Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Digital Cameras & Shooting Techniques => Topic started by: DarkPenguin on January 21, 2008, 08:19:53 pm
-
tsiphoto breaks the news. no 5d replacement at pma (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=26442724)
tsiphoto is like a groundhog. He sticks his head up every 6 months and calls the canon announcements.
This simplifies my new camera decision tree.
-
tsiphoto breaks the news. no 5d replacement at pma (http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=26442724)
tsiphoto is like a groundhog. He sticks his head up every 6 months and calls the canon announcements.
This simplifies my new camera decision tree.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168673\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yeah that's right because just how many 1DsIII bodies would they sell if there were a new 5D at half the price?
-
Maybe it's true or not, but the 5D is now going for $2100. @ B&H and less at other venues.
We'll find out in about 6 days.
-
The 24th is the expected day for canon announcements.
-
I think whatever replaces the 5D would have to be pretty spectacular to justify a $3000 price tag.
The 5D at $2100 right now is the best deal going for full frame 35mm digital. Is 14-bit RAW worth an extra grand? Live View? Digic III?
The other question is, can Canon introduce a 5D replacement at the same pricepoint as the original 5D? It seems that to compete with Nikon's D300 and D3, Canon would need to find a balance between features and price...a 5D replacement at $2000 might be enough to get the fence sitters to choose Canon over a D300, but at $3000, wouldn't the D3 with its 51 point AF and weather seals make Nikon more attractive?
The end of the month will be interesting to say the very least.
-
I think whatever replaces the 5D would have to be pretty spectacular to justify a $3000 price tag.
The 5D at $2100 right now is the best deal going for full frame 35mm digital. Is 14-bit RAW worth an extra grand? Live View? Digic III?
The other question is, can Canon introduce a 5D replacement at the same pricepoint as the original 5D? It seems that to compete with Nikon's D300 and D3, Canon would need to find a balance between features and price...a 5D replacement at $2000 might be enough to get the fence sitters to choose Canon over a D300, but at $3000, wouldn't the D3 with its 51 point AF and weather seals make Nikon more attractive?
The end of the month will be interesting to say the very least.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168782\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I also have wondered how many 5D owners will feel the need to upgrade at this point. I know I won't. Even if its 'spectacular'---for many of our needs (even wants), our current 5D is sufficient. Yes, there are things I would like---but I'd rather spend the money on photo related things than a new body. There will always be those that will upgrade for the newest/greatest and for some others, some things may be a priority and push them to upgrade. However, I'm betting that IF something is introduced, it will be more important to Canon at this point to appeal to new buyers or upgraders from cropped bodies.
I've seen tsiphoto's predictions before and they are usually pretty doggone close.
Diane
-
I also have wondered how many 5D owners will feel the need to upgrade at this point. I know I won't. Even if its 'spectacular'---for many of our needs (even wants), our current 5D is sufficient. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168785\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I don't think that a lot of people complaining about the IQ of the 5D. It those limited terms it is still competitive -- even with the D3. I think however, there are a lot of convenience, useability and build-quality aspects that need to be addressed. It is far from a perfect camera. A lot of the things perple are looking for in the replacement will make the camera more flexible, more accurate, and easier to use in multiple situations. I curse mine every time I use it and would certainly welcome a replacement that addresses some of it's failings -- even if we don't get more MP.
It will necessarily be updated sooner or later to capture production efficiencies with other more recent models. As many of the models share parts, the older partsin the 5D might not longer be produced or might be more expensive to produce them just for the 5D.
-
I want live view and the 40D's auto focus.
And at $3k a new camera would come pretty darn close to the D3 in performance, even if it didn't improve on the 5D, for 40% less. At the price of just the D3 one could buy a $3k Canon and 24-104 and 70-200 f4 IS. Depending on the bundles you might even be able to pull off a 17-40L for the 17-200 f4 trifecta.
-
Yeah that's right because just how many 1DsIII bodies would they sell if there were a new 5D at half the price?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168720\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Exactly--a 16mp 5d form factor body at around $3000 is to me a dream camera, and will probably become the biggest selling Canon of all time. Maybe image quality won't be that much better, but 16mp for cropping, especially if you shoot "4x5", is a huge plus.
-
Exactly--a 16mp 5d form factor body at around $3000 is to me a dream camera, and will probably become the biggest selling Canon of all time.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168789\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Actually it won't be by a long shot. It would hard for it to sell more than one of the entry-level XT's (Digital Rebels).
-
Actually it won't be by a long shot. It would hard for it to sell more than one of the entry-level XT's (Digital Rebels).
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168792\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Duhhhh. We're talking FF of course.
-
FWIW, One more, I have a friend story. Big deal right? I know, but my colleague, who works directly with Canon USA CEO on some educational projects, has never been wrong before. Source was bang on for 40D and MKIII. CEO said in Sept. that new 16mp, 14 bit processor, 5D would be out in February. Things may have changed since then given the fierce competition from Nikon, but.......
-
I think however, there are a lot of convenience, useability and build-quality aspects that need to be addressed. It is far from a perfect camera. A lot of the things perple are looking for in the replacement will make the camera more flexible, more accurate, and easier to use in multiple situations. I curse mine every time I use it and would certainly welcome a replacement that addresses some of it's failings -- even if we don't get more MP.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168786\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Strangely enough I don't have any issues with the 5D body at all.
I suppose the AF could be a bit better, but the whole 45-51 point business covering the same area as the 5D's 9/15 points seems rather pointless unless you're using AIServo to track moving stuff. Important if you need it but I could care less.
What I'd like is 5 high precision AF points, one in the centre and at each of the rule of thirds junctions with a quick select using the joystick.
I am also apparently one of the few photographers worldwide who doesn't use his camera in extreme weather conditions. The occasional bit of soft rain hasn't bothered my 5D at all. But the hue and cry over weather sealing completely amazes me.
I could care less about the LCD - all I want it for is the menu and checking the histogram anyway. How about making the viewfinder brighter and bigger and show ISO.
Not bothered about anti-dust. I haven't had to wet-clean my 5D sensor yet in a year of ownership, the odd blast with a rocket blower has been fine.
Not bothered about high fps. 3 is fine. I have occasionally hit the end of the buffer but I'm using a pretty slow CF card.
