# If Canon made a " truly ultimate" DSLR body for, say, $10k would you buy it?



## LovePhotography (Oct 27, 2014)

And by that, I mean a DSLR that is as good as good can get for 2015....
And, by "truly ultimate" I mean by whatever floats your boat that is realistic.
No, "Yes, if they added....." The definition of "ultimate" is your definition, not mine...


----------



## meywd (Oct 27, 2014)

not enough cash ;D


----------



## Jim Saunders (Oct 27, 2014)

Well now, is this a question of what I expect for 10 large or what Canon would sell for that much? The two are most likely different.

Jim


----------



## Canon1 (Oct 27, 2014)

I already have the ultimate camera in my 5d3. Does everything I need it to do and then some. Will be adding a 7d2 soon and hoping it will also impress. 

For me the glass is more important... And the experience out in the field trumps both.


----------



## tculotta (Oct 28, 2014)

That's way too much for a body for what I'm seeking. I expect that Canon will be offering everything I want by early 2015 - a high MP FF sensor with ~8-10 FPS. It'll probably retail for $3,500-$4,000.


----------



## jdramirez (Oct 28, 2014)

I've mulled over buying the 1dx... so cost isn't that much of an issue... but I'm really happy with my 5D mkiii... really happy with it. Sure there could be better... but I'm a happy camper.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 28, 2014)

Yes, only if it can transform from DSLR to mirrorless at a push of a button... :

Otherwise, my crappy 1DX does quite in all situations


----------



## neuroanatomist (Oct 28, 2014)

I already bought it, it cost $6799.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Oct 28, 2014)

For $10K I'm thinking medium format... current Pentax 645Z is "just" $8,500.

Realistically I suspect the manufacturers of 135 sensor size cameras are going to struggle to push prices much above current levels even as the technology improves. Cameras, sensors, processors, etc. are getting better and better but the improvements, nice as they are, are not huge and their added value is significant to a declining population (i.e more people are finding current technology is "good enough" for longer periods of time). The technology is maturing. In many ways we are approaching a replacement market - people only buying because their current camera has worn-out/broken.

I'm sure lots of folks will grab the new 5DIV when it arrives; but I doubt it will be a majority of current 5DIII owners - at least not in the first couple years. Many (certainly not all) 5DIII owners are satisfied with what the have and will remain so for 3-5 years. Ditto for the 1DX.


----------



## tcmatthews (Oct 28, 2014)

I will wait until the technology trickles down to a more reasonable price. For me the 5D III is over priced. It looked like the price was going to get to a more reasonable then ML came out with the RAW video and the price skyrocket back up to list. 

No I will buy a used 5D III or more likely a 6D II or III with most of the features of the 5D III.


----------



## tolusina (Oct 28, 2014)

old-pr-pix said:


> For $10K I'm thinking medium format... current Pentax 645Z is "just" $8,500.....


The Z has my attention. 
What's it missing and what flash system to switch to that can be radio controlled by Pentax, Canon or whatever?


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 28, 2014)

I voted no, not because I wouldn't, but because my personal ultimate camera would be the 1DX MkII if it has >20MP, and that won't cost $10,000. 

I have said since I went digital that when they make a digital camera that can replace my 1VHS's I have died and gone to heaven, I believe that is a 24MP, 10fps, full frame, best AF and metering 1 series body.

For me the 1DX MkII is the most important announcement for many years, if it comes next year and hits my personal bullet points I am a very happy camper, if it doesn't I will have to look at options, my 1Ds MkIII's really are showing their age! Maybe I'd have to go 5D MkIII's or IV's, but I can't wait too much longer.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 28, 2014)

tolusina said:


> old-pr-pix said:
> 
> 
> > For $10K I'm thinking medium format... current Pentax 645Z is "just" $8,500.....
> ...



Put your Canon flashes on Phottix Odin II's.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Oct 28, 2014)

I have no claim to a "final" camera. But I imagine this thing would have to be modular as medium format cameras: 


Chassis. 
Back digital with several options for sensor 18 MP (low ligth) until 50MP (landscape). 
LCD and viewfinder interchangeable, in different sizes to choose from. 

Something similar to Mamya or Phase One.


----------



## dash2k8 (Oct 28, 2014)

10K? No way. A 135 format DSLR should not cost 10K. For that price I'd expect at least medium format. If in fact any camera maker made a body so feature-rich that the 10K price tag is justified, it means the camera will have 150 advanced functions that will be useless to me. 200fps? Max ISO at 1,000,000? DR of 100 stops? Ultimate, but totally useless.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 28, 2014)

LovePhotography said:


> And by that, I mean a DSLR that is as good as good can get for 2015....
> And, by "truly ultimate" I mean by whatever floats your boat that is realistic.
> No, "Yes, if they added....." The definition of "ultimate" is your definition, not mine...


 
I also voted no. The question is vague and I already have the best camera I can afford. I have no idea as to what is possible to cram into a 10k camera, but not likely anything I'd want to pay for. I think that what I need can be sold for $2500. Camera bodies come and go, but good glass can be used for 20 years or more.


----------



## gsealy (Oct 28, 2014)

The 1DC was fairly close to the ultimate DSLR when it came out, and it was around $10K. I didn't buy it. The thing is that for me there were alternatives that were much less expensive and they fit my needs. I believe that will always be the case, and we will see technology continue to advance. Companies on a big budget can spend the big bucks or subcontract out specialized work.


----------



## Halfrack (Oct 28, 2014)

For Canon to hit $10k for a body would be a huge reach. It would have to work amazing with all the second gen L glass we have already (300/2.8 L IS II, 24-70 2.8L II, etc), not require yet another outlay for 3rd gen L glass.

Canon's power is in leveraging what they already have, not creating a whole new system. The Pentax 645Z has my attention due to multiple factors, one being the existing crop of lenses that work with it.


----------



## eml58 (Oct 28, 2014)

Well I feel the word "ultimate" throws a bit of the impossible into the vote game, today's "ultimate" is generally tomorrow's also ran.

But, when Canon (note "when") develop & bring to Market a 1D body, 50MP Sensor, 8 fps, built in WiFi, +65 focus points etc etc, I'm on board in a New York second, hopefully that 50 MP sensor will have all the attributes of the current Sony 50 MP sensor.

