More Full Frame Cameras on the 2012 Horizon? [CR2/CR1]

[tron]

You inadvertently changed the quotations!
The last one is NOT MINE. It's your comments. Mine is the small paragraph mentioning the LCD on the top.
Allow me to fix it:

What seems ridiculous to me is that the 5D2 was released 3+ years ago, you don't think with thousands and thousands of them on the streets that the cost of manufacturing can't be reduced to say 1,500?   Who cares if it used 
no more...

Why no LCD on top? Is that costly? Even the cheapest analog autofocus Canon cameras had LCD on top!!!
Still apart from this you described a better than 5DII camera! I still want one!

Basically your telling me just because the mk2 is still good there is no reason for change. My 1996 Acura integra was the worlds fastest FWD car when it came out but somehow they made other cars.    And with what Nikon etc are putting on the market now it's time to thank th mk2 for its service but say good bye

And continue by saying that you would like a cheaper than 5DmkII FF camera (which will be supposed to be worse too) and somehow this is progress?

[Marine03]

You inadvertently changed the quotations!
The last one is NOT MINE. It's your comments. Mine is the small paragraph mentioning the LCD on the top.
Allow me to fix it:

What seems ridiculous to me is that the 5D2 was released 3+ years ago, you don't think with thousands and thousands of them on the streets that the cost of manufacturing can't be reduced to say 1,500?   Who cares if it used 
no more...

Why no LCD on top? Is that costly? Even the cheapest analog autofocus Canon cameras had LCD on top!!!
Still apart from this you described a better than 5DII camera! I still want one!

Basically your telling me just because the mk2 is still good there is no reason for change. My 1996 Acura integra was the worlds fastest FWD car when it came out but somehow they made other cars.    And with what Nikon etc are putting on the market now it's time to thank th mk2 for its service but say good bye

And continue by saying that you would like a cheaper than 5DmkII FF camera (which will be supposed to be worse too) and somehow this is progress?

You mistake price for quality. You could argue the features on a t3i with its screen are nicer but cheaper also.

[RLPhoto]

Man if they took the sensor from the 5Dc and revamped it up to modern specs, Id buy One ASAP. 12MP is enough for me.

[Cgdillan]

It's all sounding like an entry level FF camera would be kinda like a ff 7d in a 60d body and would replace the 5d mkii

[briansquibb]

I dont see the issue with buying an older design as long as it does its job. Also all the bugs and problems have been resolved.

I got a 1DS3 (older than the 5DII) and produce clean and high IQ all day long. Best camera I have ever bought - cheaper than the 5DIII and more functionality.

5DII has the same benefits over anything up to the 60D

[Marsu42]

Dof is thinner on a crop in absolute terms

Thanks for explaining, I was really mistaken about that.

I can't see Canon being THAT cheap on the body, handicapping AF, lowering FPS, reducing weather sealing yes but lower quality than the 60D seems unlikely to me given the target audience.

Ultimately, Canon will be as cheap or not as the buyers dictate it - and just now, ff has the "pro" marketing sticker on it, and Canon will exploit this with a price premium as long as they can get away with it. Thus, I do see a ff high mp body next to or above the 5d3, a 5d2 successor at ~2000$, but imho a real ff entry level body is years away.

I got a 1DS3 (older than the 5DII) and produce clean and high IQ all day long. Best camera I have ever bought - cheaper than the 5DIII and more functionality.

What's the functionality of the 1ds3 that you're badly missing from the 5d3?

[briansquibb]

I got a 1DS3 (older than the 5DII) and produce clean and high IQ all day long. Best camera I have ever bought - cheaper than the 5DIII and more functionality.

What's the functionality of the 1ds3 that you're badly missing from the 5d3?

Metering on the AF point. f/8 AF

My 1D4, another old design has significantly more functionality than the 5D3, shame it isn't 22 mp

[plutonium10]

Ok, here's something that people often seem to overlook. Despite being somewhat outdated, the 5D mk II still sells well. Canon has simply been operating on the principle of "if it aint broke, don't fix it." When people stop buying the mk II, Canon will replace it, most likely with an affordable entry-level body.

Now here's my vision of an entry level FF camera (6D, shall we say?) Put an 18 megapixel FF sensor and pentaprism in a 7D body with slightly updated (read: more consistently accurate) 19-point autofocus and a single Digic V. Maybe give it 5 fps to avoid canibalization of both 5D mkIII and 7D sales. Given that the 5D II with a 21.1mp sensor sells for about $2200, I see no reason why this new body with less MP couldn't sell for the same or slightly less, again still allowing the faster, $500 cheaper 7D (or 7D mk II) to retain it's "poor man's 1D" niche in the EOS ecosystem.

[jrista]

Ok, here's something that people often seem to overlook. Despite being somewhat outdated, the 5D mk II still sells well. Canon has simply been operating on the principle of "if it aint broke, don't fix it." When people stop buying the mk II, Canon will replace it, most likely with an affordable entry-level body.

No truer words... +1

[elflord]

What seems ridiculous to me is that the 5D2 was released 3+ years ago, you don't think with thousands and thousands of them on the streets that the cost of manufacturing can't be reduced to say 1,500?   Who cares if it used to cost 10 thousand dollars eventually things become cheaper. 

Sensor technology hasn't changed substantially -- the 5DMkII sensor still costs much more to manufacture and is still worth much more (and performs vastly better than) a current crop sensor.

The purchase price available to the consumer has little to do with manufacturing cost, it has to do with supply and demand. If you can find something that potential buyers have already bought or don't want, and large numbers of current owners don't want, you will get a great deal (from your perspective). The 5DII appears to fit into that category to some extent, but the correction has already happened. The fact is, as you can tell by looking at prices even for very old full frame bodies, the demand for full frame bodies is very resilient.

