moondigger wrote:
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....Show more →
Actually as far as Canon is concerned perception of the buyer is fact wether it is true or not. Hence the saying perception is reality.
Most people who own a 5D would share my opinion that a pop up flash is a dicky little ad on that anyone with the money to buy that camera would not want because they would be serious enough about their photography to purchase a decent flash unit.
So opinion or otherwise it will be fact enough for Canon.
PierreB wrote:
I agree - a bit larger would be a good thing.
Various Canons sites use different cameras for the illustration. I wouldn't assume any of the silhouettes are the new camera. By the mangling of languages and the pedestrian concept and execution these ads were likely done in house by Canon. Don't want to let any secrets out.
Marcus Watts wrote:
Most people who own a 5D would share my opinion that a pop up flash is a dicky little ad on that anyone with the money to buy that camera would not want because they would be serious enough about their photography to purchase a decent flash unit.
I do not share your opinion and I do own a 580EX. But seriously, just having a pop-up flash is not enough. It has to be a wireless trigger as well - like the Nikon flash commander.
jamesf99 wrote:
The camera has provided good/great IQ, but everything else is mediocre. :Period....
Other than that, how was the play, Mrs Lincoln?
And starting rant mode (which is not directed at you, James, but at some of the comments I am reading on this thread):
A cheaper camera will have compromises over an expensive camera. It can be in the area of resolution and image quality, or it can be in the area of less-critical features (like weather sealing, 95-vs-100% VF, fewer AF points, etc).
Canon has both options there - you really need the features AND the IQ? Get the 1Ds3. If you can live with fewer features, there was the 5D and now, looks like the 7D/5D2/whatever.
If you want to pay less, you simply have to live with some compromises. And also with the reality that those compromises you have to make may not be exact ones you want to make, I think we all need to stop hoping for a camera that is made *just* to suit our personal needs and treating every little variation from our pet wishlist as a mortal affront to met with hysterical wailings.
I really think some people will not be happy if they until they get a 1Ds3 for $3k. If the Nikon bodies are a better compromise, switch already fer chrissakes.
If Canon releases a 18-21MP/FF/19-AF body for $3k, it is a swift and decisive kick in the nuts to both the D3 and the D700. About the only thing missing is weathersealing - and if someone wants to give up 50% resolution for a feature that can be better handled by $50 worth of after-market parts, then hey, Nikon calls. Just b/c you dont care about some feature doesnt mean others dont.
Marcus Watts wrote:
Most people who own a 5D would share my opinion that a pop up flash is a dicky little ad on that anyone with the money to buy that camera would not want because they would be serious enough about their photography to purchase a decent flash unit.
I disagree that most people who own a 5D would share your opinion. I own a 5D and three "decent flash units." I still think it would be more useful for rare occasions when I want to add a pop of fill flash or a catchlight in my subjects' eyes to be able to do so quickly rather than have to dig one of my external flashes out of a bag and mount it to the camera.
I also have real-world experience with an external unit failing at the wrong moment and a built-in flash saving the day.
I believe most people who thought carefully about this 'issue' would agree with me that a pop-up flash could be quite useful on rare occasions -- however rare they might be. Add to that Bobby's point about how a built-in flash could trigger external slaves in a wireless setup, and the built-in flash is even more useful. Canon hasn't done that yet, but the 5D replacement would be a good body to introduce the feature.
Marcus Watts wrote:
Most people who own a 5D would share my opinion that a pop up flash is a dicky little ad on that anyone with the money to buy that camera would not want because they would be serious enough about their photography to purchase a decent flash unit.
I have to disagree with this.
I consider myself to be "serious" about my photography and I would like to have the pop up flash. Most times I use my 430EX on my 5D and 40D, but there are times, espcially when hiking with the 5D, when I'm just not going to take the 430EX with me and the pop up flash can really be handy in such situations. I enjoy having it on the 40D and I'd like it on a FF camera as well.
But, the pop-up flash is sort of a silly thing to argue about. What we should be arguing to Canon for is in-body IS; now that would worth arguing for.
Hello
What would be truly (re)-evolutionary is a one camera with a choice of sensors, from 12 to ?mp, which could be upgraded as and when they are available or affordable.
Mike Engles
Edited by mikeengles on Sep 05, 2008 at 05:07 PM GMT
Chris Beaumont wrote:
however in practice....the 50D is hardly a D300 killer, it's simply got a couple of extra megapixels,
Funny, I think you have it reverse. If the 50D lives up to its promises (and so far, Canon has a very good track record there), the D300 will:
(a) cost more
(b) have lower resolution
(c) have more noise
and in exchange, gives you a few rather inconsequential features: weathersealing (can be done better for $50), external flash control (even if I buy the ST2, I still end up ahead price-wise) and 51pt AF (in 4 years of using the 1series and the xxD series concurrently for wildlife, I dont think I have had 1 shot where the number of AF points has made a whit of a difference...). On the other hand, if you need the extra megapixels or an extra stop with a D300, what do you do?
