# Lower Price Full Frame Camera [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 14, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/05/lower-price-full-frame-camera-cr1/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/05/lower-price-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; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/05/lower-price-full-frame-camera-cr1/"></a></div>
<strong>For Photokina?


</strong>Another mention of a new and less expensive full frame camera from Canon for Photokina. We reported this a few times before <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/03/mirrorless-camera-new-full-frame-coming-second-half-2012-cr2/" target="_blank">here </a>and <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2012/04/more-full-frame-cameras-on-the-2012-horizon-cr2cr1/" target="_blank">here</a>.</p>
<p><strong>Specs mentioned include:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>21mp</li>
<li>Less weather sealing</li>
<li>lesser AF system than the 5D3</li>
</ul>
<p><strong>CRs Take


</strong>While I don’t doubt a less expensive full frame camera in Canon’s future, I think most specs currently floating around will be of the wish-list variety. I would expect the camera to have the same 22mp sensor that is found in the 5D Mark III. After that , you can start knocking off about $1500 in “features” from the 5D3 to make the new camera.</p>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://www.canonwatch.com/rumor-canon-entry-level-full-frame-camera-for-photokina/" target="_blank">CW</a>]</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## symmar22 (May 14, 2012)

Sounds like a 5D2 again.....


----------



## nitsujwalker (May 14, 2012)

So essentially it will be the 5d2? I'm not sure why they don't just drop the price of the 5d2.


----------



## RuneL (May 14, 2012)

Excellent idea, but I'd rather have an EF-compatible mirrorless (With, god forbi, a FF sensor?) 


Of topic: Why does the 5D X mockup have the top assembly from a 1D? Weird.


----------



## preppyak (May 14, 2012)

nitsujwalker said:


> So essentially it will be the 5d2? I'm not sure why they don't just drop the price of the 5d2.


They did, they dropped the MSRP from $2499 to $2199...it just happened to coincide with the time prices normally rise. That said, there have been a variety of deals where its been <$2k.

And they dropped it fairly significantly in their refurb store...with Canon Loyalty, a refurb 5D comes out to $1500ish. Can't really get any cheaper: http://shop.usa.canon.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/subCategory_10051_10051_-1_29252#


----------



## kidnaper (May 14, 2012)

RuneL said:


> Excellent idea, but I'd rather have an EF-compatible mirrorless (With, god forbi, a FF sensor?)
> 
> 
> Of topic: Why does the 5D X mockup have the top assembly from a 1D? Weird.



Because they're shooting for 1D weather sealing with the rumors, and removing the mode dial is required for that.


----------



## zim (May 14, 2012)

I heard they are putting twice as much video into it to make it cheaper ;D ;D ;D ;D


----------



## RuneL (May 14, 2012)

kidnaper said:


> RuneL said:
> 
> 
> > Excellent idea, but I'd rather have an EF-compatible mirrorless (With, god forbi, a FF sensor?)
> ...




It says "less weather sealing"


----------



## Britman (May 14, 2012)

Doesn't make much sense to go into production with a new camera when the 5D2 is still awesome and the factories are geared to producing it. How hard would it be to maybe drop in the AF from the 60D and keep everything else the same. With a nice little price drop.

And if the rumours of Nikon bringing out a $1500 FF camera are true Canon will need to match it on price at least.


----------



## DB (May 14, 2012)

A FF body with 1DX/5D3 AF features + similar HD video for around 1600-1800 euros ($2000-2200) = death of both the 7D and 5D2!

Who would even buy a 7D mk II when for 500 bucks more they get more AF points + FF sensor???


----------



## Independent (May 14, 2012)

For one thing, the 7D has built-in flash. The current FF cameras do not.


----------



## cpsico (May 14, 2012)

LOL, isn't that why the 5dII is still in the line up?


----------



## ugly.|.face (May 14, 2012)

Wait! Where will this rank in the 5D line up? I just spent $2,200 on a 5D2, money I don't really have. If this newer but 'cheaper' FF camera out does the 5D2, I think I will cry and then die a little bit inside!!! 

Really hope that is not the case.

Anyone care to shed some light on this? Please and thank you.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (May 14, 2012)

Nikon is rumored to be bring out a low end FF Body. It will not be pro level, but have the features of their beginner models. 

The Canon equivalent would be a FF Rebel, but even that would be better than the nikon model which, without a AF motor drive, can only use the newer Nikon lenses. So if you have good but older Nikon Glass, it would be no autofocus. This really runs up the price to the buyer.


----------



## traveller (May 14, 2012)

If Canon do decide to make a body like this, I think they need to change the entire concept of the camera and make it smaller and lighter than any of the current full frame models. That would be a good way of marketing it as something different from the 5D MkII.


----------



## mccrum (May 14, 2012)

ugly.|.face said:


> Wait! Where will this rank in the 5D line up? I just spent $2,200 on a 5D2, money I don't really have. If this newer but 'cheaper' FF camera out does the 5D2, I think I will cry and then die a little bit inside!!!
> 
> Really hope that is not the case.
> 
> Anyone care to shed some light on this? Please and thank you.


The only light I can shed is that you should enjoy shooting with the actual, physical camera that actually, physically exists instead of being sad that you may or may not have saved money in the future at some theoretical point that is based solely upon a website called Canon RUMORS.

By your logic, when the 5D Mark IV comes out you should be sad you'll have been shooting for three years because the 5D Mark III is now less expensive than it was. Just go out and shoot, you got a great deal on the 5D II and it's still a great camera.