I would hate a built-in vertical grip, bigger batteries, etc.
Actually a camera with a next-gen FF sensor, in as small and light a body as possible (plastic is fine), basic but good 5-point AF, and a state of the art next gen sensor with even less noise and better DR than the 5D. More megapixels would be OK but not necessary.
In other words to heck with the feature list. Concentrate on IQ in as light and small a body as possible. It's not even a price issue particularly. How about the 1DsMkIII sensor with a single Digic III chip?
-
Strangely enough I don't have any issues with the 5D body at all.
I suppose the AF could be a bit better, but the whole 45-51 point business covering the same area as the 5D's 9/15 points seems rather pointless unless you're using AIServo to track moving stuff. Important if you need it but I could care less.
What I'd like is 5 high precision AF points, one in the centre and at each of the rule of thirds junctions with a quick select using the joystick.
I am also apparently one of the few photographers worldwide who doesn't use his camera in extreme weather conditions. The occasional bit of soft rain hasn't bothered my 5D at all. But the hue and cry over weather sealing completely amazes me.
I could care less about the LCD - all I want it for is the menu and checking the histogram anyway. How about making the viewfinder brighter and bigger and show ISO.
Not bothered about anti-dust. I haven't had to wet-clean my 5D sensor yet in a year of ownership, the odd blast with a rocket blower has been fine.
Not bothered about high fps. 3 is fine. I have occasionally hit the end of the buffer but I'm using a pretty slow CF card.
I would hate a built-in vertical grip, bigger batteries, etc.
Actually a camera with a next-gen FF sensor, in as small and light a body as possible (plastic is fine), basic but good 5-point AF, and a state of the art next gen sensor with even less noise and better DR than the 5D. More megapixels would be OK but not necessary.
In other words to heck with the feature list. Concentrate on IQ in as light and small a body as possible. It's not even a price issue particularly. How about the 1DsMkIII sensor with a single Digic III chip?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168836\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, you named many, if not most, of the things that I would like to see. I most definitely agree that we DO NOT need a built-in vertical grip or bigger batteries. That would be about the worst thing they could do to it. So we really are not all that far apart on this. I guess I just hate living with it the way it is. I would upgrade just to get these changes and improvements.
-
Well, you named many, if not most, of the things that I would like to see. I most definitely agree that we DO NOT need a built-in vertical grip or bigger batteries. That would be about the worst thing they could do to it. So we really are not all that far apart on this. I guess I just hate living with it the way it is. I would upgrade just to get these changes and improvements.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168841\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
And please can I have 100% viewfinder with my 1Ds3 chip.
-
Yes give me more DR, 14 or 16 bit, AF adjustment and no AA filter. That is all that would take for me to get one.
-
Ah yes the AF adjustment is one thing I would really like. Just to be able to tweak things a bit without having to send the whole lot in for calibration.
-
Ah yes the AF adjustment is one thing I would really like. Just to be able to tweak things a bit without having to send the whole lot in for calibration.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168940\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Dream dream dream dream dreeeeam.... Sorry if that was out of tune I cannot sing very well..:+}
Snook
-
I took a long, hard look at the 5D last month. The price with a 24-105 was getting down below $2800, which is a sweet deal. (Given the $1000 price of the lens by itself, the body was going for well under two grand.) I would like a FF body to go with my 1-D2 bodies, and I don't really need the rugged build of the 1Ds series for this camera.
Then I went and bought a 40D instead. The improvements in the body are significant, the price is reasonable, and the image quality rivals my 1D2 bodies, and surpasses it at high ISOs. I'm not a huge fan of the cropped-sensor cameras, but the 40D is a nice little carry-around camera.
Now I can wait for a 5D replacement with a smile on my face. And for once I bought a camera at the beginning of the life cycle, not at the end. (I have a history of buying a few weeks before the new model is announced.)
-
Just to stir things up a bit, there's an article (http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/01/22/canon.eos.3d.leak/) on Elctronista that purports an EOS-3D at 15.1 megapixels along with other features. It is supposed to be priced between the "entry level" 5D and the 1Ds mkIII. They also claim a 5D mk II with 12.1 megapixels with 14-bit processing and some other unspecified features.
To me, their description of the 3D sounds like what I was expecting in the 5D MkII. I'm not sure what price point such a camera would reside at given the presence of the 1D Mk III. The features touted for the 5D mk II certainly don't justify replacing my current 5D.
-
I'd rather have a d300 in canon mount.
There, I said it.
-
At $1800?
-
At $1800?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169041\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Well, lower is always better, but maybe.
A full frame sensor is great but things like top-end AF and weather sealing are more to my tastes. If they put out a 5d replacement that was fully sealed (not this "improved weather resistance junk" on the 40d) and had better AF I'd love it.
On the sensor note, I don't care if they put more megapixels in there, how about an increase in quality and high iso detail retention, that I'd love. The D3 shows that 1600 or 3200 doesn't have to be the limit anymore.
-
Well, lower is always better, but maybe.
A full frame sensor is great but things like top-end AF and weather sealing are more to my tastes. If they put out a 5d replacement that was fully sealed (not this "improved weather resistance junk" on the 40d) and had better AF I'd love it.
Top end AF, weather sealed -- hmmm, I think Canon calls this the 1-D Mark III. Okay, it's $4500, but hey, it's only money.
My 1-D Mark II's are still going strong after more than three years of hard daily use. They are quick, responsive, durable, and can handle far worse weather than I am willing to shoot in. The image quality is still pretty good, too. Now all I need is about nine grand to upgrade.
-
Top end AF, weather sealed -- hmmm, I think Canon calls this the 1-D Mark III. Okay, it's $4500, but hey, it's only money.
My 1-D Mark II's are still going strong after more than three years of hard daily use. They are quick, responsive, durable, and can handle far worse weather than I am willing to shoot in. The image quality is still pretty good, too. Now all I need is about nine grand to upgrade.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169082\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I'd noticed that 1DS3 prices were falling to something I shouldn't afford!
I like better af, more weather prrofing and some of the latest features, but I'm not sure that canon will give any short term 5D replacement enough to make the move worthwhile.
-
450D is announced. Live view, bigger LCD and 12mp.
Looks like I'll be ordering that 40D.