Considering the 645z has most of these points, but lacks some, and sells for $8,500 I'de hazard a guess that Canon may bring this Body to Market at the 8k to 10k point, which would work very well for me, I can flick the 5DMK III which other than the focus system I feel hasn't been much of an upgrade over the 5DMK II, completely bin my 1Ds MK III & coupled with the 1Dx II (not a lot wrong with the 1Dx, but the 1Dx II has to be better, right ??), then I'm in the happy happy camper group.

For a year or two at least, but still waiting for that "ultimate" camera, which is a bit like that Unicorn of Nuero's, or the well hung squirrel of Sporgon's, don't see too many.


----------



## jrista (Oct 28, 2014)

Nope. $10k for a DSLR, regardless what it does, is utterly ludicrous. I'd NEVER pay that much, not even if money was no object. If I was to spend that kind of money, it would need to be something with a much larger sensor than 35mm FF. For $10k, I would really expect, these days, to get a full 55x44mm sensor in an MFD with an excellent selection of lenses, and the option for interchangeable backs. You can already get a 44x33mm sensor MFD for as little as $8k.


----------



## RichM (Oct 28, 2014)

jrista said:


> Nope. $10k for a DSLR, regardless what it does, is utterly ludicrous.



I agree.... if I did a lot of studio work, perhaps a great MF camera, but that can be had for less than $10k. I'm happy with my 5d3, am looking forward to replacing my 7d with the 7d2. But the rest of my $$s would continue to go to glass.


----------



## dadgummit (Oct 28, 2014)

Honestly, the 5D3 is everything I need and much more. I have captured many wodnderful memories and I do not think they would be any better with more megapixels or more dynamic range. It has an excellent af system and I am very happy with the low light noise.


----------



## TexPhoto (Oct 28, 2014)

This is like buying an 18K gold cell phone. What do 2 years later when the next one comes out?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 28, 2014)

I had a Crop DSLR that sold for $35,500 new! It was truly the ultimate camera for 1995, 6MP and it shot raw images as well.

It was 10 years old when I bought it for $100, and it was still going. Unless a camera is going to make a lot of $$$ for you, its a sucker bet.


----------



## Jane (Oct 28, 2014)

No - technology changes too fast.


----------



## captainkanji (Oct 28, 2014)

It would have to have one hell of a kit lens. Say a 1DX with 200 f/2.


----------



## Bennymiata (Oct 28, 2014)

For 10K, it would have to be medium format.
To me, the 1Ds are just too big and too heavy for just a 35mm sensor.

I love my 5D3, as do so many others here, and it does everything I've ever asked of it, and believe me, I do a wide range of photography.

For 10K, a body would be able to turn up to the photos jobs itself and do the job without me.


----------



## privatebydesign (Oct 28, 2014)

The point many of you seem to be missing is product maturity, the phones are a great example, they are getting bigger again now.

The old DCS was never able to print to the sizes we can now with the colour depth and DR levels, we are already at diminishing returns, as for form factor, I don't want a smaller camera than the 1 series, lighter would be nice, but not smaller, I like mirrors, etc etc.

If the camera in our minds, the OP's "truly ultimate" model, can more than produce the output we want and need how much does it matter that a newer better model might come out in five years? My seven year old cameras takes images that pay for my lifestyle every single day, I clearly don't 'need' more than that, it will be nice when I get it, and I will use it to take images I can't at the moment, but when I get the ability to shoot at 10,000 iso I really won't care when somebody else can shoot at 15,000 iso a year or two later, 10,000 is well outside the range that I will need, same with DR, colour depth, fps AF etc etc etc. When more than enough has been easily surpassed we are just into a pissing contest, and I don't need that.


----------



## zlatko (Oct 28, 2014)

I voted no because the 5d3 and 6d already do everything I need and at a much lower price. I'd like to see future versions of these that are smaller & lighter.


----------



## dgatwood (Oct 28, 2014)

At $5k, maybe. Probably not at $10k. And for me to pay that much, it would have to be truly ultimate. Here's an idea of what ultimate means to me....

*Image sensor features:*

Full-frame sensor
52 MP (same pixel density as 7D Mark II)
Ideally, a stacked sensor, but not if that requires giving up DPAF
10 FPS or faster

*Focusing system features:*

61-point AF similar to 1DX, plus:
Eye tracking
DPAF with automatic AFMA support
Optional exposure/color-balance-follows-focus mode

*Other still shooting features:*

Continuously variable shooting speed controlled by button-press depth (with manual override lock)
Crop mode w/ hybrid viewfinder masking to allow you to treat it like a 7D Mark II, resolution and all
Compatibility with EF-S lenses using a slide-flip mirror system that activates in the presence of an EF-S lens, for when you want to travel light

*Video features:*

8K 4:2:2 and 4K 4:4:4 video support in addition to existing modes
Continuous autofocus with variable focus pull speeds
Clean Mini-DisplayPort (v1.3) to allow 8K output (either instead of HDMI, or in addition to HDMI)
Digital audio I/O through battery compartment contacts to allow attachment of a four-channel XLR input grip for when you're actually serious....

*Communication/sensor features:*

World-band LTE
Wi-Fi
GPS (w/ aGPS when cellular or Wi-Fi is available)
Digital compass
High-resolution 6-axis accelerometer/gyroscope with precise data recorded in EXIF
Bluetooth LE and NFC support for rapid tethering to iOS and Android devices

*Miscellaneous software features*

Running Android or iOS, with the ability to add arbitrary apps
Camera control SDK, allowing third-party apps to fully control the hardware

*Miscellaneous hardware features:*

Dual SD slots with full support for UHS-II at maximum speed (faster than CF) to allow continuous RAW shooting at the slower 4 FPS speed with backups, or 8 FPS when alternating between the two slots
64 GB of internal flash storage for apps, also usable for photo storage, enabling continuous RAW shooting at the full 10 FPS when combined with two UHS-II flash cards
Thunderbolt support through Mini-DisplayPort connection, w/ gigabit Ethernet dongle support
Pop-up flash for use in a pinch


Do that, and you have my attention. That, folks, is what innovation looks like. Anything less, and you're nowhere near the limits of what is practical with today's technology. Quit holding back.


----------



## Eldar (Oct 28, 2014)

I have some difficulty seeing what Canon could pack into a camera to justify a $10k price tag. However, if its focus is video, I’ll pass. If it is photography I would be interested. 50MP max resolution, with lower resolution modes, evolutionary improvements to the 1DX functionality, improved high ISO performance, improved DR (sorry, it just slipped out), I also expect to see DPAF, wifi (did not think I would say that, but I see the value) and GPS. But to justify $10k it would have to contain something more jaw dropping than that.

