# A New Entry Level Full Frame Camera? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 17, 2011)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; margin: 70px 0 0 0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/09/a-new-entry-level-full-frame-camera-cr1/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 -50px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/09/a-new-entry-level-full-frame-camera-cr1/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/09/a-new-entry-level-full-frame-camera-cr1/"></a></div>
<strong>The EOS 6D or similar

</strong>Received a vague bit of information that Canon could be readying a new entry level full frame camera. It would sit below any sort of 5D Mark III.Ã‚ It would not be the â€œmythicalâ€™ 3D.</p>
<p>The camera would be lower megapixel than the 5D Mark III.Ã‚ A Canon rep recently told the BBC that <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php/topic,1637.0.html">â€œfewer megapixels are betterâ€</a>.</p>
<p><strong>When?

</strong>Iâ€™m still getting some hints of an October announcement of some kind of DSLR, nothing seems difinitive though.</p>
<p>There is a suggestion Canon themselves donâ€™t even know what theyâ€™re going to announce, if anything at all. The problem is not prototypes that arenâ€™t ready, the problem is production. If there is an October announcement for a DSLR, I wouldnâ€™t expect immediate delivery based on this information.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## pedro (Sep 17, 2011)

That's great news, CRguy! Let it be real. 
Here's my wishlist:
Digic V
clean ISO 6400 
ISO 50- 51.200
18 MP
6 fps
better AF than 5Dii
US $ 2000
*no video *
or same as 5Dii
and I'll order it right away 8)
could be a real killer cam!


----------



## Polansky (Sep 17, 2011)

A entry full frame DSLR would not be a logical move and bad timing.

The 5DMKII has enough pixelcount, but for all else it is actually nothing more than an entry DSLR.
Feature wise the 5D MKII is a very 'old' camera in today's camera landscape except for its pixelcount as said.

Therefore this rumour sounds more like rubish and from someone who can't afford the 5D MKII.

Meaby after the 5D MKIII is released there is room for a small pixelcount full frame camera (which would then be the old 5D rebranded as 6D?) Although even that is not very likely to happen.....


----------



## Eagle Eye (Sep 17, 2011)

It's only a matter of time until Canon follows through on this. Like they did with the 7d sensor, they'll place a full frame sensor in multiple bodies, stretching their profits from the r&d and actually reducing costs for the consumer in the long run as well. I wouldn't be surprised, given that the 5d mark ii is fairly frequently backordered, if Canon simply placed the same sensor in a plastic body, stuck a digic 5 in there, and pulled a bunch of features out. The cost of producing it would not be staggering and i surmise it would sell well as a prosumer camera at around 1600?


----------



## pedro (Sep 17, 2011)

Polansky said:


> The 5DMKII has enough pixelcount, but for all else it is actually nothing more than an entry DSLR.
> Feature wise the 5D MKII is a very 'old' camera in today's camera landscape except for its pixelcount as said.
> Meaby after the 5D MKIII is released there is room for a small pixelcount full frame camera (which would then be the old 5D rebranded as 6D?) Although even that is not very likely to happen.....



or see my wishlist specs above
equip it with a full frame 7D sensor (18 MP)
and Digic V
better AF than 5Dii, but lesser than 7D

and voilÃ , here's your 6D 
would be mine at least 8)

*@EagleEye: while I was editing my post, you just hit the same nail!!!congrats!
*


----------



## Eagle Eye (Sep 17, 2011)

Polansky said:


> A entry full frame DSLR would not be a logical move and bad timing.
> 
> The 5DMKII has enough pixelcount, but for all else it is actually nothing more than an entry DSLR.
> Feature wise the 5D MKII is a very 'old' camera in today's camera landscape except for its pixelcount as said.
> ...




Entry level? Really? Do you even use one? In what ways, apart from autofocus, is the 5d mark ii an entry level dslr? As for putting a 12mp sensor from the 5d into a new body, do you really think canon would market a camera with iso 3200? They'd use the sensor from the 5d mark ii and stretch the technology. Everyone who was going to buy a 5d ii has pretty much bought one. Some will upgrade to a new higher end body, others will buy a second body on the lower end. Still others would upgrade from the rebel, 60d, or 7d. It would be shrewd of canon to puruse this.


----------



## Eagle Eye (Sep 17, 2011)

pedro said:


> That's great news, CRguy! Let it be real.
> Here's my wishlist:
> Digic V
> clean ISO 6400
> ...



Unfortunately, your wish list is a little excessive. For an entry level, why would they develop a whole new sensor, a whole new autofocus, and add more technology than the 5d ii has, then cut the cost? To keep cost down, they'll simpy build a new body around existing technology. I would expect to see a 5d mark ii with a highly limited feature set, including no top lcd. They'll bring full frame to the masses, but it aint going to be pretty and certainly not have iso of 51200. No video? You seem to miss the constant reminder on here that including video costs canon nothing and cuts your costs in the long run because they sell more bodies.


