Does 1DX mean Canon is reshuffling their pro lineup?

[AdamJ]

Regarding updating the AF, history has shown there's no need. First off, Nikon's AF isn't necessarily 'kick-ass'.  Just like more MP doesn't automatically make a sensor better, more AF points don't automatically make for better AF. Nikon's systems have never had the high-precision points that Canon offers, for example. More importantly, Canon can look back at sales records. The 40D, 50D, and 60D use the same AF.  The 5DII was a huge success, using the same AF as the 5D but with more MP. So who's to say a 5DIII with even more MP and still the same AF won't sell, especially stacked up against a 1D X with less MP? 

I know it's not a popular opinion, but don't be surprised to see the 5D's AF reused on the 5DIII, or if not that, a token improvement.  If they give it a high MP sensor, compared to the 1D X, they've got to not give it something else.  Weak AF, only one Digic5+ so the frame rate drops lower that the Rebel line, some kind of handicap will be there. Pick your poison...

As I've mentioned before in these forums, I believe most 5D MkIIs are owned by amateur enthusiasts for whom it is their only body (other than the old Rebel from which they upgraded). As such, it has to have good capabilities in all types of photography if it is to to appeal to its largest audience. And yet, if internet forums are any guide, a large section of MkII users are often frustrated by its substandard ability to track moving subjects in AI Servo AF. Neuro, you yourself have said in the past how much better your 7D is at tracking.

I'm willing to accept all sorts of compromises in the 5D MkIII's spec but if the AF remained the same, I certainly wouldn't upgrade. AF is simply too fundamental to the camera's overall performance for it to be compromised for marketing reasons and I believe Canon will soon learn this if they leave the MkIII's AF system unchanged.

[moreorless]

While I can see Canon not wanting to compete against themselves, they still have to compete against Nikon, and increasingly Sony...

I don't agree, in terms of this discussion.  The competition between Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. really takes place in the entry-level dSLR space (and of course, the P&S space).  The number of people who's first dSLR is a FF body is an insignificant fraction of the market. So, by the time someone buys a FF body, they have brand familiarity and likely a set of lenses - Canon will have the data to support that (that's why the online product registration collects info on other products already owned).  The reality is that very, very few people switch brands (despite the frequent threats to do so, which are mostly empty).  Sure, there are high profile 'defections' where Canon or Nikon provides incentives, but for the majority, if you have a lens or two there's too much inertia to change brands.

Regarding updating the AF, history has shown there's no need. First off, Nikon's AF isn't necessarily 'kick-ass'.  Just like more MP doesn't automatically make a sensor better, more AF points don't automatically make for better AF. Nikon's systems have never had the high-precision points that Canon offers, for example. More importantly, Canon can look back at sales records. The 40D, 50D, and 60D use the same AF.  The 5DII was a huge success, using the same AF as the 5D but with more MP. So who's to say a 5DIII with even more MP and still the same AF won't sell, especially stacked up against a 1D X with less MP? 

I know it's not a popular opinion, but don't be surprised to see the 5D's AF reused on the 5DIII, or if not that, a token improvement.  If they give it a high MP sensor, compared to the 1D X, they've got to not give it something else.  Weak AF, only one Digic5+ so the frame rate drops lower that the Rebel line, some kind of handicap will be there. Pick your poison...

You also have to consider price as a factor aswell i'd say, the 5D mk2's sucess was partly based on the relatively low cost while the Nikon D800 is rumoured to ge in the $4000 range. If the old AF system or a marginal improvement helps keep the 5d mk3 lower than that it could well increase the market signifcantly..

I'd say that if the 1Ds line is over the most pressing upgrades would be a 100% OVF and higher quality build. Both studio and landscape 1Ds users would I'd guess want the former with landscape users likely wanting the latter aswell.

