brainiac wrote:
But this is the crux of it: Canon refuses to make the camera that we all really want,
The problem is that we all want different things - some of which may well be mutually incompatible.
whereas Nikon decided to stop haemorrhaging users by actually making the best bodies they could.
They've not released the D700x, so that isn't really truth. Also, don't forget all of the Nikon shooters complaining about the high price of the D3x. That is what happen when everything including the kitchen sink is thrown in.
note: that I'll comment that Nikon also doesn't appear to have the data
bandwidth off of their sensor to handle full speed 14bit and/or high speed/high resolution video. Something to ponder. Canon has done it, so clearly Nikon/Sony COULD have done so if they were going to make the best cameras they possibly could.
People like cogitech and I don't like big heavy bodies and we do think that accurate manual focus with f2 lenses is crucial, because let's face it, all AF
I don't use MF all that much, but I also don't like heavy bodies - one reason why I prefer the crop form factor. The real issue is "how much are you willing to pay for a good MF body - and how much will other people be willing to pay for that same thing?"
Canon could have given the 5D2 a good AF system, and a faster frame rate for sraw, and better sealing, and built-in flash and kept the body small and light. It would have been Canon's version of the fabled D700x - call it what you will.
First for the weather sealing:
How much more expensive would it have been to develop, test, and retool the factories compared to re-using parts to the degree that they did? How many sales of the 5dmk2 would have been lost due to the higher price?
And, realize, I would prefer stronger weather sealing. I'm not sure how much more I'd pay for it.
The autofocus: perhaps canon could have used the 1d af system. We don't
know the ins and outs of the guts to know how compatible they really are. But, assuming that they were, the 1dmk3 AF system has not exactly been well received by the buying public. This would mean that canon would need to vet another system in the 5d chassis, likely a rather large undertaking -- and one which may well be in progress right now.
We also don't know what the original plans were for the 5dmk2, did canon release the "Plan B" camera to remain in the field against Nikon knowing
that they should have done better but couldn't release at their quality bar?
Again, something that we can only speculate about.
A huge number of people want that camera and don't give a crap about electronic levelling aids. Canon always has to put a fly in the ointment, and
Do you have numbers on that? I would love an electronic level. I'll bet that deep in the bowels of canon's marketing they *do* have numbers on each
and every feature that was considered for the 7d. Perhaps their
numbers are wrong, but I would be shocked if they didn't do their best to really study what went into the camera vs. the costs of so doing.
unfortunately the 7D is no exception. My next EOS will probably be a 3D, as long as it has a Canon E*-S screen option.
and if it doesn't?
consider : how many canon owners would forgo an upgrade to due to the lack of that feature in any new canon camera? I'd hazard that there really aren't all that many MF folks out there who shoot small format - if you are going to mf, you may want to seriously consider moving up to larger format photography.
for me, the new features of the 7d will likely be enough to win an upgrade sale.