----------



## pedro (Sep 17, 2011)

*@EagleEye:* 
I am planning to go FF after 30 years again ;-) Former Contax 139 Quartz shooter back in 1982...
You are right with your comment. I thought about the 18MP sensor of the 7D extended to FF. but if that's impossible...ok. The 21 MP then ;-)
What I would like to have for my low light photography is a 5Dii (6D) with less pixel count and Digic V. 
And yes, you are also right with your video based response.
Guess I could go on without a fetaure like taht, but entry levels surely would implement it...

Another possibility: A 5Dii N. Likely? and forget the entry level...


----------



## Dave (Sep 17, 2011)

Actually I'm not sure if I like the idea. They could use this to rise the prize of an upcoming 5D3 or to take away features of other cams (e.g. 7D), like they did on the 50D => 60D upgrate.

But the question is: Will it be a new cam?
An interesting thought I heard on you tube a couple weeks, was the idea that the 7D2 will go full frame. I don't think so, but it would be REALLY cool (at least if they keep all the features).

FF - especially for video - is quite interesting and me be we will see the former discussed hybrid video-SLR. A 5D as the "entry level" FF is much to expensive for guys who just want a better video cam.


----------



## Polansky (Sep 17, 2011)

Eagle Eye said:


> Entry level? Really? Do you even use one? In what ways, apart from autofocus, is the 5d mark ii an entry level dslr? As for putting a 12mp sensor from the 5d into a new body, do you really think canon would market a camera with iso 3200? They'd use the sensor from the 5d mark ii and stretch the technology. Everyone who was going to buy a 5d ii has pretty much bought one. Some will upgrade to a new higher end body, others will buy a second body on the lower end. Still others would upgrade from the rebel, 60d, or 7d. It would be shrewd of canon to puruse this.




Yes Mister, I use 2 5D mark II's as I am a professional wedding photographer. Feature wise the 5D MKII is nothing more then the 5D MK I except for a higher pixelcount and the added video (which is not being used by many photographers - not said videographers who love the 5D MKII). 

If the 5D MKII hadn't had the video it would have been a 6 year old camera with just a higher MP sensor.

Compare the 5D MK II ISO performance with a Nikon D3 or D3x and you know that your 5D2 is not that special anymore... 5D MKII for these days is just old technology. As for the autofocus of the 5D MKII that has always been a big laugh. Just one central AF point which easily causes OOF pictures when you need to recompose (at big apertures) or when you are in low contrast conditions.


----------



## pedro (Sep 17, 2011)

good point, Dave
7D FF would be great too.
equipped with the 5Dii's 21 MP sensor
clean ISO 6400
ISO 50-25600
Digic V ?
same AF


----------



## mrian (Sep 17, 2011)

hopefully true. i hope to upgrade my "old" 5d classic to the new one.

anyway, one reputable online seller i know is now selling 5dmk2 ~100-200usd lower than usual, not sure if it's a sign but let's just say she doesn't drop prices often. 8)


----------



## akiskev (Sep 17, 2011)

Polansky said:


> If the 5D MKII hadn't had the video it would have been a 6 year old camera with just a higher MP sensor.


Yes.. no live view, no better high iso performance, no digic4 with all its goodies (vignetting correction, higher dynamic range, etc etc).
U MAD BRO?

Note to self: don't feed the troll


----------



## Bokehmon (Sep 17, 2011)

A lot of people here don't think that R&D for new cameras cost money....

If they were to come out with a budget FF camera, it would be a lot like what they did with the XXXXD series... recycle old sensors and add/ cut out some new features.

If there is an entry level FF camera, then the most cost effective way to produce it would be to use the 5DII sensor, and some AF system they already have... ie the current 5D one or 7D one....

They can then sell this at a lower market price without have to spend money on R&D while protecting the sales of a newer tech 5DIII. 

It makes much more sense from a market standpoint to use the same sensor (7D, 60D, 600D) and vary the features because that reduces costs. 

Along this line, I expect that the new 5DIII will have the same sensor as a 1DsIV. Either the 1DsIV will drop to like 6999 price point or the 5DIII will rise to 3499.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Sep 17, 2011)

If this is a sub product to the 5DIII then it's pretty obvious that this new 6D camera is a 5DIII using the old 5D>5DII evolution formula. Eg, pretty much the same camera but with a newer Digic processor and more MP. 
So that would indicate that the 5DIII will be a substantially better camera than the 6D/5DII. Looks like our 5D will eventually become the mythical 3D after all!


----------



## Dave (Sep 17, 2011)

pedro said:


> good point, Dave
> 7D FF would be great too.
> equipped with the 5Dii's 21 MP sensor
> clean ISO 6400
> ...



Yeah, but I don't think so... If take a 7D going FF you have a 5D (or even more). And I wouldn't call a 7D "entry level" at the current pricing.

I can't understand why canon is spreading the line so much. If I were Canon I would reduce the number of product lines instead of increasing it.

1DS
1D
5D
7D
XXD
XXXD
XXXXD

Indeed! There's definitly missing a cheaper FF camera, but imo there is not that much room for a new line.


