I donâ€™t get it why Canon is that much eager to get rid of their customers in the ambitious hobby segment, just let me point out my story.
I have seen a lot of Canon EOS cameras, beginning with EOS 10 (to measure camera-shaking would be useful for IS too), 5, 50E to EOS 3 and 1V and therefore have a lot of lenses and accessories for full-frame. Besides my 28-135 EF IS I did like my Sigma 12-24 most (ok, you can say â€œswitch to the 8-16â€ on APS-C instead), with telephoto-lens (75-300 IS) I did work quite seldom (so much on the â€œadvantage of the crop-factorâ€). Switching to digital APS-C format was a very heavy drawback for the wide-angle-lens-range. I did find myself at the first well priced digi-cam (EOS 300d) in an awkwardly shifted focal-range at lenses and system-flashes confronted with some plastic EF-S lenses as crappy workaround. The APS-H format is nearly the same petty with crop. So I started to wait for a full-frame digital and went along with film in the meanwhile. Nevertheless waiting for developed slide-films and scanning them in was not very thrilling compared to the speed and workflow for digital, especially RAW pictures.
So end of 2009 I was confronted with the decision between EOS 500D, 50D and 5D Mk 2. 500D was no option of the missing upper LCD, so 50D vs. 5D Mk 2 were left. I have to say I do photography in a broad range, doing some studio-tabletops, studio-portraits but also portraits on location, rock-concerts (there I suffer from the AF at low light), cities & landscapes, parties, weddings, night-shots, experiments. I donâ€™t earn a single cent with my photos (never tried), thatâ€™s all for fun. So the money I spend is of course quite a lot in total, but still limited when it comes to the decision for single components, as you have to go for family, house and living as well. So I would say Iâ€™m the typical hobby-photo-enthusiast, who spends quite a lot of money on that hobby but wants to get an above-consumer-level-average-allround-camera, letâ€™s say I want to get value for money. And you can say Iâ€™m one of the â€œhalf having my money in my mattress waiting for the camera that doesnâ€™t existâ€ as mentioned above.
I donâ€™t need highend framerates (3-4 fps is really enough), I donâ€™t need that robust cam-bodies (but some weather-sealing would be very nice), I donâ€™t need a second CF-card-slot (I donâ€™t want to switch to SD as well), I donâ€™t need 45 AF-sensors (even when I did like them with eye-control in EOS 3 we havenâ€™t ever seen since digital EOS, except for focus-tracking that much sensors make no sense without eye-control, and, shame on the â€œinventorâ€ Canon, Nikon is doing 50+ area-AF in nearly all mid- to high-range-cams), I donâ€™t want a built-in portrait-battery-grip (thatâ€™s great to have for portraits, but sometimes itâ€™s unnecessary bulky & heavy), I donâ€™t need video (maybe just for playing around a little bit), I donâ€™t need 20+ MPx (not for photo-prints, not for computer-monitor; I would like to see higher ISO instead, clean 12.800 would be really great; lower MPx together with small framerates lowers cost in terms of less need for DIGIC-power), I donâ€™t want to buy every accessory new (e.g. like battery and memory-card if you switch from 50D to 60D, ok 60D was intended as marketing-gag to get x00D-users up a notch in the product-line as Canon did hope to get 40/50D-users to 7D) or take two kinds of accessories with me if I take a second camera for backup with me (as I wouldnâ€™t sell my 50D for a new cam). Thatâ€™s to point out where there is room for segmentation in the EOS-lineup and not to say I want the highend EOS 1D xy for 100 bucks. By the way, view-finder shouldnâ€™t be less than 100% in digital era, 90-100% was ok for cropping on film.
If you did compare 50D to 5D Mk2 two years ago youâ€™d get a 50D for 850 EUR and the 5D Mk2 for about 1.900 EUR, thatâ€™s twice as much. But itâ€™s not worth it, as you get â€œonlyâ€ video and high-MPx on full-frame for extra 1000 EUR, but you suffer built-in-flash (ok, bad light, but on occasion I like to get a bad picture compared to get no picture at all; I also thought remote-control of flashes as in 7d would bring built-in-flash to the top-lineup, but 1DX), AF-assist-beam (I donâ€™t get it why this is only done via system-flash in a camera featuring 6.400 ISO without high-range, it seems Canon has never heard the word â€œavailable-light-photographyâ€ before), no DEP-program (Iâ€™m sorry to donâ€™t even see the much worse DEP-A anymore in the EOS-lineup; DEP, a seldom used, very often misunderstood, but hard to substitute great feature of Canon EOS), lower X-Sync (of course out of the larger format), worse light-meter-range, worse AF-sensors (as this has been discussed once again above, there are 6 additional AI-Servo-Sensors, but less cross-type and no X-type-sensor compared to 50D, not to speak of the 7D; of course for the phase-AF there also is the advantage of the larger full-frame-format; but low-light and tracking of movement suffers a lot at 5D Mk2 I hear, not the 7D made the difference, the AF was complaint about also in 5D Mk1; remember also, with limited budget you donâ€™t spend money for 2.8-(zoom)-lenses all the time (I do have some 1.8 fixed ones), so AF should work at 5.6 or even 8.0), to mention the major drawbacks. So you can say a photo-video-hybrid (there would be much smaller sales-figures for the 5D Mk2 if it wouldnâ€™t have quite a lot of pure video-users, so the DSRL-market is I think split up in two parts; the (indie) video-guys pushing prices as they come from the more expensive pro-videos down to the 5D, the still-guys pulling the prices from the value-for-money lower EOS-segments) with a pro-1D-sensor in a x00D-housing for a lot of money. As mentioned above, of course APS-C format is 2.5-times more dense compared to full-frame, thatâ€™s I guess the reason why 50D just goes up to 12.800 ISO where the 5D Mk2 saves one full stop with about half its pixel-density, one more reason for me to go with full-frame!
I would in some way agree to the decision between 7D crop and expensive 1DX mentioned above. I would like to see in some respect a kind of â€œ7D full-frameâ€, but with this rumor I fear the â€œmid-range-full-frame-gapâ€ wonâ€™t be filled even with a 5D Mk3 (hope Iâ€™m wrong). Canâ€™t Canon start to sell customized cameras like car-sellers do (when you go through this blog there are nearly as much different opinions on whatâ€™s needed as there are writers), â€œI want the FF 5D with 12MPx, not the 21MPx or 36MPx version, max. framerate 3fps, but 100k high ISO, no video, good 9-point AF, flip-screen LCD, 100% viewer,â€¦ What will it cost and when can it be shipped?â€ I think the 5D Mk3 will be the second time when I start thinking about moving to Nikon, as some Pros I know have done in the last 2 years, but this time Iâ€™m not going to wait another 3-4 years for my â€œfull-frame value for money camâ€.
Maybe this is only one of the rumors Canon just throws to test us, the community, and decide which of the prototypes to release in the future â€“ Canon, I hope you take the right decisions also for ambitious hobbyists!!!
P.S. one word on the money: Iâ€™m always puzzled how easy some of you guys say â€œjust go and buy a 1DXâ€.I think I donâ€™t get paid that bad, but 6.000+ EUR for a camera, I wouldnâ€™t even think one second about buying a camera in this price-segment! Donâ€™t know where you guys get the bucks from, at least if you donâ€™t do photos for livingâ€¦