Congratulations Canon to another great Camera release!!

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Well, you are welcome to defend it as a business decision. However, Canon's policy of going out of their way to cripple their lower end products does make them less attractive (and difficult to recommend to someone on a tight budget!)

This is where we disagree.  The SL1 is no more "crippled" by the lack of AFMA than the 5DIII is "crippled" by the lack of creative filters and scene modes.

You can add creative filters, with much higher quality, AFTER the fact. You can't refocus all the soft images after the fact from poor AF calibration. One doesn't affect the ability of the body to perform to spec the other one does. So I'd say that one of them is a bigger cripple than the other.

But you can't add the exact same creative filters, or as easily, if you have to process them on your computer.  You need time ... and a computer.  Oh, and you need to find or buy the creative filters somewhere.  More time/money.  So omitting them is an obvious loss for 5DIII users.  Likewise, you can't fix all of the blurry images after the fact because you lacked the proper scene mode.  Again, a huge loss for 5DIII users.  SL1 users can instantly dial in the proper scene mode and get the shot.  So why not include those features in a 5DIII?  Are they just "crippling" the camera for the few users who would find those features valuable and possibly necessary?

As I've said before, the Rebel cameras do perform to their spec.  Your theory that they have poor AF calibration and don't perform to spec is based on a different spec shared by a few people on gear forums.  This is like a Ferrari owner complaining that a Kia doesn't perform to spec, especially at the race track.

Yeah you can find the same only better and who uses a DSLR and doesn't own a computer?
Plus, they are a bonus. MFA is fixing something that is broken, totally different.

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Well, you are welcome to defend it as a business decision. However, Canon's policy of going out of their way to cripple their lower end products does make them less attractive (and difficult to recommend to someone on a tight budget!)

This is where we disagree.  The SL1 is no more "crippled" by the lack of AFMA than the 5DIII is "crippled" by the lack of creative filters and scene modes.

Canon has a nice 2,500 word article on their web site on AFMA and how to do it.  That's about 5 typewritten pages, single-spaced.  Who has time for that?  Advanced users and pros ... and no one else.

Tell the typical buyer of the SL1 that they can "micro-adjust the autofocus" and they will say, "I don't need that."  Tell the typical buyer of the 5DIII about all of the creative filters and scene modes they're missing on the 5DIII, and they will also say, "I don't need that."

AFMA would be no more of a selling feature on the SL1 than creative filters and scene modes would be on the 5DIII.  Some people here would scream in protest if creative filters and scene modes showed up in their 5DIII.  That would be a case of more features making a product less attractive.

When Leica introduced a "snapshot" mode on their $6K rangefinder, that feature was greeted with ridicule and scorn by their user base.  It was something they would never use.

The lesson for the manufacturer is that you don't include features just because you can, or just because they're cheap.  That approach is as likely to turn away some buyers as it is to attract others.  Instead, you choose a package of features that make sense for the intended user and how they're likely to use the product.  Camera makers don't just compete to offer more features, they also compete to offer more intelligent, more coherent design.

+100

-1000

[Zlatko]

Let me ask you why they chose to omit the cool creative filters and scene modes in the 5DIII?  (Hey, I would really like them. )  Or why they chose to include the green Auto mode on the mode dial of the 5DIII?

Putting extraneous items on physical controls is not comparable to having an extra item in a 3 deep menu heirarchy -- since they can't custom build a camera for everyone, they need to make a cost/benefit call which means any item on the physical controls must be carefully thought out.

It wouldn't surprise me if there was some internal debate about the "green box" on the 5D -- there is after all already a P mode as well as Av and Tv.

Another analogy:  Wordpress.com offers three price levels for blogs they host, from $0/year to $99/year $300/year.  To get the ability to edit CSS on your blog (a "premium" feature), you have to go up from $0/year to $99/year.  Of course, you get some other premium features bundled together for that price. 

You have a lot of analogies but they aren't really relevant. The $0 a year option is obviously a loss leader. Also, the fixed costs of software development are very large but the marginal (per user) cost (of the software development itself) is 0. The close to zero marginal costs are why they can afford to have free riders. Camera manufacturers do have fixed costs but they also have marginal costs. There's not much point in them letting free riders in -- the sales of rebel units are large enough that it would be crazy for the manufacturer to price them at the marginal cost (e.g. as opposed to recuperating fixed costs/making a profit).  So I think another place where the analogy falls down is that the $0 a year wordpress customers are free riders while it is probably not the case that this is true of Rebel users.