----------



## CanonCameraFan (May 14, 2012)

Would love to see a Rebel size FF with Digic 5 single processor (so ML compatible), 7D autofocus system and microfocus adjust for a reasonable price - round the £1k mark.


----------



## wickidwombat (May 14, 2012)

maybe just a refit of the 5Dmk2 with the 19 point 7D AF or the 60D AF
plastic body?


----------



## kidnaper (May 15, 2012)

RuneL said:


> kidnaper said:
> 
> 
> > RuneL said:
> ...



Right, but the 5D X took over the rumors of the high megapixel non-integrated gripped pro body. This new cheap full frame would probably not be a 5D anything but a new line.


----------



## tomsop (May 15, 2012)

Can someone tell me as a potential purchaser of the t4i when and if it comes out what benefits there would be to waiting for the entry level full frame - I don't understand what the advantages/disadvantages are to having a full frame vs. cropped frame other than some depth of focus differences if all other things are pretty much equal such as MP, autofocus, ISO range - in other words if I have two cameras with similar features eccept full frame vs. crop frame which camera would I want if my interests are hobbyist level and mostly shooting family, kids and sometimes landmarks or even nature - thanks, - Tom.


----------



## samirachiko (May 15, 2012)

I really want a cheap FF. The Canon 5D MK3 is awesome BUT TOO expensive!!!! We are not all rich!...  A lot of people are waiting a cheap FF!


----------



## c-law (May 15, 2012)

With this camera we have two options for what they will deliver as entry level:

1. Cheaper than 5D2 and worse than 5D2 (same AF, cheaper/rebel like build).

2. Same price as 5D2 and slightly improved in some areas and worse in others to balance it out (do not expect a good AF system, it might be improved but I would expect equal to but probably less than 7D quality - the cannot canibalise the sales of the 5D3).



tomsop said:


> Can someone tell me as a potential purchaser of the t4i when and if it comes out what benefits there would be to waiting for the entry level full frame



Advantages of FF: Better image quality, ISO is cleaner and better at the same levels.

Disadvantages: Can't use EF-S lenses. Less "reach" for getting more pixels in the centre of your lens (which is good for wildlife/sport).

Chris


----------



## nitsujwalker (May 15, 2012)

preppyak said:


> nitsujwalker said:
> 
> 
> > So essentially it will be the 5d2? I'm not sure why they don't just drop the price of the 5d2.
> ...



Except the point is that they will release a CHEAPER fullframe with stripped specs. So why not keep the 5d2 around and lower the price.


----------



## nitsujwalker (May 15, 2012)

dilbert said:


> nitsujwalker said:
> 
> 
> > preppyak said:
> ...



#1 Possibly except they are spending money on R&D (supposedly) and we can assume that the 5d2 with the already stripped specs is not that expensive to make––surely less so than a new camera with newer technology. Save the money on R&D and lower the price.
#2 irrelevant if #1
#3 True––completely agree (but new features [generally] equals higher price)
#4 True-- but once again new features [generally] equals higher price (especially with Canon's recent history)

I suppose my point is that I don't know how they can strip a camera down much more than the 5d2 and sell it at a lower price. Or how they can add features and sell it at a lower cost. Your point is that the 5d2 price can't go down because they will lose money. But feature-wise the 5d2 doesn't have much (I own one and love it by the way). If the point is to have a cheap full-frame then the 5d2 would work without the R&D. But if it's simply marketing and they are releasing a camera similar to the 5d2 in hope that the 'new' camera will make people buy it, then I suppose I understand.


----------



## daniel_charms (May 15, 2012)

nitsujwalker said:


> Except the point is that they will release a CHEAPER fullframe with stripped specs. So why not keep the 5d2 around and lower the price.



I would guess it's because even Canon has limited production capabilities. They can't keep making the 5d2 because they're either phasing out or have already stopped producing some of its central components, like the Digic IV processor or the image sensor. The resources have already been reallocated and the tooling used for their production replaced to produce Digic V-s and 5d3 sensors; converting them back or setting up a separate production line for the previous-generation stuff would not be cheap. It would be more economical in the long run to produce a cheap "updated 5d2" utilizing bits used in other current cameras than keep resources tied up in making limited quantities of older components.


----------



## eirikv (May 15, 2012)

They must make something to replace my 5D classic  I'm not making money on my photography and I can't pay the price for a 5DIII. The 5D was a huge investment for me and I'm probably not going to spend that much on a camera again. But my EF lenses need a host in the future.

Making a "entry" FF camera with a price between 7D and 5D (I and II) makes a lot of sense and someone will eventually make it.

And Canon; I would like CF card and articulated LCD screen 
And because of my long journeys into the wild I would also like a optical viewfinder, live view is nice but it eats my batteries.


----------



## PhilDrinkwater (May 15, 2012)

traveller said:


> If Canon do decide to make a body like this, I think they need to change the entire concept of the camera and make it smaller and lighter than any of the current full frame models. That would be a good way of marketing it as something different from the 5D MkII.



Agree. I think it should be a new category of camera - a 6d or something.

There's definitely a market for people who would like FF but won't spend on a 5d3 (or don't need the features) but who would like an "upgrade" from their 7d, 5d1 or something.


