4 More DSLRs Coming in 2012? [CR2]

[preppyak]

How about a FF entry with no Video, you know to keep the price down, something for the purist photographers for a change…. 650D is good enough for those wanting to do video

they can disable the features sure.. but that would not safe them a cent (*).
it would only make the video models more expensive but not the crippled ones cheaper.

(*) ok a few cents maybe, for the mics as an example.

As was mentioned, you wouldn't save money that way. Simple supply and demand really. If 25% of users want video, than the non-video DSLR either has to be 25% cheaper to make (its firmware already designed and a few hardware parts, so, not likely), or they have to charge 25% more for it to break even. And so on if the percentage is higher than 25%. Oh, and as an owner, it'd probably be harder to re-sell to upgrade since your market would be smaller as well.

If memory serves me, there was a poll on this forum, and it wasn't until about the 30% cheaper price point that people were willing to give up video functions in their DSLR's. So, I'd say they probably aren't going away.

[sleepnever]

I wish they'd hurry up and announce/release these! I want to upgrade from my T2i to something more mid to high end before all my trips to various places this summer and later in the year.

[lol]

For the 4 bodies, I'd go with a 70D, budget FF, and how about TWO mirrorless bodies? A lower model and a mid range model? The 650D showed us something a bit different, and I can see the new toys making their move into the 70D at least and it would be a good fit for mirrorless.

traveller, a budget full frame just wont kill the 7D. If you need crop, you need crop. They are too different. Even today, if you offered me a choice of 7D or 5D2 to use day to day, it would be the 7D no question. Use the right tool for the job. Full frame isn't the only tool.

[Daniel Flather]

When can we CR3 a ff mirror-less, or even the ef 20mm f2.8L?

[stipotle]

What would an 'entry level' full frame Canon look like? Realistically, there's only two choices of sensor -the 5D MkIII's  22MP and the 1D X's 18MP; not much of a product differentiation.  I can't see them using the 18MP sensor, as I think this would devalue the 1D X psychologically by implying that it uses Canon's 'budget' FF sensor.  So how else to differentiate from the 5D MkIII: less weather sealing, <100% viewfinder, slower frame rate, smaller image buffer? They're all a given (I would think), but Sony's experience with the A900/A850 would suggest that this isn't enough -a major product feature would have to be omitted.  I'm guessing that would have to be the fancy AF system, which would leave the camera as little more than the 5D MkII with a slightly improved sensor.  Unless Canon can knock them out at a very low price point, which might disrupt their APS-C line-up (refer also to my first point about the A900/A850 margins). 

Is the 18MP sensor really only slightly better? I've seen some amazing sample images.
And think about the 5DC - it was revolutionary because it had an amazing sensor put into an affordable body. Couldn't the flip side of "devaluing" the 1DX sensor be more like they put the flagship sensor in an affordable body (if that sales pitch worked once...)
Also - the non-fancy AF these days is still better than the 5D mkII's. So it would be more like a 5D mkII with a better sensor (slightly or more) and a slightly better AF. Seems reasonable to me for a true MkII refresh.

I dunno, don't mind me. That's just what I want. And I'm only coming from a wish list point of view, not necessarily  logical one.

[ed24]

It was a bit silly of me to mention the AF because AF doesn't matter to me at all but I thought that perhaps the whole full frame/automatic stance might be something that would sell really well for Canon. Thinking about it you're right about the undercutting the C300 and I'm most probably just being paranoid.

I think you are being paranoid. Have you looked at the Gh2 hacks? That seems to be the best bang for your buck video right now.

Also, the c300 will always have better DR over any 5D variant, presuming it uses the same 5D3 sensor.

Yeah I like the GH2 a lot but I'm not so sure I'd purchase one as I know the GH3 is just around the corner, I've got a pretty close relationship with Panasonic UK and I know the GH3 is in the wild. Hopefully I'll get my hands on one soon.

[justsomedude]

A mirrorless body isn't really a DSLR, so, technically speaking, only 3 more DLSRs are coming in 2012.

Just sayin'...

 

[alan_k]

I agree with the guess about an XXXXD upgrade. Adding a touch screen and Digic 5 without the fancy hybrid AF would be enough to warrant a new version. It all depends on what they do with their mirrorless offerings. If they really push mirrorless as a big new part of their line, they may want to avoid a low-end DSLR that might impact their mirrorless sales. However, those entry rebels are the perfect gateway drug for their higher end DSLRs, and they may not want to abandon that so quickly.