To me the 1DX becoming the flagship seems like it might be more an acknowledgement of the strenghts and weaknesses of the EF/FF format. As a sports/jurno camera the 1DX can claim to be the very best tool for the job with its FPS/ISO/AF where as a 1Ds Mk4's sensor would be unlikely to beat medium format offerings. Its alot easier to sell something at a prenium when your at the top of the market afterall, espeically with the 645D pushing below £9K.

[mdoher1]

My take on this, FWIW...

I think that Canon are essentially taking a new direction in their camera strategy. I expect that they will announce a new, effectively, medium format camera for studio users. I think this will be in the range 30 to 50 megapixels (I expect around 40 for first generation). Part of me says that this will be with a new lens system...the other part of me says they will stick with the EF mount. I also half expect the new MF camera to be mirror-less...

Just my 2 cents worth!

How would EF lenses work with medium format? The image circle wouldn't be big enough.

I did say 'effectively' medium format...I was thinking more about pixel count rather than full medium format. I know pixel count doesn't in any way define medium format...but if Canon are to produce a Camera that competes for the next three years in the studio...it would seem to me that it would have to be in the 40 to 50 MP range...similar pixel counts to some of the leaf backs and Pentax 645D. But I also realise that this asks the question - are the current optics capable of supporting that sort of resolution? I don't believe that they are.

Could Canon cope with producing a new lens mount alongside the EF? Probably not at the moment. But I cannot believe that Canon are going to give up the prestige of producing a large pixel count camera to their rivals. Both Nikon and Sony are ahead in the raw numbers game...I'm sure Canon will respond in kind.

[moreorless]

I did say 'effectively' medium format...I was thinking more about pixel count rather than full medium format. I know pixel count doesn't in any way define medium format...but if Canon are to produce a Camera that competes for the next three years in the studio...it would seem to me that it would have to be in the 40 to 50 MP range...similar pixel counts to some of the leaf backs and Pentax 645D. But I also realise that this asks the question - are the current optics capable of supporting that sort of resolution? I don't believe that they are.

Could Canon cope with producing a new lens mount alongside the EF? Probably not at the moment. But I cannot believe that Canon are going to give up the prestige of producing a large pixel count camera to their rivals. Both Nikon and Sony are ahead in the raw numbers game...I'm sure Canon will respond in kind.

It has often been rumoured that Canon believe there more recent lenses can handle 40-50 MP and there performance on crop bodies does seem to suggest they've got a good deal more to offer on FF beyond 21 MP.

The real unknown to me seems likely to be whether were talking about one new 5D sized FF body or two, Personally I think that with the 1DX specs/price two has become much more likely since a single body would have to cover alot of ground between amatures moving up to FF to 1Ds users moving down for more megapixels.

Something like...

3D - 30-40 megapixels, 7D AF, 3-4 FPS, 100% viewfinder, pro build/sealing. - $3500-4000

5D mk3 - 18 megapixels, 7D AF, 5-6 FPS, less than 100% viewfinder, current build - $2000-2500

[Polansky]

Very interesting and maybe Canon would sell some 5D III simply with more MP.  Not being an expert on the subject, I just find it odd that Nikon seem to have a different AF strategy differientiation than Canon.  Nikon has the same or similar AF in the D700 and D3S for example while for Canon, huge difference exist between the 1 series and the 5 series (sort of the equivalent of the D700 in terms of "entry" level FF).

What you should consider is that Canon is selling its AF for big bucks while Nikon sells megapixels for big bucks.
So with Nikon you get a low number of megapixels but a good AF, while Canon sells you loads of megapixels but poor AF.

It has always been this way up until now and therefore I take the rumours of a D800 with a big grain of salt. Unless something has to go with Nikon.

[te4o]

@moreorless : now this is going to make choices really interesting. I can see current 5D2 users wanting to jump to "your" 3D and first-time-FF users taking your 5D3 prediction. I consider this very business oriented and logical

[docsmith]

@moreorless : now this is going to make choices really interesting. I can see current 5D2 users wanting to jump to "your" 3D and first-time-FF users taking your 5D3 prediction. I consider this very business oriented and logical

+1

I think it makes sense for canon to build a high MP FF camera, decrease the frame rate and build quality, and decrease high ISO performance and DR.  But then throw a $4,500 price tag on it.

