I guess I was talking more along the line of the actual body rather than the AF itself.
Like I said, Canon had no real competition in 5D market before the D700. Obviously now Nikon has raised the bar so again, let's just see how Canon responds.
n0b0 wrote:
I guess I was talking more along the line of the actual body rather than the AF itself.
Like I said, Canon had no real competition in 5D market before the D700. Obviously now Nikon has raised the bar so again, let's just see how Canon responds.
Exactly. And hopefully Canon gets it right with the new 7D - AF wise.
n0b0 wrote:
I guess I was talking more along the line of the actual body rather than the AF itself.
Like I said, Canon had no real competition in 5D market before the D700. Obviously now Nikon has raised the bar so again, let's just see how Canon responds.
No offense but if you're speaking about body build then why bring up shooting BIF and car races?
Talking about the actual use of the 5D MkII DSLR camera. People who shoot BIF or car races or sports or any other action would probably not have chosen this camera for these purposes.
michael49 wrote:
Many have suggested that the 1DmkIII's AF issues caused Canon to become "gun-shy" about putting a new AF in the 5DmkII. Does anyone here agree with this or do you think it was purely a marketing decison?
Could be either or a combination of both but I tend to lean more towards marketing. Truth is there is no way for anyone outside Canon's marketing, design or corporate teams that know for sure. In fact I'm a living example of how they succeeded in doing so, having been a shooter of the 5D (understanding it's pitfalls) waiting for the 5DII only to skip it in favor of the 1DIII, which as you all know is 1K more. I believe Canon is relying solely on 21mp 'FF aura' to sell the 5DII. For those who need more out of a Camera, namely a great FF sensor with AF speed to match, would have to buy either a used 1DsII (not an option for a lot of people) or spend 6-7K on a 1DsIII. The next best thing to the 1DsIII is the 1DIII, but then you loose the FF sensor...it's a trade off, as are many other features between the 5DII, 1DIII and 1DsIII.
n0b0 wrote:
Talking about the actual use of the 5D MkII DSLR camera. People who shoot BIF or car races or sports or any other action would probably not have chosen this camera for these purposes.
Based on AF speed/accuracy, which you said you were not referring to, not body build.
you inflated your canon defense shield, it MALFUNCTIONED now you're spinning "canon customers are SOL due to no competition".
ugh.
n0b0 wrote:
I guess I was talking more along the line of the actual body rather than the AF itself.
Like I said, Canon had no real competition in 5D market before the D700. Obviously now Nikon has raised the bar so again, let's just see how Canon responds.
n0b0 wrote:
Talking about the actual use of the 5D MkII DSLR camera. People who shoot BIF or car races or sports or any other action would probably not have chosen this camera for these purposes.
I went from a 1d3 to a 5d2 because I'd be shooting weddings. After taking it to a race in Daytona I quickly realized that it was capable of a lot more than just weddings. The only thing I miss from the 1d3 is 10fps.
M Vers wrote:
... I believe Canon is relying solely on 21mp 'FF aura' to sell the 5DII. For those who need more out of a Camera, namely a great FF sensor with AF speed to match, would have to buy either a used 1DsII (not an option for a lot of people) or spend 6-7K on a 1DsIII. The next best thing to the 1DsIII is the 1DIII, but then you loose the FF sensor...it's a trade off, as are many other features between the 5DII, 1DIII and 1DsIII.
Seems to be the case.
The other "problem" is that there are many of us who don't want to carry around a 1D sized body, but would still like FF and an upgraded AF.
FF, 5D sized body, 12-15mp, uprgraded AF, 5-6 fps - is that really too much to ask?
For now, I'm holding on to my 5D and praying for the 7D to be more than I expect it to be.
It's been pretty clear what canon's strategy has been for the past few years. If you want pro af , build, etc , you have to get the 1D series. You are not getting the whole ball of wax with a prosumer body. If the 5D had pro level AF , there would be little incentive to buy the big boy.
Nikon is in an interesting position. On one hand , they don't want to take sales away fron the D3x, and on the other, they have to have something to compete in the 5D and Sony hi Rez segment. I suspect that the sales numbers of the D3x will never be high due to the high cost, so a d700x or whatever is the only way to generate a profit with this sensor.
M Vers wrote:
Based on AF speed/accuracy, which you said you were not referring to, not body build.
Where do you get this "body build" thing from? When I said "body", I meant the the actual camera body.
Glen_C wrote:
sorry but that's a horrendous back-track.
you inflated your canon defense shield, it MALFUNCTIONED now you're spinning "canon customers are SOL due to no competition".
ugh.
Yeah whatever... You know what? you're worse than those Nikon trolls here, at least they do more than just whinge and bitch about Canon, they actually have the guts to do something about it and move system.
michael49 wrote:
The other "problem" is that there are many of us who don't want to carry around a 1D sized body, but would still like FF and an upgraded AF.
IFor now, I'm holding on to my 5D for now and praying for the 7D to be more than I expect it to be.