----------



## pedro (May 15, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Nikon is rumored to be bring out a low end FF Body. It will not be pro level, but have the features of their beginner models.
> 
> The Canon equivalent would be a FF Rebel, but even that would be better than the nikon model which, without a AF motor drive, can only use the newer Nikon lenses. So if you have good but older Nikon Glass, it would be no autofocus. This really runs up the price to the buyer.



I would like to see this materializing. Would take us back to film days, when every SLR was FF. The manufacturers may use lesser material in > US $ 2200 bodies and so on, as long as they get back to "the real thing", maybe time and construction cost are due for a move like that.


----------



## Danack (May 15, 2012)

Britman said:


> Doesn't make much sense to go into production with a new camera when the 5D2 is still awesome and the factories are geared to producing it.



[quote author=daniel_charms]#1 Possibly except they are spending money on R&D (supposedly) and we can assume that the 5d2 with the already stripped specs is not that expensive to make––surely less so than a new camera with newer technology. Save the money on R&D and lower the price.[/quote]

The economics of running a high tech production line are not very intuitive. Manufacturing costs are relatively fixed no matter what level of technology is actually being assembled.

This is similar to the manufacture of hard drives. For example about 5 years ago you could buy a 100 gigabyte hard drive for $100 dollars. If hard drives were like other goods, where the price of manufacturing them comes down as time goes by you would expect that you could now buy a 100 gigabyte hard drive for say $50. 

This is not the case. Instead you can buy a 2 terabyte hard drive for $100 - i.e. the unit cost has really not come down at all, as cost for each part of the hard drive has remained the same, but because of the R+D done you get much more space for your $100 of hard drive.

Similarly - continuing the production of the 5d mkII may not be cheaper for Canon than producing a new cut down version of the 5d mkIII. In fact if they stopped manufacturing mkIIs and released another camera that used the same sensor as the mkIII but with other features removed - they would probably see large savings compared to having to continue to have two separate production lines for sensors. (Production lines for producing sensors has to be more expensive than production lines for assembling bodies which is relatively low tech.)

btw Yes, I'm implying that Canon are making a huge profit per mkIII sold, but they have spent a lot on R+D, and people are prepared to pay that price, so fair play to them. As the price comes down over the next year or so, it won't be due to improvements in manufacturing process resulting in cheaper unit costs - it will just be slimmer profit margins for Canon.

Also I'm not sure how they could remove enough stuff from a 5d MKIII to produce a cut down version that is so significantly cheaper that it would get reasonable sales though. Pulling numbers from my posterior:

Remove SD card - $50
Change 61 AF points to 31 or fewer - $200
Frame rate from 6fps to 3fps - $200
Direct print button - $1

Even in a couple of years time when the mkIII is selling for $2500, there's not many people who would go for a cutdown camera for $2000 when the full 5d mkIII is only a little more. About the only thing I can think of is if they removed video then they could justify a much lower price (even if the manufacturing costs would actually be the same) and be able to capture more of the market.


----------



## psolberg (May 15, 2012)

> While I don’t doubt a less expensive full frame camera in Canon’s future, I think most specs currently floating around will be of the wish-list variety



thank you. that's what I've been saying since the D600 articles on nikon rumor's triggered the flood of sudden cheap FF dslr canon tips. It was clearly a reaction to usual "canon has to follow nikon all the time" trend we see whenever nikon does anything. In 2007 nikon released the D3, suddently canon was going to do a fast full frame camera. Did not happen until the 1DX. In 2008 nikon released an 8fps capable full farme camera at 3K called the D700, then canon's 3D was inminent. Didn't happen until 2012 with the 5DmkIII. Nikon releases big MP camera, suddenly canon has one in the wings. Yes it will be called 5Dmk4. And now, nikon is about to release a cheap FF dslr and suddently canon has one too.

are we seeing a trend? this is the typical design by wishlist fans we get every time. the day we get tips like these far removed from a recent nikon release I may believe them. until then they are just reactions from the crowd that seems to be more worried about what nikon does than what canon does. just switch over then 8)


----------



## goodmane (May 15, 2012)

I would be interested in this if it is lighter than the 5d classic, and a bit smaller. 

I really want something a little lighter with a built-in flash, but I'm not willing to give up the large viewfinder and nice image quality of full frame. I also really want video mode, auto ISO in PASM modes, and some wireless transfer built-in would be nice, perhaps with an ftp link run on Android on the backscreen. 

I also want a small lens e.g. better 35mm f2 to go with it. As in, USM AF, and better screen coating. While you're at it Canon, how about a non-branded strap to go with my camera so I'm not a walking advert? Canon colours are fine, but I don't want your logo on my shoulder. 

I really hope Canon delivers on the cheaper, more useable full frame camera front, because I am unhappy with the level of technology in cameras at the moment relative to smartphones for example, where you can take pics and video then wirelessly transfer everything to the PC (or wherever) when you feel like it. 

I do not expect to have to pay extra for wireless functionality in 2012. This should be the price of admission to market these days, not a selling point!

Also while I don't expect every trinket from the 5D3, the AF needs a serious boost, just to compete with 2012 competition e.g. micro four thirds. 

Canon is no longer competing with just standard DSLRs in this category anymore, but also with M43 and Fuji x100 etc.


----------



## nicku (May 15, 2012)

nitsujwalker said:


> So essentially it will be the 5d2? I'm not sure why they don't just drop the price of the 5d2.



Maybe a 5D2 with 7D AF. i will definitely buy one for $2000-2200. 

The only thing they must do is to implement the 7D AF in the current 5D2 and change the name( say 6D, 3D) .


