# Canon DSLR Announcement in March? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 19, 2014)

```
<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/2014/02/canon-dslr-announcement-in-march-cr1/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/02/canon-dslr-announcement-in-march-cr1/">Tweet</a></div>
<p>With Nikon officially announcing the D4S next week, we’re starting to see the usually unreliable mentions of Canon following suit with an announcement of their own. The latest being that Canon will announce a high end full frame DSLR some time in March.</p>
<p>We do not believe a camera above or replacing the EOS-1D X is on the immediate horizon, as we’ve seen a few small marketing campaigns for Canon’s flagship camera. Along with a <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/01/eos-1d-x-firmware-version-2-0-3-released/" target="_blank">feature adding firmware update</a> that came out in January.</p>
<p>We’ve been told by a great source that <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/01/the-next-dslr-will-be-entry-level-cr3/" target="_blank">Canon would announce 3 DSLRs in 2014</a>. The first being the entry level DSLR that was announced last week. The replacement to the EOS 7D Mark II and a third camera that is currently unknown. There is always a chance of adding to the number of cameras in the way of a “development” announcement, but those are always hard to predict.</p>
<p>As always, whenever Nikon does something, there’s always an upturn of Canon speculation.</p>
<p>NAB is coming in April, so I would think Cinema EOS would get an announcement before the EOS line.</p>
<p>More to come.</p>
<p><em><a href="http://rover.ebay.com/rover/1/711-53200-19255-0/1?icep_ff3=2&pub=5574981434&toolid=10001&campid=5337241362&customid=&icep_item=230828116912&ipn=psmain&icep_vectorid=229466&kwid=902099&mtid=824&kw=lg" target="_blank">Canon EOS-1D X Body $5848</a> (Reg $6799)</em></p>
<p>Source: [<a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_rumours.html" target="_blank">NL</a>]</p>
```


----------



## SwampYankee (Feb 19, 2014)

Ah, finally!! The Canon ti6 with 18mp sensor. Was waiting 2 weeks for this!


----------



## rs (Feb 19, 2014)

Very unlikely. Although not 100% confirmed, it looks like the specs of the upcoming D4S are beaten on every front by the 2011 1D X.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 19, 2014)

SwampYankee said:


> Ah, finally!! The Canon ti6 with 18mp sensor. Was waiting 2 weeks for this!


Yes, it's likely that the next camera is launched T6i. I just hope it has the same sensor 70D. We've waited so long for 7D mark ii, we should expect some more until Photokina in the second half of the year.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 19, 2014)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> Yes, it's likely that the next camera is launched T6i. I just hope it has the same sensor 70D.



Canon is shrewd when it comes to milking profits from sensors. Consider that the T5i/700D did _not_ get the latest version of the 18 MP APS-C sensor. The T5i's sensor has Hybrid CMOS AF (same sensor as the T4i and the EOS M), whereas the sensor used in the SL1/100D and the EOS M2 has Hybrid CMOS *II* AF (where the phase AF area covers 80% of the frame vs. just the central portion). That allows Canon to release another T#i-series body with a 'new' (to the line) sensor (but not the 70D's sensor). Put Digic 6 in there, and they're good to go with the T6i/750D.


----------



## SwampYankee (Feb 19, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, it's likely that the next camera is launched T6i. I just hope it has the same sensor 70D.
> ...



I was being factious because of my frustration with Canon. In truth I think 2014 will be a good year for new hardware. I know that Canon has cited the 5DIII as one of their current success stories so I don't expect much there. This might be the 1DX going to 24MP or it might finally be the first of the new sensors. 
I'm probably wrong but I think that the Nikon 800e caught Canon flat footed. Their sensors ruled the roost for a long time and the 800 was the point where they knew their current sensors could not continue to compete with the Sony's. Perhaps they were working a new line for a while but the Nikon's with Sony sensors really got their attention. I'm sure that it takes years and years before a sensor goes from design to profitable production. Hopefully, Canon is near then end of that cycle and we will see some significant new sensor technology. Canon has made real improvements everywhere but in sensors. Fortunately, they have held their market share but that can't last forever. Sony probably has another generation in the pipeline already.


----------



## Woody (Feb 19, 2014)

Where are the lenses in a so-called Year of the Lens for Canon? Sigh


----------



## kphoto99 (Feb 19, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, it's likely that the next camera is launched T6i. I just hope it has the same sensor 70D.
> ...



You are absolutely right. Canon will not let you get the 70D sensor in a Rebel price camera. The earliest that the 70D sensor migration to Rebel will be T7i. Or if you look at the T4i to T5i change, it will be in T8i. So in 2016.


----------



## mackguyver (Feb 19, 2014)

Canon Rumors said:


> The replacement to the EOS 7D Mark II and a third camera that is currently unknown.


I'm happy to see that they'll be replacing the non-existent 7D Mark II


----------



## slclick (Feb 19, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > The replacement to the EOS 7D Mark II and a third camera that is currently unknown.
> ...



I just hate the noise above 12,800 in the 7D Mk2


----------



## scyrene (Feb 19, 2014)

SwampYankee said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > ajfotofilmagem said:
> ...



Here we go again...


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 19, 2014)

mackguyver said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > The replacement to the EOS 7D Mark II and a third camera that is currently unknown.
> ...


Darn! I waited 4 years for the camera, and then one morning it came and went and I missed it! Darn!


----------



## spturtle (Feb 19, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Put Digic 6 in there, and they're good to go with the T6i/750D.



Digic 6 adds e.g. 1080/60p video recording which the current Canon CMOS sensors apparently do not support, even the G1 X II still has Digic 5. The 700D is really a rebadged 650D so I don't think it not having the latest 18MP sensor means a lot, maybe the "rebel" team was just busy with the 100D.


