# Land of Crazy not so Crazy? [CR1.5]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 25, 2011)

```
<div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/01/land-of-crazy-not-so-crazy-cr1-5/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/01/land-of-crazy-not-so-crazy-cr1-5/"></a></div>
<p><strong>Maybe not so crazy</strong>

I posted the craziest rumor of the week on Sunday, it didn’t seem at all plausible to me.</p>
<p>One person in particular wrote in saying it may not be that far off. Such a camera was apparently discussed with him/her before Christmas.</p>
<p><strong>Spec List!</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>- New small body FF</li>
<li>- Pro AF (45 point same as Eos 1D MKIV)</li>
<li>- 16.7 MP</li>
<li>- 6 FPS (booster with extra batterygrip up to 9fps)</li>
<li>- ISO 100-12800 (L50 / H102400)</li>
<li>- Single CF slot</li>
<li>- Video as Eos 7D</li>
<li>- Msrp $ 4,399</li>
</ul>
<p><!--more--></p>
<p>What I was told was the MSRP was way off, the rest of it was relatively on the mark. A CP+Ã‚Â announcementÃ‚Â was unknown, as the source was told it would be announced at the end of February.</p>
<p><strong>5D Mark III / 1Ds Mark IV</strong>

As most people know, the 5D Mark II completely killed the 1Ds Mark III sales numbers. The same source explains that Canon will move the 5D Mark III into the territory of flagship resolution camera and the 1D Mark IV/V will be the flagship “pro”Ã‚Â body. The 1Ds Mark IV will be something completely different, yes, another person saying it.</p>
<p><strong>CR’s Take</strong>

The whole Canon DSLR lineup is due for a big shake up, all of this info points to that. I’m not going to commit to all of this being true, but there’s an awful lot of people saying the same thing.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## davidonformosa (Jan 25, 2011)

In another thread c.d.embrey wrote:



> How would you feel if the 5D MkIII turned out to be a FF 60D. The way Canon has been acting lately, it could happen.



Maybe this is the camera described. If so the price is likely to be somewhere around $2,000.


----------



## Keith (Jan 25, 2011)

Well I would be glad to see Canon re-structure their FF camera lines. I am an amateur enthusiast, but I'd really like the option of a FF body for $1500-1800 (street price). The specs listed here look like they would fit my needs without blowing my budget. With a FF body and limited to 16MP, I hope it will have great low-light performance.

If they start tailoring the 5D series for ultra-megapixel performance, I wonder if this will raise its price.


----------



## kubelik (Jan 25, 2011)

I really would NOT like a new FF camera with only 16 MP. there's no reason that canon can't get better performance out of 28 MP today in 2011 than they could out of 21 MP back in 2008. as a generalist, I like being able to crop down if I want to since I'm not in the market for a 1D Mark IV, and I don't feel like I should be forced to buy a 7D just for wildlife/sports.

I also don't want something with crap build quality just so we can get it cheap. if the 5DIII were to be built like a rebel, I probably wouldn't buy it. just save my money for glass and then go to whatever the 1D series cam is once my 5DII dies eventually. I've seen cameras hit the floor and survive, and I've seen cameras hit the floor and die. I've seen a T2i croak after being exposed to hard spray. build quality matters.

also, what does "video as 7D" mean? why not "video as current 5DII firmware"? how/why would a FF camera shoot video like a crop camera? if anything, 7D video is weaker than 5DII video as you do not have manual audio gain available, which better be an available feature in the next 5D cam released

so I am firmly thinking/hoping this rumor is total bunk. I want that 5DIII with 28 MP and 19-point AF that was rumored previously


----------



## x-vision (Jan 25, 2011)

16.7 MP ??? 

Nah. This could have been believable in the summer of 2008. Not in 2011, though. 
CR, this 'source' is not reliable grin.

Expect the 5DIII to have the same 30mp (FF) sensor as the 1DV. Price going up too. 
The 7DII will be the entry level pro camera for those who don't like the 5DIII price.


----------



## Isurus (Jan 25, 2011)

I agree; I've seen this "wish list" a thousand times. Nothing but someone wanting a D700 that says "Canon" on it.