I’m not even in the neighbourhood of having the skills, nor the need, to justify a $10k camera. However, I have glass for a lot more, so from that perspective it would improve the balance. And, being sufficiently old and with a hard earned self-knowledge, I am aware of my weak character and how easily I’m tempted by the latest and greatest, so I voted yes …


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 28, 2014)

$10K on a camera body is way outside my budget, simple as that. As I'm more interested in portraiture I don't need anything faster or more complex than a D810. Why would a Canon equivalent to the D810 cost anything close to 10K?


----------



## albron00 (Oct 28, 2014)

No


----------



## ChristopherMarkPerez (Oct 28, 2014)

So... what would this Miracle Camera do for me that my present equipment can't? Make me rich? Make me famous?

I can't imagine Canon having the cachet of Leica or Zeiss. Leica and Zeiss are just "bling". They can get away with charging ridiculous prices for things that are not demonstrably better than anything made by Nikon or Canon. Canon can't/shouldn't play that game.


----------



## DominoDude (Oct 28, 2014)

Most women, wine, and lenses age in a well-behaved way. Men and camera bodies don't...
So for that kind of a price the ultimate Canon would have to be of a more flexible, perhaps, modular design - an insurance that the body would be able to live on for a long time.
I earn quite a decent salary when I work, but at $10,000 it would still be a number of months net income, and would be incredibly hard to justify for a hobby. I have to say no.


----------



## Helios68 (Oct 28, 2014)

I would definitely buy it for $3000 or 2400€ max.

Canon 6D mkII as a mix of 70D and 6D would be ultimate enough lol ;D


----------



## Antono Refa (Oct 28, 2014)

My answer is no for three reasons:

1. I can't pay $10K for a camera.

My father would say the rest is just excuses, but still...

2. I bought a 5DmkIII, which is expensive to begin with. Add the features I'd like, e.g. sensor with better IQ, and the added value wouldn't push it across the $5K line.

3. As others have noted, for $10K one can get a medium format camera with lots of cash to spare. That sum is just above the price range for a 35mm camera.


----------



## Sabaki (Oct 28, 2014)

Perhaps the question should have been, what would you pay for an all singing, occasionally rapping, all dancing DSLR that is the ultimate in every single aspect.

Well, considering the 1DX is about $7000, we need to ask, where does it fall short for genres such as portraiture, landscapes and the like and ball park how much, in dollar value, that would add to the entire price?


----------



## Maiaibing (Oct 28, 2014)

Never.

But would spend 10K on the ultimate lens...


----------



## pedro (Oct 28, 2014)

Are you, BTW, doing some sort of undercover Marketing Research for Canon? Don't take it personal, just came to my mind ;-)


----------



## tron (Oct 28, 2014)

dash2k8 said:


> 10K? No way. A 135 format DSLR should not cost 10K. For that price I'd expect at least medium format. If in fact any camera maker made a body so feature-rich that the 10K price tag is justified, it means the camera will have 150 advanced functions that will be useless to me. 200fps? Max ISO at 1,000,000? DR of 100 stops? Ultimate, but totally useless.


MMMM, if Max ISO 1,000,000 means a super clean 25,000 or even better 50,000 and if DR was 25 stops (not necessary 100) then that would be a camera to pay for 8) 

P.S 10 fps would be enough too.


----------



## Antono Refa (Oct 28, 2014)

Sabaki said:


> Perhaps the question should have been, what would you pay for an all singing, occasionally rapping, all dancing DSLR that is the ultimate in every single aspect.
> 
> Well, considering the 1DX is about $7000, we need to ask, where does it fall short for genres such as portraiture, landscapes and the like and ball park how much, in dollar value, that would add to the entire price?



What *I* would consider an all singing all dancing DSLR would *not* have some of the 1DX's features, e.g. ability to shoot 12 fps and integrated grip. I need neither and would rather not pay for those, which is why I preferred to buy a 5Dmk3.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Oct 28, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> Never.
> 
> But would spend 10K on the ultimate lens...



There's the answer.

No way I would spend 10K on a body. Even if Canon made a custom model just for me with everything I want and nothing I don't want, I would not pay 10K. That is too much for a body. 

But for a lens that is ultimate for me? 10K might be workable. 

I will have to talk to the Sigma people LoL


----------



## Bob Howland (Oct 28, 2014)

Not unless it allows me to do something that would make me lots of money and that I can't do for cheaper another way. Besides, the ultimate camera in 2015 is mediocre in 2017.


----------



## Corvi (Oct 28, 2014)

Id pay 10k for a camera that has the exact same color rendition and dynamics of Kodak Portra 400, Ektar 100 and TriX400.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Oct 28, 2014)

LovePhotography said:


> And by that, I mean a DSLR that is as good as good can get for 2015....
> And, by "truly ultimate" I mean by whatever floats your boat that is realistic.
> No, "Yes, if they added....." The definition of "ultimate" is your definition, not mine...



Easy answer is no


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 28, 2014)

So Canon introduces the "ultimate" DSLR for $10,000....

It scores poorly on DXO 

2 months later Nikon introduces a DSLR that is even better....

next year Sony improves it again, but for only $6000....

Apple claims that the iPhone17 takes better pictures....

Then Canon releases the Ultimate "Ultimate DSLR" for only $12,000....

and the cycle starts again....

Meanwhile, my 10 year old camera still takes great pictures....


----------



## gsealy (Oct 28, 2014)

ChristopherMarkPerez said:


> So... what would this Miracle Camera do for me that my present equipment can't? Make me rich? Make me famous?
> 
> I can't imagine Canon having the cachet of Leica or Zeiss. Leica and Zeiss are just "bling". They can get away with charging ridiculous prices for things that are not demonstrably better than anything made by Nikon or Canon. Canon can't/shouldn't play that game.



Cameras, maybe so. Lens are different story. The Zeiss 85mm Otus is demonstrably better than anything made by Canon.


----------



## kubelik (Oct 28, 2014)

the only thing I'd do differently about the 5D Mark III would be to have it be able to morph into the LX100 or G7X at the push of a button for when I don't feel like hauling around the weight or when the DSLR form is too obtrusive. Given that I can just purchase one of those for under $1K, and my 5DIII cost about $2K after trading in my 5DII, I see no reason to spend $10K on a supercamera.