----------



## SwampYankee (Feb 19, 2014)

scyrene said:


> SwampYankee said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



I own a 5DIII and love it but I shot with a Sony 7R this weekend and the images were just better. Sharper by a wide margin. I make big prints and it really shows there. Maybe I just had a good day and the camera had nothing to do with it?


----------



## ajndesign (Feb 19, 2014)

spturtle said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Put Digic 6 in there, and they're good to go with the T6i/750D.
> ...



The G1X II has the Digic 6, not 5 like the original.


----------



## traveller (Feb 19, 2014)

SwampYankee said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > ajfotofilmagem said:
> ...



Canon's sensor advantage came from their early adoption of the CMOS type sensor; they have fallen behind as other manufacturers also adopted this technology. Canon fabricate their own (large) sensors, which represents a considerable capital investment, and are therefore understandably keen to recapture the maximum value back from this. I think that Sony has an advantage here, because they sell so many sensors to other camera manufacturers, they can afford to move their sensors forward a fabrication generation more often than Canon. As much as I understand Canon's reluctance to invest in new fabrication technology at a time of recession and market contraction, I think that they've reached the end of the road with what they can squeeze out of their current technology. Either they will have to change their fabrication foundries over to newer sub-0.18 micron (or even sub-0.11 micron) process generation architectures, or they'll have to start subcontracting the manufacture of their sensor out to a third party foundry partner. 

Sony does seem to have established itself as the dominant player in CMOS sensors at the moment, but it doesn't have the field all to itself; apart from Canon, Aptina have shown they can produce and Toshiba sensors have found their way into the Nikon line-up. Even the vaunted Olympus EM1, which everyone thought had a Sony sensor, turns out to be using a Panasonic sensor -another manufacturer that people were starting to question.


----------



## tron (Feb 19, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...


 ;D Aren't you happy that you will finally get 7D mark III ? ;D


----------



## tron (Feb 19, 2014)

I think they will announce a high end body. I have just ordered my 2nd 5DMkIII ;D


----------



## SwampYankee (Feb 19, 2014)

traveller said:


> SwampYankee said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



I presume that Sony would sell them sensors but at something of a markup. Nikon was able to absorb the cost and put at good cameras, although the 800 is not flying off the shelves and the 600 is headed towards a class action lawsuit. Dispite the outcry it was a really god day for Apple when they got in bed with Intel.


----------



## tron (Feb 19, 2014)

SwampYankee said:


> I own a 5DIII and love it but I shot with a Sony 7R this weekend and the images were just better. Sharper by a wide margin. I make big prints and it really shows there. Maybe I just had a good day and the camera had nothing to do with it?


Interesting! Although I do not intend to change my hardware (I just ordered a second 5DIII) could you care to elaborate please? (for example did you focus using LV in both models, you used same lens, same aperture, tripod, same PP?)

I always wondered why the 22mp raw processing of 5D3 is so slower than the 21mp raw processing of 5D2. Combining this with old case where DPP was not producing sharp pictures - THAT HAS BEEN CORRECTED WITH AN UPDATE - I wonder whether a possibly strong AA filter has something to do with it (just wondering, NOT knowing...)


----------



## wsmith96 (Feb 19, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



something about oil or grease on the sensor/mirror... they pulled it from the shelves


----------



## scyrene (Feb 19, 2014)

SwampYankee said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > SwampYankee said:
> ...



Oh I don't dispute it. But yet another thread has turned into people 'worrying' that Canon is facing ruin because their sensors aren't as good as Sony's. Now, the real world scenarios where the difference would be worth buying a new body (for those of us with a fairly recent Canon body) will be a subset of all situations - maybe (probably) a minority for most. And the autofocus speed, and native lens range (let's not get into using adaptors) and form factor of the body... those are important too - more important for some (maybe many?) users.

My point is, Canon is doing okay. Some other companies are doing better in *some areas*. Good for them. Competition is good. If you like the A7(r), good - get one. Use it, enjoy it. But try not to get caught up in the 'newer sensors are EVERYTHING' bandwagon that I've only seen here and in dpreview comments. I've no doubt something new will come along. Be patient.

(And I'm sure Neuro can tell you the relative sales of D800(E) bodies versus the Canon equivalents).


----------



## preppyak (Feb 20, 2014)

Woody said:


> Where are the lenses in a so-called Year of the Lens for Canon? Sigh


Yeah, its gonna into March of "the year of the lens" before we even have a shot at a new lens. Which probably means no possible availability until April or May. 

Is Canon really going to go a year and a half between announcing lenses (200-400 not withstanding)?


----------



## Richard8971 (Feb 20, 2014)

I can understand Canon "reusing" the 18mp sensor over and over again as Nikon has done the same with their 16mp sensor and now new 24mp sensor. It makes good marketing sense, in a way. I just think that it has been more noticeable with Canon as the last 5 years and 9 camera bodies have been 18mp even though there have been some small changes between certain sensor designs. Noise levels have not gotten noticeably better either, so naturally, people have become frustrated. 

The 7D is 5 years old and I still think it is one hell of a camera body that is very capable. All crop sensors have noise so if your job demands noise free images, you are not looking at crop bodies anyway, you are shooting full frame. 

I think the last couple great cameras from Canon were the 5D3 and 1DX and other than that nothing has been released (in MO) from Canon that is ground-breaking or anything that would make me want to give up my 7D and 40D backup. I still use my 40D and the images are stellar, I will never give up my 40D!

Hopefully, IF Canon makes a 7D replacement, it will show the "world" what a great crop body can do!

D


----------



## mkabi (Feb 20, 2014)

Richard8971 said:


> Hopefully, IF  Canon makes a 7D replacement, it will show the "world" what a great crop body can do!
> 
> D



Yeah, I don't think they are going to release a 7D replacement...
Canon Photographers are in for a dissappointing year, Cinematographers on the other hand....