----------



## dukeofprunes (May 15, 2012)

Danack said:


> ...
> 
> Also I'm not sure how they could remove enough stuff from a 5d MKIII to produce a cut down version that is so significantly cheaper that it would get reasonable sales though. Pulling numbers from my posterior:
> 
> ...



I think a major cut in cost for an entry level FF could come from the body. As stated in a number of reviews, the 5D3 body is greatly improved over the 5D2 and is more comparable to the 1D series in terms of build quality. Quality is expensive. Using a 60D/7D type body could probably shave off another $500 at the least.. (?)


----------



## nitsujwalker (May 15, 2012)

Danack said:


> Britman said:
> 
> 
> > Doesn't make much sense to go into production with a new camera when the 5D2 is still awesome and the factories are geared to producing it.
> ...



The economics of running a high tech production line are not very intuitive. Manufacturing costs are relatively fixed no matter what level of technology is actually being assembled.

This is similar to the manufacture of hard drives. For example about 5 years ago you could buy a 100 gigabyte hard drive for $100 dollars. If hard drives were like other goods, where the price of manufacturing them comes down as time goes by you would expect that you could now buy a 100 gigabyte hard drive for say $50. 

This is not the case. Instead you can buy a 2 terabyte hard drive for $100 - i.e. the unit cost has really not come down at all, as cost for each part of the hard drive has remained the same, but because of the R+D done you get much more space for your $100 of hard drive.

Similarly - continuing the production of the 5d mkII may not be cheaper for Canon than producing a new cut down version of the 5d mkIII. In fact if they stopped manufacturing mkIIs and released another camera that used the same sensor as the mkIII but with other features removed - they would probably see large savings compared to having to continue to have two separate production lines for sensors. (Production lines for producing sensors has to be more expensive than production lines for assembling bodies which is relatively low tech.)

btw Yes, I'm implying that Canon are making a huge profit per mkIII sold, but they have spent a lot on R+D, and people are prepared to pay that price, so fair play to them. As the price comes down over the next year or so, it won't be due to improvements in manufacturing process resulting in cheaper unit costs - it will just be slimmer profit margins for Canon.

Also I'm not sure how they could remove enough stuff from a 5d MKIII to produce a cut down version that is so significantly cheaper that it would get reasonable sales though. Pulling numbers from my posterior:

Remove SD card - $50
Change 61 AF points to 31 or fewer - $200
Frame rate from 6fps to 3fps - $200
Direct print button - $1

Even in a couple of years time when the mkIII is selling for $2500, there's not many people who would go for a cutdown camera for $2000 when the full 5d mkIII is only a little more. About the only thing I can think of is if they removed video then they could justify a much lower price (even if the manufacturing costs would actually be the same) and be able to capture more of the market.
[/quote]

Interesting insight.. The harddrive analogy makes sense.


----------



## Danack (May 15, 2012)

dukeofprunes said:


> I think a major cut in cost for an entry level FF could come from the body. As stated in a number of reviews, the 5D3 body is greatly improved over the 5D2 and is more comparable to the 1D series in terms of build quality. Quality is expensive. Using a 60D/7D type body could probably shave off another $500 at the least.. (?)



I don't think it would be that much...the cost of magnesium is only a couple of dollars, and yes machining it into a body is not cheap, but it couldn't be much more than $50.




dilbert said:


> It won't be the SD card that gets the chop but rather the CF card. It's a larger enclosure. Smaller card, smaller enclosure, smaller door.



Possibly. That would make sense to entice people upgrading from non-full frame cameras. Sucks for people like me with two 5d classics and a whole bunch of compact flash cards.




> The only way that would make it cheaper is if there is dedicated hardware that would be left out.



It wouldn't make the manufacturing cost cheaper, but it would make the product be worth much less (in consumers eyes), and so allow Canon to have a significant price differential between the 5d mkIII and a 'cut-down' full frame camera.

And yeah I don't think that leaving video out makes much sense - as Canon are not just competing with their own product line, but with lots of other competitors as well.



> Which one are you going to choose?



Actually - I'm waiting for the 1DX to come out and am saving up for that...


----------



## dukeofprunes (May 15, 2012)

Danack said:


> dukeofprunes said:
> 
> 
> > I think a major cut in cost for an entry level FF could come from the body. As stated in a number of reviews, the 5D3 body is greatly improved over the 5D2 and is more comparable to the 1D series in terms of build quality. Quality is expensive. Using a 60D/7D type body could probably shave off another $500 at the least.. (?)
> ...



I think build quality comes at a higher premium. If 1D series build quality comes at $50, why don't all xxD cameras have it? It's relatively cheap compared to the total price.

I suspect the pricing policy of these products has as much with Canon (and other brands) DSLR line up, as with absolute production costs. Entry level pricing needs to be competitive, while pro level pricing is more determined by what the users are willing to pay. In that respect, I think there are alooot of wedding photographers willing to pay $3.500 for the 5D3.


----------



## whatta (May 15, 2012)

I was hoping for a 60d size/price full frame (max 7d price), but then I decided not to wait further and invested too much into efs lenses..


----------



## MacDarcy (May 16, 2012)

Ok. Since this is just a rumor, I'll bite. 

I would LOVE to see a FF rebel! Yup. Thats what I'd like ta see. Canon, make it happen!