I honestly don't want to see lower megapixels in the next 5D. Why go backwards? There is no reason technology shouldn't allow for improvements in other areas while at least keeping the MPs constant, if not increasing. 



x-vision said:


> 16.7 MP ???
> 
> Nah. This could have been believable in the summer of 2008. Not in 2011, though.
> CR, this 'source' is not reliable grin.
> ...


----------



## blacksheep21 (Jan 25, 2011)

FF in a rebel body? other than the MSRP, the specs on this thing is fantastic. If you want a good build with a metallic body and extras, the upper ranges like the single digit cameras are available for you. I just want a light FF body, everything else is immaterial, it lets amatuers finally get full use off their EF lenses.


----------



## Keith (Jan 25, 2011)

kubelik said:


> I've seen cameras hit the floor and survive, and I've seen cameras hit the floor and die. I've seen a T2i croak after being exposed to hard spray. build quality matters.



I think the Rebels can hold up better than you do: http://www.digitalrev.com/en/nikon-d90-vs-canon-550d-destruction-test-6481-article


----------



## Stuart (Jan 25, 2011)

The sensor does not seem to ring true, only just above the k5 resolution.
the ISO 128000 max with a jump to 1million in H mode - a 3 stop jump?


----------



## JLN (Jan 25, 2011)

Stuart said:


> The sensor does not seem to ring true, only just above the k5 resolution.
> the ISO 128000 max with a jump to 1million in H mode - a 3 stop jump?



thats 102k not 1mil, 12800, h1 = 25600, h2 = 512000, h3 = 102400.

As for the rumor, ugh please no. The current 5d is fine in terms of size and ergonomics.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jan 25, 2011)

I'm expecting this new model to be a video camera that happens to take very nice still images in ridiculously low light levels. For those who think that 16.7MP isn't enough, the Red Epic $58,000 movie camera only has 14MP in a very oblong APS-H-size sensor, but does 5K raw video and claims 13.5 stops of DR. One of the big complaints about the 5DMk2 and 7D as movie cameras is the absence of raw video output. I would expect this to change.

The 5DMk3 will be the high resolution still camera that also takes video.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jan 25, 2011)

If these specs are true, the big question...is...this a 5DIII or something different.
I find it bizarre that Canon can moan that the 5DII stole 1DsIII sales when they are about to release a camera that will totally rip into the current 1DIV....unless they are about to bring out a 1DV?


----------



## Etienne (Jan 25, 2011)

Improve the video, AF, and high ISO noise
Add AF in Video, swivel screen, rack focus, peaking and false color
Improve AWB too

The rest is gravy:

MP can be anywhere from 16 - 28. I prefer staying around 21, files are getting pretty big
Pixel binning awesomeness: include 3 levels 9:1, 4:1, 1:1 for useable digital zoom as well as max high ISO and minimized moire.


----------



## kubelik (Jan 25, 2011)

Keith said:


> kubelik said:
> 
> 
> > I've seen cameras hit the floor and survive, and I've seen cameras hit the floor and die. I've seen a T2i croak after being exposed to hard spray. build quality matters.
> ...



nothing against the digitalrev guys, as I enjoy their videos a lot, and I have seen that video before, but I'll believe what I've seen in my own experience. I'm not the kind that babies my equipment, although I try to take good care of it, but if I'm next to a waterfall I need to know my camera isn't going to get waterlogged from spray. I don't want a 50-50 chance -- that doesn't cut it. 

I've respected Canon build quality ever since I first bought a G9 and proceeded to drop it from standing height onto rough stone (accidentally, of course), and nothing happened except a minor surface scratch. I'm 6'1, so that's a long way down. but I have to say, if I were putting money on whether a G9 or a T2i were to survive a given situation ... I'd have my money on the G9.



Bob Howland said:


> I'm expecting this new model to be a video camera that happens to take very nice still images in ridiculously low light levels. For those who think that 16.7MP isn't enough, the Red Epic $58,000 movie camera only has 14MP in a very oblong APS-H-size sensor, but does 5K raw video and claims 13.5 stops of DR. One of the big complaints about the 5DMk2 and 7D as movie cameras is the absence of raw video output. I would expect this to change.