Okay, look at the rumors...
3 DSLRs for 2014:
-One down, introduced as the T5.
-We all know the T6i is going to be next, a rebel is released every year.
-Last one will be a cinema DSLR, a DSLR is a DSLR whether its under a Cinema EOS category or not. But no worries, its going to have the same sensor as the 70D (thats my prediction).

EDITTED TO ADD: If this rumor: 
http://www.canonrumors.com/2014/01/canon-to-offer-global-shutter-for-2-5k-video-on-an-upcoming-dslr-cr1/ 
has any merit, I expect it to be in the next Cinema EOS DSLR. In which case it is a 7D replacement, because if you follow the developments by Magic Lantern, they already have enabled the current 7D to do 2.5K:
https://www.google.ca/?gfe_rd=ctrl&ei=Wk0FU_m0AoKN8QeFvYH4Cg&gws_rd=cr#q=2.5K+by+7D
Its only natural to add it in the next iteration without the help of Magic Lantern


----------



## Richard8971 (Feb 20, 2014)

mkabi said:


> Yeah, I don't think they are going to release a 7D replacement...



I think it's very possible you are right, for 2 more reasons in addition to the ones you already mentioned,

1) The 2.0 firmware update unlocked some very cool features to an already great camera giving it more "life" and,

2) The Nikon "king-of-the-crop-sensor" body is the D7100. My wife shoots with one and the images are fantastic. Nikon really doesn't have a 7D equivalent and the 70D is lined up to compete with the D7100. I still think the 7D is the better choice (for a couple of reasons) but the 70D and D7100 are very, very nice cameras. I don't shoot video so I can't base my choices on anything other than still shooting and as such I could care less what video features any of these cameras have, but many people do care about video features.

I see tons of 7D's when I go shooting, however I am seeing more Nikon D7000's and D7100's out there. Nikon has a real winner with these two cameras and I think Canon might have realized that they don't need a high performance crop body other than the 70D. 

Canon may feel that keeping the 7D around for a couple of more years will keep the budget minded sports and wildlife photographiers happy and the 70D will make the rest happy. I really won't believe anything regarding a 7D2 until I actually can buy one for myself.

Fortunately for me, the 7D suits my shooting needs and I really don't feel the need to upgrade unless the FF bug finally hits me and I buy a 5D3.

D


----------



## scottburgess (Feb 20, 2014)

And the third Canon camera of 2014 is....

::drum roll::

The *EOS M*y, a rerelease of the EOS M in sunshine yellow!


----------



## Zv (Feb 20, 2014)

Richard8971 said:


> I can understand Canon "reusing" the 18mp sensor over and over again as Nikon has done the same with their 16mp sensor and now new 24mp sensor. It makes good marketing sense, in a way. I just think that it has been more noticeable with Canon as the last 5 years and 9 camera bodies have been 18mp even though there have been some small changes between certain sensor designs. Noise levels have not gotten noticeably better either, so naturally, people have become frustrated.
> 
> The 7D is 5 years old and I still think it is one hell of a camera body that is very capable. All crop sensors have noise so if your job demands noise free images, you are not looking at crop bodies anyway, you are shooting full frame.
> 
> ...



I agree the 7D is still a great camera, capable of taking amazing pictures in good light. It suffers a bit in low light though. I think a 7D replacement isn't out of the question but I am starting to doubt if it will be this year. 

If Canon put in a completely new sensor, dual Digic 5, with DPAF, perhaps wifi and and touchscreen plus a higher burst rate and 4K video a lot of folk will be happy. Even without the 4K video (which I think is a stretch) this would be a great camera. Improvements to ISO noise are prob not going to be groundbreaking but hopefully better than what it is now. 

Also, I think the 6D should be in the category of something great released recently. For the price you are getting superb IQ and features. It pretty much brought FF to the masses. Before that the only cheap options were the dated 5D cameras. For the same price as the 5D2 used you get a similar spec'd camera but more modern and with insane high ISO usability. Four years ago that was unheard of at that price point.


----------



## Tugela (Feb 20, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, it's likely that the next camera is launched T6i. I just hope it has the same sensor 70D.
> ...



I doubt it. A 70D body already costs barely more than the current rebel when it is released. What is more likely to happen is that the rebel line will not be updated and the 70D will take that place in the lineup, since it is about the same price point. The top end APS-C will be taken by the new 7D2 (or whatever they call it), and will probably have advanced video features that would allow it to compete in the same space as the GH4. The last of the three speculated DSLRs would then be a full frame camera, replacing either the 6D or 5D3 (probably they would do the 6D first). Full frame cameras have not been updated for some time and are due, if they are to remain competitive.

Canon is in the business of making money, they need their revenue stream flowing and the way to do that is to convince people that it is time to update their bodies. An iterative update will not cut it in that regard, so we can expect something substantial in higher end cameras. Since they have already said that they are going to be focussing on video, what will probably happen are a set of new cameras will incremental upgrades in still capabilities and large upgrades in video capabilities. That is where the growth potential is, and (unless they are stupid) they will capitalize on the current interest in 4K and high quality output to drive that process. While the average Joe might not care about 4K and video quality, the target group that buys their high end cameras most certainly is.

So, at the low end the new Rebel T5 will provide good quality stills for the average Joe (who doesn't care that much about video quality). The 70D will fill the spot in the lineup previously occupied by the Rebel Txi series, with a price drop of 200-300 dollars to get it in the sweet spot. The high end of the consumer market will be targeted by the 7D2 which will have excellent APS-C stills capability and high quality camcorder like capabilities for 1080p video. The prosumer market will be targeted by something like a 6D2/5D4 which will provide excellent full frame stills and high quality 4K capabilities (similar to the GH4). That way they could revamp the entire line and provide something for each of the four main market segments to drive growth.