Then, an entry level FF that looks very much like the current 5DII except with perhaps a slightly larger sensor, slightly better AF, and improvements in high ISO and DR.....Perhaps with a decrease in build quality (if 6D).  This would likely fit the $2,500-$3,000 price range.

In terms of names, I can see a 3D/5DIII combo or a 5DIII/6D combo. 

As has been said above, the 7DII is easier as it is APS-C.  I hope that it has better ISO performance and better DR.  But I wouldn't be surprised if it is more MP/AF instead.

[moreorless]

@moreorless : now this is going to make choices really interesting. I can see current 5D2 users wanting to jump to "your" 3D and first-time-FF users taking your 5D3 prediction. I consider this very business oriented and logical

My feeling is that an entry level FF body would really be the way to gain an advanatge, Canon, Nikon and Sony have all seen that high megapixels in a smaller body sells with the 5D mk2 and I'd be supprized if they didnt go after that market this time around. The smarter business move would I'd say be to realise that the strong sales of the 5D mk2 at a lower price point have hilighted theres a market for a $2000ish FF body. If big megapixel bodies are all we see with the lower end FF market this time round there launch prices are likely to be $3000+ which could price many potential buyers out.

That could actually be more important than who gets the very best spec high megapixel body, if say Canon only has 32 MP and lesser AF than Nikon are many current 5D mk2 users going to switch? probabley not with the investment in lenses. The more important battleground would be getting users locked into a system and if Canon are the only people with an entry level body thats a definate advanatge to them since crop upgrades cannot be depended on with many users having to sell EF-S/DX lenses anyway.

[moreorless]

@moreorless : now this is going to make choices really interesting. I can see current 5D2 users wanting to jump to "your" 3D and first-time-FF users taking your 5D3 prediction. I consider this very business oriented and logical

+1

I think it makes sense for canon to build a high MP FF camera, decrease the frame rate and build quality, and decrease high ISO performance and DR.  But then throw a $4,500 price tag on it.

Then, an entry level FF that looks very much like the current 5DII except with perhaps a slightly larger sensor, slightly better AF, and improvements in high ISO and DR.....Perhaps with a decrease in build quality (if 6D).  This would likely fit the $2,500-$3,000 price range.

In terms of names, I can see a 3D/5DIII combo or a 5DIII/6D combo. 

As has been said above, the 7DII is easier as it is APS-C.  I hope that it has better ISO performance and better DR.  But I wouldn't be surprised if it is more MP/AF instead.

FPS and AF seem the most obvious ways to differentiate a high megapixel body from the 1DX to me. If the target market is landscape and studio users then are big upgrades to those areas compaired to the 5D mk2 really needed? AF perhaps a bit(more accuracey than speed) but 3 FPS seems like it would be enough for most people.

Personally as an amature landscape shooter who might be in the market for a FF body in the next year the things I'd be after are maximum megapixels that can still keep lower ISO(say 400-800) clean and a fully sealed body that doesnt weigh much more than 800-900g.

[neuroanatomist]

3D - 30-40 megapixels, 7D AF, 3-4 FPS, 100% viewfinder, pro build/sealing. - $3500-4000

5D mk3 - 18 megapixels, 7D AF, 5-6 FPS, less than 100% viewfinder, current build - $2000-2500

FPS and AF seem the most obvious ways to differentiate a high megapixel body from the 1DX to me.

You're right, the main differentiators will likely be fps and AF.  The thing is, the 7D AF is the best Canon AF outside of the 1-series.  So, for another FF camera to have the 7D AF would not be a real differentiator.  Now, maybe it would...if you really mean the actual 7D AF, i.e. an APS-C-sized AF sensor - that would have the same top/bottom spread as the AF in the 5DII, and a slightly reduced side-to-side spread.   