> 
> The 5DMk3 will be the high resolution still camera that also takes video.



the weird part about this is: when is Canon going to bring these kinds of sensors to their video lineup? with Panasonic and Sony and Red all releasing full-featured video cams with large sensor, Canon's flaships still only run 1/3" sensors ... they're really starting to look weak against the competition, all of which is very fairly priced. the new "professional" handycams look kind of sad against Sony's NXCAM system. I think we'll need to see significant improvement here as well, otherwise the 5D series will end up killing off not only the 1DsIII but also Canon's video lineup.


----------



## Justin (Jan 25, 2011)

CR rating creep I see. 

This would be a disappointing camera to studio and landscape shooters. It would be a boon to wedding photogs though. Nature shooters would welcome the extra depth of field at wide apertures, but would loose reach and without a nice big sensor from which to crop, would lose the power of crop in PP.


----------



## Bob Howland (Jan 25, 2011)

kubelik said:


> Bob Howland said:
> 
> 
> > I'm expecting this new model to be a video camera that happens to take very nice still images in ridiculously low light levels. For those who think that 16.7MP isn't enough, the Red Epic $58,000 movie camera only has 14MP in a very oblong APS-H-size sensor, but does 5K raw video and claims 13.5 stops of DR. One of the big complaints about the 5DMk2 and 7D as movie cameras is the absence of raw video output. I would expect this to change.
> ...



I think you're being a little too hard on Canon. First, the XF100/105/300/305 camcorders include fast wide-range zoom lenses and the lens on the XF300/305 is reportedly excellent (See Luminous Landscape). The lens on the XF100/105 appears to be the same as the one used on the XA10 and $1500 G10 and hasn't been tested. Second, using a larger sensor means that a larger lens will have to be used. I suspect that a 29-527 f/1.6-2.8 lens (the FF equivalent of the XF300/305 lens) would cost and weigh a bunch. Third, so what if the new model hurts sales of the Canon video lineup, so long as the camera that is purchased instead is a Canon and not a Panasonic or Sony?


----------



## kubelik (Jan 25, 2011)

Bob Howland said:


> I think you're being a little too hard on Canon. First, the XF100/105/300/305 camcorders include fast wide-range zoom lenses and the lens on the XF300/305 is reportedly excellent (See Luminous Landscape). The lens on the XF100/105 appears to be the same as the one used on the XA10 and $1500 G10 and hasn't been tested. Second, using a larger sensor means that a larger lens will have to be used. I suspect that a 29-527 f/1.6-2.8 lens (the FF equivalent of the XF300/305 lens) would cost and weigh a bunch. Third, so what if the new model hurts sales of the Canon video lineup, so long as the camera that is purchased instead is a Canon and not a Panasonic or Sony?



bob, good points; although I think if you had a larger sensor format you wouldn't need f/1.6 on a zoom lens like that. you didn't say it explicitly but I realize you're also pointing out that these are used for different purposes; a newsman needs to have that zoom range and doesn't need/want ridiculous DOF effects, while the camera I'm talking about would be more of something that would intrigue a filmmaker. still, I'm sure canon is toiling away on some new large-sensor video-dedicated cam; to not be examining that right now would put them pretty far behind the curve


----------



## clicstudio (Jan 25, 2011)

*Small Body?*

I can't work with a small body. I am not a tourist nor do video with the camera and I shoot vertical all the time. Why can't they have 2 different versions of the camera: A normal one and a Pro model with a built-in grip? Those plastic crappy grips for 5D's, 7D's etc., really suck. They are not well made, the materials are not the same as the camera, and having to use 2 batteries is stupid.


----------



## Flake (Jan 25, 2011)

You've never touched one of the battery grips have you? 








Looks just the same Magnesium Alloy to me!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 25, 2011)

Justin said:


> Nature shooters would welcome the extra depth of field at wide apertures, but would loose reach and without a nice big sensor from which to crop, would lose the power of crop in PP.