Small. Light. Basic. Entry level FF for the masses. Yeah baby! Bring it! Heh heh heh


----------



## Danack (May 16, 2012)

Actually I thought of how they can knock a significant amount off the price of a full frame camera. Drop the:

Mirror
Penta-prism
Phase detection focusing

aka make a full-frame mirrorless camera. Those three items are all pretty expensive material wise and also make the manufacture process much more complicated, so removing them would result in a full-frame camera much cheaper than a 5d MKiii.


----------



## RLPhoto (May 16, 2012)

MacDarcy said:


> Ok. Since this is just a rumor, I'll bite.
> 
> I would LOVE to see a FF rebel! Yup. Thats what I'd like ta see. Canon, make it happen!
> 
> Small. Light. Basic. Entry level FF for the masses. Yeah baby! Bring it! Heh heh heh



They've already made it, over 6 years ago. The 5dc is the budget full frame camera thats under 1000$.


----------



## DB (May 16, 2012)

Danack said:


> Britman said:
> 
> 
> > Doesn't make much sense to go into production with a new camera when the 5D2 is still awesome and the factories are geared to producing it.
> ...



The economics of running a high tech production line are not very intuitive. Manufacturing costs are relatively fixed no matter what level of technology is actually being assembled.

This is similar to the manufacture of hard drives. For example about 5 years ago you could buy a 100 gigabyte hard drive for $100 dollars. If hard drives were like other goods, where the price of manufacturing them comes down as time goes by you would expect that you could now buy a 100 gigabyte hard drive for say $50. 

This is not the case. Instead you can buy a 2 terabyte hard drive for $100 - i.e. the unit cost has really not come down at all, as cost for each part of the hard drive has remained the same, but because of the R+D done you get much more space for your $100 of hard drive.

Similarly - continuing the production of the 5d mkII may not be cheaper for Canon than producing a new cut down version of the 5d mkIII. In fact if they stopped manufacturing mkIIs and released another camera that used the same sensor as the mkIII but with other features removed - they would probably see large savings compared to having to continue to have two separate production lines for sensors. (Production lines for producing sensors has to be more expensive than production lines for assembling bodies which is relatively low tech.)

btw Yes, I'm implying that Canon are making a huge profit per mkIII sold, *but they have spent a lot on R+D*, and people are prepared to pay that price, so fair play to them. As the price comes down over the next year or so, it won't be due to improvements in manufacturing process resulting in cheaper unit costs - it will just be slimmer profit margins for Canon.

Also I'm not sure how they could remove enough stuff from a 5d MKIII to produce a cut down version that is so significantly cheaper that it would get reasonable sales though. Pulling numbers from my posterior:

Remove SD card - $50
Change 61 AF points to 31 or fewer - $200
Frame rate from 6fps to 3fps - $200
Direct print button - $1

Even in a couple of years time when the mkIII is selling for $2500, there's not many people who would go for a cutdown camera for $2000 when the full 5d mkIII is only a little more. About the only thing I can think of is if they removed video then they could justify a much lower price (even if the manufacturing costs would actually be the same) and be able to capture more of the market.

[/quote]

You state categorically that Canon have spent a lot of money on R&D for the 5D3, could you tell us all how much? To the nearest hundred thousand dollars would be fine.

*Fact* and *Opinion* are two very different things.

IMHO they spent very little on 5D3 R&D: 7D body, 1DX AF system, 5D2 slightly modified sensor, same 5D2 battery etc.


----------



## DB (May 16, 2012)

PhilDrinkwater said:


> traveller said:
> 
> 
> > If Canon do decide to make a body like this, I think they need to change the entire concept of the camera and make it smaller and lighter than any of the current full frame models. That would be a good way of marketing it as something different from the 5D MkII.
> ...



+1 Could not agree more. As a 7D user with several L lenses who would like my next body to be FF, I'd be prepared to pay up to $2000 for the camera body, but would never consider three and a half thousand euros (that's US$4,460) for a 5D3 which is what it retails for in my country.

There is potentially a large swathe of APS-C camera owners with good glass that would buy a sub-$2000 FF camera, and if NIKON get there first, well they will likely clean-up both in market share and profitability.


----------



## Ew (May 16, 2012)

If you're invested in glass you would be less likely to jump ship - probably hold out for the home team to catch up.


----------



## daniel_charms (May 16, 2012)

DB said:


> You state categorically that Canon have spent a lot of money on R&D for the 5D3, could you tell us all how much? To the nearest hundred thousand dollars would be fine.
> 
> *Fact* and *Opinion* are two very different things.
> 
> IMHO they spent very little on 5D3 R&D: 7D body, 1DX AF system, 5D2 slightly modified sensor, same 5D2 battery etc.



Just because Canon has already used the same AF system in another camera (which has been announced but hasn't actually reached the market yet) it doesn't mean it didn't cost them anything to add the same sensor to the 5d3. Developing this AF system cost a certain fixed amount of money that they will have to recover somehow; the fact that they chose to use it in another camera besides their flagship product just means this cost will be spread out between two different camera lines, just like the cost of developing the Digic V chip will be spread out between different cameras and so on. And which one of those do you think will help them recover most of it? My guess is it definitely won't be the one still not actually shipping.


----------



## samirachiko (Jun 7, 2012)

A cheap FF must have these features for me: swivel screen, Built-in Flash, HD video capture, 18/20 Mpx, (I don't care fps if you love theme buy a 7D!  

Then all that PROFESSIONAL features of a 5D MK3 I don't need theme at all!! A LOT of people aren't professional! BUT we love FF cameras! 