----------



## Bokehmon (Sep 17, 2011)

GMCPhotographics said:


> If this is a sub product to the 5DIII then it's pretty obvious that this new 6D camera is a 5DIII using the old 5D>5DII evolution formula. Eg, pretty much the same camera but with a newer Digic processor and more MP.
> So that would indicate that the 5DIII will be a substantially better camera than the 6D/5DII. Looks like our 5D will eventually become the mythical 3D after all!



$6999 -- 1Ds: FF high res studio monster 

$4999 -- 1D: FF low res speed demon

$3999 -- 3D: FF higher end

$2499 -- 5D: FF entry level 

$1799 -- 7D: APS-C high end

$1199 -- 9D: future of XXD series? enthusiast camera

$899 -- XXXD: mid range APS-C

$599 -- XXXXD: entry level APS-C


----------



## Eagle Eye (Sep 17, 2011)

Bokehmon said:


> A lot of people here don't think that R&D for new cameras cost money....
> 
> If they were to come out with a budget FF camera, it would be a lot like what they did with the XXXXD series... recycle old sensors and add/ cut out some new features.
> 
> ...



+1


----------



## shtfmeister (Sep 17, 2011)

If the 1D and 1Ds are to be merged then isn't the aps-h sensor going to be abandonded?
so maybe it'll be a
7DII aps-h with 18(or 21)MP
and the rest basically the same (maybe dual digic V)


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 17, 2011)

shtfmeister said:


> so maybe it'll be a
> 7DII aps-h with 18(or 21)MP
> and the rest basically the same (maybe dual digic V)



Unlikely. A 7D with APS-C and compatibility with EF-S lenses, and a 7DII that's neither? Nope.


----------



## trulandphoto (Sep 17, 2011)

Polansky said:


> Eagle Eye said:
> 
> 
> > Entry level? Really? Do you even use one? In what ways, apart from autofocus, is the 5d mark ii an entry level dslr? As for putting a 12mp sensor from the 5d into a new body, do you really think canon would market a camera with iso 3200? They'd use the sensor from the 5d mark ii and stretch the technology. Everyone who was going to buy a 5d ii has pretty much bought one. Some will upgrade to a new higher end body, others will buy a second body on the lower end. Still others would upgrade from the rebel, 60d, or 7d. It would be shrewd of canon to puruse this.
> ...



This seems like pure BS. Digic II vs. Digic 4, live view, almost twice the pixels with great IQ, sensor cleaning, etc. It's hard to believe you actually use cameras at all.


----------



## pwp (Sep 17, 2011)

7DII with FF just won't happen. It would shut out too many potential upgrade customers with a current 7D and a bag full of EF-S glass.

Paul Wright


----------



## akiskev (Sep 17, 2011)

pwp said:


> 7DII with FF just won't happen. It would shut out too many potential upgrade customers with a current 7D and a bag full of EF-S glass.
> 
> Paul Wright


I agree. If an entry level DSLR is coming, it won't be named 7d mkii. It just doesn't make sense and it will confuse customers.


----------



## AG (Sep 17, 2011)

Dave said:


> Yeah, but I don't think so... If take a 7D going FF you have a 5D (or even more). And I wouldn't call a 7D "entry level" at the current pricing.
> 
> I can't understand why canon is spreading the line so much. If I were Canon I would reduce the number of product lines instead of increasing it.
> 
> ...



Agreed

I dont understand why they can't take the 60D as we have it today and stick the FF sensor of the 5D2 in there. 
That could make the xxD series the entry FF cameras and differentiate them from the xxxD line better.

They really need to either drop or merge a few lines so they can refine their products to particular markets more.

eg
1D m4 (1D + 1Ds lines merged full frame PRO photo camera)
5D m3 (high end video rich DSLR)
7D (high end APS-c line)
60D m2 (budget FF line)
600D (basic APS-c line)
1100D (beginners DSLR line)

That way the xD series are the pro cameras, the xxD are the semi pros or advanced amateurs, xxxD is where the money is with the bulk of retail sales and hobbyists, xxxxD my first DSLR people (also in funky colours to sell to younger generations).


----------



## Bokehmon (Sep 17, 2011)

AG said:


> Dave said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, but I don't think so... If take a 7D going FF you have a 5D (or even more). And I wouldn't call a 7D "entry level" at the current pricing.
> ...



you clearly don't understand that the cost of producing a full frame sensor would mean that they cannot maintain the 60D price point. also, canon isn't can't just combine cameras, they need to compete against the competition at certain price points and features, which means that a one shoe fits all scenario is unlikely.


----------



## gene_can_sing (Sep 17, 2011)

I have a feeling this might be the Video optimized full frame.

Why? Because video works best with lower mega-pixels. I've read that for the best video, the camera shouldn't go above 12 mega pixels because it starts to introduce line skipping.

That would be awesome because I just want a full frame video camera with a flip screen (which many stills people hate) that has lower megapixels and better ISOs, kind of like the Nikon D700, but with good video.

This is what is needed. 1) A video based full frame, and also 2) a still based full frame 5D3 for those who hate video (but it will probably still have video because it's become a huge part of Canon's strategy). Video was a HUGE reason for the 5D2 success, so sorry stills people, but it's here to stay.