-
450D is announced. Live view, bigger LCD and 12mp.
Looks like I'll be ordering that 40D.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169136\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Link?
-
www.canonusa.com
www.dpreview.com
-
Thanks
Well. That...sucks.
I have no more words...
Other than:
I'm horribly disappointed and with the amount of time they've made the market wait, the new 5D had better be amazing when it comes out in the fall...assuming they haven't scrapped the 5D FF type line (which I can't imagine, and choose to refuse to accept into my head).
Hey...at least they had me excited and checking constantly to see if it had been released!
-
450D is announced. Live view, bigger LCD and 12mp.
Looks like I'll be ordering that 40D.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169136\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I thought you were joking . But you're right. I just checked the USA Canon site.
Improved Image Quality
At the heart of the new EOS Rebel XSi is its newly designed 12.2 megapixel APS-C size Canon CMOS sensor. This new sensor employs large microlenses over each pixel to reduce noise and enhance sensitivity up to ISO 1600, which is ideal for high-quality images in low light. The APS-C size sensor retains a 1.6x focal length conversion factor compared to full-frame digital image sensors or 35mm film format cameras.
Another image quality enhancement is the upgrade of the Analog-to-Digital (A/D) conversion process to a 14-bit A/D processor. The inclusion of the 14-bit A/D process means the Rebel XSi camera records up to 16,384 colors per channel and allows the camera to produce images with finer and more accurate gradations of tones and colors. This is ideal for shooting outdoors where subtle hue changes in sky, water or foliage can really add to an image.
The Canon EOS Rebel XSi DSLR also incorporates the optional Highlight Tone Priority and High-ISO Noise Reduction functions first introduced in 2007 with the EOS-1D Mark III Professional Digital SLR and now available for the first time in an entry level Canon digital SLR camera. Additionally, the new camera is equipped with Canon's Auto Lighting Optimizer technology, which corrects image brightness and contrast automatically. Introduced last year in the EOS 40D camera, this valuable optional feature now works in all exposure modes and utilizes Face Detection technology to prevent underexposure with backlit faces.
Why would you now be ordering the 40D?
One point in favour of a late release of the 5D upgrade is we can be more certain that the upgrade will be worthwhile. It seems to me we're getting too close to the limits of the current paradigm in Bayer type CMOS sensors. Improvements in fundamental image quality tend to be too marginal. There was a long wait between the introduction of the 1D and the 1D Mk II, but what an improvement on a number of fronts. Double the pixel count, improvement of an already fast frame rate despite the increase in pixel count and a vast improvement in high ISO noise performance.
I'm certainly not interested in a 5D with a marginal improvement in resolution (12.7 to 16mp) and a marginal improvement in low noise performance like that between the D3 and the 5D, unless the price is substantially lower than the original 5D. That makes a difference of course.
-
Top end AF, weather sealed -- hmmm, I think Canon calls this the 1-D Mark III. Okay, it's $4500, but hey, it's only money.
My 1-D Mark II's are still going strong after more than three years of hard daily use. They are quick, responsive, durable, and can handle far worse weather than I am willing to shoot in. The image quality is still pretty good, too. Now all I need is about nine grand to upgrade.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169082\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The d300 has the nicer AF and the pentax k10d and oly e-3 are sealed. All for under 2k.
Edit, pentax now has a sealed dslr for under $1000. Common canon, sealing is something every landscape photog can appreciate.
-
Just to stir things up a bit, there's an article (http://www.electronista.com/articles/08/01/22/canon.eos.3d.leak/) on Elctronista that purports an EOS-3D at 15.1 megapixels along with other features. It is supposed to be priced between the "entry level" 5D and the 1Ds mkIII. They also claim a 5D mk II with 12.1 megapixels with 14-bit processing and some other unspecified features.
To me, their description of the 3D sounds like what I was expecting in the 5D MkII. I'm not sure what price point such a camera would reside at given the presence of the 1D Mk III. The features touted for the 5D mk II certainly don't justify replacing my current 5D.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169019\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Since we are all speculating... I wonder how does that fit with the 1Ds Mk II market? They still sell it, in fact, I'm torn between buying one used and tossing a wad on L lenses or getting the III and getting a few lenses. If they under-cut the Mk II, would they be screwing the upgrade buyers looking to roll into the Mk III by selling their current Mk II's?
Just a thought...
Cheers,
-Andrew
-
40D covers what I need and is available today.
Should arrive Tuesday.
I thought you were joking . But you're right. I just checked the USA Canon site.
Why would you now be ordering the 40D?
-
40D covers what I need and is available today.
Should arrive Tuesday.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169388\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Fair enough! But I can't help getting the impression Canon has complicated the decision making process with the introduction of the 450D. It's seems to have some desirable features which the 40D lacks.
I've probably overlooked a few features but the only substantive feature I see in the 40D which could make a difference to the shots you take is the faster continuous frame rate. The 40D would be a better choice for action shots where the precise split second makes or breaks the picture.
On the other hand, the 450D has at least a couple of additional features which could contribute to the taking of a better picture. At least they are features that I would find useful.
(1) 12mp versus 10MP. Not an issue for someone who already has a 10MP DSLR, but for someone coming from a 350D, 20D or 30D, a 50% increase in pixel count has to be noticeable, using a good lens.
(2) Exposure compensation and autobracketing of +/- 3 stops. This is very useful for HDR shots of really high contrast scenes. A 4 stop difference is sometimes not enough. 6 stops should take care of almost any situation. Try taking a series of 3 shots with a total of 6 stops interval, without a tripod, for merging to HDR, with the 40D. Even with a tripod it's going to be a slower and more cumbersome procedure.
(3) Exposure compensation of +/- 3 stops is also useful for a technique of achieving accurate ETTR using the spot meter mode, which the 450 also has. I learned this technique from Dale Cotton.
Take a spot meter reading of the brightest part of the image in AV mode, fix the exposure with that star button on the back of the camera, then increase exposure by 3 stops using the big wheel, and recompose the scene. Voila! Perfect ETTR!
(4) A big disappointment with the 40D is the fact it doesn't do autofocus at maximum apertures of f8. For all its claims of more accurate and faster focussing, this doesn't translate to better focussing at f8, so it's disabled.