As a FF camera, it would have shallower DoF (not deeper) than a crop body, for a shot with equivalent framing. That has nothing to do with megapixels, only the size of the sensor. It's why cheap P&S cameras have nearly infinite DoF even 'wide open', and why portrait photographers want as large a sensor as they can afford...


----------



## Bob Howland (Jan 25, 2011)

*Re: Small Body?*



clicstudio said:


> I can't work with a small body. I am not a tourist nor do video with the camera and I shoot vertical all the time. Why can't they have 2 different versions of the camera: A normal one and a Pro model with a built-in grip? Those plastic crappy grips for 5D's, 7D's etc., really suck. They are not well made, the materials are not the same as the camera, and having to use 2 batteries is stupid.


My 5D and 40D operate just fine with only one battery in the grip.


----------



## Justin (Jan 25, 2011)

Right to all. "Extra depth of field" was poor phrasing. By extra I meant extra shallow at wide apertures. 



neuroanatomist said:


> Justin said:
> 
> 
> > Nature shooters would welcome the extra depth of field at wide apertures, but would loose reach and without a nice big sensor from which to crop, would lose the power of crop in PP.
> ...


----------



## jsixpack (Jan 26, 2011)

I'll put in my "never gonna happen" vote, a master-only flash on this FF body. Don't need a real flash, but a wireless controller would be cool

JSP


----------



## ronderick (Jan 26, 2011)

Yeah, I think the important message is that it's time Canon decides to shake up its product lines to accomodate new technologies and demand. The design/release of 5D3 and 1DsIV would have to take a back seat, since the shaping of this policy could affect the market habitat for the next decade or so :

First, if these rumors on the low spec FF camera (call it the FF 60D for now) would indicate that Canon might be thinking about starting the war on consumer-model FF bodies. However, if such indeed is part of the plan, it would no doubt HURT the sales of future APS-C bodies and EF-S lenses. Are they ready to cannibalize their own consumer level market a-la Olympus with the 43 vs. m43 decision? It's hard to say.... but I think announcements in the near future would shed more light.

Frankly, life would be easier if 35mm means 35mm, not 35mm on FF bodies and 35mm x 1.6 (or 1.5 for Nikon) for crop bodies. Doing away with this bizarre remanents of the digital camera revolution would be worthy of a standing ovation.

Next, I'd be wondering if Canon is trying to diversify their flagship models (a-la Nikon D2, D2H, D2X, and so on). If this is the strategy, then I would say the the FF 60D would be there as the designated all-rounder king of prosumer level FF body (like the xxD in the pre-7D era. Now, what they're going to do with the 7D line would be another mystery... maybe leaving it as a one-shot wonder?).

Now, that would leave the pro level with a lot of room to play with... 1D for speed, 1Ds for resolution, and maybe a 1Dv for videos (or whatever way they can imagine of diversifying that piece of the market).

Just my 2 cents...


----------



## Mr.Magic (Jan 26, 2011)

Based on the message above, I started thinking and came up with this: 

Possible new canon camera product lines: camera - market segment - main feature

1Ds: medium format (I gues 1Ds will not be the pro body for resolution, therefore a 5D with grip can be bought)
1D: pro aps-h - fps

5D: prosumer FF- resolution
7D: prosumer crop - fps
9D: prosumer FF - basic technologies, less megapixels

60D: enhusiast - same as current
550D: beginner - same as current
1000D: same as current - or I should delete it 


Features as seen often with regards to 3D (less megapixels, superb up to date technologies), would
1) cost to much (both in sales price, as in production cost)
2) kill other FF's sales
and therefore unlikely to be produced (as in my opinion). So, not insert another high end FF, but insert a low end FF in the product line


----------



## zerozeronine (Jan 26, 2011)

Hi Ronderick,

I totally agree that Canon should shake up its product lines now, even if it means further delaying the releases of the 5D III and 1Ds IV. The staggered release of their high-end models, and advances in tech have made things very awkward. Competition from Sony and Nikon is also going to complicate stuff because it's unclear where everyone is heading (and thus becoming hard to know where to compete and where to be unique). 