Would I get dramatically better photos if the high-ISO IQ were doubled? focus speed was doubled? frame rate was doubled? nope. Whatever shots I'm not getting now, I probably still wouldn't get then, because I'm fairly confident the capabilities of the 5DIII as a camera exceed my capabilities as a photographer.


----------



## LovePhotography (Oct 28, 2014)

For me, the easy answer is "YES". I just spent $6000 on a single lens that only shoots a ONE focal length (one I'd use pretty rarely in the greater scheme of things (maybe 10% of the time?)- 300mm). And, I have spent $1000's overall on lenses from 8mm to 800mm (with extenders). If I could buy the "ultimate DSLR" for up to $10,000 I'd do it. And I'd keep it forever, never needing to buy another one (until 3D or holographic becomes the standard, or whatever). I wouldn't care what comes out next year. One purchase, essentially perfect focus, high speed fps, limitless IQ, that's easy. People often spend way more than that on Hasselblad or Red, without nearly as many superb lens options. And, while they are medium format, if you have the "Ultimate DSLR", you've got one helluva sensor in your camera. You only get one chance to capture a once in a lifetime image- whether it be graduation, birth of your grandchild, the meteor striking Mars, your kid's wedding, or just that picture of your family at Christmas.


----------



## LDS (Oct 28, 2014)

If I were a pro and it could really give an advantage over the competition for its foreseeable lifetime while it repays the expense and returns a real profit? Yes. Even at an higher price, if the profit is ok. For a pro, is a matter of ROI.

But I'm not a pro, I am not overly rich, and I have no reason to invest so much money for just a body in an already expensive hobby. So the answer is no. 

It's the classic "one size DOESN'T fit all". Otherwise there won't be so many devices on the market at different price points. Not everybody wants, wish, or simpy can - afford the best of the best at a give price point.


----------



## Zv (Oct 28, 2014)

If I was a billionaire with $10k to burn then yeah I might but right now the answer is no. My limit on a camera body is probably $2k maybe stretch that to $3k if I was earning more money from photography. 

I tried to do a rough calculation one sleepless night of how much my gear is worth now and I'd say close to or just under $10k including everything from lenses to camera bags and all the crap in between. No wonder I couldn't sleep! Yikes!


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 28, 2014)

For an unrealistic "ultimate" body, yes (over100 MP, no compromises), for something that we can expect to see announced any day now, I'll wait for the price to drop.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Oct 28, 2014)

Eldar said:


> I have some difficulty seeing what Canon could pack into a camera to justify a $10k price tag.



Accounting for inflation, didn't many of the 1Ds models cost that much?

Anyway, for me the answer is yes. The ultimate camera will be so revolutionary that every image I record earns me a dollar. At 50FPS, it will pay for itself post haste.

Also, it won't be full sized, but will ship with two detachable grips:
1) typical battery grip, and
2) memory grip compatible with two 2.5" solid state drives at SATA-express bandwidth.


----------



## tolusina (Oct 28, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> tolusina said:
> 
> 
> > old-pr-pix said:
> ...


I think I might be missing something here. Looking at Phottix' site, I don't see which components make nice with the 645Z.
Cactus looks like a cross make compatible system that can effectively mimic the functionality of a ST-E3-RT/600EX-RT system plus more, but the prices are so low I'm wary of getting what I pay for.
Cactus linky


----------



## Lurker (Oct 28, 2014)

Such a camera cannot exist for me, "truly ultimate" and $10k are mutually exclusive.


----------



## old-pr-pix (Oct 28, 2014)

Courtesy of RPL...

A common question for strobists who have a stack of 600rt's and want to use them on non-canon cameras wirelessly. A quick video of using a yongnuo STE-3 to gain the ability and also second curtain sync.

http://youtu.be/mEJYxnhUEMw

« Last Edit: October 04, 2014, 02:49:48 PM by RLPhoto »


----------



## Rick (Oct 28, 2014)

*If the sensor is Medium Format - maybe.*

$5k is my max limit for any 35mm format camera body.


----------



## BL (Oct 28, 2014)

Chasing after the "best" anything in the category of consumer electronics is like chasing after the wind.

Perhaps because I don't earn a dime from my hobby, ever dollar spent on camera gear really needs to come from disposable income. $10k is too deep for my pockets!


----------



## pedro (Oct 28, 2014)

*Re: If the sensor is Medium Format - maybe.*



Rick said:


> $5k is my max limit for any 35mm format camera body.


very wise move rick. mine is a 5D. Paid the premium 3.5k in August 2012, but I wanted to make those photographs at ISO 6400 which my trusty 30D couldn't do ;-) 3.5K to 4K max. And next time: i'll bite the bullet the year after release... As my only interest is better high ISOs. Regards, Peter


----------



## ppix (Oct 28, 2014)

As a working pro that makes a living off my tools (currently 1DX's), there are a couple of features that I'd spend a lot of money for. In my line of business, sellable images straight out of the camera is of paramount importance, and the following improvements would vastly improve the number of sellable images I could make:

#1: Auto white balance & auto exposure that works well under cycling sodium/mercury vapor lighting. The 7DII apparently makes a step in dealing with cycling lights on the auto exposure front. Currently cycling lights do horrific damage to IQ.
#2: Digital crop that would allow cropping into the sensor on the fly, similar or better than the Nikon D3/D4 can do.
#3: Better AF in poor lighting (the 1DX is awesome, but there's always room for improvement)

John


----------



## danski0224 (Oct 28, 2014)

I voted no, but considering that many of the 1D bodies were awfully close to $8k at release, $10k may not be much of a stretch.

Seems that high ISO usability and the interface have changed the most over the years. Good images taken today with a 2002 vintage 1D still look good. 

I bet that if Canon could merge the best of the 1DX with the best of the 1DsIII, many would pay the asking price.


----------



## jrista (Oct 29, 2014)

danski0224 said:


> I voted no, but considering that many of the 1D bodies were awfully close to $8k at release, $10k may not be much of a stretch.
> 
> Seems that high ISO usability and the interface have changed the most over the years. Good images taken today with a 2002 vintage 1D still look good.
> 
> I bet that if Canon could merge the best of the 1DX with the best of the 1DsIII, many would pay the asking price.