----------



## Stuart (Sep 17, 2011)

Eagle Eye said:


> It's only a matter of time until Canon follows through on this. Like they did with the 7d sensor, they'll place a full frame sensor in multiple bodies, stretching their profits from the r&d and actually reducing costs for the consumer in the long run as well. I wouldn't be surprised, given that the 5d mark ii is fairly frequently backordered, if Canon simply placed the same sensor in a plastic body, stuck a digic 5 in there, and pulled a bunch of features out. The cost of producing it would not be staggering and i surmise it would sell well as a prosumer camera at around 1600?


I love this idea, and hope entry level is actually really accessable.


----------



## JonB1975 (Sep 17, 2011)

Depending on the price - I'm in.

600D size and weight and FF? Perfect for the mid-level primes....


----------



## dstppy (Sep 18, 2011)

pwp said:


> 7DII with FF just won't happen. It would shut out too many potential upgrade customers with a current 7D and a bag full of EF-S glass.
> 
> Paul Wright



I can count 4 EF-S lenses that would make people possibly hesitate at FF and nothing more:
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM
EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM

I own and use the last 3; they wouldn't stop me from getting a FF camera. The above lenses resale isn't all that bad, if you got them at a reasonably good price to start with.

Whatever the badge is, an entry level FF is DEFINITELY aimed at the 60D/7D owners and potential buyers.

We also don't know what's going to happen with the next gen of cameras. I've seen more than a few people on this forum mention that they do not like the articulating screen for robustness reasons, but it'd be hard for a company to explain why an articulating screen isn't added to any 'entry' level camera in almost any camera.

Personally, I like the rumor but won't get my hopes up . . . I wanted a 7D but could not force myself to pony up the cash and not get FF. I guess we'll see.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Sep 18, 2011)

I agree that many of the ef-s lenses are very good. Often the 1.62x crop offers a really nice reach advantage and with the rise of affordable and optically good ultra wides there is often little to choose between the two crop formats. But full frame does offer better pixel clarity and contrast and then there's the whole depth of field debate. If I want less dof....ff rules, if I want more dof....the 1.62x crop rocks. 
Personally, I use both formats and love em both.


----------



## UncleFester (Sep 18, 2011)

trulandphoto said:


> Polansky said:
> 
> 
> > Eagle Eye said:
> ...




I love drive-by rumors - instant flame-war. 

@Polansky - I hear what you're trying to say but price-wise alone place the 5D and 5DII well above entry-level.

*If* Canon comes out with another ff and categorizes it as "entry-level", it may very well feature higher tech specs than the current 5D, but will have a plastic body, pop-op flash, flip-out lcd, etc. In hand it will feel much cheaper and perform accordingly.

@Truland- you have some nice photos on your site.


----------



## Blaze (Sep 18, 2011)

dstppy said:


> pwp said:
> 
> 
> > 7DII with FF just won't happen. It would shut out too many potential upgrade customers with a current 7D and a bag full of EF-S glass.
> ...



Don't forget 3rd party crop lenses like the Tokina 11-16mm. The FF ultrawides are not cheap.


----------



## justicend (Sep 18, 2011)

For sure new entry level FF camera will have no weather sealed, plastic body and variable angle LCD, what else and new kit lens without red ring.


----------



## robert55 (Sep 18, 2011)

For the foreseeable future 7D [with mark#] will be the name of Canon's top crop camera. There is a clear place for such a camera. Making it FF would turn it into a sort of 5D]

This newest rumor is in two ways consistent with earlier rumors about the 5D3:
- the price of the 5D3could go up significantly, which leaves more room for a ceaper model [a 60D equivalent with FF]
- the new 5D would get a sensor with fewer pixels than the new 1Ds would get

The unlikely thing with the second part is that Canon would have to make three different sensors for FF. Even if they rework the 5D2 sensor for the cheapest camera that is a lot compared to the use of basically the same sensor in three crop camera's and Sony using the same sensor in its SLT and Nex lines and selling versions to Pentax and Nikon


----------



## Stuart (Sep 18, 2011)

If its FF entry evel, then i want a pop up flash if there is room above the prism/EVF?


----------



## LuCoOc (Sep 18, 2011)

Stuart said:


> If its FF entry evel, then i want a pop up flash if there is room above the prism/EVF?



The D700 is FF and has a pop-up flash, so it's not impossible.
But no Electronic View Finder, please!!!


----------



## nikkito (Sep 18, 2011)

electronic viewfinders SUCK!


----------



## martijn (Sep 18, 2011)

Interesting thought...but I think this is just a pipedream.

Apart from the extra R&D costs involved (for an 'entry level' product that, as such, would probably sell at lower profit margins), production facilities are still recovering from events earlier this year. 
Refresh cycles have been delayed across the board as it is-I doubt whether there would be enough headroom for an extra level in the range.

