charlesk wrote:
"3D - about 25 megapixels, FF, 6 fps, pro AF, two digic IV processors, 100% viewfinder (maybe # megapixels and fps will change but they will multiply together to about 150 megapixels per second - so maybe 21 megapixels at 7 pfs), $3,000"
This is the camera I want. But Canon has so far refused to make it.
Everything else is too much of a compromise for me in one way or another. So much so that if I didn't have a ton oe Canon glass, I'd be considering moving away, something I never thought I would do. --c
I'm sorry- but that's just ridiculous. That sounds like the specs for the 1ds mark IV to me, which will sell for $8000- and never would you see that in a "3D" before you see the 1dsIV.
If you need 25MP with those specs (and very, very few of us will ever "need" that) then you're going to have to cough up the change for the 1dsIV. The 3D as most folks want it is just the Canon version of the D700 (or a digital version of the EOS-3). What was described is absolutely ludicrous.
If I could get a FF camera, at 25mp, 6fps, and pro-af for 3K right now, I'd sell whatever it took to get two of them, and not worry again for many, many years to come.
That 3D is wishful thinking, even in a wet dream.
If the offerings from another company are that much better, then why not purchase the other companies offerings, and sell your glass to get theirs? I mean, if you're going to spend 3K on a camera (an imaginary camera at that) to get you to not think of leaving Canon, why not lose a few hundred to swap glass out and go to another company?
A few people have said that this 19 pt AF is "pro AF". It was to my understanding that the 1 series cameras, had considerably more AF points than 19.
I'm not looking for more AF points, I"m looking for ones that I have to work better.
I just dawned on me. It isn't Canon whom we should expect to make our dream camera, whichever it is), it is a bank or insurance company. They are willing to take risks that lead them to bankruptcy unless the State saves them with our money. Obviously Canon is not willing to follow this path... I say: Shame on them!
twilighter wrote:
Leak of information can be a business tactic.
I think you are right on this. They probably planned this, so that when D300s hit the shelf, we get the leak from Canon 7D. Fewer people switch to Nikon.
WillWeb wrote:
Ferrari is pretty useless if you need to haul a bunch of people, or get a few miles off the maintained road, or bring a load of firewood home. Different tools for different purposes. Just because I only need a certain feature set doesn't mean that I'm being betrayed if someone makes a tool that meets other people's requirements.
Enjoy your 5D series; I'm happy for you that Canon served your market first. I'm looking forward to putting a 7D on the back of my 500.
You are exactly right. That is why Ferrari owners also have 15 other automobiles in their garage. Don't get me wrong, 7D is probably a great camera and so is D300 which I could have enjoyed for two full years already if I didn't have thousands of dollars invested in Canon glasses. That is all I am saying.
To me, even though Nikon is charging a premium for their lenses and cameras, but they seems to make good tools with better quality (especially at the non-pro level) and put or improve essential features on their camera first for photographers, and Canon on the other hand like to add features to sell more camera and ignore the fact a lot of those essential feature improvement will help us to capture better images.
henryng wrote:
Canon on the other hand like to add features to sell more camera and ignore the fact a lot of those essential feature improvement will help us to capture better images.
Do you really think Canon doesn't care about photographers, or about enabling peopel to make better images? If that were true they would have been out of the camera business a long time ago.
The one thing I can say, after being both a Canon and Nikon user for many years, is that Canon has always had much more of a separate development focus in its 3 product tiers (entry, mid, and pro). The result is that there is often less "familiy resemblance" across its products than in the Nikon line, which seems to flow from a more holistic design vision.
You can cite examples of this: Consider that the 1D Mark III when it shipped had a "joystick" (the rear multi-controller), BUT there was no way to use it to select the active focusing point, a well-loved feature on the 5D. It was as if the 1-series designers had not ever considered that idea (this was eventually rectified by a firmware update). Similar examples abound, and only recently have the camera lines begun to share menu and UI features. This bifurcation goes way back to the F-1 and the Canon A and T-series which were vastly different mechanically and ergonomically.