At the professional level they introduce the new cinema EOS models to address the dedicated film makers. There will be a high end model (8-10K range) for the real professionals, and a lower end model (3-4K range) for the wannabe amateurs.

In addition, in the camcorder segment there will be new 4K camcorders, a semi professional model similar to the HA 20/25 and a consumer model similar to the Vixia HFG30. One or two professional big bucks camcorders will be introduced to address that market segment as well.

If they do this over the course of the next 9-12 months they will revamp pretty much every market segment and keep them competitive, particularly with respect to the changes that video is currently undergoing.

That is my prediction of what will happen.


----------



## Zv (Feb 20, 2014)

Tugela said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > ajfotofilmagem said:
> ...



Where does the SL1 fit into this model? 

I don't know about you but the 70D is way more expensive than any rebel I've ever seen, even when newly released, where I live. Also they are targeted at two different types of photographers. I think the rebel / txi line will continue on. It's a big seller for Canon. It's very much their bread and butter camera. The T5 is aimed at the budget conscious and IMO doesn't replace a rebel. It's a great camera though for the price. The SL1 fills the handbag and compact travel needs. Neither of those are a good replacement for a solid, full functional mid sized DSLR for the beginner looking to get into photography. The 70D probably seems too advanced to some of those types of people. That would be a tough choice - a very low budget DSLR, or a $1000 semi pro model. As a newbie or casual shooter I'd want something in between. 

The rebel has always been that perfect balance of awesome features and performance at a reasonable price level. I doubt Canon would disturb that strategy.


----------



## Tugela (Feb 20, 2014)

Where I live a 70D body costs about $1250. On initial release a Rebel Txi usually costs around $1100 with its crappy kit lens (they cost a lot less at the moment, but that is because the T5i is relatively old now). If what you say is correct, and they released a T6i with marginal improvements over the T5i, then it is going to have a tough time competing with the 70D. Who in their right mind would buy a T6i when for a little bit more they could get a much better camera in the 70D? I think one of the problems with Canon's DSLR lineup is that they have too many models on the market. It is not really economical to support future development of all of them.

It is much simpler for Canon to reduce the price of the 70D one or two hundred dollars than it is to start producing a new camera.


----------



## Floder3 (Feb 20, 2014)

Well i think i´m not in the topic as you guys. So here is my question:
Why shouldn´t there be an 5D update like the 800 to 800e?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 20, 2014)

Floder3 said:


> Well i think i´m not in the topic as you guys. So here is my question:
> Why shouldn´t there be an 5D update like the 800 to 800e?


Currently 5D Mark III is the camera best selling in its category. This does not encourage Canon to launch a replacement this year. Maybe appear one "5D Mark IV" seen in 2015. On the other hand, Nikon D800 is not a great sales success, much less D800E. This forces Nikon update their models as quickly as possible, to avoid losing market share. Suppose Canon make now an "5D Mark IV" much better than the Mark III. It could steal sales from more expensive 1DX. In addition, Canon 1DX sells more of Nikon D4. Because of that Nikon did an update with D4S to stay competitive.


----------



## tron (Feb 20, 2014)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> Floder3 said:
> 
> 
> > Well i think i´m not in the topic as you guys. So here is my question:
> ...


The D800E is not an upgrade of D800. It is a D800 without the AA filter. Everything else about them is the same.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 20, 2014)

tron said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > Floder3 said:
> ...


I did not say it D800E would be an update of D800, since they were launched at the same time. However, I imagine there will be only one version of the hypothetical D900, possibly without AA filter.


----------



## tron (Feb 20, 2014)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > ajfotofilmagem said:
> ...


Your words: "Why shouldn´t there be an 5D *update like the 800 to 800e?*"


----------



## quiquae (Feb 20, 2014)

Tugela said:


> Where I live a 70D body costs about $1250. On initial release a Rebel Txi usually costs around $1100 with its crappy kit lens (they cost a lot less at the moment, but that is because the T5i is relatively old now).



Maybe Canon does things differently in some regions, but where I live (Japan) T5i's "crappy kit lenses" are _exactly the same_ as the ones that come with the 70D: 18-55mm STM and 55-250 STM, neither of which are crappy at all.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 20, 2014)

tron said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...


Dear friend Tron. Just a misunderstanding. You responded by making a quote from my message, and referred to a statement from the new member of CR "Floder3" which seemed to affirm D800E would be an upgrade. I re-read, and understand that you fixed an incorrect idea of ​​"Floder3". All cleared up now.


----------



## tron (Feb 20, 2014)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > ajfotofilmagem said:
> ...


Very true! I should have made bold the part of the text I was referring to. Sorry for that!


----------



## Floder3 (Feb 20, 2014)

tron said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...


Thanks for the quick response 
Now there is nothing in my way to buy the 5d3...
And sorry for my incorrect assumption, as i said i´m not in this topic as you


----------



## Zv (Feb 20, 2014)

Tugela said:


> Where I live a 70D body costs about $1250. On initial release a Rebel Txi usually costs around $1100 with its crappy kit lens (they cost a lot less at the moment, but that is because the T5i is relatively old now). If what you say is correct, and they released a T6i with marginal improvements over the T5i, then it is going to have a tough time competing with the 70D. Who in their right mind would buy a T6i when for a little bit more they could get a much better camera in the 70D? I think one of the problems with Canon's DSLR lineup is that they have too many models on the market. It is not really economical to support future development of all of them.
> 
> It is much simpler for Canon to reduce the price of the 70D one or two hundred dollars than it is to start producing a new camera.



So what you're saying is Canon should cut the price of the 70D by about $200 or more and not release a new T6i? 

Great. Now they're selling the 70D close to break even thus losing profit and to top it off they have no income at all from what used to be a best seller. 