If they really would want to do something like this, it would be far simpler to lower prices on the 5DII, keeping it current alongside a new, and much more expensive 5DIII. But they can't make enough 5DII's as it is...I don't see that happening either. And you certainly can't just stick an FF sensor into an existing APS-C design, the metrics and dynamics are very different.

Actually, FF cameras aren't entry-level product by definition-they do require bigger and better glass too, and longer tele's to make up for the lack of crop factor...and, just in case you hadn't noticed (ouch!), quality glass is getting more expensive by the minute...


----------



## NormanBates (Sep 18, 2011)

this is most probably a pipe dream

unless the camera is an 8D catering to video users, with a very small megapixel count (<12) but getting rid of all the current issues (line-skipping, rolling shutter, etc)

because this could make sense, and because they could share the R&D cost for such a sensor with the video division


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 18, 2011)

The 5D MK II is already the photosite density of the Canon 20D. Thats very low. even Nikoon executives admitted that their low pixel count would not happen again.

This sounds like it was made up by someone who likes the old 6mp Canon D30, because thats what we would have density wide if there were a 12mp FF camera like the D700.

I'd certainly never downgrade to one from my 5D MK II or trade out my 7D either for that matter.


----------



## ecka (Sep 18, 2011)

Well, I don't need a new entry level FF camera and I don't see it coming. This rumor doesn't make sens at all. FF DSLR system is expensive. It would be like an entry level of spending big money 
What I would like to have is an affordable FF mirrorles camera from Canon. That would be THE camera for me.


----------



## Sunnystate (Sep 18, 2011)

In case that Canon missed the boat developing mirrorless camera so far, low cost FF camera could be a quick fix to satisfy the need of potential mirrorless customer, not perfect of course, but it would be able to keep at least portion of the buyers for some time to come with Canon brand.
In any case if you guys think that there will never come low cost FF cameras, I can only laugh about that... like you are keeping hostage once most common, amateurish 35mm format for some elite that can afford it, I hate to burst your bubble but comparing to Hasselblad you still look pretty pathetic with all those D marks something...


----------



## AJ (Sep 18, 2011)

A 5d2 sensor in a Rebel body: plastic + pentamirror.

Sounds like an awesome travel + hiking camera where every gram counts. I'd definitely buy it. But I doubt that this is gonna happen any time soon.


----------



## Rocky (Sep 18, 2011)

Canon do not have any Mirror less interchangeble lens camera Now. People in this forum are asking for FF low cost mirrorless system from Canon. That sound like they want Canon to run before Canon can walk. I hope that people can understand that there is only ONE mirrorless FF camera in the world. That is the Leica M9 and it is very expensive for both the body and the lenses. One of the biggest issue (at least for me) is the slow focusing speed of mirrorless camera (about 0.4 second, like any P& S). M9 get fast shooting speed by using manual focusing (no auto focusing). How many EOS DSLR user knows how to use ZONE Focusing?? Canon has been doing Leica copy from the 1930's until 1960's. They definitely have the know how. How ever for them to resurect it. It will not be cheap.
I am for a good mirrorless system with auto focusing speed comparable to DSLR. I will even settle for APS-C sensor with good manual focusing lens (or it will comes with Leica M ount or vis adapter).


----------



## rcha101 (Sep 19, 2011)

Hi,

Wow, certainly a mix of opinions and ideas here which seem to stem from 2 camps of prospective customers those who want a mirrorless camera (cheap leica?) and those who would be interested in a lower end FF.

As an xxD casual photographer who is keen to upgrade to FF the things that appeal to me would be low light performance, picture and LCD quality. I could live with a xxxD size body but with the wear and tear resistance of the xxD series. I would also be happy with a 7D2 with a FF sensor or a non-video 5D2 for 2k. I've found it hard to justify 2500 for a new body and have been waiting 3 years for something which better fits my needs. Worse case I wait until the 5D3 comes out and pick up a cheap 5D2.

Let's see what happens this week.

R


----------



## ronderick (Sep 19, 2011)

After giving it some thoughts, I think this rumor goes well with Canon's decision of expanding factory operations in Taiwan. 

If I recall correctly, one of the local magazines (business magazine, not camera-related) reported in an earlier articles that the capacity in the new factory will be tapped for the production of 5DII, which is slated to begin somewhere in mid-2012.

Now that there's a rumor about an entry-level FF camera, the earlier report would make much more sense. Why shift production of an old product to a new overseas plant which specialize in making lower-end product such as 1100D, 600D, and entry-level EF-s glasses?

So I guess "entry-level" and "full frame" might be Canon's answer to the m43 boom. Indeed, that would make more sense for consumers to carry a 600D-size/price DSLR if it yields high quality pictures. 

Now what remains to be seen is the price...


----------



## Hillsilly (Sep 19, 2011)

Six to Seven years ago, everyone was talking about the demise of crop bodied cameras. People were very optimistic that the cost of producing sensors would continually fall and that FF cameras would become a lot more affordable. Maybe Canon have developed some manufacturing efficiencies (or benefits from increasing volume) and this is the start of that? Maybe its time to start offloading EF-S lenses onto "non-CR" people?