I think the biggest reason they were so expensive in the past was the cost of manufacturing the larger sensors. It used to be extremely expensive to manufacture a full frame sensor. That's also the reason MFD used to $60k and up in the past, instead of ~$10k or so. There is very little reason for DSLRs with FF sensors to be expensive anymore...manufacturing larger sensors is a lot more efficient (especially on 300mm wafers). I think a lot of the $6700 price premium of the 1D X is just the prestige of the line, and a more hand-crafted (or rather hand-assembled and optimally tested) touch.


----------



## preppyak (Oct 29, 2014)

The answer is easily no for me. I can own a 1DX and a 7dII right now and still have enough leftover for a few L lenses. If the $10k body came with a fixed 16-300 f/1.8 lens, then it'd do something the others couldn't. Otherwise, $10k is about double the max I could ever see a body being worth.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Oct 29, 2014)

ppix said:


> As a working pro that makes a living off my tools (currently 1DX's), there are a couple of features that I'd spend a lot of money for. ..
> #2: Digital crop that would allow cropping into the sensor on the fly, similar or better than the Nikon D3/D4 can do.



Interesting. May I ask why? It's a nice to have, maybe, but if that (software) functionality adds "a lot of money" to the cost of a body, I'd prefer to put that money into memory and crop in post.


----------



## wsmith96 (Oct 29, 2014)

I'd have to pass. In a year it would be worth $5000, then the next year $2500, then the next year $1800. I'm not necessarily an early adopter of large priced items. Besides, they'll obsolete the model with a rebel that has wifi, cellular data and quad pixel AF. Then the complaints will start right back up.

* disclaimer - of course, if it were making me significantly more money than what my previous camera would, that may change my mind.


----------



## Zv (Oct 29, 2014)

wsmith96 said:


> I'd have to pass. In a year it would be worth $5000, then the next year $2500, then the next year $1800. I'm not necessarily an early adopter of large priced items. Besides, they'll obsolete the model with a rebel that has wifi, cellular data and quad pixel AF. Then the complaints will start right back up.
> 
> * disclaimer - of course, if it were making me significantly more money than what my previous camera would, that may change my mind.



Really? Do you think of it would depreciate by that much? By that calculation the 1DX should be about $1500 right now on the used market. Damn why is this not on the front page! Deal alert!


----------



## tolusina (Oct 29, 2014)

old-pr-pix said:


> For $10K I'm thinking medium format... current Pentax 645Z is "just" $8,500.......


Handled a Z today briefly. 
It is gorgeous, it is a monster.
I do think it's hand holdable.
It's so massive and conspicuous I think it's just too outre for casual carry. 
Studio, weddings, planned shooting of any type, yes, casual use, nope.
I'm still wanting one, 6D and 40 will remain my carry around unit though.


----------



## candc (Oct 30, 2014)

No, Dslr's are dinasaurs with roots in the film days. The design made sense then but it doesn't now. Mirrorless is the way to go. It's good enough for everything except sports and wildlife now. I expect the 7dii is the last dslr I am going to buy.


----------



## jrista (Oct 30, 2014)

candc said:


> No, Dslr's are dinasaurs with roots in the film days. The design made sense then but it doesn't now. Mirrorless is the way to go. It's good enough for everything except sports and wildlife now. I expect the 7dii is the last dslr I am going to buy.




This is entirely a matter of preference. 


It's always been curious to me how mirrorless lovers just assume that everyone wants something uber-tiny, or to give up their OVF for an EVF, or what an electronic shutter, or anything like that. Personally, I think the DSLR form factor...it's size, shape, and ergonomics, are IDEAL for photography. Doesn't matter if I'm using a giant 600mm f/4 lens, or a tiny 50mm f/1.4 lens, either way, a larger DSLR fits my hands WAY better than a tiny mirrorless. And I speak from first hand experience, I spent the greater part of a week with the A7r recently. I love the IQ, however I really don't' like the body. It is just too compact. If I was casually shooting things on a vacation, the smaller form factor could be nice, especially with a compact lens, but the darn thing just does not fit my hands.


I may eventually warm up to EVFs for some things, however even with the best of them on the market, they are still, IMHO, radically inferior to OVFs as far as responsiveness and detail and all that goes, and really need to come a LOOONG way before I think they could possibly be ready to actually, en-mass, replace OVFs.


For me, I'm part of the group that will stick with DSLR to the utter end. You can basically pry it from my cold dead hands...right along with my optical view finder...which is what die-hard "eliminate DSLRs, mirrorless for everything!" guys like you are literally going to have to do in your crusade to expunge the universe of what you personally, and IMO incorrectly, believe is an inferior camera design. I refuse to give up my DSLR, and I personally hope they stick around for the next, oh, forty years or so (depending on how long I live. )


----------



## candc (Oct 30, 2014)

I hear what your saying and I agree with a lot of it. I just think the deisign is over complicated for what it needs to do and will be replaced by mirrorless designs. Right now I am using a 6d and 70d I have a 7dii on order. When it comes time to replace the 6d I will likely get an a7 type camera, hopefully from canon if they get on the mirrorless ball. In a few years when I switch out the 7dii I reckon mirrorless will have progressed to the point where dslr's are obsolete.

I don't think mirrorless is better because it can be smaller, I think its better because its simpler, it's got a ways to go but its coming.

P.s. I was reading an article which about the new panosonic lumix which really got me thinking. It does 4k video grabs which are 8mp stills at 30fps I can see where that is going. Not that I want video but just think of full resolution bursts at that rate or higher.


----------



## jrista (Oct 30, 2014)

candc said:


> I hear what your saying and I agree with a lot of it. I just think the deisign is over complicated for what it needs to do and will be replaced by mirrorless designs. Right now I am using a 6d and 70d I have a 7dii on order. When it comes time to replace the 6d I will likely get an a7 type camera, hopefully from canon if they get on the mirrorless ball. In a few years when I switch out the 7dii I reckon mirrorless will have progressed to the point where dslr's are obsolete.
> 
> I don't think mirrorless is better because it can be smaller, I think its better because its simpler, it's got a ways to go but its coming.




How are you defining simpler, though? I've used the A7r, and while mechanically it lacks the mirror, outside of that it really isn't that much "simpler" of a camera to operate than a regular old DSLR. There are also some significant problems with the EVF that often present at the most inopportune times (such as severe EVF or LCD stutter).