Who said anything about extra physical controls?  All of those features could be implemented in the menus of the 5DIII.  The 5DIII already has "Scene Intelligent Auto" (the Green setting) which sets up its own abbreviated menu, so why "cripple" it with no grainy black & white mode, no toy camera mode, no watercolor mode, and no settings for Sports, Kids or Food?  The code for those features is already written and could be added for "free", right? 

This is not about loss leaders/free riders.  People paying $0 for their blogs get ads on their site, so they are not necessarily loss leaders/free riders.  Now that I look it further, it appears the company offers a variety of upgrade options and increments -- custom domains for $13/year, custom designs for $30/year (lets you change fonts & colors, but not edit CSS), extra storage for $20/year, etc., etc.   The point is that if you want just that one extra feature (edit CSS), you have to splurge on their "Pro Bundle" and pay $99/year.  And yet the code for that feature is written and costs nothing to ad to any site at any price level.  It's just a tab that is switched on or off, based on what you pay.  Why do they "cripple" that feature on sites that pay $13/year or $30/year, but not on those that pay $99/year?  Are they bad people because of this?  Is "crippling" even the appropriate word for this?  Perhaps it just makes good business sense. 

Seems analogous to me:  more expensive cameras are the analogous "Pro Bundle".

[Zlatko]

Well, you are welcome to defend it as a business decision. However, Canon's policy of going out of their way to cripple their lower end products does make them less attractive (and difficult to recommend to someone on a tight budget!)

This is where we disagree.  The SL1 is no more "crippled" by the lack of AFMA than the 5DIII is "crippled" by the lack of creative filters and scene modes.

You can add creative filters, with much higher quality, AFTER the fact. You can't refocus all the soft images after the fact from poor AF calibration. One doesn't affect the ability of the body to perform to spec the other one does. So I'd say that one of them is a bigger cripple than the other.

But you can't add the exact same creative filters, or as easily, if you have to process them on your computer.  You need time ... and a computer.  Oh, and you need to find or buy the creative filters somewhere.  More time/money.  So omitting them is an obvious loss for 5DIII users.  Likewise, you can't fix all of the blurry images after the fact because you lacked the proper scene mode.  Again, a huge loss for 5DIII users.  SL1 users can instantly dial in the proper scene mode and get the shot.  So why not include those features in a 5DIII?  Are they just "crippling" the camera for the few users who would find those features valuable and possibly necessary?

As I've said before, the Rebel cameras do perform to their spec.  Your theory that they have poor AF calibration and don't perform to spec is based on a different spec shared by a few people on gear forums.  This is like a Ferrari owner complaining that a Kia doesn't perform to spec, especially at the race track.

Yeah you can find the same only better and who uses a DSLR and doesn't own a computer?
Plus, they are a bonus. MFA is fixing something that is broken, totally different.

Perhaps the same people who use the direct Print button on the 5D?  There are people who have expensive cameras but don't do any photo editing on a computer.  They don't have the software, or don't know how to use it, or don't have the time, or don't bring their computer to every place where they bring their camera.  Why make them suffer with "crippled" cameras, especially when they paid for more than the basic model?  Why not just give them every creative filter and every scene mode on any camera they might buy?

But wait ... are you really arguing against including certain features on advanced cameras?  If so, you might want to apply for an executive position at a camera company.  That's where they're always deciding how to "cripple" cameras and leave features out. 

[awinphoto]

Yep, when clients are reacting when they see the photos from my 5d3, we ALL know they say "damn that's too bad you didn't have more DR or a 36 mega pixel camera". But, what one of my top models DID tell me that she hated my camera because it has too much detail and shows all her imperfections. Rebel is a rebel, no more no less. Whatever did we do when we had the 10d, 20d, 30d, 40d, 5d classic... The 60d has no reason it shouldn't have afma, but if the 70d doesn't have it, then panic

Yeah well maybe get out of the studio for once and shoot some giant landscapes that can't be lit with flashes or umbrellas....