In any case, as long as it had some weather sealing and at least 5fps, I'd be very interested in a bare bones 5Diii at the right price (approx $1800-$2000). As the price increases above that point, the little man inside my head will probably start saying "its only a little bit extra to get something a lot better". Hopefully, by then, rumours of a "much improved" 5Div might start surfacing and I can hold onto my money for a few more years.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 19, 2011)

> If they really would want to do something like this, it would be far simpler to lower prices on the 5DII, keeping it current alongside a new, and much more expensive 5DIII



That's the most rational comment on this thread. (Faint praise, I suppose, given some of the bizarre comments this rumor is prompting, but it is meant as a compliment.)


----------



## Dave (Sep 19, 2011)

> Well, I don't need a new entry level FF camera and I don't see it coming. This rumor doesn't make sens at all. FF DSLR system is


If you have video in mind a cheap (and no manufacturer can afford to ignore video) FF cam makes a lot of sense. 

If I were canon and wanted to release an "entry level FF cam":
- pricing around the 60D
- plastic body
- a comparably low resolution like 12 MP or so
- low shutter speed
- digital viewfinder
- features on the level of a 600D...
- but optimized for video with some nice feature that no other cam has at the moment
- a new EF mega-zoom Kit lense (18-2xx mm) 

Because of the low resolution and an electronic VF (time is not ready yet for a pro EVIL cam) it would neither be in competition to the other pro cams like 5D nor the low-end cams (1100D 600D 60D). 
But for video you don't need a hight resolution. 

Imo this kind of "hybrid" cams would sell like hot cakes. 
Everybody would be happy:
- canon has satisfied the market: "Yes we have an EVIL cam!" (and Canon really NEEDS an EVIL cam)
- the photo freaks are happy since they can keep their optical viewfinder
- the pros are happy since the new XD would compete their FF cams


----------



## Dave (Sep 19, 2011)

> If they really would want to do something like this, it would be far simpler to lower prices on the 5DII, keeping it current alongside a new, and much more expensive 5DIII



This wouldn't work, because the 5D is still too superior to lower the price significantly. Many pro users would be quite pi**ed off.
I guess Canon wants to enter a new market (and as said before this market probably has something to do with video). 
The art of selling a new line is to take a way some features to keep old customers happy and to invent some new features to low price to get new customers.

regards, Dave


----------



## J. McCabe (Sep 19, 2011)

Hillsilly said:


> Six to Seven years ago, everyone was talking about the demise of crop bodied cameras. People were very optimistic that the cost of producing sensors would continually fall and that FF cameras would become a lot more affordable. Maybe Canon have developed some manufacturing efficiencies (or benefits from increasing volume) and this is the start of that? Maybe its time to start offloading EF-S lenses onto "non-CR" people?



If those expectations / optimism was based on the assumption that sensors prices would go the way of microprocessor prices, I think misses two points.

First, computers sell much better than DSLRs / cameras with large sensors (in contrast to cameras with stamp size sensors). E.g. it makes sense for software companies to sell certain softwares (e.g. certain anti-viruses and office) with three licenses, because many households have that many computers. DSLRs aren't that popular, and if there are two or more DSLRs in a single household, chance are it's because someone uses them to make a living.

Second is cameras with large sensors are in a luxury / 'pro equipment' category, while similarily priced computers are in a household category. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if they would be priced as such, regardless of production cost.


----------



## ecka (Sep 19, 2011)

Rocky said:


> Canon do not have any Mirror less interchangeble lens camera Now. People in this forum are asking for FF low cost mirrorless system from Canon. That sound like they want Canon to run before Canon can walk. I hope that people can understand that there is only ONE mirrorless FF camera in the world. That is the Leica M9 and it is very expensive for both the body and the lenses. One of the biggest issue (at least for me) is the slow focusing speed of mirrorless camera (about 0.4 second, like any P& S). M9 get fast shooting speed by using manual focusing (no auto focusing). How many EOS DSLR user knows how to use ZONE Focusing?? Canon has been doing Leica copy from the 1930's until 1960's. They definitely have the know how. How ever for them to resurect it. It will not be cheap.
> I am for a good mirrorless system with auto focusing speed comparable to DSLR. I will even settle for APS-C sensor with good manual focusing lens (or it will comes with Leica M ount or vis adapter).


I'm afraid that Leica is expensive just because it's a Leica. The M9 has more voodoo magic than modern technology in it (joking ). The fact that most people can't afford Leica M9 is making it somewhat special already. IMHO, luxury is all about unique and overpriced products. If only Sigma had made a mirrorless camera using SD1 sensor in it, then it would be a much more desirable product than SD1, even if it was over $3000. I'm not talking about the "living in your pocket" mirrorless concept nonsense, but a nice and comfortable size body which could accept any brand lenses via adapter and (hopefully) retain the AF and aperture control. Is it too much to ask? :


----------



## ecka (Sep 19, 2011)

Dave said:


> > Well, I don't need a new entry level FF camera and I don't see it coming. This rumor doesn't make sens at all. FF DSLR system is
> 
> 
> If you have video in mind a cheap (and no manufacturer can afford to ignore video) FF cam makes a lot of sense.
> ...