The 450D, however, has (apparently) a very accurate, albeit slow, contrast detection autofocussing in LiveView mode. I imagine this would probably work at f8 and be an advantage for those who use the Canon 100-400 IS lens with 1.4x TC.
The downside of no ISO 3200 is not serious because ISO 3200 is just an in-camera boost which is no different from ISO 1600 underexposed one stop, if shooting RAW.
The incompatibility of memory cards and battery with other Canon DSLRs represents an unfortunate additional expense, though. Probably fine for the P&S crowd who already own a few SD cards, but for many of us the cost of a couple of high capacity SD cards and a spare battery bring the cost of the 450D up to the level of the 40D.
-
I've probably overlooked a few features but the only substantive feature I see in the 40D which could make a difference to the shots you take is the faster continuous frame rate. The 40D would be a better choice for action shots where the precise split second makes or breaks the picture.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169672\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
-It has a thumbwheel on the back which makes a world of difference
-It takes proper sized batteries so if your main camera is a 5D you can share
-It's built solidly and has a bit of arbitrary weather sealing
-Every 2nd person on the street doesn't have one
-
The 5D replacement needs to be something special to keep me a Canon user in the future.... nikon have a lot of features that i think should almost be standard on a digital camera Multiple exposure,overlay mode, and as Michael has repeatedly asked for a mirror lock button.
Canon have many lenses now that need resolution improvements including the Tilt & Shift range.... it's the T&S lenses that are at the moment keeping me Canon, if Nikon had a good range of these lenses it would be an easy decision to change. P.S meant to say that dual media storage would be good... but the same type of card... SD or CF its good to know you have an instant back up,once in lifetime shots and if someone is paying you!
Fingers crossed for us all.
-
-It takes proper sized batteries so if your main camera is a 5D you can share
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169676\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I didn't overlook that feature. Read my post more carefully .
-
meant to say that dual media storage would be good... but the same type of card... SD or CF its good to know you have an instant back up,once in lifetime shots and if someone is paying you!
Ever heard of a Compact Flash to SD adapter. It is possible to have 2 SD cards installed in a Canon...
-
-It has a thumbwheel on the back which makes a world of difference
The 400D controls are really pretty good. I didn't miss the 20D's wheel much while using them. Provided the 450D doesn't screw that up it should be pretty good, too.
That said, the controls are better on the 40D.
-It takes proper sized batteries so if your main camera is a 5D you can share
I wish it took the G9 (or 400D) battery. The 40D doesn't use the same batteries as my G9 so I can't share them with the main camera I'd be using with it.
-It's built solidly and has a bit of arbitrary weather sealing
I don't believe this. I think it looks like it is built more solidly. My old 300D and my 400D took far more abuse than my 20D did. My 20D split its seams at the first opportunity. Any weather sealing would be nice but I've never had a camera fail in the rain. (20D did fail in the cold. And it wasn't the battery.) I have rain gear now so it shouldn't be an issue.
Did they seal anything other than the cf and batter doors?
-Every 2nd person on the street doesn't have one
I think the rant I just typed on this one was therapeutic.
-
I don't believe this. I think it looks like it is built more solidly. My old 300D and my 400D took far more abuse than my 20D did. My 20D split its seams at the first opportunity. Any weather sealing would be nice but I've never had a camera fail in the rain. (20D did fail in the cold. And it wasn't the battery.) I have rain gear now so it shouldn't be an issue.
It's a metal body rather than plastic. My old 350d took a huge amount of abuse, but i'd still rather have metal over plastic
Did they seal anything other than the cf and batter doors?
I think the rant I just typed on this one was therapeutic.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169732\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Nope, although it's a start. I'd rather have the flash, shutter button and control dials sealed, they're the things that the rain hits first.
-
One of the big ones (which seems odd with my want of liveview) is that the viewfinder on the 40D is much better than the 450D. Better magnification and better eyepoint. There is a thing that doesn't like eye glass wearers - Viewfinder designers. (And I'm not getting lasik. I saw what happened to Ned Flanders in the future.)
The AF on the 40D looks to be a better setup. The speed helps for poor man's IS. It has a slightly higher sync speed (1/250 vs 1/200). Has a PC sync socket.
The 10mp vs 12mp thing is a pure unknown. With each camera I buy I've found that I l{o|oo}se an f stop. With the 400D I'm not willing to stop down much beyond f11. With the 20D I was willing to stop down more than that. A touch more with the 300D. There is a thing that doesn't like prairies - Noise reduction.
The fact that I can get it now rather than in april helps, too. I've ideas for how to use live view that I need to work on before I use them in anger.
Plus The Man is due to give me $600 (deficit schmeficit) that more than offsets the price difference.
Anyways. There were other minor things. Didn't keep the list. The 450D made me go through its spec and the dpreview review of the 40D pretty thoroughly before ordering. If it was available now I'd have a harder time choosing. Wasn't enough to make me wait.
Fair enough! But I can't help getting the impression Canon has complicated the decision making process with the introduction of the 450D. It's seems to have some desirable features which the 40D lacks.
-
It's a metal body rather than plastic. My old 350d took a huge amount of abuse, but i'd still rather have metal over plastic
Nope, although it's a start. I'd rather have the flash, shutter button and control dials sealed, they're the things that the rain hits first.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169735\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Fair enough. I tomahawked my old 300d into the ground as I fell down a hillside. Took a while to vacuum the dirt (not dust) out of the camera. Person I sold it to (and yes, I told him) is still using it.
So long as the frame is metal I think it is pretty good.
As to the weather sealing I suppose those two spots were the biggies. Figure canon will dole out weather sealed buttons one by one? New on the 50D: Sealed direct print button!
-
I don't believe this. I think it looks like it is built more solidly. My old 300D and my 400D took far more abuse than my 20D did. My 20D split its seams at the first opportunity. Any weather sealing would be nice but I've never had a camera fail in the rain. (20D did fail in the cold. And it wasn't the battery.) I have rain gear now so it shouldn't be an issue.
I'll start with this: I own a 20D, I've played with the 40D, but only had it for a couple days, I've also used the XTi for about a week. Two comments on the difference in the lines.
1) The XT series feels a lot less rugged. plasticy, very light, etc.