There is significant value to be had with an OVF. I honestly do not believe that, regardless of how responsive EVFs get, that they will ever be as responsive as an OVF, and for some types of photography, that kind of instantaneous response is critical.


I see mirrorless and DSLR as different options, not one that will replace the other or one being better than the other (in the long run...mirrorless designs still have a lot of growing to do.) The other "complexity" of DSLRs, such as all the buttons and configurability, are IMHO their greatest STRENGTH. For the kind of action-centric photography I do most of the time, having as many buttons as possible to instantly access the majority of the critical camera functionality is HUGE to being able to effectively use the camera in difficult situations. There is some programmability to the A7r, however it's smaller body size (which is pretty endemic to mirrorless designs so far) doesn't leave much room for having lots of buttons that give instant access to important functionality. The larger, more "complex" bodies of DSLRs offer plenty of room for buttons and dials...it's their strength, not their weakness.


----------



## sdsr (Oct 30, 2014)

jrista said:


> It's always been curious to me how mirrorless lovers just assume that everyone wants something uber-tiny, or to give up their OVF for an EVF, or what an electronic shutter, or anything like that.



I think you forgot to put "some" before "mirrorless." Most of that doesn't apply to me, and it presumably doesn't apply to those who buy near-dslr-size mirrorless bodies made by Olympus & Panasonic; and more than a few of us prefer EVFs to OVFs (esp. those of us who like using manual lenses). If my preferences put me in a tiny minority, that's fine with me!


----------



## candc (Oct 30, 2014)

I like the canon dslr form factor for its ergonomics and usability. You have to have a digital sensor so I am all for doing all the work there and eliminating the mirror and mechanical shutter curtains in favor of electronic. When you look at a diagram of how a dslr functions it is amazing that they work as well as they do. Its he culmimaion of decades of engineering and refinement but it can only go so far. It is limited by mechanical physics. 

I rhink we will see a dslr form factor camera with mirrorless guts that provides the best of both before too long.


----------



## ppix (Oct 30, 2014)

3kramd5 said:


> ppix said:
> 
> 
> > As a working pro that makes a living off my tools (currently 1DX's), there are a couple of features that I'd spend a lot of money for. ..
> ...



For most of my work there is no time for post processing. My images go straight from the camera to viewing stations where my customers can view and purchase the images. Selected images also go straight to slideshows running on multiple 50" screens. If a parent sees a good shot on the 50" screens, chances are they are going to head to the viewing stations to look and hopefully make a purchase. A my larger venues my selected shots are projected on 20'x30' screens. Again no time for post processing.

The crop on the fly ability allows me to put a more tightly cropped image in front of the customer, whether it be on my viewing stations, 50" monitors or 20'x30' screen. For me this increases sales.

-John


----------



## 3kramd5 (Oct 30, 2014)

ppix said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > ppix said:
> ...



Fair 'nuff. Thanks John!


----------



## Richard8971 (Oct 30, 2014)

10 grand for a body? No way. Glass? Yes.


----------



## Larry (Oct 30, 2014)

jrista said:


> For me, I'm part of the group that will stick with DSLR to the utter end. You can basically pry it from my cold dead hands...right along with my optical view finder...which is what die-hard "eliminate DSLRs, mirrorless for everything!" guys like you are literally going to have to do in your crusade to expunge the universe of what you personally, and IMO incorrectly, believe is an inferior camera design. I refuse to give up my DSLR, and I personally hope they stick around for the next, oh, forty years or so (depending on how long I live. )



I'm with you!


----------



## Larry (Oct 30, 2014)

shashinkaman said:


> ... if God would create woman with three tits, I would marry two of them at the same time!!!



Hmmm. depends on the configuration - one up front, two in back, or 3 abreast (so to speak) ;D

Wouldn't be an early adopter, though, ...don't want pay the full rib-and-a-half msrp!


----------



## candc (Oct 31, 2014)

this is what i am talking about.

http://petapixel.com/2014/10/31/sony-rumored-working-8k-mirrorless-full-frame-camera/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PetaPixel+%28PetaPixel%29

8k video means you are shooting 33mp stills at 30fps continuous.


----------



## tamahome5555 (Oct 31, 2014)

If it has like DxO rating of 
ISO : 6700+ (More than double the Nikon D800)
DR : 16.5+ EV stops
5K recording up to 250fps , 1080P 2000+ fps, C-log, S35 Recording
29MP+ 
13fps shooting
Incredible Moire, Rolling Shutter handling.
Then we can talk about the price


----------



## CurtL5 (Oct 31, 2014)

Floats my boat...?

Sure! At $10K, it would be a 5DmIV/V/VI - something with high MP: 25+
High frame rate: _At least_ 10, preferably 12 or more fps
Features I don't yet use but will eventually figure out that I need.

And lastly, a 200-400 f4 as the accompanying "Kit" lens.

THEN, I would drop $10K...


----------



## dash2k8 (Dec 5, 2014)

I would need noiseless performance at ISO12800 and 15 stops of DR. And of course, if it can indeed do noiseless at that ISO, then why not bump it up to 40MP?


----------



## tat3406 (Dec 5, 2014)

For 10K, I wish to have waterproof and bulletproof camera with lens...


----------



## anthonyd (Dec 5, 2014)

The "ultimate" camera would not cost anywhere near $10K. For starters it would have a frame rate of 100 billion frames per second. Oh wait, that exists already!

Think out of the box


----------



## tpatana (Dec 5, 2014)

For sure. Don't even need to improve that much from 1DX and I'll drop $10k easily. 2 stops on ISO performance, 2 stops on DR, 2 stops on MP. Sold.


----------



## dash2k8 (Dec 5, 2014)

tpatana said:


> For sure. Don't even need to improve that much from 1DX and I'll drop $10k easily. 2 stops on ISO performance, 2 stops on DR, 2 stops on MP. Sold.



You think adding 2 stops here and there is worth a $3500 bump in price?


----------



## Maui5150 (Dec 5, 2014)

Why pay $10K when they already have one for $6K


----------



## jeffa4444 (Dec 5, 2014)

Its all about the glass and if you look at the sensor and performance in say the Nikon D810 or the Sony A7R the weakness is the optics. Canon lens replacement cycle in the last twelve months is as much about this issue as its about IS or design in fact it should JUST be about resolution, cromatic & lateral abberation correction, and flat field even illumination.