But, I'm pretty sure that you mean the 7D's AF system upscaled to match the FF sensor, meaning even though it only has 19 points, it would covers the same horizontal spread as the 1D X and would even have a slightly larger vertical spread, i.e. much better coverage than the 5DII.  The 7D's AF is good enough that Canon borrowed many of those features for the 1D X.  They're not going to put an AF that good in a FF body outside of the 1-series, because then they'd be differentiating primarily on fps, and that's not enough.

Consider where the 5D/5DII's AF is positioned in the lineup - it's based on the 20D's AF and thus most similar to the AF system currently in the Rebel/xxxD line (9 points, only one cross-type).  I'm ignoring the 6 invisible points on the 5D, since those are intended to help with AI Servo tracking, and while maybe they do help, tracking a moving subject is clearly not the 5DII's forte).  In overall performance, the 5DII's Af is a step below the xxD AF.  I think a sub-1-series FF will keep the same relative position.  It seems likely that the xxD AF will get a bump - it's been used in three bodies (40D through 60D).  So, Canon enhances the xxD AF slightly (say, 15 points and better tracking), gives 9 cross type points to the xxxD/Rebel line but none of the sophisticated tracking (and that addresses how they can release a new xxxD in early 2012 with the same 18 MP APS-C sensor), and the next FF gets the FF-sized version of that, with no broader spread of points than is currently in the 5DII.

[moreorless]

3D - 30-40 megapixels, 7D AF, 3-4 FPS, 100% viewfinder, pro build/sealing. - $3500-4000

5D mk3 - 18 megapixels, 7D AF, 5-6 FPS, less than 100% viewfinder, current build - $2000-2500

FPS and AF seem the most obvious ways to differentiate a high megapixel body from the 1DX to me.

You're right, the main differentiators will likely be fps and AF.  The thing is, the 7D AF is the best Canon AF outside of the 1-series.  So, for another FF camera to have the 7D AF would not be a real differentiator.  Now, maybe it would...if you really mean the actual 7D AF, i.e. an APS-C-sized AF sensor - that would have the same top/bottom spread as the AF in the 5DII, and a slightly reduced side-to-side spread.   

But, I'm pretty sure that you mean the 7D's AF system upscaled to match the FF sensor, meaning even though it only has 19 points, it would covers the same horizontal spread as the 1D X and would even have a slightly larger vertical spread, i.e. much better coverage than the 5DII.  The 7D's AF is good enough that Canon borrowed many of those features for the 1D X.  They're not going to put an AF that good in a FF body outside of the 1-series, because then they'd be differentiating primarily on fps, and that's not enough.

Consider where the 5D/5DII's AF is positioned in the lineup - it's based on the 20D's AF and thus most similar to the AF system currently in the Rebel/xxxD line (9 points, only one cross-type).  I'm ignoring the 6 invisible points on the 5D, since those are intended to help with AI Servo tracking, and while maybe they do help, tracking a moving subject is clearly not the 5DII's forte).  In overall performance, the 5DII's Af is a step below the xxD AF.  I think a sub-1-series FF will keep the same relative position.  It seems likely that the xxD AF will get a bump - it's been used in three bodies (40D through 60D).  So, Canon enhances the xxD AF slightly (say, 15 points and better tracking), gives 9 cross type points to the xxxD/Rebel line but none of the sophisticated tracking (and that addresses how they can release a new xxxD in early 2012 with the same 18 MP APS-C sensor), and the next FF gets the FF-sized version of that, with no broader spread of points than is currently in the 5DII.

I agree Canon are likely to keep the 7D line's AF above the 3D/5D/6D but they could equally deside to shift both lines AF upwards.

I wouldnt be supprized if the 7D line generally was pushed up market a little to pickup any 1D users who need the crop and persuade existing users to upgrade. Canon's crop lineup is afterall pretty crowded and a bit more space between each body might help.

