Pixel Perfect wrote:
Interesting that Nikon essentially did this with the D700. I think it caught most by surprise that they would offer a camera so close to the D3 in specs. Still, what happens is that those artificially forced into the pro model because they feel they had no other choice can drop back a level and those that really need the pro cameras still buy them - sort of how things used to be in the film days. As I keep saying, it doesn't matter how the bottom line is achieved as long as it doesn't get worse. I'm guessing they would sell more than enough prosumer models to make up for a drop in 1 series revenue....Show more →
Point. Very true in the $3K price tag. You can buy a D700, 5D2 or 1D3.
When I said prosumer, I meant $1K price tag, like the OP meant, I think.
Anyway, the richer the consumer, the more I agree with you.
Hrow wrote:
If I were Canon I would keep the 50D and drop the price and add a full featured crop body with upgraded AF into the line-up between the 50D and the 5DII. A "pro" crop if you will. That way it doesn't really compete with any of the existing products and presents a cleaner product line and clearer product demarcation.
That is pretty much what I have been wanting for years. A lighter body with optional grip(not a cheap plastic one) which takes all the lighter and high quality EF-S lenses. This is exactly the Nikon D300 and the D300 feel great in hand with the grip and very comparable with my 1D2. I gave up waiting and bought a used 1D2 for a very good price, probably cheaper than a whatever new 60D+grip and very happy except the size and weight is now killing me and I have to sell all my EF-S lenses and replace them with EF lenses. I think the Nikon approach to keep the DX along with the FX is a great selling point. I can see myself having a 1.6x crop pro body which I can shoot with telephoto lenses and a FF 1 series for wide angle and normal range stuffs. If Canon can make the FF camera take EF-S lenses and shoot at crop mode like DX for Nikon on the D3 and D3X. It will be even better, but the EF-S design was a big mistake and won't fit on EF unless they have that in mind and come out with a special EF mount which take both EF and EF-S without hitting mirror.
alexandre wrote:
Point. Very true in the $3K price tag. You can buy a D700, 5D2 or 1D3.
When I said prosumer, I meant $1K price tag, like the OP meant, I think.
Anyway, the richer the consumer, the more I agree with you.
We're not going to get an EOS 3D class camera for $1K for a long time. Something in the $2K-$3.5K range depending on format and speed
garyvot wrote:
5D II AF works great and seems well suited for a 4fps camera. I've been impressed with results from both AI-Servo and One-Shot modes. The only real limitation I have observed is outer-point hunting in low light, but, that's hardly a deal breaker for an otherwise excellent package.
I wonder how many critics have encountered problems in real-world shooting, and how many are simply reading the D700 spec sheet?
Better yet, how many have actually used the D700 for any length of time? In one-shot AF, or in AF-C with slow or erratic moving subjects, it is most definitely NOT better than the 5D Mark II.
I have (~40k pictures) with the D700. And it is... just better. Unfortunately I cannot make the comparison with the 5D2 as I don't use that body much, but I DO use the 1Ds3 quite a lot (~20k pictures) - when light is good. For accurate focus in difficult situations, I'd say the 700 gives a noticeably higher keeper rate, and more consistent focus plane placement.
I'd also say that the 1Ds3 is FASTER in acquiring&locking - but it misses quite a bit in the exact positioning more often. This is more noticeable in bad light, and almost the other way around in good light (where the 1Ds3 is better in all accounts)... From the few weeks I've had with the 5D2 I'd say that exact focus positioning with large aperture lenses is really bad. Not constant front/back-focus, but a mix of both... Like if you inserted a random generator in the AF-module. Quite a lot of users have reported this as a problem to CPS Europe/Sweden. The 5D2 is the highest single item in the service cost department for service, and 85% of the reported guarantee returns/service requests are regarding the AF.
Two cases that I really remember clearly involved the camera focusing inconsistently depending on the orientation of the camera - it later showed that the vertical center AF-point reported a distance that differed by 30% compared to the horizontal center point when focused on the same target... This also made focusing with lenses faster than F/2.8 almost impossibly slow/erratic, as the system starts the AF actuation with the larger vertical sensor and fine-adjusts with the smaller, more sensitive horizontal sensor.
Yes, the 60D had better be good because the Rebel line and in particular the 500D, offer amazing image quality at a relatively cheap price.
I loved my 40D, but I can't say it offered better image quality than my 400D. Next year I'm going to be buying a Canon crop body to complement my 5D2, but its not certain I will be splashing out on the more expensive 60D, Canon are going to have to tempt me to spend more!
Otherwise its the 500D or 550D (by then) for me. And it will be great.
n0b0 wrote:
See Nkon D700 has about half the megapixel of D3X, that's something to differentiate those two cameras. 5D2 on the other hand, has the same megapixel as 1Ds3. If Canon gives pro AF to 5D3, they would have to lower the megapixel or take something else out to differentiate the cameras or they'd just be shooting themselves in the foot. Either way people will still complain, for example, macro or landscape photographers who have more use for the bigger megapixel than pro AF.
Yep, and this is where Nikon outmaneuvered Canon. Nikon knows that many prosumers, advanced or well-to-do amateurs, and some pros also want the do-it-all features and full frame of the pro cameras but won't pay the price. They positioned the D700 in a nice spot below the D3, holding back on enough so that the D3 is still worth it to many working pros.
Canon, on the other hand, gave us more megapixels. Who cares about megapixels? Ok, well, some do, and maybe for good reason. And I'm sure the 5D II is an excellent camera and well worth it to many, especially for portrait and landscape (just like the original). But it is not the one-notch-down that the D700 is, which seems to represent what a larger segment of photographers want. They can't give the 5D II (or III) the pro AF without it being too much the equal of the 1D series. So what do they do? Well, this is where the speculation of the 3D and 7D come in. If Canon wants to compete for that D700 market (which seems large to me) they can't do it with the 5D. The 5D is more of a separate niche than a step down from the 1D.
David Baldwin wrote:
Yes, the 60D had better be good because the Rebel line and in particular the 500D, offer amazing image quality at a relatively cheap price.
I loved my 40D, but I can't say it offered better image quality than my 400D. Next year I'm going to be buying a Canon crop body to complement my 5D2, but its not certain I will be splashing out on the more expensive 60D, Canon are going to have to tempt me to spend more!
Otherwise its the 500D or 550D (by then) for me. And it will be great.
Did you have to buy a grip for the 500D? I find it just too darn small overall and the grip in particular. I find the grip 40D a bit short for my liking and would like the cameras to be about 10mm higher.
I currently own a 40D and two 1DII's. The 40D is a fine camera, but it's not a Ferrari. Neither is the 1DII, but it's a heck of a lot better than a 40D for shooting fast action.
Me too. Different reason though.
If you only would have choose one to keep, wich cam was that?
Yes, I did buy the grip for my 400D, I have small hands (loved the Pentax ME Super) and find the grips make the camera feel more secure to hold. I also like the ability to use 2 rechargeable batteries, or AAs if necessary. Also if tripod mounting the camera marks the base of the grip then I can just take it off and sell the mint camera body secondhand for more money.