----------



## fragilesi (Dec 5, 2014)

I would want it but not buy it.


----------



## leGreve (Dec 5, 2014)

The problem would be:

A. Sony or Panasonic would have better video options

B. Nikon would have better stills option.

Canon has their own goals confused; if you focus solely on making more and more money, your tech will suffer in the long run.
But if you tech up and innovate, then you will automatically see sales increase and therefore also revenue.


----------



## tpatana (Dec 6, 2014)

dash2k8 said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > For sure. Don't even need to improve that much from 1DX and I'll drop $10k easily. 2 stops on ISO performance, 2 stops on DR, 2 stops on MP. Sold.
> ...



Even the first two, totally. And for MP, 1 stop would be good enough, 2 stop add on MP would be already to much in my mind.


----------



## privatebydesign (Dec 6, 2014)

tpatana said:


> dash2k8 said:
> 
> 
> > tpatana said:
> ...



You guys make me laugh, a one stop improvement means twice as good, two stops means four times as good, we are well into product maturity and small incremental increases in performance. What do you think could be done to give you 400% more performance in key areas with a mere 45% price increase?

And what is a stop of MP?


----------



## edknuff (Dec 6, 2014)

10k? Seriously? Hell no!


----------



## Ryan85 (Dec 6, 2014)

To the op....no I wouldnt. I think we can create some great photographs with the existing cameras we have. If I'm going to spend that kind of money on 1 item it'll be a big white


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> You guys make me laugh, a one stop improvement means twice as good, two stops means four times as good, we are well into product maturity and small incremental increases in performance. What do you think could be done to give you 400% more performance in key areas with a mere 45% price increase?




So, just to make sure I understand here...suddenly a 2-stop DR improvement is now appreciated as the 400% improvement it really is (instead of so little a to be effectively meaningless for most kinds of photography), and is large enough that we cannot achieve it for a reasonable price because products are so "mature"? Hmm...curious... 





For everyone here who thinks you need to spend $10k to get better IQ:


For the recor, a 400% improvement in DR at low ISO can be had for about $3000 in the form of a D810. Also for the record, a 400% improement in DR at high ISO and a 200% improvement at low ISO can be had for about $2500 in the form of an A7s.


Just for the record...both productare far cheaper than $10,000, cheaper than the 1D X or 5D III. If you find you actualy have a need for more DR/lower noise at either low ISO or high ISO, you don't need have to spend ten grand. You can spend less than a thir that on the D810, and get one of the best DSLRs on the market that has performance in all areas that is similar to the 5D III. You also have access to one of the best wide lenses on the market, the 14-24 f/2.8. You can spend a quarter and get the best high ISO performance on the market, and get phenomenal 4k video at uunprecedented ISO settings (at least as far as consumer grade products go.)


Just for the record.


----------



## Eldar (Dec 6, 2014)

jrista said:


> So, just to make sure I understand here...suddenly a 2-stop DR improvement is now appreciated as the 400% improvement it really is (instead of so little a to be effectively meaningless for most kinds of photography), and is large enough that we cannot achieve it for a reasonable price because products are so "mature"? Hmm...curious...


That´s what puzzles me too ...


----------



## meywd (Dec 6, 2014)

jrista said:


> For the recor, a 400% improvement in DR at low ISO can be had for about $3000 in the form of a D810. Also for the record, a 400% improement in DR at high ISO and a 200% improvement at low ISO can be had for about $2500 in the form of an A7s.



Not agreeing with anyone here, but you won't have both in the same body, as you know A7s has 12MPs while D810 36MPs, which is why the A7s has a better high ISO performance, however since both have the same sensor why they don't have the same low ISO performance, maybe its as Roger said in the 7DII Sensor thread, Nikon is doing something with the data to increase the DR.


----------



## Mancubus (Dec 6, 2014)

Perfect Canon DSLR for me would be like:

- Not larger nor heavier than a 5dM3
- Minimum of 10fps, desirable 14fps
- Noise performance at least as good as the Sony A7S
- Autofocus points and speed same as the 1DX or 7Dm2.
- 4k video (at least 60fps, desirable 240fps for slow motion)
- A focus accuracy better than anything else on the market, to nail any f/1.2 shot in low light
- Touch screen with that fast focusing, same as 70D
- Weather sealing as good as the 7Dm2
- At least 36mp
- Color depth and dynamic range of the D810
- 1200 shots in a single battery life
- Built in radio transmitter for triggering flash
- Built in Wifi (not lagged as the 70D) and GPS
- Sensor shifting to get some IS on lens without stabilization
- A few extra completely customizable buttons around the body

Then it would be worth 10k.


----------



## Memnon (Dec 6, 2014)

For some reason I can't participate in voting. My vote is No.

Stupid poll. If you have the beans to drop $10k on your ultimate camera, then your will. Otherwise no, duh.


----------



## surapon (Dec 6, 2014)

LovePhotography said:


> And by that, I mean a DSLR that is as good as good can get for 2015....
> And, by "truly ultimate" I mean by whatever floats your boat that is realistic.
> No, "Yes, if they added....." The definition of "ultimate" is your definition, not mine...



Well, YES and NO, Dear Friend Mr. LovePhotography.

Yes, If Canon can do " "a " truly ultimate" DSLR body for, say, $10k " in 2015, I will buy 1 in 2015, Same thing that I buy "The EOS-1Ds is a full-frame 11.1-megapixel digital SLR camera body made by Canon in the 1Ds series," in early of 2003= That was the Truly Ultimate DSLR Camera in That year = $ 8999 US Dollars ( ??---Sorry too long , I forget)., And I buy Canon 20 D for support Camera-----But After that, I do not buy any more of 1D or 1Ds ( Another Ultimate Body , New in every 2-3 years anymore. JUst buy the The High end Prosummer level.
Yes, This 2015, I will buy Canon EOS 1DX MK II ( 36-42 MP ?--ISO = 1,000.000( For X-Rated Photo in the Dark,Peeping Tom/ Surapon--Ha, Ha, Ha) for the Truly Ultimate Camera Body---Just For Very Proud of my self= To think that, My Hobby Photography level will jump from SO-SO- Level to The " PRO" Level---When Some one see that best of the best Camera in my hand with out see the Photos( Still So-SO level= Ha, Ha, Ha , Because my brain and my heart stop improve 20 years ago.).
Have a great weekend, Sir.
Surapon.


