July 31, 2014, 10:48:36 AM

Author Topic: Canon naming protocol  (Read 3902 times)

rowanlamb

  • Guest
Canon naming protocol
« on: October 15, 2011, 02:03:39 PM »
Here in Europe, the cameras that our American cousins refer to as T3 and T3i are called the 1100D and the 600D. I have a 400D, which they may know as the XTi. Basically, the names started at 300D and increased in 50 point increments up to the current 600D. The 1100D is an upgrade of the 1000D, and is quite obviously the bottom of the range. Sorry if I'm teaching you all to suck eggs, so to speak, but I want to establish a bit of context for those that are unaware of the difference in naming.

Anyway, my actual question is this - what happens when, in a few years, Canon reach the point where they've gotten all the way to 950D, and have nowhere to go? They can't go around to 1000D again. I realise this is some way off, but it's also inevitable unless a change is made to their European naming protocol. There's mention elsewhere on this forum that the 'D' portion of camera names nowadays are largely pointless - will canon ditch it altogether before their hand is forced? Will they go over to the XTi/T3/etc naming worldwide? Or will we go all Japanese and start shooting with Kiss X cameras? Of course, the xxD range can keep on going beyond 100D, but there'll still be some confusion over the fact that it'll then be a xxxD camera, at least in name. 

Your thoughts on this admittedly silly subject gratefully received!

canon rumors FORUM

Canon naming protocol
« on: October 15, 2011, 02:03:39 PM »

lol

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • My dA
Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #1 on: October 15, 2011, 02:47:25 PM »
I've never been keen on the US naming system of random letters. I still need to look it up now and then which is which. And I just can't see Kiss being used outside Japan. When the numbers run out, they'll just start another new series of numbers. Look at CPU and GPU model names for an example of that in progress.

How far have we got anyway? Three more xxD and/or 7 xxxD models. That's still some way to go and I think there's a chance in that time mirrorless would have had a chance to make DSLRs as we know them redundant, sidestepping the problem.
Canon 1D, 300D IR, 450D full spectrum, 600D, 5D2, 7D, EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 70-300L, 100-400L
EF-S 15-85, TS-E 24, MP-E 65, Zeiss 50/2 macro, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8 OS, Samyang 8mm fisheye

ecka

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 577
  • Size matters ;)
    • View Profile
    • flickr
Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #2 on: October 15, 2011, 03:11:25 PM »
There are 7 xxxD models already (300D-600D) and they have another 7 possible numbers before 1000D. That is at least 7 years to go. IMHO, it would be logical to name those cameras by the year, 2012D instead of 650D, or even drop the 2000 and make it 12D ;) . They are making a new one each year anyways. However, in 7 years everything can change. They could drop all the DSLR thing (just like film SLR) and start something new, better. Maybe you will be able to download an image directly from your brain ;D .
« Last Edit: October 15, 2011, 03:13:08 PM by ecka »
FF + primes !

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13617
    • View Profile
Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #3 on: October 15, 2011, 04:11:18 PM »
Anyway, my actual question is this - what happens when, in a few years, Canon reach the point where they've gotten all the way to 950D, and have nowhere to go? They can't go around to 1000D again.

In Canon's high end, compact P&S line, there was the S90, then the S95.  The S100 was just announced as the S95-successor, 14 MP CMOS, 5x zoom, great IQ.  But don't confuse the new PowerShot S100 with the PowerShot S100 that's an old, 2 MP, 2x zoom, cheap P&S. 

So, I guess they could reuse a number...
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

rowanlamb

  • Guest
Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #4 on: October 15, 2011, 04:19:59 PM »
Anyway, my actual question is this - what happens when, in a few years, Canon reach the point where they've gotten all the way to 950D, and have nowhere to go? They can't go around to 1000D again.

In Canon's high end, compact P&S line, there was the S90, then the S95.  The S100 was just announced as the S95-successor, 14 MP CMOS, 5x zoom, great IQ.  But don't confuse the new PowerShot S100 with the PowerShot S100 that's an old, 2 MP, 2x zoom, cheap P&S. 

So, I guess they could reuse a number...

Good point, well made  ;)

lol

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 492
    • View Profile
    • My dA
Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #5 on: October 15, 2011, 05:20:43 PM »
On a similar note, Canon do the 500D close up filter as well as the body, but I guess their function is different enough the chances of them getting mixed up are minimal. Made it a pain for me to search for the close up filter though!
Canon 1D, 300D IR, 450D full spectrum, 600D, 5D2, 7D, EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 70-300L, 100-400L
EF-S 15-85, TS-E 24, MP-E 65, Zeiss 50/2 macro, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8 OS, Samyang 8mm fisheye

dr croubie

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1398
  • Too many photos, too little time.
    • View Profile
Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #6 on: October 16, 2011, 06:49:07 AM »
Anyway, my actual question is this - what happens when, in a few years, Canon reach the point where they've gotten all the way to 950D, and have nowhere to go? They can't go around to 1000D again.