I believe the possibility of more independent internal groups could be at least partially responsible for what many perceive as Canon "hording" features for its 1-series cameras (like weather sealing and "pro" AF). It's probably not some corporate conspiracy to cheat you of your money, but natural competition between product groups that helps shape the decisions around feature differentiation.
Another thing to keep in mind is that for NIkon, the DX format was also a "professional" format adopted in two generations of its flagship cameras, and the D300 inherits and benefits from this design focus. For Canon, the "professional" formats have always been APS-H (for sports) and FF (for studio). This, more than anything, is likely why the xxD models have always been solidly "prosumer".
With the 7D, perhaps Canon is changing its own internal game. In any case, people griping about the lack of a true competitor to the D300 should be happy. I'm sure there'll also be a full-frame sports/action camera someday, or perhaps the next APS-H model will be so good that most people won't care.
Quoting DPP "based on my trusted source, (a tester who handled the camera personally), it will yes be APS-C and yes takes EF-S but NOT 1.6x, rather close to 1.45x. and if u do the math you'll find that being 18MP at that sensor size means the pixel density is not higher than the 50D. that way the camera exceeds D300 by both sensor size and MP count, it is certainly better than 50D in many ways and it tries to find a compromise between being compatible with EF-S's and a bit more exciting sensor-size-wise than traditional 1.6x. this is the sort of camera that makes non-canon users like me wish they were canon users, it'll be a very exciting camera IMO, if it is not too heavy nor priced too expensive beyond the reasonable"
Is it possible at all ?? Is canon changing the cropped factor?
I'm sorry- but that's just ridiculous. That sounds like the specs for the 1ds mark IV to me...
But see, this is exactly the problem. Those specs do not represent any sort of significant improvement over the 1Ds3. So if that's what the 1Ds4 is like, it's just another example of Canon trying to get people to pay thousands for incremental improvements.
The next 1Ds should have some *real* improvements. Like, say, finally giving us better dynamic range -- it's only the #1 thing people have been asking for for years?
What you call "just ridiculous", I call "pushing the envelope". It is when people are amazed at the amount of product you get per dollar, that you know a company is really innovating. This has happened many times in Canon's past, but not any time in recent memory, AFAIC.
What we get now is "well, there are a few new things in there". I was wholly underwhelmed when the 5D2 was announced, given how long it took them to make it.
I don't want a 1 series. They are too heavy, too bulky, too expensive, and have too many pro features I don't need. I just want a *proper* update to the 5D -- a camera with lots of pixels, good image quality, decent AF and a reasonable price. --c
Granted I may have missed it in this 49 (!) page thread, but is there any mention in the 7D rumored specs that it includes micro-focus adjust? I don't seem to recall hearing that yet...
Aug 30, 2009 at 04:37 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
orangefirefish wrote:
I'm sorry- but that's just ridiculous. That sounds like the specs for the 1ds mark IV to me, which will sell for $8000- and never would you see that in a "3D" before you see the 1dsIV.
If you need 25MP with those specs (and very, very few of us will ever "need" that) then you're going to have to cough up the change for the 1dsIV. The 3D as most folks want it is just the Canon version of the D700 (or a digital version of the EOS-3). What was described is absolutely ludicrous.
I would expect the 1Ds MKIV to have a lot higher resolution than 25 megapixels--at least 30. Canon has to leap frog Nikon in overall resolution with the MKIV and not just match and it seems likely to me that the successor the D700 with have the same sensor as the D3X so if Canon wants to step up to the plate and compete with Nikon as the 7D suggests they do, then they will need a camera like the 3D to compete with the successor to the D700. It may take them 18 month to 2 years (just as it took them that much time for the 7D to compete with the D300 and now D300s), but I think it is quite likely they will.
"3D - about 25 megapixels, FF, 6 fps, pro AF, two digic IV processors, 100% viewfinder (maybe # megapixels and fps will change but they will multiply together to about 150 megapixels per second - so maybe 21 megapixels at 7 pfs), $3,000"
"This is the camera I want. But Canon has so far refused to make it."
I say: Shame on them!