Then why not making a FF camcorder and skip messing with the whole DSLR thing? IMHO, FF mirrorless makes a lot more sense than "cheap" FF DSLR, specially for videos, because you don't need a mirror for that at all and it would be much easier to adapt ANY lens you want. The next important thing is that mirrorless is cheaper to produce - no mirror-box, no OVF, no PDAF etc.


----------



## Rocky (Sep 19, 2011)

ecka said:


> Rocky said:
> 
> 
> > Canon do not have any Mirror less interchangeble lens camera Now. People in this forum are asking for FF low cost mirrorless system from Canon. That sound like they want Canon to run before Canon can walk. I hope that people can understand that there is only ONE mirrorless FF camera in the world. That is the Leica M9 and it is very expensive for both the body and the lenses. One of the biggest issue (at least for me) is the slow focusing speed of mirrorless camera (about 0.4 second, like any P& S). M9 get fast shooting speed by using manual focusing (no auto focusing). How many EOS DSLR user knows how to use ZONE Focusing?? Canon has been doing Leica copy from the 1930's until 1960's. They definitely have the know how. How ever for them to resurect it. It will not be cheap.
> ...


Leica is expensive due to its quality and uniqueness. If you put a M9 or any M series camera in you hand and try to handle it, you will feel the quality immediately. The coupled range finder/view finder combination is an optical marvel. The focusing of the lenses (All leica lenses) coupling back to the range finder in the body is not an easy task either. All Leica lenses (at least the older ones) are brass construction with supurb optics. These are what make Leica expensive and unique. Also Leica is built to last. I have a M4 as my work horse until I went digital. It served me 40 years without the need to repair. 
As you want a mirrorless FF that can use any brand of lens and retain the auto focus and aprture control. You are really asking too much. As far as I know, there is no such adapter exist. You might have seen adapter being advertised. If you look close enough, you will find that they only allow you to mount the lens on the body, no aperture control or auto focus.


----------



## ecka (Sep 20, 2011)

Rocky said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > Rocky said:
> ...


Well, yes, Leica products are nicely built, you can feel the quality. Also you can feel how slow it is. I hope Leica will borrow some processing power from their partners (Panasonic?) and put it into the next M. I really can't justify spending $7k-8k on that nice old looking camera with a retro technology inside. Leica lenses are beautiful, solid combination of metal and glass. For the price, their optics should be near flawless (or at least superior to anything else), but they are not.
Now, about the adapter thing. Everything is possible and they do exist. Sony is successfully adapting their DSLR lenses for the NEX mirrorless while retaining AF and aperture control. I believe the same works for m4/3. If you'll search for it on the web, you can even find some EF-NEX adapter prototype videos. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FY1Nm6ZDWJs Sigma is a famous third party DSLR lenses manufacturer for a long time, and I don't think they would have much problems producing adapters and electronics compatible with other brand AF/aperture/IS/VR systems.


----------



## Rocky (Sep 20, 2011)

ecka said:


> Well, yes, Leica products are nicely built, you can feel the quality. Also you can feel how slow it is.


M9 is slow in frame rate and NO auto focusing. Agree. However the delay between shutter button to be pushed and picture actually being taken is faster than most DSLR if it is used the right way. The adpapter you quoted from the Utube is just a proto type, the lens cannot even being mounted on the camera. Sony can make adapter for its DSLR lens to be used on the NEX body. It is all in the family. You did ask fro " use with any brand of lens with aperture control and auto focusing". It does not exist yet. 
Do not get me wrong, I am not defending the high price of M9. I am just pointing out the virtue of M9 and its lenses. Camera is a very subjective personal choice. Otherwise there will only be one brand and one model left (the best that every body will agreed on)


----------



## Dave (Sep 21, 2011)

> Then why not making a FF camcorder and skip messing with the whole DSLR thing?


Because people don't want two different devices doing actually the same. We are living in the digital age. To distinguish between video camera and photo camera has just historical reasons.


----------



## Mark D5 TEAM II (Sep 22, 2011)

Price it south of US$1500 and I won't care if it had last-gen electronics, it would be as revolutionary as the 300D.


----------



## koolman (Sep 22, 2011)

With all the new bodies, advancements, and systems pouring into the market, it would make allot of sense for canon to provide an affordable FF body - with a ~$1,500 price tag. This will open the market to many enthusiasts (like myself) who want the high end of IQ - but are not going to pay thousands of $$ on a body - that with the fast moving market - might be somewhat obsolete in less then 18 months.

This would also prompt enthusiasts to invest in L lenses which are geared for FF.


----------



## ecka (Sep 22, 2011)

Dave said:


> > Then why not making a FF camcorder and skip messing with the whole DSLR thing?
> 
> 
> Because people don't want two different devices doing actually the same. We are living in the digital age. To distinguish between video camera and photo camera has just historical reasons.


IMHO, those who don't understand that all-in-one isn't actually the best in anything, are not buying FF cameras in first place. There are many reasons why 5D2 just can't do the same thing FF camcorder would.