Although many point out that Canon has official descriptions for their product lines, some of us have trouble putting faith in those because the current lineup doesn't make total sense within itself (like the 1Ds III), and we don't believe that it can remain that way with the pressure from all the competition.

As much as having everyone use full-frame would simplify things, I'm pretty sure that we're actually moving away from that. APS-C-sized sensors are so much cheaper to make, and cost is the most important thing in this market. Most people don't want to pay FF prices, and the vast majority of sales are made in APS-C. APS-C sensors (especially those from Sony) are so good now, that most people (I'm including every kind of consumer here) don't even see the need to lust after FF. Sony and Nikon are seeing this in their sales (the 5D II kicked butt because of its video feature). Sony execs have even said that, although they're not planning on abandoning FF, they're going to first focus on getting all the APS-C bodies updated before focusing on FF, as that's a lower priority.

I do think that Canon should still have two options for nonpro full-frame users. A fast FPS, high sensitivity, low-res sports camera 3D, and a high DR, high-res, low FPS landscape/studio 5D III. But whether that makes business sense, only Canon knows. In trying to bring in an affordable full-frame, Canon sort of "screwed up" the product lineup with the 5D II, but they ended up showing that there's a significant number of people (much bigger than the pro group) who want to get a full frame (or a good video DSLR) but don't want to pay for a 1 series. So Canon probably needs to make the 1 series A LOT more special to maintain its flagship status, and segment the consumer full-frame line because that market has expanded (partly from eating away at the pro market).

Even better would be if they'd do on-chip pixel binning so we could have the best of both worlds in a single camera body. Brute force 4-1 binning before the image processing or demosaicing, so that you could up the FPS (and/or use a crop mode). Then they could simplify the lines into one pro full-frame 1D, one consumer full-frame 5D, and a slew of APS-C cameras. Man...I'd buy that new 5D in a heartbeat!

Kaz


----------



## Bob Howland (Jan 26, 2011)

Mr.Magic said:


> Based on the message above, I started thinking and came up with this:
> 
> Possible new canon camera product lines: camera - market segment - main feature
> 
> ...



How does video fit into your scheme?


----------



## Mr.Magic (Jan 26, 2011)

Bob Howland said:


> Mr.Magic said:
> 
> 
> > Based on the message above, I started thinking and came up with this:
> ...



Indeed, forgot. I think Canon should not focus on high quality video's by using DSLR's. Video on dslr's is cool, but when a movie producer wants high quality movies, he should use something applicable for video, and not shoot with 'a dslr that accidentaly shoots good video'. 

So, they should follow sony's example and come up with a brand new service line in which cmos sensors are used for video's. Link: http://www.dpreview.com/news/1007/10071401sonynexvg10e.asp


----------



## Bob Howland (Jan 26, 2011)

Mr.Magic said:


> Indeed, forgot. I think Canon should not focus on high quality video's by using DSLR's. Video on dslr's is cool, but when a movie producer wants high quality movies, he should use something applicable for video, and not shoot with 'a dslr that accidentaly shoots good video'.
> 
> So, they should follow sony's example and come up with a brand new service line in which cmos sensors are used for video's. Link: http://www.dpreview.com/news/1007/10071401sonynexvg10e.asp



I'm half tempted to agree with you but there are lots of people who think you're wrong. Certainly the control layout and functionality on the XF100/105/300/305 camcorders and my Panasonic HDC-TM700 are radically different than on the 5D2 DSLR.


----------



## ronderick (Jan 27, 2011)

zerozeronine said:


> Hi Ronderick,
> 
> I totally agree that Canon should shake up its product lines now, even if it means further delaying the releases of the 5D III and 1Ds IV. The staggered release of their high-end models, and advances in tech have made things very awkward. Competition from Sony and Nikon is also going to complicate stuff because it's unclear where everyone is heading (and thus becoming hard to know where to compete and where to be unique).



