
Gerry, in 5 years I'd be pretty bummed if they were still using the 45 pt AF system from the EOS 3. I think your a bit pessimistic though. I'm certain Canon will have to offer a pro level camera in a 5D sized body within 2 years or less. They have no choice, seeing Nikon and probably soon Sony have done just that with the D300. Okay, it's not FF, but I guarantee we'll see that change too. It won't be too hard for Nikon to put the D3 sensor into a D300 body.
gml1 wrote:
I'll edit my post to clarify - by 40D body I meant to say latest and greatest non-weather sealed, no-integrated grip body (as opposed to weather sealed, integrated grip body – ala 1D) .
It is latest but not one cent better body than 5D (I own both) as body.
chez wrote:
Yeh, that would kill the sales of D3 since the D300 already has the D3 focusing.
No, pro models are made for good reason. A FF sensor in a D300 body would not kill sales of D3, it just might mean those that had no other choice but to spend $5K on a FF camera would now have a cheaper option, but pros and those that want the extra features will still buy the D3. Just like the EOS 3 did not kill sales of the 1V. In fact you'd find many pros now having the consumer grade FF as a backup to their D3.
The D300 already has features which people would have said 2 months ago will never be in a consumer model as they'll steal sales.
IMO what does it matter how the pie is sliced up. If Nikon make $100K a week say from D3 sales and then a D500 FF comes along, and the they make $60K a week from that and $40K from the D3 does it matter? I'll bet the sum of the parts is greater than the whole anyway. I'd say a FF D300 selling for less than $3K would sell like hotcakes, and more than make up for any revenue loss on the D3. Anyway the big money is made from the consumer models and P&S cameras.
What I always wanted was a Mk III with a FF 12Mp + sensor. But that's not the way Canon slices the salami for their body feature marketshare. So the Nikon D3 seems to be what I want (if only it fit my many L's!). I doubt that Canon will make a direct competitor for the D3. That would mean adding a FF sensor to the Mk III (and possibly more buffer memory too) for just $500 more.
I just need is a moderate-price full frame such as 5D but with weather seal! All of my weather seal lens means nothing if the body isn't weather sealed!
Based on what canon has been doing lately (disappointing the hell out of me) it will probably end up being a 16MP 5D with 14 bit RAW (YAY! so worth it!), live view, and a 4" screen with 1,000 pixels total.
The only thing I would add to what has already been said is that I would like to see them remove the AA filter (and remove any resulting moire by software).
