« on: December 03, 2013, 08:16:52 AM »
I think there may be a processing power and heat dissipation issue with the 20MP sensor from the 70D; either that or it's too expensive to manufacture!
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Seems more like a firmware update than a whole new camera...
hmm. no new lenses?
The 'leak' is of the camera's spec.
Where does it imply there are no new lenses?
Gentlemen, please step back from the brink..... a lot of you are getting way to personall and it would be a shame if the moderators had to step in.
I value all civil voices and like to hear both sides of the debate, but only when it is civil. When you resort to name calling and taunting each other, anything good that you have to say gets lost in the noise.
Take a deep breath, count to 10, go take some pictures, whatever.... let us restore our sanity.
+1 ... Well said. I agree
...This is a NL rumor, so take it with a huge grain of salt.
Yes, and it's kind of garbled too.
Break it down:
The 5D IV will push toward higher specs. No Sh*t Sherlock. Did you think it would push toward lower specs? No information on when this would be released. Could be 2015, could be 2016, who knows. Just a random statement tossed in there.
Canon's new studio camera will be the one to maximize image quality Again, let's state the obvious. If it's a studio camera it better maximize image quality, else why make it?
There will be no 3D Of course not, Canon will never use the 3D designation unless they build a stereo camera. Too confusing.
By early 2015 there will be four full frame cameras Let's see: a 6D, a 5D, a 1Dx and a studio camera. Yep, that's four.
Two of which will be announced next year Okay, if they have three cameras now. They aren't replacing any of the three, but adding a fourth, where does the "two" come from. Either somebody is bad with math or one of the three could be updated. But which one?
My suspicion is that the 6D won't be updated for awhile says Keith
I’m willing to wager the EOS 6D won’t be replaced before the EOS 5D Mark III or EOS-1D X. says Craig
First off, neither Keith nor Craig are particularly good at predictions. No assessment of their ability to extract information from inside sources – there is a big difference. Craig has the best sources in the industry, and once a rumor hits CR2 or CR3 he's almost never wrong. I'm just saying that when it comes to personal opinions/predictions, the batting average doesn't seem to be any better than anyone else on this forum.
So, let's discount the idea that the 6D won't be replaced before the 5D or the 1D and put them all on equal footing.
Me, I'd bet on the 6D being updated first. There is a lot of headroom between the 6D and the 5D so Canon could throw a 70D/7D autofocus system into the 6D II without seriously impacting sales of the 5D or 1D. The 6D also seems like a prime candidate for the current dual pixel technology. I don't see 5D or 1D owners particularly caring about that until it shows some significant benefits beyond what it offers in the 70D.
The 1Dx is the oldest in the lineup, so it could be updated, but neither Canon nor Nikon like to update the flagship too frequently because the professional customer base just isn't that into frequent upgrades. Still, a late 2014 announcement with availability in 2015 is certainly possible.
Or, it could be the 5DIII. The only reason to update the 5DIII would be because I just bought one, so with my track record, it could get an update. But, honestly, I'm pretty hard pressed to see what they would update that would motivate buyers to upgrade. Especially since the current 5DIII has been a pretty phenomenal seller.
Bottom line, I'd be surprised to see any of these three updated, but my personal bet is the 6D.
*sigh* Ok, new lenses, probably better optical IQ than their previous, with IS (yay?), more expensive and a lot slower. Yes, I said it, f/2.8 is slow. For a good quality prime that is. For a zoom, yea, that's pretty fast. But for the 85mm going from f/1.8 to f/2.8? Ugh.
The 135L is a special lens that I don't think will be lumped in with a 50/85 refresh (keep in mind that there also is a 100m F/2 USM that no one talks about, also in need of a refresh). I see the 135L being a very serious piece of kit that will get its own fanfare when it is released.
I know DXO scores are pretty arbitrary, but how is the zeiss 6 points higher than the 300/2.8 even though its worse in 4/5 of their "categories"
Because of the difference in speed of the two lenses. Dxo seem to load the 'transmission' score more heavily.
But is a 1.4 lens better than a 2.8 lens per se ?
Well, you see a Score, and you see a bunch of Measurements under it. Logically, you assume the Score represents some sort of summary or synthesis of those Measurememts. But, no...that's DxOMark's Biased Scores for you - BS.
The Lens Score is actually based on 'performance in 150 lux illumination' - the light level of a dimly lit warehouse. So, the Lens Score is determined mainly by the T-stop of the lens...and by the camera on which the lens is tested. Like I said...BS.
The G series is still quite compact compared to some DSLRs... For an APS-C sensor (as rumored) if they can maintain the size of the present G1X, this is still one of the smallest even among mirrorless aps-c.
G1X with an APS-C sensor? Hmmm.... Nice but could be too big to be one of the "G" series. If compact enough like G1X, then count me in. This can be a very good backup/fun camera if the on-sensor dual AF can be copied from 70D. 10 to 15MP should be more than enough. I like a 17/18-135 F3.5-5.6 lens though.
On the other hand, why not the eos-M with a viewfinder and a built-in flash instead? Both should be almost the same size. G1X with APS-C sensor doesn't make sense really unless they can make the lens smaller and retractable just like the G series.
It does get interesting when you try to compare two cameras... You set them both at ISO1600 and look at the noise.... camera A appears to be cleaner than B... then you realize that the ISO's are different and you are comparing 800 to 1600....
It looks to me like DXO Mark has come up with a test that proves you can not compare apples to oranges :-)