Zerozeronine, I totally agree with you that competition is going to get more complicated - not only from companies but also from innovations appearing out of nowhere. Who'd ever expect the translucent mirror technology to be a potential alternative to mirror vs. mirrorless approach until Sony placed it into their alphas? I have no doubt that we'll see a fair share of wild cards appearing to test the market configuration, and that's what makes this industry so full of surprises and so fun to watch/follow.




zerozeronine said:


> Although many point out that Canon has official descriptions for their product lines, some of us have trouble putting faith in those because the current lineup doesn't make total sense within itself (like the 1Ds III), and we don't believe that it can remain that way with the pressure from all the competition.



Agreed, and I think that's why the product line is being shaking up quietly (at least there's no big commotions, save those who notice the gaps in the product cycles).



zerozeronine said:


> As much as having everyone use full-frame would simplify things, I'm pretty sure that we're actually moving away from that. APS-C-sized sensors are so much cheaper to make, and cost is the most important thing in this market. Most people don't want to pay FF prices, and the vast majority of sales are made in APS-C. APS-C sensors (especially those from Sony) are so good now, that most people (I'm including every kind of consumer here) don't even see the need to lust after FF. Sony and Nikon are seeing this in their sales (the 5D II kicked butt because of its video feature). Sony execs have even said that, although they're not planning on abandoning FF, they're going to first focus on getting all the APS-C bodies updated before focusing on FF, as that's a lower priority.



Yes, I agree that the majority of casual users - which contributes to majority of Canon's profit, no doubt - probably isn't even aware of the difference between FF and cropped bodies. Like what you've said, $$$ has the biggest say - unless they can bring the price of the FF sensor down to the same level as APS-C sensors. But coming to think of it, maybe there's a reason why Canon has been slow at producing new APS-C body lenses...

However, I guess the option is still in Canon's hand. Though I doubt the same thing could be said about Nikon who's using Sony sensors... ;D I hope it didn't affect their plans for the D800 :



zerozeronine said:


> I do think that Canon should still have two options for nonpro full-frame users. A fast FPS, high sensitivity, low-res sports camera 3D, and a high DR, high-res, low FPS landscape/studio 5D III. But whether that makes business sense, only Canon knows. In trying to bring in an affordable full-frame, Canon sort of "screwed up" the product lineup with the 5D II, but they ended up showing that there's a significant number of people (much bigger than the pro group) who want to get a full frame (or a good video DSLR) but don't want to pay for a 1 series. So Canon probably needs to make the 1 series A LOT more special to maintain its flagship status, and segment the consumer full-frame line because that market has expanded (partly from eating away at the pro market).
> 
> Even better would be if they'd do on-chip pixel binning so we could have the best of both worlds in a single camera body. Brute force 4-1 binning before the image processing or demosaicing, so that you could up the FPS (and/or use a crop mode). Then they could simplify the lines into one pro full-frame 1D, one consumer full-frame 5D, and a slew of APS-C cameras. Man...I'd buy that new 5D in a heartbeat!
> 
> Kaz



I think the cute and cool thing about the pro product line is it's a niche thing - it's expensive enough that not many people will ever buy one, but it's important enough that none of the big name company would hesitate putting in major technology to establish itself among the ranks. 

Now, I also believe the 5D series (5D2 to be specific) "broke the glass ceiling" on this one. I've seen a lot of professional jobs turned out with this little beauty, and several professional photographers choosing this one over the 1D series simply because this is "easier for their backs". I think Canon has created a Frankenstein out of the 5D2 - it messes up the border between the prosumer and pro, because pros uses this one (or prefers this one) over the flagship 1DsIII. 

Once we enjoy this fruit of chance, I doubt us consumers would want to give up ground in the future. Now, would Canon answer this calling, or would they go back to setting up a solid barrier between the "prosumer" USD2,500 body and the "pro" USD7,000 body?

Like what you've said, I too agree that a simplified, logical product line on the top end would be nice. The 5D as the solid foundation (I think the new era calls for smaller bodies, so the flagships are way too big) of the flagship models, and the 1D series to be place for experimental, specialized, and durability innovations. Of course, if you want to satisfy the pro-look ego, there's always the Leica strategy - just label the flagships "limited edition" and have lots of different runs 8)


----------