[neuroanatomist]

I agree Canon are likely to keep the 7D line's AF above the 3D/5D/6D but they could equally deside to shift both lines AF upwards.

I wouldnt be supprized if the 7D line generally was pushed up market a little to pickup any 1D users who need the crop and persuade existing users to upgrade. Canon's crop lineup is afterall pretty crowded and a bit more space between each body might help.

Makes sense...but, I just don't see the 7DII getting a newer, better AF.  It's not just that it's already second-best in the lineup.  When was the last time Canon used a new AF system in only one model of a series, outside of the 1-series?  With an admittedly quick look, I couldn't even find a single example. 

Perhaps, as 1982chris911 proposed in another thread, Canon will release a 4D or whatever as a truly pro APS-C camera with a fully weather-sealed build, fast fps, and technological improvements such that the IQ from it's APS-C sensor approximates that from the retired APS-H format.  That could sit in the big price gap, along with a low end FF.  After all, if you need the 1.3x crop factor and will suffer without it in the 1D X, wouldn't a 1.6x crop factor be even better than 1.3x, if you didn't take a big IQ hit?

[heavybarrel]

Unfortunately, I think neuro is right... there is a very slim chance that Canon will improve the AF in the 7D after only one generation. But if you would allow me to be optimistic for a second, I think maybe they could make an exception here if they wanted to improve the antediluvian AF on the 5D2 and at the same time, move the 7D upmarket closer to where the 1D4 used to be. That way, the 7D can be in the $2500 range with improved AF and metering to go along with better ISO performance while keeping the mp count the same (or even dropping it a little... something I would never have believed Canon would do until the 1DX). One could argue that sensors have gotten better and the new lenses have gotten better to the point where APS-H was no longer needed. The 5D3 could then stay in that price range as well with the upgraded AF, and 36mp and 3-4 fps. I suppose at this point, there would be a fourth XD camera that comes with every video option Canon has thrown in.

The problem with my logic here of course is this is all based on what Canon COULD do. And Canon is definitely not looking to do what they can to make me happy lol. They're trying to figure out what they can get away with and still have me shell out for a new camera.

Also, does anyone know roughly how many 5D2s Canon has sold? What kind of numbers make it this huge sales success?

[Edwin Herdman]

The 7DII is a bit easier, because of the APS-C sensor. They give it a pair of Digic5's, maybe a Digic4 for AE/AF

I'd be very surprised if Canon plays mix-and-match with DIGIC IV and V.  They may continue to use dual CPUs for the 7D's eventual replacement but that combination should handle AE/AF just fine.

The 5DIII is a bigger challenge. It will certainly have more MP - probably 30+.  Because that 'sounds' a lot better than 18 MP, they'll need to incorporate some significant handicaps compared to the 1D X, especially since it will have sufficient MP for an APS-H-size crop with more resolution than the 1D IV.

That will already be accomplished due to the much higher throughput requirements of a larger-format sensor; a lower framerate will immediately put a camera with a larger pixel count out of consideration by the intended market of this camera.

While I came to the conclusion last week that Canon might go this route, there's nothing that says that they will in the actual Canon marketing or literature.  From the talk Canon employees have been giving lately, it seems they're free to criticize high megapixel counts and that doesn't seem compatible with a strategy emphasizing very high pixel counts.

It would be odd to see a reduction in pixel counts, but then we can just look at the apparent death of the 1Ds line to see evidence it could happen to any line.

I don't think the 1D line necessarily dictates what happens at lower tiers, though, aside from the headline features (but an argument could be made that you perhaps simply can't fit all those features in a smaller body).

[te4o]

So buying a Canon now will be like waiting on the bus stop - some time later the correct number bus line will come for everyone.
With the 1DX they made everyone waiting for the next announcement and only a few real journalists and photographic professionals are preordering (and neuro)
And it is not exactly inspiring to notice that the next stills DSLR announcement is months away...
We can't call this a reshuffle, it is a game of EOS-GO