2) The 20D will take a lot of punishment. Mine has been in the ocean twice and thrown against a rock. The flash no longer functions, but all in all, I think that's pretty good considering what it has been through. Now, I can't say what would happen to the XTi in the same situations, but the camera definitely doesn't look like it would take that type of punishment.
-
My 20D didn't take well to the rock thing. I remember back in the 80's dropping my Minolta off of a curb. Not a problem. Tried to get one more frame from a roll of film and snapped the winder. Unreal.
-
Exactly--a 16mp 5d form factor body at around $3000 is to me a dream camera, and will probably become the biggest selling Canon of all time. Maybe image quality won't be that much better, but 16mp for cropping, especially if you shoot "4x5", is a huge plus.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168789\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
All recent Canon DSLRs of all ranks have higher quantum efficiency, less read noise at low ISO, and less banding noise (which is very visible, but doesn't manifest itself in read noise statistics very well) than the 5D. Any 5D replacement is bound to have at least 1/2 stop better DR at all ISOs at the pixel level, and a higher base ISO (more photon sensitivity).
The 5D, to me, as good as it is, and as well as it has been filling a niche, is old tech, IMO, and that is why I have put off buying FF until the 5D replacement. The 5D is basically a 20D with 50% more pixels, spread farther apart (and therefore, less taxing on lenses, at least in the center of frame).
I really wish, however, that it would come out in the spring, as I prefer to do nighttime street photography in warm weather.
-
Look at it this way, John. The 5D upgrade is going to rival the 1Ds3. In some respects it's probably going to beat it.
You can't expect this technology next month.
-
Look at it this way, John. The 5D upgrade is going to rival the 1Ds3. In some respects it's probably going to beat it.
You can't expect this technology next month.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169751\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Yeah, they're definitely going to have to cripple it in some way
-
My 20D didn't take well to the rock thing. I remember back in the 80's dropping my Minolta off of a curb. Not a problem. Tried to get one more frame from a roll of film and snapped the winder. Unreal.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169741\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I was taking pictures on a stormy day from about 100 feet into the shore. A rock outcropped about 15 feet or so, and the tide was rising. It was a stormy day, so there I was getting some fun shots of the waves crashing against the rock next to me with the town in the background. On the way back I put the camera into a water resistant bag to avoid splash up on the way back through the water to the cliff i came down. As I was wading back through the water, I accidentally let go of the bag and tossed it about 10 feet onto a rock.
My lens (Canon 24 f/1.4L) stopped working, focus ring got disconnected or something, but the camera worked fine. I sent the lens into canon, and they fixed it...no further problems have arisen.
-
Yeah, they're definitely going to have to cripple it in some way
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169772\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That is the case only if you assume that the demand vs. price curve is relatively inelastic. That does not at all appear to be the case--I expect that if they produce the best 5D II they can build for the money, they will sell several 5D II's for each 1DsIII sale that they cannibalize.
Also, remember the extreme competitiveness of the Japanese. Their first concern is likely to be to crush Nikon. To do that, they need to sell the best technology, at the best price.
Producing crippled products is counterproductive in that environment. And I believe that the decision-makers at Canon are smart enough to know that.
-
I was taking pictures on a stormy day from about 100 feet into the shore. A rock outcropped about 15 feet or so, and the tide was rising. It was a stormy day, so there I was getting some fun shots of the waves crashing against the rock next to me with the town in the background. On the way back I put the camera into a water resistant bag to avoid splash up on the way back through the water to the cliff i came down. As I was wading back through the water, I accidentally let go of the bag and tossed it about 10 feet onto a rock.
My lens (Canon 24 f/1.4L) stopped working, focus ring got disconnected or something, but the camera worked fine. I sent the lens into canon, and they fixed it...no further problems have arisen.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169778\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
My 20D fell about 4 feet on to billion year old rock. The billion year old rock won.
I think you have a significantly better copy of the 20D.
-
Thanks Jonathan.. I had not been aware of the CF to SD adapter Maplin uk have said item... can now get the express card SD card reader and have 2 SDs in the Canon
-
Is 14-bit RAW worth an extra grand? Live View? Digic III?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168782\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
And remember self cleaning sensor that Micheal has said does a brilliant job even after many lens changes in the field. Oh yes, and the increased size and view ability of the LCD in ALL light situations. Oh yes, a better menu navigation system. Oh yes, and it's most likely going to have 16MPs so as not to compete with the 40D. I mean how many peple would buy the 40D instead of a new 3K 5D with only 3MPs of difference between them--uh, none? Are you kidding? An updated 5D with everything the 40D and MKIII got is well worth 3K, especially if it's 16MPs. Is the MKIII worth 5K additional US dollars if the 5D is 16MPs? Sure, if you need the pixels (and who doesn't) and can afford it.
In a word--YES.
-
I also have wondered how many 5D owners will feel the need to upgrade at this point. I know I won't. Even if its 'spectacular'---for many of our needs (even wants), our current 5D is sufficient.
Diane
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168785\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
For most people a Rebel xTI is sufficient too, but if you are doing a lot of landscape stuff, the extra pixels and auto sensor cleaning--for many lens changes--is really not a sufficient question, but one of necessity from a quality perspective. If I were shooting traditional family portraits I'd probably never buy anything more than a 40D or 5D--the 40D would allow you to use a 200mm lens at 320mm effective, giving a nice portrate lens from compression, not to mention the increase in sharpness across the eyes at angles and lower fStop settings.
For those of us who shoot many different types of images, such as myself where I use my 5D and a 70-200mm lens almost exclusively for portraits, then the extra pixels and other things are well worth it. I recently shot a gal for her advertising portfolio, and one of the images she liked the best was a full body she wanted cropped down to just above the waist, while maintaining a 8x10 (4:5) aspect ratio. Opps--where did all the pixels go?
-
Strangely enough I don't have any issues with the 5D body at all.
Not bothered about anti-dust. I haven't had to wet-clean my 5D sensor yet in a year of ownership, the odd blast with a rocket blower has been fine.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=168836\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Really? What about having the top LCD information panel on the back--where it belongs-- where you can actually see it without having to climb over your tripod or tilt the camera backwards? What about having an ISO readout in the viewfinder--that's disgusting not having that information there.
I have to wet clean my sensor almost every time I come back after changing lenses. The sensor cleaning thing really pisses me off.