Development costs for their rebel line are quite low. You said yourself "... with marginal improvements". How much development do you think is going on in these rebels?! The developing has already been done. The cameras use tech filtered down from the older high end models. A little spit and polish, add a few new creative filters and increase the model number accordingly and voila! A T6i is born! Sit back and enjoy as profits go up!

People will buy it simply because it's newer. Others will wait until the price drops. Either way it will sell.


----------



## tron (Feb 20, 2014)

Floder3 said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > ajfotofilmagem said:
> ...


Go on and enjoy it  

Having sold my 5D2, I ordered a second 5D3


----------



## thedman (Feb 20, 2014)

Really hope some of these upcoming announcements are of interest to professionals. Seems like their last 10 announcements have been a new Powershot, or new cheap kit lens.


----------



## SwampYankee (Feb 20, 2014)

tron said:


> SwampYankee said:
> 
> 
> > I own a 5DIII and love it but I shot with a Sony 7R this weekend and the images were just better. Sharper by a wide margin. I make big prints and it really shows there. Maybe I just had a good day and the camera had nothing to do with it?
> ...



Just an informal photowalk. around lower Manhattan With the 5DIII my usual lens for this type of thing is a 24-105L f4 On the Sony I used the 28-70mm F3.5-5.6 kit lens. It's an area I know and photograph well so I was using the Sony under real life conditions (for me) and could compare to similar days out with the Canon. Mostly full auto. I like AV but the lens on the Sony was not fast so I just used Auto and RAW. I didn't care for the menus, and that's not because I am unfamiliar. Fuji has a great menu system you can pick up in an hour. This was not a formal test, just a test of the way I use my camera every day. Sony RAWs were far, far sharper than the best my 5D3 has ever put out....and It has put out some great ones.


----------



## Richard8971 (Feb 21, 2014)

Tugela said:


> I think one of the problems with Canon's DSLR lineup is that they have too many models on the market. It is not really economical to support future development of all of them.



I believe that that is one of Canon's biggest problems right now. I also believe that Canon, for years, have continued to set the bar of performance for DSLR's.

1) The 5D was the first "compact" full frame DSLR, it was in a class all on it's own. (Nikon didn't follow until about 3 years later with the D700)

2) Even though the Nikon D90 was first, Canon raised the bar by putting video into the 5D2, a camera that was ahead of it's time and far superior to the D90 (at twice the price) in many ways. To this day, it's a very popular camera.

3) The 7D was loaded with features and speed and showed what a high performance crop body could do. A test bed for a lot of the technology that is found in today's Canon bodies.

4) The 5D3 integrated affordable speed and fantastic full frame image quality into a compact DSLR body (compared to dual-grip bodies), not to mention many other great features.

5) The 1DX stands king of speed and image quality. It was smart for Canon to blend the 1Ds and 1D lines in favor of this new powerhouse and sales proves it.

I think a lot of people got used to Canon always leading the way and lately it seems like the semi-professional APS-C segment (I.E. 7D line) has been largely ignored. The 70D is a very nice camera, but it's no "7D". Maybe it's on par with the 7D but certainly not "class-leading".

Something else to consider that didn't necessary exist a few years ago is now we have a market flooded with tons of awesome used camera equipment for dirt cheap. I mean, the 40D was $1600 new and now you can get bodies for $250-$300. It's a powerhouse of a camera and still takes fantastic images. It's getting harder and harder for the companies to "impress" the people with REAL usable features. There will always be the useless features that look good on paper but I'm not too concerned with those. Not to mention the fact that DSLR's are still expensive and not everyone has a grand laying around to just buy new equipment each time a new body comes out.

One more thing is that not everyone shoots video, I don't. My 7D takes video and I have never taken a video with it. I am a still shooter so I don't look at DSLR's from a video point of view and I am sure there are plenty of people out there who feel the same way as I do. I think Canon is starting to forget that people still take still photos. Seems like more attention is being placed on video features than photography features. From a still photography point of view, just about all of the APS-C bodies from Canon over the past 3-4 years have been pretty much the same, just my opinion...

I always figured that when they released the T5i (at 5fps) they would integrate the xD line into the xxD line. Well, the 70D came out and I suppose with 2 entry level cameras under the Rebel line, it is still possible, but I thought they would get rid of the xxD in favor of a 7D replacement rather than the other way around. The fact that Canon has been mum on any news regarding any kind of 7D replacement adding to the V2.0 firmware update unlocking many new cool features to the 7D makes me wonder if they will even go down that road. Again, Nikon does not have a "7D" and they may feel the D7100 is sufficient enough competition to the 7D that they don't need to make a higher performance crop sensor body. The 70D is pretty close to the 7D in terms of features that I believe that a lot of people will buy the 70D on the fact alone that it is simply a newer camera body than the 7D. 

D


----------



## pedro (Feb 21, 2014)

Richard8971 said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Something else to consider that didn't necessary exist a few years ago is now we have a market flooded with tons of awesome used camera equipment for dirt cheap. *I mean, the 40D was $1600 new *and now you can get bodies for $250-$300. It's a powerhouse of a camera and still takes fantastic images. It's getting harder and harder for the companies to "impress" the people with REAL usable features. There will always be the useless features that look good on paper but I'm not too concerned with those. Not to mention the fact that DSLR's are still expensive and not everyone has a grand laying around to just buy new equipment each time a new body comes out.
> ...


----------



## scottburgess (Feb 22, 2014)

Richard8971 said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > I think one of the problems with Canon's DSLR lineup is that they have too many models on the market. It is not really economical to support future development of all of them.
> ...



Perhaps it's a feature, not a bug:
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2014/03/too-many-product-choices-in-supermarkets/index.htm

In terms of development, the big research costs for sensors, autofocus systems, lower power consumption, and so on are spread across all sales. The development costs for an individual camera model from that technology base are evidently quite small, which is one reason why there are still so many SLR manufacturers. Canon is shrewd enough to realize that when confronted with store displays of 1-3 models of a competitor versus 8-9 models of Canon, the consumer will tend to gravitate toward Canon. Having more choices allows the consumer potentially to get the mix of features they want at an acceptable price. 