Right--there are many trade offs. I honestly do not believe we will see anything FF that fills the gap between the 5DII and the current 1-series line for a while, if ever. Obviously that doesn't stop me from hoping, but then again I'm a true blue cynic In the end I have found, having shot with the 1DIII, that there is a lot of hype that surrounds FF and a lot of it should be ignored. Don't get me wrong, I like FF but I am well aware that it is not the above all and end all at this current juncture. IMO there is not enough to justify spending 3K more to pick up a 1DsIII over the 1DIII and certainly not enough to save 1K going with the 5DII over the 1DIII...ymmv.
n0b0 wrote:
Where do you get this "body build" thing from? When I said "body", I meant the the actual camera body.
Yeah whatever... You know what? you're worse than those Nikon trolls here, at least they do more than just whinge and bitch about Canon, they actually have the guts to do something about it and move system.
.
Moving to Nikon is a no-brainer if it better suits your needs & budget. In my case it would be suit neither.
n0b0 wrote:
Where do you get this "body build" thing from? When I said "body", I meant the the actual camera body.
You brought up shooting specific subject matter (BIF, Cars). That subject matter revolves almost exclusively around AF speed and accuracy. What exactly does that have to do with the camera's body? When someone refers to 'camera body' when speaking technically I think of the actual body itself, it's size/weight, sealing, finish and ergonomics (overall all build quality of the body), not the internal components or the camera's performance as a whole. In that case I just refer to it as 'the camera' itself. So that is where I get "body build" from when someone refers to the term 'camera body'.
Canon are a successful company because they know how to milk the market.
Prior to the introduction of the T90 photographers were spoilt for choice with a range of cameras that produced the goods.
The T90 was essentially the test bed for the 1 series bodies and with the introduction of the 1N Canon had things it's own way in the pro market. and seemed to have chosen to put much of that 'quality' into lower priced models, making them desirable buys.
Somewhere along the line Canon seemed to have developed a policy of just doing what was necessary to pull in the punters at all price levels...in the belief ( I suspect ) that for many it was a Canon system or nothing. Some Canon lenses were so bad they were just rubbish...but they had the Canon name on and that seemed to satisfy Canon.
Then, out of the blue, the current Nikons arrived! That must have been a total shock to Canon. The question is, what now? Most probably. Canon will merely up the quality of their products again to regain market dominance. What we have just seen is the tail end of the 'We don't have to worry about the competition' era.
Regarding top end cameras like the 1Ds 3.....many manufactures produce prestige products that are both cutting edge and out of the reach of most customers. It is a necessary marketing ploy to enable them to claim to be the best.
Think Ferrari.
The G11 will be interesting. It will be the first Canon to arrive that has been developed within the 'new reality' that needs to take on serious competition from other manufactures '. This will show what Canon can ( or cannot ) do when taking on the competition.
M Vers wrote:
....In the end I have found, having shot with the 1DIII, that there is a lot of hype that surrounds FF and a lot of it should be ignored. Don't get me wrong, I like FF but I am well aware that it is not the above all and end all at this current juncture....
I've used FF and 1.6X crop, but I've never really spent time with a 1.3X crop body.
I haven't really decided how I will feel if the 7D is 1.3X crop. A 1.3X crop with very good AF, more reasonable AF point spread, excellent high ISO performance, 6-8fps in the form factor of a 5D would be an interestnig camera and one that I would certainly give some thought to owning depending on the price.
michael49 wrote:
I've used FF and 1.6X crop, but I've never really spent time with a 1.3X crop body.
I haven't really decided how I will feel if the 7D is 1.3X crop. A 1.3X crop with very good AF, more reasonable AF point spread, excellent high ISO performance, 6-8fps in the form factor of a 5D would be an interestnig camera and one that I would certainly give some thought to owning depending on the price.
Mike, I thought you owned a 1DIII prior to the 5DII? Did you only use it for a short period of time? The APS-H sensor format is a good one IMO...it's not FF but then again it does have its advantages.
Canon can silence it's (even canon-using) critics & vastly improve it's pro (semi-pro) lineup quite easily:
* 1DmkIV 16-18mp FF & 10FPS
* 7D 15-18MP APS-H & 6-7 FPS with 1D-like AF system. For those wanting the benefits of 1.3x crop but a larger sensor than APS-C.
* then eventually 5DmkIIn with proper AF system.
3 bodies that professional photographers would have much interest in and budget/expense for regular replacement & repair. No pro would use a xxD for "backup" or "second" or "third" body. Would leave the competition scrambling in the pro arena (which trickles down to consumers). Leave the 1Ds at super-high MP for niche, large studios, etc. and forget product overlap. Put it on an island (and price point) of it's own in collusion with Nikon like it does now. 60D & dRebels can appear with usual yearly updates to stay current for the under $1200 market ($600 cheapest rebel, $900 better rebel, $1200 xxD).
That would effectively end the market milking phase of Canon dSLRs. Highly unlikely to happen but...
In the end I have found, having shot with the 1DIII, that there is a lot of hype that surrounds FF and a lot of it should be ignored. Don't get me wrong, I like FF but I am well aware that it is not the above all and end all at this current juncture. IMO there is not enough to justify spending 3K more to pick up a 1DsIII over the 1DIII and certainly not enough to save 1K going with the 5DII over the 1DIII...ymmv.
.