I'd love to have it weather sealed, and so would you after coming back from a week camping trip in Death Valley--seriously. I even carry my equipment in a large Pelican case that is sealed with a large "O" ring. That does keep things clean and dry, but not when you use it.
-
The d300 has the nicer AF and the pentax k10d and oly e-3 are sealed. All for under 2k.
Edit, pentax now has a sealed dslr for under $1000. Common canon, sealing is something every landscape photog can appreciate.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169211\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The 5D is sealed. It's just not "professionally" sealed. I talked to a tech from Canon on teh phone when I had my 24-70 calibrated, and he said you can shoot all day in mild rain or dust with a 5D and nothing will get inside. The extra sealing in the MK series is of course even better, but the sealing in the 40D and 5D are good enough for on location journalist photos, then you can bet it's pretty sealed. True, the battery and CF card compartments are not O ringed, but I doubt much is going to get inside from the shutter button and other buttons like those. I mean I don't think dust and water are going to work their way into the camera body through the CF or battery doors. If that were the case, then the camera would probably fill up with water from simple condensation, and in the first year Canon would be replacing lots of 5Ds, not to mention they would be out of business.
-
Since we are all speculating... I wonder how does that fit with the 1Ds Mk II market? They still sell it, in fact, I'm torn between buying one used and tossing a wad on L lenses or getting the III and getting a few lenses. If they under-cut the Mk II, would they be screwing the upgrade buyers looking to roll into the Mk III by selling their current Mk II's?
Just a thought...
Cheers,
-Andrew
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169342\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I would assume the MKII selling is only back stock. Canon isn't making that camera any longer, I would bet.
-
Look at it this way, John. The 5D upgrade is going to rival the 1Ds3. In some respects it's probably going to beat it.
You can't expect this technology next month.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169751\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The technology is already there, on the ID, the 1Ds, and the 40D.
-
We have from January 31st to February 2nd 2008. If it's not announced then, we're screwed by the Rebel at 12Mps. lol
It's really hard for me to believe that the Rebel now has 12MPs and the 5D isn't getting an upgrade.
Replacing the EOS Rebel XTi / 400D, Canon has announced the EOS Rebel XSi / 450D, which is a 12.2 megapixel DSLR. Source: http://www.photographybay.com/2007/11/04/pma-2008-preview/ (http://www.photographybay.com/2007/11/04/pma-2008-preview/)
-
The technology is already there, on the ID, the 1Ds, and the 40D.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169920\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Then there will be less reason to upgrade for me. The 5D has about one stop less noise than the 40D (at high ISO); about equal noise to the 1Ds3 when the 1Ds3 image is downsampled to the 5D file size. The 1D3 has an ISO 6400 and less noise than the 5D, I guess, but also fewer pixels.
In the meantime we have the Nikon D3 with marginally lower noise than both the 5D and 1Ds3. The 5D upgrade will have to contain newer technology than already exists in current Canon cameras if it's going to surpass Nikon.
12.7 to 16mp doesn't seem enough regarding increased image quality. But combine that with half a stop or more of lower noise, as well as all the other inevitable features such as faster frame rate, LiveView etc, then it becomes a very attractive package.
-
Then there will be less reason to upgrade for me. The 5D has about one stop less noise than the 40D (at high ISO); about equal noise to the 1Ds3 when the 1Ds3 image is downsampled to the 5D file size. The 1D3 has an ISO 6400 and less noise than the 5D, I guess, but also fewer pixels.
In the meantime we have the Nikon D3 with marginally lower noise than both the 5D and 1Ds3. The 5D upgrade will have to contain newer technology than already exists in current Canon cameras if it's going to surpass Nikon.
12.7 to 16mp doesn't seem enough regarding increased image quality. But combine that with half a stop or more of lower noise, as well as all the other inevitable features such as faster frame rate, LiveView etc, then it becomes a very attractive package.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169934\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Fair enough, but you're not calculating noise and an upgrade to NEW technology with a new 5D. If the noise on the 5D is already better than a 40D, etc., I wonder what it would be with the new technology inside?
The thing with more pixels is that if you want to sell your images to professional sites for advertising, books, etc., about the minimum they accept is 16MPs. So let's say we keep shooing and in a few years get good enough and have enough "stock" to actually be accepted by an online broker of "professional" images, and you have all these files taken with a 12.7MP camera.
I'm seriously thinking about forking over the loot and getting the 1DS3 for that reason. The 5D will be a nice portrait camera, for local jobs, and a nice backup camera. I just have to figure out how to eat and buy the 1DS3 at the same time. (I guess there is always bulk rice, beans, and hamburger for a few months, without eating out everyday like I do now.)
On the other hand, I'd also like to invest in a new 100-400 IS L lens, and a nice 50MM prime too. If I bought the updated 5D I'd have money for all of that. If I get the 1DS3, those lenses will need to wait for next year.
-
I'm seriously thinking about forking over the loot and getting the 1DS3 for that reason. The 5D will be a nice portrait camera, for local jobs, and a nice backup camera. I just have to figure out how to eat and buy the 1DS3 at the same time. (I guess there is always bulk rice, beans, and hamburger for a few months, without eating out everyday like I do now.)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170175\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Where I've got to!
Mike
-
I think that before a 5dII comes out we´ll have an update to the 1dmkIII, or something that puts the d3 down a notch. Think a 1dsmkII+5d with a faster frame rate and updated features. That´s a camera a lot of people would get excited about if it had better high iso improvement and great DR.
I´d personally just like to see a smaller body like the 5d with better AF distribution and more sensitive outer points, weather sealing, 14 bit and all the new tech. If nothing´s announced by august, I´m getting a 1dsIII when I go back to the US to visit the family. The strong euro rocks for me right now.
-
I've probably overlooked a few features but the only substantive feature I see in the 40D which could make a difference to the shots you take is the faster continuous frame rate. The 40D would be a better choice for action shots where the precise split second makes or breaks the picture.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169672\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
If it's anything like the 20D/350D they as said above there's a world of difference. One had very nice handling and the other made you dig around in menus and was crippled in little but very annoying ways. Same sensor, but to my mind one camera was good and one was crippled.