----------



## moreorless (Sep 25, 2011)

ecka said:


> Then why not making a FF camcorder and skip messing with the whole DSLR thing? IMHO, FF mirrorless makes a lot more sense than "cheap" FF DSLR, specially for videos, because you don't need a mirror for that at all and it would be much easier to adapt ANY lens you want. The next important thing is that mirrorless is cheaper to produce - no mirror-box, no OVF, no PDAF etc.



The obvious problem is that to really exploit the mirrorless small size Canon would need to come up with a new range of lenses. A rangefinder with a few primes(say 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 100mm macro, 135mm) I could see but a whole new range of lenses seems unlikely to me.

If anything happens I'd say that going by Canon's current lineup its likely a cheap FF DSLR would be more likely to be held back by AF than megapixels, perhaps with no video aswell if Canon are looking to market an EF video cam.


----------



## ecka (Sep 25, 2011)

moreorless said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > Then why not making a FF camcorder and skip messing with the whole DSLR thing? IMHO, FF mirrorless makes a lot more sense than "cheap" FF DSLR, specially for videos, because you don't need a mirror for that at all and it would be much easier to adapt ANY lens you want. The next important thing is that mirrorless is cheaper to produce - no mirror-box, no OVF, no PDAF etc.
> ...



Well, I don't need small size FF mirrorless and I hope Canon won't make any. I want a normal size FF mirrorless with all the buttons and dials, vari-angle LCD, comfortable grip with a big and powerful battery inside, wireless flash control + a bunch of adapters for using any lens available. It is as simple as that ;D


----------



## YoukY63 (Sep 25, 2011)

Why do you want it mirrorless? Have you ever watched in one of these EVF?
I tested the best actual EVF this week (NEXN EVF, the same than alpha77): it still lags far far behind a good FF OVF! 8)
Colors are so so, dynamic is very poor, and when you move the image get blurry (I get 60fps is not enough, or processing is too weak).
Today I tested the hybrid OVF/EVF from the Fuji X100. It is already much more interesting and appealing.


----------



## ecka (Sep 25, 2011)

YoukY63 said:


> Why do you want it mirrorless? Have you ever watched in one of these EVF?
> I tested the best actual EVF this week (NEXN EVF, the same than alpha77): it still lags far far behind a good FF OVF! 8)
> Colors are so so, dynamic is very poor, and when you move the image get blurry (I get 60fps is not enough, or processing is too weak).
> Today I tested the hybrid OVF/EVF from the Fuji X100. It is already much more interesting and appealing.


I want it mirrorless mostly because of the lower price and lens adapting ability. I prefer OVF over EVF too, but I could live without any of the two. Manual focus optimized LiveView would be enough for me, for what I usually shoot. It won't be a camera for sports anyways, but if you do need a view finder then you could use something like Zacuto Z-Finder. IMHO, problem solved.


----------



## marginwalker (Oct 4, 2011)

I'm a college student, and right now the only way I'd be able to afford a 5dmkii plus a couple good L lenses would be to take some more money out of my student loans. So a FF priced about the same as a 7d would be awesome!


----------



## moreorless (Oct 4, 2011)

koolman said:


> With all the new bodies, advancements, and systems pouring into the market, it would make allot of sense for canon to provide an affordable FF body - with a ~$1,500 price tag. This will open the market to many enthusiasts (like myself) who want the high end of IQ - but are not going to pay thousands of $$ on a body - that with the fast moving market - might be somewhat obsolete in less then 18 months.
> 
> This would also prompt enthusiasts to invest in L lenses which are geared for FF.



I'd add that it could also potentially change the nature of the FF market bringing it closer to Canons crop setup.

Something like....

$1500-2000 - New entry level with old 5D mk2 sensor and new processor.

$3000-4000 - 5D mk3 with new FF sensor, new processor and 7D AF.

$7000-8000 - Flagship with new sensor and duel processor.

Much more room for users to potentially upgrade though the models that way.


----------



## Alexiumz (Oct 8, 2011)

I'm just wishing for a full frame flip screen. Please?


----------



## KittenMittens (Oct 8, 2011)

I really hope this is true. I bought a used D60 about two years ago as my first DSLR, but the AF on it is terrible especially in low light and I primarily shoot indoors. I've been itching for a full frame camera and if it's focused on ISO performance over MP and is somewhat affordable I'm all over it. I'll just have to find out who to steal money from. ;D


----------



## smartin53 (Oct 10, 2011)

You know, one thing people forget is just because the 5D exists today, doesn't mean it has to exist tomorrow. Maybe canon could split the 5D features somewhat. Move the best features from the 5D and move them up to a 3D with more functions from the 1Ds. Then create a 6D/65D with less features. I would go the 65D route because then you could justify a plastic body. I would also hope that they would keep the MP down on both this round and focus on light sensitivity. My 7D does well, but a 12-16 MP Full Frame could potentially murder the market for noise free high iso pics. 3D would get the dual Digic setup, 6D/65D would get single.


----------

