DanielPaul wrote:
On the discussion that "Destined Evolution" is awkward or uninspired, I actually had a thought on"Evolution" a while back.
With pretty much the death of film cameras, how long can Canon go with D? 1D, 5D, 50D, etc. People talk about the 3D, the 7D, the 60D. Eventually it is all just numbers--the D is irrelevant--everyone knows the cameras are digital.
So my prediction is that tease will morph and make the E more prominent.
Introducing, the Canon 5E. E for Evolution.
Now that would be evolutionary.
I actually kind of like the idea.
Edited by michael49 on Sep 05, 2008 at 03:17 PM GMT
The 5D replacement is still likely to be (IMO) a 50D with a real nice FF sensor. If Canon is emphasizing the sensor in these teases, you guys looking for features are not likely to be very happy.
These ads don't even have good design or good flash programing. So what's the chance a D700 killer follows?
Pick a resolution between 16mp - 21mp and divide by 100 fps to get frame rate. Add 50D features and there is your new camera.
PetKal wrote:
Right on.
Canon understands all too well the megapixel thirst which largely drives both the P&S and dSLR markets. High ISO also sells well.
After all, the old 5D concept &marketing formula worked well for Canon. Why would they abandon it now in the case of 5DII ?
Three reasons, the 3D, the D300 & the D700. Can't believe you seriously ask this question. Canon's marketing strategy was great when they were the undisputed champ w/o competition, things have changed.
dcmiller wrote:
So why does the german website have the english word "undefined"?
Because he referenced the swf directly, the relative paths to the text contents probably are not correct anymore, and Undefined is just the text that Flash uses to represents that.
Someone wake me up when they stop screwing around and introduce the stinkin' camera. If they went through this entire exercise just to introduce a 50D w/FF sensor, I ... well the people in charge should be committed!
The existence of a pop-up flash does not detract from a camera; it adds to its utility.
jamesf99 wrote:
No, it really doesn't.
So you don't understand how fill flash works or understand why it's useful? Even if that were true, how does the mere existence of a feature you don't use hurt you? See Braniac's post above.
calvillo wrote:
Someone wake me up when they stop screwing around and introduce the stinkin' camera. If they went through this entire exercise just to introduce a 50D w/FF sensor, I ... well the people in charge should be committed!
Ditto. I hope they come out with something special. That will help prices for old 5D tank to my wallet size.
moondigger wrote:
So you don't understand how fill flash works or understand why it's useful? Even if that were true, how does the mere existence of a feature you don't use hurt you? See Braniac's post above.
In a way you are right. It just makes the camera look like a toy and part of having expensive equipment is that it looks very cool as well.
Maybe a built-in ringflash. Because it's a semi-pro camera. Consisting of 4 small flashes on top, bottom, left and right of the lens. They don't even have to pop up. Would also be good as a fill.
I amend my "50D like 5D" statement to say that the mp count could go as high as 25.
I think it still has to be ~100mps. So the new camera would be 25mp at 4fps.
The Sony specs have been know forever. A good way to kill Sony momentum would be 25/4. A 25/4 camera would have significantly bigger physical pixels than the 50D. So probably one more stop sensitivity. I don't believe there is any cost difference to Canon between 16/6 and 25/4. If the masses want mp give them mp.
Marcus Watts wrote:
In a way you are right. It just makes the camera look like a toy and part of having expensive equipment is that it looks very cool as well.
There's a difference between fact and opinion.
In my opinion, the existence of a flash does not make the camera look like a toy. In your opinion, it does. That's fine.
What is a fact (NOT opinion) is that the existence of a flash adds utility to a camera. It allows you to do something with that camera that you couldn't otherwise do. So when somebody says that the existence of the flash does not add utility to a camera, they are, in fact, wrong. One can be wrong about a statement of fact.
Whether a photographer would choose to use the pop-up flash is a matter of personal prerogative. But just because somebody can't see the value in something does not mean its mere existence is a knock against the camera designers.