Would be perfect if we can buy A NEW 5D+24-105L for 2000 Euro! This ca be PERFECT. Nikon will make a FF for 1500 dollar!!!


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 9, 2012)

The biggest reason I didn't buy the mark 3 flat off was its Price of 3499$, but for me I would also have to buy other things to support a new camera body. 

5d mark III body - 3500$
I would need Lightroom 4. 150$
I would need windows 7 pro. Retail package 250$
I would need 4GB of more ram. 250$ 
I would need to buy 2 32gb SD cards - 80$

This is close to a whopping 4200$ just to upgrade and incorporate a 5D3 into my workflow. Damn too expensive for me, considering I could by a 1ds3 used for the same price and wouldn't need to upgrade everything else around it. 

Canon really needs to drop the price of the 5d3 to 2999$ or release a body around that price range. I won't spend 4200$ for just one camera body that I would love but can live without. I could buy two MK2 with that cash.


----------



## Albi86 (Jun 9, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> The biggest reason I didn't buy the mark 3 flat off was its Price of 3499$, but for me I would also have to buy other things to support a new camera body.
> 
> 5d mark III body - 3500$
> I would need Lightroom 4. 150$
> ...



Excuse me, why Win7 Pro?


----------



## moreorless (Jun 9, 2012)

I'm not sure that a "5D3 sensor + lower specs" is really that great a potential move by Canon for a cheaper FF body considering that those specs are really what sell the camera over the 5D2.

Personally I think the best move might be to do the reverse of Nikon, that is include the higher resolution sensor thats been rumoured for a 1D body in a lower spec body.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 10, 2012)

Albi86 said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > The biggest reason I didn't buy the mark 3 flat off was its Price of 3499$, but for me I would also have to buy other things to support a new camera body.
> ...



Lightroom 4 will not run under windows XP pro which I'm using.


----------



## Albi86 (Jun 10, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> Lightroom 4 will not run under windows XP pro which I'm using.



Oh, ok. I thought you needed to upgrade from Win7 Home Premium and I couldn't understand why


----------



## moreorless (Jun 10, 2012)

Danack said:


> Britman said:
> 
> 
> > Doesn't make much sense to go into production with a new camera when the 5D2 is still awesome and the factories are geared to producing it.
> ...



The economics of running a high tech production line are not very intuitive. Manufacturing costs are relatively fixed no matter what level of technology is actually being assembled.

This is similar to the manufacture of hard drives. For example about 5 years ago you could buy a 100 gigabyte hard drive for $100 dollars. If hard drives were like other goods, where the price of manufacturing them comes down as time goes by you would expect that you could now buy a 100 gigabyte hard drive for say $50. 

This is not the case. Instead you can buy a 2 terabyte hard drive for $100 - i.e. the unit cost has really not come down at all, as cost for each part of the hard drive has remained the same, but because of the R+D done you get much more space for your $100 of hard drive.

Similarly - continuing the production of the 5d mkII may not be cheaper for Canon than producing a new cut down version of the 5d mkIII. In fact if they stopped manufacturing mkIIs and released another camera that used the same sensor as the mkIII but with other features removed - they would probably see large savings compared to having to continue to have two separate production lines for sensors. (Production lines for producing sensors has to be more expensive than production lines for assembling bodies which is relatively low tech.)

btw Yes, I'm implying that Canon are making a huge profit per mkIII sold, but they have spent a lot on R+D, and people are prepared to pay that price, so fair play to them. As the price comes down over the next year or so, it won't be due to improvements in manufacturing process resulting in cheaper unit costs - it will just be slimmer profit margins for Canon.

Also I'm not sure how they could remove enough stuff from a 5d MKIII to produce a cut down version that is so significantly cheaper that it would get reasonable sales though. Pulling numbers from my posterior:

Remove SD card - $50
Change 61 AF points to 31 or fewer - $200
Frame rate from 6fps to 3fps - $200
Direct print button - $1

Even in a couple of years time when the mkIII is selling for $2500, there's not many people who would go for a cutdown camera for $2000 when the full 5d mkIII is only a little more. About the only thing I can think of is if they removed video then they could justify a much lower price (even if the manufacturing costs would actually be the same) and be able to capture more of the market.
[/quote]

I'd agree with your first point and that Canon are making a large profit per unit on the 5D3 right now but surely the latter means that its not so much a case of how they could "save" on production cost but rather what kind of margin they would be happy with on a budget model.

Such a model could have a relatively modest difference in production cost to the 5D3 but if the difference in specs is enough to protect 5D3 sales Canon might well be willing to drop there margins significantly.

Getting enough of a difference in specs while still remaining competitive with the D600 seems like the potential problem to me. Nikon can afford to sail very close to the D800 in specs(and beat it in FPS potentially) because there offering a lower res sensor, if Canon do the same with then 5D3 they'll likely loose more sales.

As I said earlier to me the best way forward would seem to be to include a higher resolution sensor in the budget model if one is going to be released in a higher end model first. 

A FF lineup something like...

1DX - 18 MP - 12 FPS - 61 Point AF - Top level Build and features
3D - 30 MP - 6 FPS - 61 point AF - Top level Build and features
5D3 - 22 MP - 6 FPS - 61 Point AF - Slight reduced build and features
6D - 30 MP - 4 FPS - 20 Point AF - 5D2 level build and features


----------



## unfocused (Jun 10, 2012)

> Similarly - continuing the production of the 5d mkII may not be cheaper for Canon than producing a new cut down version of the 5d mkIII. In fact if they stopped manufacturing mkIIs and released another camera that used the same sensor as the mkIII but with other features removed - they would probably see large savings compared to having to continue to have two separate production lines for sensors.