-
If it's anything like the 20D/350D they as said above there's a world of difference. One had very nice handling and the other made you dig around in menus and was crippled in little but very annoying ways. Same sensor, but to my mind one camera was good and one was crippled.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170296\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
400D was a big improvement on the 350d interface. The 20D still had a better interface for some things. But in general the 400D's is right there with it.
The introduction of the My Menu stuff should make it even better.
-
There was stuff like the flash + camera interaction wasn't as good too.
Canon will probably cripple the 400 compared to the 40, simply so as not to canibalise sales.
I just happened to have a play with both the 20 + 350/300? when they both were new as the cheaper camera simply had a different wrapper around the sensor IIRC and I was curious about the difference. And the cheaper one seemed deliberately designed to be inferior in use, which is a crap way of doing business. Make the more expensive cameras seem like they have added value as opposed to making the cheaper ones look like they have reduced value - there is a difference, is a much better way of doing it.
Years ago I bought the EOS3 over the EOS1 as it was a better camera [for my needs] and had eye control AF, which is soooooo much better than any other AF I've ever used. I bought the 5D over the 1DsII for same reason, a better tool [for me], and not crippled to the price point.
-
And the cheaper one seemed deliberately designed to be inferior in use, which is a crap way of doing business. Make the more expensive cameras seem like they have added value as opposed to making the cheaper ones look like they have reduced value - there is a difference, is a much better way of doing it.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170626\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
jjj,
I don't believe this is happening this time. Canon are aiming this camera at the P&S crowd. It doesn't even accept CF cards or the standard BP-511A batteries, which is a disadvantage for 20D, 30D owners who might like to buy one. The additional cost of SD cards and a spare battery wipe out the price advantage over the 40D.
-
jjj,
I don't believe this is happening this time. Canon are aiming this camera at the P&S crowd. It doesn't even accept CF cards or the standard BP-511A batteries, which is a disadvantage for 20D, 30D owners who might like to buy one. The additional cost of SD cards and a spare battery wipe out the price advantage over the 40D.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170633\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Memory is cheap and it doesn't use the same battery as the 400D. (The 400D shares the G9's battery.)
-
Memory is cheap and it doesn't use the same battery as the 400D. (The 400D shares the G9's battery.)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170644\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
That's true and the difference in price between the 450D and 40D is, what, about $200. Anyone shooting RAW will need at least one 4GB SD card or a couple of 2GB cards or even a handful of smaller cards. Owners of a P&S camera should already have a few.
The point I make is that anyone upgrading from a 20D or 30D will not find a price advantage if they don't already have a few SD cards. Since it's a new design of battery, a spare battery will be an additional cost for everyone.
I guess 2x4GB SD cards and a spare battery would be pretty close to $200, wouldn't it?
-
That's true and the difference in price between the 450D and 40D is, what, about $200. Anyone shooting RAW will need at least one 4GB SD card or a couple of 2GB cards or even a handful of smaller cards. Owners of a P&S camera should already have a few.
The point I make is that anyone upgrading from a 20D or 30D will not find a price advantage if they don't already have a few SD cards. Since it's a new design of battery, a spare battery will be an additional cost for everyone.
I guess 2x4GB SD cards and a spare battery would be pretty close to $200, wouldn't it?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170686\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Probably closer to $45. Unless you buy at a brick and mortar store in which case it might be $200.
Regardless, you're right, it does reduce the price gap.
-
Probably closer to $45. Unless you buy at a brick and mortar store in which case it might be $200.
Regardless, you're right, it does reduce the price gap.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170701\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Geez! Things must be cheap in America. In Australia a Sandisk Extrememe III SD 2GB card cost A$50 (US$40) from an internet site called "Cheap Chips". That wouldn't include postage. A genuine Canon BP-511A costs around US$90-$100.
This issue is more relevant for someone in my situation. I decided against upgrading from my 20D to a 40D because it didn't seem to have any particularly significant features I would find useful, considering the 5D is my main camera.
8mp to 10mp is not enough to get better image quality when I want the greater reach with my 100-400 IS zoom that the cropped format offers. The 40D also doesn't allow auto-focussing with the 1.4x extender on that lens, which becomes an f8 lens at 560mm.
The 450D would provide a noticeable resolution boost from 8mp to 12mp and the contrast detection autofocussing system in LiveView should permit autofocussing at f8. In addition it has that +/-3 EC for autobracketing of high contrast scenes.
The fact that it doesn't accept CF cards and has a completely new design of battery annoys me because I already have several 4GB & 2GB CF cards and half a dozen spare BP-511A batteries.
-
I would assume the MKII selling is only back stock. Canon isn't making that camera any longer, I would bet.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=169919\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Probably.
To throw my $0.02 into the discussion -- I either buy a 1Ds MK II if there is no "5d MK ii" or similar released/announced, or I buy the 5d MK ii. I'm not going to spend up for the MK III right now; the new investment in glass to rival my 645 would get me divorce papers. However, I can approach that goal with a less expensive 5d mk II or a 1Ds mk II.
Cheers,
-Andrew
-
Probably.
To throw my $0.02 into the discussion -- I either buy a 1Ds MK II if there is no "5d MK ii" or similar released/announced, or I buy the 5d MK ii. I'm not going to spend up for the MK III right now; the new investment in glass to rival my 645 would get me divorce papers. However, I can approach that goal with a less expensive 5d mk II or a 1Ds mk II.
Cheers,
-Andrew
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171002\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The Sony Alpha900 at $3000 and 24MP is gonna make the 5D2 look pretty lame at 16MP.
This may force Canon to include their 21MP chip in the 5D replacement instead of the planned 16MP unit. It doesn't cost Canon a red cent more to make a 21MP sensor versus a 16MP sensor, so the only reason they are using a lower MP chip in the 5D series is to protect sales of their oversized and overpriced 1DsIII.
-
The Sony Alpha900 at $3000 and 24MP is gonna make the 5D2 look pretty lame at 16MP.
This may force Canon to include their 21MP chip in the 5D replacement instead of the planned 16MP unit.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171023\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I doubt that Canon ever planned a pixel count as low as 16MP in the 5D's replacement: a substantial image resolution advantage over smaller formats is important to a product like the 5D, and the encroachment of 10MP and then 12MP from APS-C cameras probably weakened demand for the 5D, leading to all those price cuts. Probably the 16MP was just speculation based on a dubious belief than fewer, bigger pixels improves the dynamic range seen on equal sized prints, or the even more dubious idea that Canon can afford to "hobble" its products in what is a now a quite competitive market.