So, what exactly is it that you love so much about the D300?
vkalia wrote:
So, what exactly is it that you love so much about the D300?
The AF ACCURACY. It's not the number of points, I never use more than 9 on my 1Ds3 either. But the accuracy of the 1D series compared to my 40D is ... startling.
vkalia wrote:
Funny, I think you have it reverse. If the 50D lives up to its promises (and so far, Canon has a very good track record there), the D300 will:
(a) cost more
(b) have lower resolution
(c) have more noise
and in exchange, gives you a few rather inconsequential features: weathersealing (can be done better for $50), external flash control (even if I buy the ST2, I still end up ahead price-wise) and 51pt AF (in 4 years of using the 1series and the xxD series concurrently for wildlife, I dont think I have had 1 shot where the number of AF points has made a whit of a difference...). On the other hand, if you need the extra megapixels or an extra stop with a D300, what do you do?
So, what exactly is it that you love so much about the D300?
Care to tell me how you are planning to weather seal my 30d or an old 5d for $50? what about bracketing? What you call "inconsequential" may be be all end all for some. So instead of trying to have some kind of "this is -the- right opinion", what about stating "for my use..."....?
brainiac wrote:
Me neither. Nikon were mad to put a flash on the camera. It really spoils the whole camera. It's an embarrassment. Couldn't possibly be useful. Adds so much weight and cost. $500 at least. Makes weather sealing impossible. Terrible for fill. Makes a $400 dedicated flash optional. Thank God Canon understands that serious users hate features and love having to carry extra batteries, chargers, accessories. And especially we love those wide deep shadows caused by flash heads which are six inches or more from the lens. Thick black shadows around everybody's chins and noses are seriously more professional. A flash that works off the camera battery! What a load of crap! That would really get in the way of my creativity.
Meanwhile if the 5D2 has no flash, I will unfortunately have to get a D700 instead, even though Nikon is completely wrong, and Canon is so right....Show more →
I think you totally missed the ball on this one.
1) A builtin flash DOES add cost, most likely makes the VF smaller (manual focus/alternative lenses etc) AND makes weather sealing harder to do right.
2) You try to make it sound like off-camera flash is the end of all lighting, either you have a meta ironic point inside all the irony or you have _never_ ever tried off-camera flash OR the builtin one ..
moondigger wrote:
There's a difference between fact and opinion.
........
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....Show more →
OK it adds utility for YOU, but it does nothing for me, and many others. Period. So let's be specific, shall we? In your OPINION it adds utility. In my OPINION it does NOT, especially when its ultimate inclusion does/may exclude something more useful to me, and others.
Wow, thanks. To your other point, you're right. I have no idea what fill flash is. I've never heard of it before so can you tell me/us? What does "flash" mean anyway
Should I likewise assume you don't know what a VF is, or more importantly, understand how to use one? It's the thing you look through when you're taking a picture. The thing that you use almost every time you release the shutter (LV and AF-C's excepted). It's the first or second most important aspect of a camera (with basic ergonomics being the other) if you want to control your framing and the ultimate image. Not important to some I guess because without the ability to understand what you're seeing, it's just a mess in the end anyway.
Here's a tip. Spend a $100 and buy a 200EX. Small, light, and you can put it on the camera and fill in whatever dark recesses surround you....
Edited by jamesf99 on Sep 05, 2008 at 12:29 PM GMT
calvillo wrote:
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.
First, D700 is a different (read "higher") niche camera than the 5D concept as we know it today.
Second, even if 5DII ends up having 18 Mp it will still "kill Nikon" in the eyes of megapixel aficionados.
ulrikft wrote:
Care to tell me how you are planning to weather seal my 30d or an old 5d for $50? what about bracketing? What you call "inconsequential" may be be all end all for some.
WEATHER-SEALING:
A shower-cap and some waterproof fabric which extends out all the way to the hood. Kinesis makes good rain gear. Not only is it far more robust than "weather sealing", it is also reduces water on the front element, which can spoil your shot
BRACKETING:
Learning how the meter works and simply using the exposure compensation dial. Not ideal, but if it saves me $xxx, I'll live with it.
Point is - there are workarounds to features. There is no workaround to image quality.
So instead of trying to have some kind of "this is -the- right opinion", what about stating "for my use..."....?
I actually agree with that. I was trying to counter that very "it doesnt have my features, so it is pointless" argument by showing that different people look at things differently. See my rant on this a little earlier.