  If you could show me that there were not newer better camera's coming out anytime soon, how can I as a 450D user justify 2,000 on a nearly 4 year old body. 

Well, it does leave all the current APS-C bodies in the dust as far as image quality is concerned. So if you care about image quality, you have every reason to pay a premium for full frame. For those who don't want to pay a premium for full frame, why not be thankful that good APS-C bodies are cheap instead of complaining that full frame bodies are expensive ?

[Marsu42]

For those who don't want to pay a premium for full frame, why not be thankful that good APS-C bodies are cheap instead of complaining that full frame bodies are expensive ?

I'd be fine with aps-c for the time being, but unfortunately aps-c is no equivalent alternative because the eos ecosystem is more geared toward ff - historically and marketing-wise. A lot of aps-c users who are ok with their sensor but want more sharpness or better lens build use ef lenses. While it is a strange side effect that ef lenses have an extended reach on aps-c, you can only use their full potential of on ff.

Sensor technology hasn't changed substantially -- the 5DMkII sensor still costs much more to manufacture and is still worth much more (and performs vastly better than) a current crop sensor.

Well, it hasn't changed for Canon - that's what many people are complaining about :-p ... but real question: How do you know ff the gap between ff and aps-c sensor manufacturing cost is as large as in the last years? Is it because there is no "shrink" like in cpu tech, but a sensor process still needs the same die space and there are many broken ones with hot pixels? However, one would think that manufacturing costs would still drop over time and the 5d3 premium price couldn't be due to sensor cost.

[moreorless]

I can't see Canon being THAT cheap on the body, handicapping AF, lowering FPS, reducing weather sealing yes but lower quality than the 60D seems unlikely to me given the target audience.

Ultimately, Canon will be as cheap or not as the buyers dictate it - and just now, ff has the "pro" marketing sticker on it, and Canon will exploit this with a price premium as long as they can get away with it. Thus, I do see a ff high mp body next to or above the 5d3, a 5d2 successor at ~2000$, but imho a real ff entry level body is years away.

Canon's hand maybe somewhat forced by the competision in this case if Nikon does come up with a rumoured $1500 FF body.

The 5D mk3 has the advanatge that it seems to be targetted mostly as pro's who both have existing lens investments and maybe willing to pay for its "all rounder" features as they did for the 1Ds in the past. In the amature market though I think things are becoming more competitive and Nikon looks to have reduced their profit margin significantly in order to increase market share.

As I said my opinion is that resolution remains king in the amature market, while not many people print these days I'd guess a pretty high percentage of FF users do and getting the highest quality print of a holiday landscape or family shot to hang on the wal(where even 30x20 isnt THAT large)l is IMHO the key factor for them. 

That was I'd say the key to the 5D2's continued sucess and I think Canon would be well served by looking to follow that up. The best way to do that to me seems to be to release a high MP body that undercuts the D800 in price while scaling back on some of the "pro" functionality of the 5D3.

[nicku]

I can't see Canon being THAT cheap on the body, handicapping AF, lowering FPS, reducing weather sealing yes but lower quality than the 60D seems unlikely to me given the target audience.

Ultimately, Canon will be as cheap or not as the buyers dictate it - and just now, ff has the "pro" marketing sticker on it, and Canon will exploit this with a price premium as long as they can get away with it. Thus, I do see a ff high mp body next to or above the 5d3, a 5d2 successor at ~2000$, but imho a real ff entry level body is years away.

Canon's hand maybe somewhat forced by the competision in this case if Nikon does come up with a rumoured $1500 FF body.

More realistic will be a 7D mk2 with a APS-H sensor and 20-24 MP ( to compete with Nikon budget ff body and preserve the wildlife capabilities and extra reach reputation of the actual 7D).... move a little bit up the new 70D to compete with Nikon d300S replacement.

If Nikon will come with an  $2000 ff body than maybe the new D400 will be moved one step down ( like 60D was)....

2012 will be a very interesting year.....

[plutonium10]

More realistic will be a 7D mk2 with a APS-H sensor and 20-24 MP ( to compete with Nikon budget ff body and preserve the wildlife capabilities and extra reach reputation of the actual 7D).... move a little bit up the new 70D to compete with Nikon d300S replacement.

An APS-H 7D is a nice idea, but the big problem is that it would lack wide-angle coverage (21mm equivalent with a 16-35 and no EF-S). Manufacturing an APS-H body to compete directly with a Nikon FF body would likely lose Canon a lot of market share for this very reason.

Recent 5D mk II customers no doubt include lots of landscape/nature/architecture photographers who want full frame coverage and good IQ at a reasonable price but don't really mind the 5D II's ancient AF system. There's no reason why they would buy a 1.3x crop and lose critically important wide-angle coverage, so the new Nikon FF would be the logical upgrade path for them.

[dilbert]

More realistic will be a 7D mk2 with a APS-H sensor and 20-24 MP ( to compete with Nikon budget ff body and preserve the wildlife capabilities and extra reach reputation of the actual 7D).... move a little bit up the new 70D to compete with Nikon d300S replacement.

An APS-H 7D is a nice idea, but the big problem is that it would lack wide-angle coverage (21mm equivalent with a 16-35 and no EF-S). Manufacturing an APS-H body to compete directly with a Nikon FF body would likely lose Canon a lot of market share for this very reason.

Recent 5D mk II customers no doubt include lots of landscape/nature/architecture photographers who want full frame coverage and good IQ at a reasonable price but don't really mind the 5D II's ancient AF system. There's no reason why they would buy a 1.3x crop and lose critically important wide-angle coverage, so the new Nikon FF would be the logical upgrade path for them.

The last 7D MkII rumor on the front page of this website was that there will be no 7D Mk II.... so...