----------



## danski0224 (Dec 6, 2014)

The 1Ds was releasd in 2002.

The MSRP of $8,999.00 would be equivalent to $11,560.13 in 2013 US dollars. 

Inflation calculator: http://www.westegg.com/inflation/

A ~$10k USD 1DsIII replacement is quite possible.


----------



## RGF (Dec 6, 2014)

Mancubus said:


> Perfect Canon DSLR for me would be like:
> 
> - Not larger nor heavier than a 5dM3
> - Minimum of 10fps, desirable 14fps
> ...




I would add that the body needs to be upgradable and have grip that provides full function of lower half like the 1Dx.


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2014)

meywd said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > For the recor, a 400% improvement in DR at low ISO can be had for about $3000 in the form of a D810. Also for the record, a 400% improement in DR at high ISO and a 200% improvement at low ISO can be had for about $2500 in the form of an A7s.
> ...




I don't actually think they have the same sensor. The Exmor in the A7s apparently use the dual CDS approach, which does a preliminary analog CDS then an additional digital CDS. Based on the information I could find, that is not how the Exmors in the D800 series work...they only have Digital CDS. Additionally, I think the A7s is operating at a higher readout frequency, which is probably why it has a bit more read noise and thus the slightly lower low ISO DR. But, it was designed to be a high ISO powerhouse, and having more than two stops additional DR at ISO 51200 over the 1D X is beyond phenomenal...and it still has over 12 stops DR at ISO 100.


Anyway...I was not saying that you could pick up either body and do the same things. What I was saying is you could get the D810 if your primary need is low ISO DR and stills resolution, or you could get the A7s if your primary need was high ISO DR and/or video quality. And you could actually get MORE than a 400% improvement with either camera in terms of DR, and on the D810, you could also get a huge resolution boost as well.


----------



## surapon (Dec 6, 2014)

danski0224 said:


> The 1Ds was releasd in 2002.
> 
> The MSRP of $8,999.00 would be equivalent to $11,560.13 in 2013 US dollars.
> 
> ...



Thanks you, Sir, Dear Friend Mr. danski0224
Yes, You are right on the target, 1DS = the end of 2002.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS-1Ds

Yes, I still use this Old Baby, up to Now, Because of Great AF, And PLUS GREAT COLORS similar to Film Camera's Photos too---May be just my Imagination, Not the Real Facts----Ha, Ha, Ha.
Have a great weekend, Sir.
Surapon


----------



## jrista (Dec 6, 2014)

Eldar said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > So, just to make sure I understand here...suddenly a 2-stop DR improvement is now appreciated as the 400% improvement it really is (instead of so little a to be effectively meaningless for most kinds of photography), and is large enough that we cannot achieve it for a reasonable price because products are so "mature"? Hmm...curious...
> ...




Aye...very curious, that...


----------



## tpatana (Dec 7, 2014)

privatebydesign said:


> tpatana said:
> 
> 
> > dash2k8 said:
> ...



Like you said, it's twice for each stop. So e.g. 2 stop increase in MP from 20MP would go to 80MP.

And like others mentioned, 2 stops extra DR is not 400%. Increasing from e.g. 12DR to 14DR is not 400% more performance.


----------



## jrista (Dec 7, 2014)

tpatana said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > tpatana said:
> ...




Stops don't really apply to megapixels. At least, I've never heard them applied that way. 


Stops apply to anything involving the light entering the camera. Two additional stops of dynamic range means two doublings of the range of brightness sensed by the sensor. Two additional stops of ISO means the ability to shoot in two stops darker light at the same shutter speed. Stops also was originally applied to aperture settings, as you usually "stopped down" the aperture with manual lenses before taking the shot. A full "stop" was a reduction in aperture area by a factor of two...doubling or halving the light passing through the lens.


Stops apply to light.


But for megapixels...I wouldn't apply the term stops to that. It doesn't really work there.


As for dynamic range, two stops of additional dynamic range IS a 400% increase. It's two doublings of contrast range (or tonal range). One doubling (200%), then another doubling (another 200%).


----------



## tpatana (Dec 7, 2014)

jrista said:


> But for megapixels...I wouldn't apply the term stops to that. It doesn't really work there.



Relax  I know it's not official, but it's handy.

Stops is perfect word in camera world to describe any units, e.g. if I take 2 stops more picture tomorrow, that'll mean 4x.

In my day job I talk in dBs and dBms all the time, and I usually mix those to anything else too. E.g. if I want a raise, I tell my boss I'm happy for only 3dB raise. Or some night I should have drunk -3dB less beer.

I know they don't make sense if you take them literally, but they work perfectly in these cases and everyone knows what they really mean.


----------



## dash2k8 (Dec 8, 2014)

> Even the first two, totally. And for MP, 1 stop would be good enough, 2 stop add on MP would be already to much in my mind.



Interesting perspective. I think if we waited a few more years, the 2 extra stops would become de facto. As of this moment, for me, maybe 2 extra stops is worth $3000, but I won't buy it. I'd wait for things to catch up in a few years and get it "for free." Our current cameras can already do things that were once unimaginable just a few years ago, so the future looks good IMO.


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Dec 9, 2014)

I say yes only because after this buy i will never need another DSL never ever again. since it will surpass the levels of the hubble, 10k is chick feed compare to the real cameras that people dont even know exist that cost millions and even billions of dollars more, take all that and jam pack it in a 10k camera and there you have it.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Dec 9, 2014)

If I had the finances for that kind of purchase then yes, otherwise I'd just look to get it second-hand for cheap...


----------



## Mharwood16 (Dec 12, 2014)

Nope!
If I had 10K to drop on camera gear (I can dream), than I'd much rather have a great white. At least i know that it wouldn't be replaced in a handful of years like the camera would. 
Mharwood16


----------



## e17paul (Dec 12, 2014)

tcmatthews said:


> I will wait until the technology trickles down to a more reasonable price. For me the 5D III is over priced. It looked like the price was going to get to a more reasonable then ML came out with the RAW video and the price skyrocket back up to list.
> 
> No I will buy a used 5D III or more likely a 6D II or III with most of the features of the 5D III.



I'm just waiting for the cheap lightweight plastic bodied full frame Rebel FF, which could logically happen after the 6D II takes the technology trickle down from the 5D3, in the wake of whatever the 5D4 brings.


----------