You just dont get it [/shakes head]...  The day landscapes pay me the money studio does, then I will look at things differently... then again, when I do go out and about, I know what i'm doing, i know what filters I need and I dont fret DR...

Wow so basically unless it makes money it may as not even well be considered photography right?
And maybe if you did get out and try some other types more often you'd realize that the filters you refer to only work for a very few specific types of scenes/scenarios.

You know how silly you are sounding?  I've shot with the 10d all the way to 7d and 5d's. all the prior cameras had even less DR than the 5d3. I've shot landscape, portraits, weddings, aviation, macro, etc. I know what I want and how to get it and I don't blame my gear. I know how to get what I want with what I have, and that used to not be much. I couldn't care less how much DR a camera has, as long as I can get what I want

[elflord]

Who said anything about extra physical controls?  All of those features could be implemented in the menus of the 5DIII.  The 5DIII already has "Scene Intelligent Auto" (the Green setting)

My point is that the green box itself is a top level item (it takes a spot on the mode dial, at least on the 5DII).

Putting the art filters inside any menu, which requires a few steps of navigation to reach and also generally requires taking ones eye from the viewfinder, renders them considerably less useful (aside from the fact that most users of this body consider such features useless in general this would make them a little bit more useless).

As long as they are buried inside a menu, those features wouldn't actually be harmful. I'm going out on a limb here, but my guess is that there haven't been a lot of requests for these features from 5D users. Your post is the first I've heard of this.

This is not about loss leaders/free riders.  People paying $0 for their blogs get ads on their site, so they are not necessarily loss leaders/free riders.

You seem to be trying really hard to not understand here. The marginal software development cost of adding users to a software product is 0. Therefore the economics of developing software are completely different to those of developing camera bodies.

Far from providing any illumination, your analogy is off base and amounts to a willful obfuscation of an issue that you are apparently unwilling or unable to address in a more forthright manner.

[LetTheRightLensIn]

You know how silly you are sounding?  I've shot with the 10d all the way to 7d and 5d's. all the prior cameras had even less DR than the 5d3. I've shot landscape, portraits, weddings, aviation, macro, etc. I know what I want and how to get it and I don't blame my gear. I know how to get what I want with what I have, and that used to not be much. I couldn't care less how much DR a camera has, as long as I can get what I want

goody for you, not everyone can get all the DR they need for all types of shots, if you never shoot that fine but don't pretend that is the case for everyone

[fonts]

We need a 7D mark II with a cf card slot, a 5D Mark IV or higher with a cf card slot and a lot of lens replacements or new lenses.

What's so important about cf cards (or was that irony)? For my money, I want dual sd cards - smaller and also very fast.

This is not far from the truth.  In October 2011, Canon announced that the 50 millionth EOS cameras and 70 millionth EF lens was produced.  1.4 lenses to each body.

It's be really interesting if the ef-s lenses are included - but even if not this proves Canon marketing's efficiency, they manage to make people buy new camera bodies all the time - just like Intel/AMD convince users to change their mainboard/memory alongside their cpu but at the same time market them as "changeable".

Yes thank you! What is wrong with people. Why do they want CF? That sh*t is outdated. SD Cards which are cheaper and more durable are getting faster and faster, have more interest in that. I would think that would be in everyones minds especially how people are going over "innovation".

[Zlatko]

Who said anything about extra physical controls?  All of those features could be implemented in the menus of the 5DIII.  The 5DIII already has "Scene Intelligent Auto" (the Green setting)

My point is that the green box itself is a top level item (it takes a spot on the mode dial, at least on the 5DII).

Putting the art filters inside any menu, which requires a few steps of navigation to reach and also generally requires taking ones eye from the viewfinder, renders them considerably less useful (aside from the fact that most users of this body consider such features useless in general this would make them a little bit more useless).

As long as they are buried inside a menu, those features wouldn't actually be harmful. I'm going out on a limb here, but my guess is that there haven't been a lot of requests for these features from 5D users. Your post is the first I've heard of this.

This is not about loss leaders/free riders.  People paying $0 for their blogs get ads on their site, so they are not necessarily loss leaders/free riders.

You seem to be trying really hard to not understand here. The marginal software development cost of adding users to a software product is 0. Therefore the economics of developing software are completely different to those of developing camera bodies.