To extend the argument you're making to a related product: consider lenses. Is it really better to have fewer lenses in your line-up? After all, each one of those does require developing a new lens formula. So if the "fewer choices means more profits" argument were correct, Canon would not have two 100mm macros plus a 100mm f/2, or four different 50mm lenses. In reality, if developing a lens design costs $500k and you expect to sell 50k units in the next five years, you're looking at an amortized development cost of $10/unit which is negligible. Those amortized startup costs could be worse for competitors who expect lower unit sales per lens model.

That doesn't mean that consumers always deal well with choice overload, as the article cited above points out. But it is a proven mechanism for increasing market dominance which Canon appears willing to use. 

Here some consumers are probably losing track of all the factors to consider and buying on lowest price, or lightest weight, or good movies, or best autofocus system, or WiFi, or best lens lineup, etc... because choosing based on one or two attributes simplifies the choice. Since Canon has many combinations of features, many consumers will end up buying a Canon as their first SLR. And Canon may be able to afford lower profits on intro bodies with the expectation of profits from step-up bodies and lenses. 

Sigma may be changing those profit projections now and actually forcing Canon to push more body lines out the door. Still, if I were a competitor of Canon's with lower unit sales, what Sigma is doing might scare me more than it scares Canon because it might suck _all_ profits out of my lens sales and force me to be profitable almost entirely on sales of camera bodies. If we are entering an "Era of Mergers" as I questioned in another thread, this might be a tipping point. [Or not. It's hard to predict without hard numbers. But it's fun to think about.]


----------



## dgatwood (Feb 23, 2014)

Tugela said:


> I think one of the problems with Canon's DSLR lineup is that they have too many models on the market. It is not really economical to support future development of all of them.



I've been saying that for a long time. Ignoring the mirrorless segment for the moment, the right number of DSLR models is 4:


Consumer crop-body DSLR (based on the 70D)
Pro crop-body DSLR (7DMk2)
Consumer full-frame DSLR (6D)
Pro full-frame DSLR (1D-???)

I could possibly accept 5, but only if it's because they continue to sell one older model of consumer crop-body cameras to hit a price point. Any more models than that, and your products are cannibalizing each other's market share way too badly.

What this means is that they need to merge the 1D and 5D lines and price them where the 5D line is currently. They also need to kill the Rebel line and rebrand the 70D as the Rebel T6i. There really is no good reason to have two consumer crop body lines that are barely differentiated, much less two professional full-frame body lines that each have some features and not others.

Also, the high-end model should always be a strict superset of the low-end model. Having features in the 6D and 70D that the 7D, 5D, and 1D don't have is absurd.


----------



## Khufu (Feb 23, 2014)

The 7D, 5D3 and 1DX are all older models than the 70D and 6D, yo!

If you can bang out 4 or 5 new dSLR designs to suit these different target audiences and put them all into production and distribution by Springtime, go for it 

Also, I really do wonder how many of these 60D/70D "haters" have ever even touched the things... Mag Alloy for a 1.6x crop seems like overkill to me - the 70D is only really missing the Spot AF for birders, it has its MFA back and 7fps, decent weather sealing... It's a nifty 1.6x extender alongside my 5D3 IMO, I wouldn't personally want a crop cam as my number 1 shooter so bring on the lightweight 70D or buy a proper FF camera


----------



## Zv (Feb 23, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > I think one of the problems with Canon's DSLR lineup is that they have too many models on the market. It is not really economical to support future development of all of them.
> ...



Hmmmm .... I disagree with what you said about 2 FF bodies. The current system is pretty good in my opinion. One low cost, one mid level and one high end. By merging the 1D and 5D I presume the body would be 1D shape? That would annoy a lot of journalists and wedding togs for sure. The 5D range is the bread and butter for a lot of folk. The 6D is targeted for a different kind of photographer. It seems more travel and casual stuff. Maybe first time FF buyers etc. also a one camera does it all top end model would be very pricey. The jump between 6D and 1D is really high.


----------



## scottburgess (Feb 23, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> I could possibly accept 5, but only if it's because they continue to sell one older model of consumer crop-body cameras to hit a price point. Any more models than that, and your products are cannibalizing each other's market share way too badly.


If you really couldn't accept >5 models, you might sell your Canon gear and hang out in the Sony forums. Canon will care about your position if you and others like you vote with your feet.

Note what I said earlier about the start-up costs of model lines--they probably aren't significant if you have the technology base and decent sales. And if tech products have taught us anything, it's that you _must_ cannibalize your own products with still more innovative products or risk losing market share. If you don't push forward, like Apple is now struggling to, there's always a Samsung ready to take the lead.



dgatwood said:


> There really is no good reason to have two consumer crop body lines that are barely differentiated, much less two professional full-frame body lines that each have some features and not others.


Really? Have you been to a grocery store lately? 11 flavors of Cheerios, 25 types of Head and Shoulders, 74 flavors of Campbell's soup... with more than a dozen versions of vegetable soup. Crest and Colgate produce 52 varieties of toothpaste. The "good reason" you're struggling to find is called profits. Whether or not the different flavors of camera are all useful to you is irrelevant to Canon when they increase profitability. Visual store impact, consumer psychology, and marketing data are transforming the way dominant companies push products to consumers, with the result being an explosion within product lines that feeds profit margins.

Even if you watched here the last couple weeks, you'd have noted all the excitement generated by the merest hint that new Canon bodies would come to market. Excitement -> sales -> profits.


dgatwood said:


> Also, the high-end model should always be a strict superset of the low-end model. Having features in the 6D and 70D that the 7D, 5D, and 1D don't have is absurd.


