« on: June 29, 2014, 12:42:52 AM »
APS-H Does not fit the existing line up either. You already have 6D as low cost FF, 5DIII as mid range FF then the 1DX at the top, 7D as top APS-C. Where does the APS-H fit in??? So if I want a APS-H I need to think outside of the box and propose what I WANT. I agree that my proposal does not fit the existing line up. So is a general APS-H proposal without any substance. At least my proposed APS-H have a chance to beat or equal to the 1DX in terms of low light and frame rate with the portability of the 6D. What more can I ask for? Only draw back is that it has a low MP count. But Sony has just done that. There must be someone out there want such type of camera. The existing APS-C cannot match the FF in low light is due to the MP race. With the same technology and same pixel density( read it as pixel size), the APS-C will equal the FF in low light.Why it has to be paired with the Big White. It can also pair with the shorty 40 To be carried around as "king of low light" for family event.If Canon bring back the APS-H, It must be in the niche market and meet the following requirement.
1. Smaller than the 6D for portability
2. Same pixel density(or even smaller) than the 1Dx for low light/high ISO performance.
3. Very fast FPS for sports photographer due to lower MP.
4. At least half of the price of 1Dx
Question is at this day of age, how many photographer can live with a 10 to 12 mp camera as a general purpose camera?
Why does it have to be smaller than the 6D when you're going to be hanging big whites off it?
I think a 7D size 24+MP APS-H body would be attractive since the 1D4 is 16MP and $3500 complements the current line alongside the 5D3
I think someone is confusing what they would like it to be versus where it should fall in regards to performance within the lineup.
I don't see a aps-c/h having better low light performance than the current full frame models for at least 10 years... but maybe I'm being pessimistic...