Far from providing any illumination, your analogy is off base and amounts to a willful obfuscation of an issue that you are apparently unwilling or unable to address in a more forthright manner.

As the 5DIII already has green box setting, and that setting already activates its own abbreviated version of the camera's standard menus (fewer tabs, fewer options), the creative filters and scene modes could easily reside there and still be useful.  Set the camera to green box, hit the menu button, select the filters tab, choose your filter.  Or do it via the Q button. 

But your guess is that creative filters and scene modes are not included because most users of this body consider such features useless in general.  Your guess is that there haven't been a lot of requests for these features from 5D users.   I believe your guess is absolutely correct.  Note that your guess doesn't rely on the popular "cripple the camera" theory.

I believe your guess also correctly explains exactly why AFMA is not included on the new Rebel SL1:  useless to most users, not a lot of requests for it.  So the manufacturer makes the most sensible decision.

You're avoiding the question about whether the useful "edit CSS" feature should be offered to all WordPress.com customers, regardless of how much they pay, or only with the $99/year Pro Bundle. Is it right to "cripple" that feature on all sites that don't purchase the Pro Bundle?  We've heard from some people in this thread that the cost of adding AFMA to any camera is zero; -- it's just software already written for other cameras, so the cost of adding it to any Rebel is zero.  I'm not sure that's true, but if it is true, then the economics are the same.  In either case, the feature is useful to some buyers and it's a zero cost add-on for the company, but buyers have to spend more to get it.  Just as with cameras, they have to buy the more advanced model just to get that one feature which could have been included in the most basic model.  Good, bad, shocking?

[fonts]

You know how silly you are sounding?  I've shot with the 10d all the way to 7d and 5d's. all the prior cameras had even less DR than the 5d3. I've shot landscape, portraits, weddings, aviation, macro, etc. I know what I want and how to get it and I don't blame my gear. I know how to get what I want with what I have, and that used to not be much. I couldn't care less how much DR a camera has, as long as I can get what I want

goody for you, not everyone can get all the DR they need for all types of shots, if you never shoot that fine but don't pretend that is the case for everyone

Sigh..give it time. I don't know why people don't get that there isn't ONE company that has the best of everything in their product for that industry. Seriously, if you REALLY NEED the DR then just get Nikon bodies. You should already know this. It's not me being an asshole but research what you want before investing. Stop blaming Canon for not dedicating their R&D into something they never promised. If you look at any sporting event, you will see Canon dominating the floor, why? Because Canon produces the best High ISO and FPS DSLR out there. Take that into consideration when you ask for more DR; its not their main objective.

Seriously be realistic. Every manufacture has their benefits and weakness. If you obviously need the DR then again get the gear that is right for YOU. Canon will make higher DR cameras, but just cause it's not NOW doesn't mean they suck.

Also again, the AFMA arguement needs to stop. It's not like its only 50% of Rebel users are beginners, its a massive amount which can be estimated to 80%. LEAVE IT BE. Know that the Rebel line is not targeting Advanced users. Yes I wouldn't mind if they did add it, but it doesn't make it a BAD camera because it doesn't have it.

To add to that, it's not FIXING anything BROKEN. Being within specs is a choice, a choice that benefits us the consumers. If you really wanted everything perfectly aligned to begin with then trust me, forum sites would be down for week with threads yelling at Canon for raising the price by an insane amount. So stop with this battle, learn to pick your fights, its not broken, its how its meant to be.

[Chuck Alaimo]

Most people who get Rebels leave the stock lens on - or at best, get a 50mm 1.8...

How would you know? Just because the people in this forum are so well-off that they don't use Rebels with L glass?

Because 80-90% of the people I see shooting with Rebels out in the field are doing so with the stock lens...mind you, it's only from my own experience and I realize there are many that use much more expensive lenses with them. I was one of them (I used the 70-200 F4 IS with it)

This is not far from the truth.  In October 2011, Canon announced that the 50 millionth EOS cameras and 70 millionth EF lens was produced.  1.4 lenses to each body.

I would guess that for many who bought a rebel because out of cost consideration would look to 3rd part lenses to get more bang for their buck.

That being said most of the rebels I see done on the boardwalk have the kit lens on them.