I think it would be absurd to wait 8 years for a product to get a feature available today: 5-7 years for the next couple top end bodies to acquire it, and then a couple more for the latest amateur version. Canon, to it's credit, has been willing to try new features on lower-end cameras to see if they drive sales, then push them upward if the feature is successful. Like eye-controlled focus in the 90's, or internal WiFi and GPS today. If you look at the Digital EOS SLR Timeline, you'll see that the 1Ds line has never introduced an image processor; instead, they are introduced below and the software perfected before being moved up. Besides, a pro can always add on the latest external GPS unit or Wireless File Transmitter, with a better quality feature likely resulting (along with possible future upgrades).

If a Canon rep stood before you today and heard your complaints, he'd probably apologize that making profits is sometimes untidy. But he'd likely argue that consumers like choices, and he'd also proudly note you're still holding a Canon.


----------



## tron (Feb 24, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > I think one of the problems with Canon's DSLR lineup is that they have too many models on the market. It is not really economical to support future development of all of them.
> ...


Well the number remains 4 if you remove the FICTIONAL 7DII and put the REAL AND EXCELLENT 5DIII ...


----------



## dgatwood (Feb 24, 2014)

scottburgess said:


> Note what I said earlier about the start-up costs of model lines--they probably aren't significant if you have the technology base and decent sales. And if tech products have taught us anything, it's that you _must_ cannibalize your own products with still more innovative products or risk losing market share. If you don't push forward, like Apple is now struggling to, there's always a Samsung ready to take the lead.



Sure, but it's bad when your consumer models cannibalize your pro models to the brink of irrelevance because you haven't updated your pro crop body in well over four years. Products should predominantly cannibalize sales of previous models in the same general line, and possibly previous models in higher lines, but if they cannibalize current models in higher lines, you pretty much have two choices: rev the higher line very quickly or put the handful of extra features into the lower line and drop the higher line entirely. Then, optionally introduce a lower line.




scottburgess said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > There really is no good reason to have two consumer crop body lines that are barely differentiated, much less two professional full-frame body lines that each have some features and not others.
> ...



The big difference is economies of scale. It doesn't take much R&D to release a new cereal flavor, at least when compared with designing a new camera. And the sales are many orders of magnitude higher for the cereal, so it covers the R&D costs very quickly. In the electronics industry, where the R&D costs are high and the sales volume is low, that approach leads to John Sculley's Apple, where there were hundreds of products differentiated only in tiny ways, leading to consumer confusion, poor sales, and massive financial bleeding. No surprise that the person who screwed up Apple so badly came from a company (PepsiCo) that made just the sorts of products you're talking about.

One of the best things Steve Jobs did when he came back to Apple was slash the number of models. Repeatedly. By the time he passed away, there was one size of MacBook, two (maybe three) sizes of MacBook Pro, the Mac Mini, the Mac Pro, and the iMac. One consumer laptop, a couple of pro laptops, one consumer desktop, one pro desktop, and one all-in-one desktop. There were several configurations that let you change various options (hard drive and RAM sizes, CPU speed, etc.), but as far as actual designs go, there were only a very few.




scottburgess said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > Also, the high-end model should always be a strict superset of the low-end model. Having features in the 6D and 70D that the 7D, 5D, and 1D don't have is absurd.
> ...



The "introduce in low-end hardware and let it bubble up" excuse just doesn't match reality. Well, it does, but only over nearly geologic time scales. Canon first tried GPS on consumer bodies back in 2011, and they were incredibly late to the party even then, having been preceded by dozens of other cameras dating back as far as 2007. The fact that it still isn't built-in across the board in their pro line in 2014—some seven years after you could get cheap point-and-shoot cameras with built-in GPS—means that Canon's rate of DSLR upgrades can only be described as "glacial".

And part of the reason for that slow upgrade speed is that they have to cover their R&D costs before they introduce a new model. The more models they sell (to what is mostly a fixed-size market, give or take), the longer each model has to be on the market before they can upgrade it again. Right now, there are three pro bodies by my count—the 1D-X, the 1D-C, and the 5D Mark III. That's an insane amount of R&D for devices that don't sell very many units. And you can bet the cost difference in the hardware among those three is orders of magnitude less than the price difference. So Canon could drastically reduce their R&D costs by folding them into one. Or, if you'd rather have two different body sizes, use the same guts in different enclosures, and update them both at the same time, every time.

Actually, I'd go so far as to say that Canon's biggest problem is that they're afraid to let their low-end products cannibalize their high-end gear, so they artificially limit the features of their low-end products. If they stopped doing that, they would lose sales of their high-end gear, because there would be less reason for people to spend twelve grand on a 1D-C, but on the other hand, the only reason those cost twelve grand is that so few people buy them, so they're distributing R&D costs over a tiny niche market. If they had only one unified 1D/5D model, they could almost certainly make just as much money selling it at less than the 5D's price, and still significantly increase their rate of updates.


----------



## scottburgess (Feb 24, 2014)

dgatwood said:


> The big difference is economies of scale. It doesn't take much R&D to release a new cereal flavor, at least when compared with designing a new camera. And the sales are many orders of magnitude higher for the cereal, so it covers the R&D costs very quickly.


By the numbers, it looks like Canon shipped around 15 million SLR bodies over the last two years. And 5Diii's are a top selling model--look at the best sellers on Amazon. There's plenty of scale. Again, research costs are not borne by individual camera models but across all their SLRs. Development costs and setting up the manufacturing line are not that costly on a per unit basis.


dgatwood said:


> In the electronics industry, where the R&D costs are high and the sales volume is low, that approach leads to John Sculley's Apple, where there were hundreds of products differentiated only in tiny ways, leading to consumer confusion, poor sales, and massive financial bleeding. No surprise that the person who screwed up Apple so badly came from a company (PepsiCo) that made just the sorts of products you're talking about.