Same with processors, I suspect. Rather than continue to produce the old processor and old sensor, it's probably cheaper to put the new ones in a different body. I suspect a "budget" full frame camera would have a composite body, scaled down autofocus, SD Card only, slower frame rate, etc.


----------



## stipotle (Jun 10, 2012)

Isn't anyone else thinking 1DX 18 Mp sensor in a 5DII-like body with 60D level AF, low FPS?

I saw something posted here that production line constraints (for the 1D sensor) would make this unrealistic for Canon, so maybe I'm going in the wrong direction... But wouldn't a no-frills (well... low frills) camera with Canon's highest low light / all around IQ be appealing for a lot of photographers? 

Having seen some impressive early images coming from the 1DX, I would love to be able to take usable shots at and above 25600 ISO. (But I can live without Mp and fps and top line AF)

I remember reading many sentiments like this before the 5DIII came out, but no one mentioning it now. Is the 1DX sensor so much more expensive than the 5DIII's that _this_ couldn't be the "Lower Price Full Frame Camera?"


----------



## Jettatore (Jun 10, 2012)

The original 5D classic makes an amazing, entry level Full Frame camera at a Lower Price point. If you can afford more and or require video, get a used 5DII at near double the price. It doesn't get much simpler. High mega-pixel FF (not something I'm interested in personally) would seem to make more sense from a marketing perspective as there are at least many out there, that are specifically asking for a product like that and where it exists is across the isle on the Nikon side, although not at a low price. If they can strip video from it and a bunch of other features in an effort to keep the price low, it would probably make a lot of folks happy, but if I wanted price alone just to access full frame, I'd re-buy the original 5D in a heartbeat, it's an amazing camera (great battery life, great ISO performance, full-frame, great IQ, and a used copy in good working condition is $850USD or less shipped). If you have the EF lenses and have been waiting for full-frame and don't need video get one immediately, it will likely even hold a large portion of it's current re-sale value if you want to sell it for a 5DII/III/etc. upgrade sooner rather than later.


----------



## x-vision (Jun 10, 2012)

Canon have basically dug themselves into a hole with the 5DIII specs and price:


If they are planning a more expensive model than the 5DIII with more MPs (say a 5DX), then this model will not be competitive with the D800 on price.
And if they are planning a lower-priced FF camera than the 5DIII with less MPs, then this model will not be competitive with the (rumored) D600 on megapixels. 

So, it indeed appears that Canon's most sensible option for a lower-priced FF camera would be to put a higher MPs sensor (say 28-30mp) in a body with the 7D AF system.
This will provide enough differentiation from the pro-oriented 5DIII and will be competitive with the rumored D600.

... Except that they won't do it, IMO. 8) 8)

I think Canon will just wait for the D600 announcement and will reduce the 5DIII price. 
As I've predicted many times, the 5DIII price will drop to $2999 this Christmas and $2499 the next. 

So, there you have it: Canon's "entry level" FF camera will be the 5DIII @ $2499 at the end of next year. 

After that, it's anyone's guess. 
If the D600 is successful (very likely), Canon might respond ... eventually. 
For now, though, the 5DIII will be Canon's only 'affordable' FF camera.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 11, 2012)

stipotle said:


> Isn't anyone else thinking 1DX 18 Mp sensor in a 5DII-like body with 60D level AF, low FPS?



One I really like about Canon and what makes me a Canon enthusiast, too, is that every product I ever bought from them was balanced and "just works" - a thing that I have come to value more and more. I don't think they'll start releasing unbalanced products like a severely crippled high-end model just to fill a marketing gap. The only case I can think of where they really screwed up was removing afma from the 60d.



x-vision said:


> So, there you have it: Canon's "entry level" FF camera will be the 5DIII @ $2499 at the end of next year.



Well, you might be correct :-o ... especially if the 70d is moved up again @$1500+ the gap aps-c to ff wouldn't be that large anymore. And if Canon expects the 5d3 price tag to drop $1000 over the next year, it would make sense they're putting their high-mp body above the 5d3, eventually taking its place in the price range.


----------



## Haydn1971 (Jun 11, 2012)

I'm not so sure Canon (or Nikon) will be that concerned about the reletive price vs spec of their current entry level full frame cameras, in the real world, someone buying a 5DIII or D800 will generally already have a collection of lenses, typically a 70-200/70-300mm zoom, perhaps a couple of primes, so would need to chop in £1000's of investment to actually change for one generation... what happens next generation, ewe, swap back and trade £1000's of Nikon glass.... 