This is dead on.

[Chuck Alaimo]

You know how silly you are sounding?  I've shot with the 10d all the way to 7d and 5d's. all the prior cameras had even less DR than the 5d3. I've shot landscape, portraits, weddings, aviation, macro, etc. I know what I want and how to get it and I don't blame my gear. I know how to get what I want with what I have, and that used to not be much. I couldn't care less how much DR a camera has, as long as I can get what I want

goody for you, not everyone can get all the DR they need for all types of shots, if you never shoot that fine but don't pretend that is the case for everyone

Sigh..give it time. I don't know why people don't get that there isn't ONE company that has the best of everything in their product for that industry. Seriously, if you REALLY NEED the DR then just get Nikon bodies. You should already know this. It's not me being an asshole but research what you want before investing. Stop blaming Canon for not dedicating their R&D into something they never promised. If you look at any sporting event, you will see Canon dominating the floor, why? Because Canon produces the best High ISO and FPS DSLR out there. Take that into consideration when you ask for more DR; its not their main objective.

Seriously be realistic. Every manufacture has their benefits and weakness. If you obviously need the DR then again get the gear that is right for YOU. Canon will make higher DR cameras, but just cause it's not NOW doesn't mean they suck.

Also again, the AFMA arguement needs to stop. It's not like its only 50% of Rebel users are beginners, its a massive amount which can be estimated to 80%. LEAVE IT BE. Know that the Rebel line is not targeting Advanced users. Yes I wouldn't mind if they did add it, but it doesn't make it a BAD camera because it doesn't have it.

To add to that, it's not FIXING anything BROKEN. Being within specs is a choice, a choice that benefits us the consumers. If you really wanted everything perfectly aligned to begin with then trust me, forum sites would be down for week with threads yelling at Canon for raising the price by an insane amount. So stop with this battle, learn to pick your fights, its not broken, its how its meant to be.

+1000

[EchoLocation]

I think the main reason the creative filters were added to the new rebels is that they literally had zero upgrades to the bodies at all worth mentioning in the press release.Thus, this was a cheap and easy way to spruce up the spec/features list, reviews and conversations with something new, instead of literally adding nothing. lol.
Look at this thread, it has degenerated from an utter trashing of the new releases to a conversation about why these new "features" weren't included on the 5DIII.
These new features are for the M 4/3rd, Instagram, hipster crowd, and just as a filler to rearrange the list of specs.

[aznable]

I think the main reason the creative filters were added to the new rebels is that they literally had zero upgrades to the bodies at all worth mentioning in the press release.

from 550d to 650d rebel's line had a great jump in AF features (borrowing a quite good AF from XXD line) and in fps department...the 700D got nothing particular.

the creative filters are a good thing for beginners and casual shooters

[GMCPhotographics]

I think the main reason the creative filters were added to the new rebels is that they literally had zero upgrades to the bodies at all worth mentioning in the press release.Thus, this was a cheap and easy way to spruce up the spec/features list, reviews and conversations with something new, instead of literally adding nothing. lol.
Look at this thread, it has degenerated from an utter trashing of the new releases to a conversation about why these new "features" weren't included on the 5DIII.
These new features are for the M 4/3rd, Instagram, hipster crowd, and just as a filler to rearrange the list of specs.

I think most of the DSLR innovation is now done. So we get very simular new models with very simular specs. The odd new tweek sometimes does shake things up. The 40D brought live view...many said it was a gimmic but it's transformed most of the way landscapers work and paved the way for movie mode.
the 5DIII brought a near silent mode (which really works) and it's been a game changer for many genres, especially Wedding work with grumpy registras. So while MP's haven't increased much and many of the AF arrays have stayed the same for a lot of the Canon product range, innovation is creeping in from different areas and isn't so obvious on paper. Grab hold of a 300D and then take a 650D, the difference of only a few years is huge. The pace of sensor and AF array improvements has now slowed to almost static, but the rest of the camera is still open for a lot more improvements.
I don't think Canon will ever put a pro AF system in any camera which isn't in it's pro portfolio. So lets get real here, if you want a 5DIII or 1Dx Spec then that's not going to ever happen in a XXXD camera. But the ergo and ui differences do get filtered down and up stream.