In Canon's high end, compact P&S line, there was the S90, then the S95.  The S100 was just announced as the S95-successor, 14 MP CMOS, 5x zoom, great IQ.  But don't confuse the new PowerShot S100 with the PowerShot S100 that's an old, 2 MP, 2x zoom, cheap P&S. 

So, I guess they could reuse a number...

And wait for the scammers on ebay advertising a $300 camera and shipping a $20 second-hand one?

Made it a pain for me to search for the close up filter though!
Yeah, same as looking for a 550EX speedlite (the way ebay works it'll still turn up the 550D bodies I don't want).

Still, I love canon's numbering scheme (the non-US, non-Japan, numbered rest-of-world scheme that makes sense).

Trying to make sense of Nikon's line apart from the D1-D3 is a lot worse, numbers are all over the place (even the D1 line is a bit weird, there was no D2, but 's' versions of both the D2H and D2X, then no D3H, and only the D3* were FF):
D1>D1X>D2X>D2Xs>D3X
D1H>D2H>D2Hs>D3>D3S
D700
D100>D200>D300>D300S
D7000
D70>D70s>D80>D90
D50>D40X>D60>D5000>D5100
D40>D3000>D3100

Glad i don't work in a camera shop and have to figure out all of that mess, canon's xD>xxD>xxxD>xxxxD just makes more sense.
And no matter what, the xD line can continue indefinitely with mk* after the name. Maybe after 90D we get 91D? or 900D-> 910D? keeps the lines going another 10 rounds respectively...
Too much gear, too little space.
Gear Photos

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #6 on: October 16, 2011, 06:49:07 AM »

rowanlamb

  • Guest
Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #7 on: October 16, 2011, 07:00:12 AM »
I did wonder whether they might start shortening the increments, i.e. 620D, 640D, 660D, etc, but I think from a marketing point of view they might suffer from the casual observer thinking 'well, they jumped from 550 to 600, but this new one is only 20 points "better" than the last one? What's wrong with it?'

I think we'll see a totally new naming system come up within the next 3 iterations.

I totally agree with you on Nikon's system by the way, it's a mess. I think the same about their lens names, but that's more because I can't be bothered to learn what all the letters mean.

Edwin Herdman

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 542
    • View Profile
Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #8 on: October 16, 2011, 08:01:35 PM »
I had this thought recently as well.  There is a bigger problem than XX0D naming in X0D naming - you only have nine usable digits before you suddenly roll over to the 10D, and you don't want anybody to confuse the latest and greatest with the 10D from years past.

The pro or semi-pro series (1D, 5D, 7D) have the "advantage" of roman numeral numbering but even that will become obtuse in short order.

Of course, the real answer is that it's probably wishful thinking to believe the EOS format will stay static long enough for the naming convention to become limited.  There's enough examples from the past to indicate that marketing, like the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park, "will find a way" but it's the engineering that will break with tradition enough that we get something totally new - perhaps.  There is certainly a cachet associated with 1D but at the current rate it will be many years before they reach roman numeral X.

Forceflow

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 128
    • View Profile
    • My Gallery
Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #9 on: October 17, 2011, 08:50:59 AM »
If push comes to shove, just add a "Mark II" to whatever name you're at and you are good for a while longer. I guess They can push that one for at least 5 more iterations.
Canon 7D - Canon 50mm 1.8 - Canon 24-70mm 2.8 L - Canon 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 L IS - SIGMA 85mm 1.4 - SIGMA 150mm 2.8 OS Macro - SIGMA 10-20mm 3,5

distant.star

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1429
    • View Profile
    • Tracy's Shooting Gallery
Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #10 on: October 17, 2011, 09:41:34 AM »

They can call it Kingfish for all I care. If it's a good tool for making pictures, I'll use it.
Walter: Were you listening to The Dude's story? Donny: I was bowling. Walter: So you have no frame of reference here, Donny. You're like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know...

iaind

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 311
    • View Profile
Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #11 on: October 17, 2011, 02:13:53 PM »
If push comes to shove D could be changed to d  or suffix becomes prefix.
What really matters is the product not the name
5DIII + BGE11 / 5DII + BGE6 / 40D + BGE2N /8-15 4L / 17-35 2.8L / 24 3.5L TS-E /24-70 2.8II L / 24-105 4L IS /Zuiko 50 1.4/ 100 2.8L Macro IS / 70-200 2.8L / 300 4L / 100-400L

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon naming protocol
« Reply #11 on: October 17, 2011, 02:13:53 PM »