Sculley's sin was turning away from the culture of innovation at Apple, alienating the star developers and driving many out. He is still recognized today as a marketing guru, and everyone agrees his Pepsi-style sales campaigns helped build the Mac market--though I would agree that the sales structure for Macs during his CEO tenure was controversial. He just didn't understand how the tech world differed from standard products and wasn't great as the CEO of a technology company. What Jobs did to turn the company around was to return to an engineer-centric culture where ideas and highly-refined products mattered. Does Apple have too many products today? Not really, but their culture of refined technology is again weakening.


dgatwood said:


> The "introduce in low-end hardware and let it bubble up" excuse just doesn't match reality. Well, it does, but only over nearly geologic time scales. Canon first tried GPS on consumer bodies back in 2011, and they were incredibly late to the party even then, having been preceded by dozens of other cameras dating back as far as 2007. The fact that it still isn't built-in across the board in their pro line in 2014—some seven years after you could get cheap point-and-shoot cameras with built-in GPS—means that Canon's rate of DSLR upgrades can only be described as "glacial".


An alternative and arguably more realistic interpretation is that Canon is savvy enough in their marketing research to know what the public will pay for the GPS feature. Just because _you_ want it doesn't mean that there is sufficient demand at this time to put GPS in every product. GPS also has to navigate difficult regulatory structures which reduce its value in a product.


dgatwood said:


> And part of the reason for that slow upgrade speed is that they have to cover their R&D costs before they introduce a new model. The more models they sell (to what is mostly a fixed-size market, give or take), the longer each model has to be on the market before they can upgrade it again. Right now, there are three pro bodies by my count—the 1D-X, the 1D-C, and the 5D Mark III. That's an insane amount of R&D for devices that don't sell very many units. And you can bet the cost difference in the hardware among those three is orders of magnitude less than the price difference. So Canon could drastically reduce their R&D costs by folding them into one. Or, if you'd rather have two different body sizes, use the same guts in different enclosures, and update them both at the same time, every time.


Again, most of the expensive parts are shared technology. Canon cannot stop designing processors, sensors, AF technology, etc... just because they package them into fewer models. Pricing is done in part based on expected sales and market profile, as you note in your next paragraph, which undermines your argument here. The paper and layout of a college textbook doesn't differ much from a similar mass-market book, but the low unit sales establish the higher price. Canon moved into the security camera market precisely because it means selling still more camera models off of largely the same technology base (and it may become a larger market, too). 

And again, this ignores the economics of creating additional product lines when your company is in a dominant position. Canon can leverage its technology to increase market share via additional products; it is not clear yet how many models the market can bear (though with the recent addition of yet another, the Rebel SL1, Canon clearly believes the limit hasn't been reached based on their sales data). Essentially your argument boils down to that you are more of a marketing genius than those stupid folks at Canon, Colgate, Campbell's, and so on. I haven't seen any evidence to support this. Your precise argument was that "There really is no good reason to have two consumer crop body lines that are barely differentiated."  I have clearly explained reasons why, with numerous examples from contemporary companies (including the lens market), yet you keep insisting this is wrong based on your superior knowledge of Canon's R&D costs and unit sales. I doubt this is true. If you do know, then state clearly what the R&D costs and unit sales are for individual Canon camera lines.


dgatwood said:


> Actually, I'd go so far as to say that Canon's biggest problem is that they're afraid to let their low-end products cannibalize their high-end gear, so they artificially limit the features of their low-end products. If they stopped doing that, they would lose sales of their high-end gear, because there would be less reason for people to spend twelve grand on a 1D-C, but on the other hand, the only reason those cost twelve grand is that so few people buy them, so they're distributing R&D costs over a tiny niche market.


They do have to pay for staying ahead technologically, so creating high end product lines makes sense. Again, this just fails to understand how markets work. Of course Canon wants higher end products--they have _much higher profit margins_. So does a Gucci handbag relative to one from Ross's. By your reckoning, Canon should give up the higher profit margins that some folks will pay per camera in order to turn out pro cameras with 7D pricing. But you failed to explain why a company should walk away from substantial profits. Canon might sell a few more camera bodies at first, but Canon's long term profitability would be hurt.

Sigma wants to produce high end lenses for the same basic reason Canon has high end bodies. Leica makes a living in a boutique niche market and profits at Leica have done well under the new management. Nikon has 7 active SLR models, with three of those high end. Funny how everyone must be wrong...

Your argument might make better sense if every major maker had a sub-$2k body that did what a 5Diii did. They don't. But if you think the grass is so much greener elsewhere and that Canon has ******* itself by producing a wide product line, reason dictates you should sell your Canon gear while you can still get a decent price on it and go. I'm staying in part because I am betting Canon will probably be the market leader for years--and I put my money where my mouth is.


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 24, 2014)

scottburgess said:


> dgatwood said:
> 
> 
> > The big difference is economies of scale. It doesn't take much R&D to release a new cereal flavor, at least when compared with designing a new camera. And the sales are many orders of magnitude higher for the cereal, so it covers the R&D costs very quickly.
> ...


Yes, but your whole argument falls apart in the light of one simple fact......

We people in the forum are so smart that we can can make a far better decision than Canon can, even though it is based on biased and partial information.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Feb 24, 2014)

Don Haines said:


> We people in the forum are so smart that we can can make a far better decision than Canon can, even though it is based on biased and partial information.



Indeed. "We" decided long ago that Canon *must* address their poor sensor IQ. 

;D


----------



## scottburgess (Feb 25, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > We people in the forum are so smart that we can can make a far better decision than Canon can, even though it is based on biased and partial information.
> ...



Oh screw that. I want a camera that fixes my lousy compositions!


----------



## slclick (Feb 25, 2014)

scottburgess said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...


----------