It doesn't cost Canon a red cent more to make a 21MP sensor versus a 16MP sensor.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171023\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Indeed, it could even cost less in this case, because Canon can share more of the design and fabrication resources even if two different 21MP sensors are made. Maybe just a lower read-out rate version for the "5DMkII" sensor, as has been done in several cases previously. (But Sony has effectively killed sensor read-out rate as a cost factor with its massively parallel on-chip A/D conversion!)
If a 35mm system has a sufficient range of primes (r very good zooms) that can do justice to 25MP sensors, DMF probably has to move beyond current 22MP, 31MP and maybe even 34MP sensors. So Dalsa in particular needs a new sensor soon. Kodak's 39MP might be safe for now, but anyway Kodak has already talked about going to 50MP or 60MP in the next generation. It should be enough to about match the 6 micron pixel spacing of Sony's 25MP sensor, giving about double the pixel count, 50MP.
I keep thinking that lenses will eventually return to being the dominant image resolution distinction in favor of larger formats, as sensors push the limits of lenses (and with the cost and weight of a sufficiently versatile lens collection being as always a major distinction in favor of smaller formats.)
-
Yes, yes, all fine and good!
Has anyone any new information on the 5D upgrade?
lol
-
I keep thinking that lenses will eventually return to being the dominant image resolution distinction in favor of larger formats, as sensors push the limits of lenses (and with the cost and weight of a sufficiently versatile lens collection being as always a major distinction in favor of smaller formats.)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171056\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
This appears to be the case to me, too. The pixel count of a sensor seems to determine pretty accurately it's resolving capability. A 20D really does resolve slightly more than a 10D, and a 40D really does resolve more than a 30D, even if you would hardly notice it in the average shot.
But lenses seem to be 'all over the place'. The best copy of one model of lens can be better than the worst copy of a more expensive and apparently higher quality lens. Poor performance at maximum aperture, and in the case where the lesn has been designed for the format, vignetting and resolution fall-off at the edges are my main gripes
-
jjj,
I don't believe this is happening this time. Canon are aiming this camera at the P&S crowd. It doesn't even accept CF cards or the standard BP-511A batteries, which is a disadvantage for 20D, 30D owners who might like to buy one. The additional cost of SD cards and a spare battery wipe out the price advantage over the 40D.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=170633\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
It always happens. You cannot sell a better camera for less, if you want to keep selling your more expensive model. And why would a 20D/30D ownner want to buy a camera that is more faff to use and as said above SD cards are cheap.
If you want to see a fantastic example of removing features/usability to target each price point, look at Polar Heart Monitors.
-
It always happens. You cannot sell a better camera for less, if you want to keep selling your more expensive model. And why would a 20D/30D ownner want to buy a camera that is more faff to use and as said above SD cards are cheap.
If you want to see a fantastic example of removing features/usability to target each price point, look at Polar Heart Monitors.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171190\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
/[engagedpreviewmode]
I met an engineer from Canon in the pub last night - he was on holiday in the Yorkshire Daels - and he said that the next 5D will have 28Mp (this has been forced on them by Nikon and Sony - and will be used as the test bed for Canon's latest 'thought control' technology.
It will be released on 1 April.
/[enddpreviewmode]
Really, I think this shows that Canon remain competent at marketing. If there was a new 5D equivalent with 16Mp I would buy a 1Ds3, if it had 21Mp and better autofocus I'd buy the new 5D.
As it is I either wait and see what they come up with, or just stump up for a 1Ds3 now. Or perhaps I should see if Canon really want to play catch up and release the >25Mp 1Ds3a later in 08...
Mike
-
It always happens. You cannot sell a better camera for less, if you want to keep selling your more expensive model. And why would a 20D/30D ownner want to buy a camera that is more faff to use and as said above SD cards are cheap.
If you want to see a fantastic example of removing features/usability to target each price point, look at Polar Heart Monitors.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=171190\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
The interesting thing that appears to be happening here is that the cheaper 450D really does offer some useful improvements over the no doubt better-built 20D, 30D and even 40D.
Those who occasionally drop their camera or who have had the experience of getting caught in a downpour with their camera which subsequently refuses to work, will probably be willing to forgo the improvements in the 450D for the sake of the more robust build and better waterproofing of the 40D, which of course is part of the additional cost.
I'll just go through again the main features I've noticed in the 450D which the 40D doesn't have.
(1) An extra 2 megapixels. By itself, not particularly significant but would be noticeable when upgrading from a 30D. A 50% increase in pixel count is definitely worthwhile, especially when using the full advantage of the cropped format to extend the reach of one's longest telephoto lens.
For example, when comparing an 8MP image from my 20D using a 400mm lens, with a 4.8MP image from my 5D using the same lens (cropping the 5D image to the same FoV as the 20D image), there's a noticeable improvement in detail in the 20D shot. One would not really expect a further noticeable improvement when using a 40D in place of a 20D in these circumstances, except perhaps at 400% enlargement on the monitor.
However, I'm fairly confident the 450D would provide a further improvement in these circumstances, compared with the 20D.
(2) +/- 3 stops EC. There are extremes of dynamic range which cannot be captured with just the usual +/- 2 stops EC with exposure bracketing for the purpose of merging to HDR. Such scenes would include the interior of one's hotel room with a view of snow-capped Himalayan peaks through the window.
Of course, you can get around this limitation by using a tripod. However, CS3's auto-alignment of images is so good, you can now merge hand-held shots, although sharpness is going to be limited by the sharpness of the longest exposure.
(3) Auto-focussing in LiveView mode. The 450D has it. The 40D doesn't. The 40D's autofocussing is phase detection which is expensive to implement at maximum apertures of f8, so the 40D doesn't autofocus at all with 400/f5.6 lenses plus 1.4x extender. The 450D which employs a contrast detection system probably does autofocus at f8 and/or in LiveView mode, although this remains to be investigated.
Setting aside ergonomic issues and robustness, the main feature advantage of the 40D is it's 6.5 frames per second as opposed to the 450D's 3.5 frames per second.