Once you commit to a brand with a large established lens lineup, you would have to a really good reason to swap brands, i.e. inherit some lenses, merge companies, start working for a firm that uses a different brand... or, be barking mad losing £100's in trade in's


----------



## Alumina (Jun 11, 2012)

Hey everyone, I signed up on this forum just for this topic 

I currently own a T3i, which is my first DSLR, and while I'm still a beginner (started in November 2011) I already find myself wanting a better camera (especially for the FPS) And my eye has really fallen on the 7D, but according to these forums it won't take too long for canon to announce their successor for the 7D (although I've seen some differing opinions on that matter) 

Now this is my view on things:
Right now canon feels a bit lackluster compared to Nikon with its new DSLR's (especially on the full-frame segment, my fiance bought a Nikon D800 recently and is just out performs the Mark3 while it is cheaper*) 

So I can definitely wait for an upgrade (my camera is still fairly new and it works amazing, I'd just like a few upgrades for my macro's) 

I've read about the full frame discussion if the 7D2 will be a full frame yes or no, and honestly I can't really decide if I'd like a FF yes or no. It would be nice because I'd probably have everything without having to upgrade AGAIN (to a FF) but I would have to switch lenses (I own four lenses right now) 

I would really be disappointed if they lowered the fps on the 7D2, and I would love more auto-focus points (although then again I shoot full manual on my macro's anyway, but for my other lenses it would be nice) 

Just my contribution to the subject. So I think I will just wait to see what canon comes out with. It would be nice if I could upgrade within the next year or something, but who knows what canon will do. 

*based on a few reviews I've read in magazines and the internet


----------



## cliffwang (Jun 11, 2012)

Alumina said:


> I would really be disappointed if they lowered the fps on the 7D2, and I would love more auto-focus points (although then again I shoot full manual on my macro's anyway, but for my other lenses it would be nice)
> 
> Just my contribution to the subject. So I think I will just wait to see what canon comes out with. It would be nice if I could upgrade within the next year or something, but who knows what canon will do.
> 
> *based on a few reviews I've read in magazines and the internet



Ideally 7D2 should have better specs than 7D. If 70D will have 19 AF pints, 7D2 should have at least 40 AF points. And new dual processors will improve its FPS as well.

By the way, if you are not in rush to upgrade your camera, waiting for another year is good idea. I feel Canon has a lot pressures from it competitors now. Canon must have some new cameras soon and we should see Canon drop some cameras prices as well. I am trying not to upgrade my gears at this moment. Actually I just sold my 7D and some EF-S lenses. I am getting ready for the new entry level FF or waiting for the price drop of 5D3. Unfortunately, I just ordered an 2x TC for my 5D2 because my 70-200mm is not enough on FF.


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 11, 2012)

Alumina said:


> And my eye has really fallen on the 7D, but according to these forums it won't take too long for canon to announce their successor for the 7D (although I've seen some differing opinions on that matter)



Take the poll - http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=7210.0 - and see the current opinion trend: Either there won't be a 7d2 at all, or it will be a long time before it is released, certainly after 70d (photokina?)



Alumina said:


> Right now canon feels a bit lackluster compared to Nikon with its new DSLR's (especially on the full-frame segment, my fiance bought a Nikon D800 recently and is just out performs the Mark3 while it is cheaper*)



Watch out for bad karma flying in your direction, this is a Canon enthusiast's forum  ... really, d800 & 5d3 have different usage scenarios: high-mp landscape vs higher iso event/wedding, but of course you can use them vice versa, too. But personally, I also think that the 5d3 is currently overpriced and will drop a lot after pros & well-off early adopters got theirs.



Alumina said:


> I've read about the full frame discussion if the 7D2 will be a full frame yes or no, and honestly I can't really decide if I'd like a FF yes or no.



If you're asking this question chances are you don't need a ff sensor - there are only specific scenarios when the current aps-c sensor is too limited, though they matter a lot to many.


----------



## Alumina (Jun 12, 2012)

Alumina said:


> Right now canon feels a bit lackluster compared to Nikon with its new DSLR's (especially on the full-frame segment, my fiance bought a Nikon D800 recently and is just out performs the Mark3 while it is cheaper*)



Watch out for bad karma flying in your direction, this is a Canon enthusiast's forum  ... really, d800 & 5d3 have different usage scenarios: high-mp landscape vs higher iso event/wedding, but of course you can use them vice versa, too. But personally, I also think that the 5d3 is currently overpriced and will drop a lot after pros & well-off early adopters got theirs.



Alumina said:


> I've read about the full frame discussion if the 7D2 will be a full frame yes or no, and honestly I can't really decide if I'd like a FF yes or no.



If you're asking this question chances are you don't need a ff sensor - there are only specific scenarios when the current aps-c sensor is too limited, though they matter a lot to many.
[/quote]

Don't get me wrong here, I picked canon over Nikon at the time, even bearing in mind I wouldn't be able to share lenses with my fiance (Boyfriend back then =P ) and I'm strictly speaking about the mark3 and D800. I've always had a weakness for canon (not just camera's) for some reason I just like their products, I'm just a bit disappointed with the price/performance difference on both camera's. (also thanks for explaining the different usage scenario's - didn't realize that! see, I have a lot to learn  )

About the full frame, I just started shooting in November 2011, got my T3i in December so I'm just afraid that in the future I will want FF. That's why I'm unsure right now  I don't have that much experience yet, I shoot a few nice macro's but for now that's about it. I might want to look into studio and wedding photography later so I'm really scratching behind my ears as in 'what to do?' I don't want to spend a bunch of money on a camera only to realize later I'd rather have FF (or not ..  )


----------



## Marsu42 (Jun 12, 2012)

Alumina said:


> I don't want to spend a bunch of money on a camera only to realize later I'd rather have FF (or not ..  )



If you buy only ef lenses, you'll be able to use them on ff, too. And if you want to do wedding photography, you'll need a second backup body in any case - so just get a good aps-c now, use it a lot and after a while you'll know when your abilities outgrow it or shooting situations are too difficult and you should switch to a ff body.


----------