[Gcon]

There will be no point having an entry level FF unless Nikon comes out with one, otherwise they'll cannibalise 5D3 sales.

1100D
70D
3D - high MP FF

Sorry 7D users - your time is up.

[dlleno]

noteably absent from the CR2 speculation in the OP was any meaningful stab at how Canon will rationalize the 7D and 1D successors.  If the prosumer APS-C body is the 70D, and there is no direct replacement for the 7D, this implies hope for an APS-H body

[Dylan777]

When can we CR3 a ff mirror-less, or even the ef 20mm f2.8L?

+1...works with current L lenses 

[traveller]

What would an 'entry level' full frame Canon look like? Realistically, there's only two choices of sensor -the 5D MkIII's  22MP and the 1D X's 18MP; not much of a product differentiation.  I can't see them using the 18MP sensor, as I think this would devalue the 1D X psychologically by implying that it uses Canon's 'budget' FF sensor.  So how else to differentiate from the 5D MkIII: less weather sealing, <100% viewfinder, slower frame rate, smaller image buffer? They're all a given (I would think), but Sony's experience with the A900/A850 would suggest that this isn't enough -a major product feature would have to be omitted.  I'm guessing that would have to be the fancy AF system, which would leave the camera as little more than the 5D MkII with a slightly improved sensor.  Unless Canon can knock them out at a very low price point, which might disrupt their APS-C line-up (refer also to my first point about the A900/A850 margins). 

Is the 18MP sensor really only slightly better? I've seen some amazing sample images.
And think about the 5DC - it was revolutionary because it had an amazing sensor put into an affordable body. Couldn't the flip side of "devaluing" the 1DX sensor be more like they put the flagship sensor in an affordable body (if that sales pitch worked once...)
Also - the non-fancy AF these days is still better than the 5D mkII's. So it would be more like a 5D mkII with a better sensor (slightly or more) and a slightly better AF. Seems reasonable to me for a true MkII refresh.

I dunno, don't mind me. That's just what I want. And I'm only coming from a wish list point of view, not necessarily  logical one.

I was referring to the 22MP sensor in the 5D MkIII not the new 18MP FF sensor from the 1D X as the one that is only slightly better than the old 21MP sensor (from the 5D MkII and 1Ds MkIII).  It's too early to tell exactly how well the 1D X sensor will perform. 

As for my devaluing argument: logically, choosing to put the 18MP as opposed to the 22MP sensor in a budget FF camera must either devalue the 1D X or the 5D MkIII.  Canon would either be choosing the 18MP sensor over the 22MP model because it is cheaper, or because they feel it is better.   The first case would devalue the 1D X, the second would devalue the 5D MkIII -both cameras that would be marketed at a higher price point.  Thus, I would argue that the 22MP sensor is the logical choice for any budget camera, which would imply that Canon would need to find other ways to differentiate it from the 5D MkIII. 

[distant.star]

.
This is really only two DSLR cameras. Maybe just one.

The mirrorless is not a DSLR. That reduces it to three.

The 1DX will actually be announced/delivered during this period. That reduces it to two.

And given their recent history, if they announce two cameras, they'll probably only be able to deliver one.

This has become a company with irresponsible management. If you went to a Chevrolet dealer and he promised to deliver a new car in three weeks -- you wouldn't wait months without explanation. You'd go get a good lawyer.

So, as always, we'll see what happens. I have unlimited patience, although I don't know if my T2i does. The shutter is starting to sound creaky.

[Orion]

I just wish they would release all these cameras at the same time so that we can decide on a mkIII or 1Dx or entry FF, etc etc etc

If I spend 3500 on a mkIII and find out that a new release just a few months later has better AF in video, etc than my 5D . . . . well it's a cause for grave concern. Actually . . when you say it like that: three - thousand - five - hundred - dollars.. . . . meh I wouldn't trade my mkIII for any other camera except a 1Dx. . . . . but still, . . . . "things that make ya go 'hmmm?'"

[hmmm]

Based on the T4i -- here's a guess: the new entry level FF will have a hybrid sensor and a new 24-90 3.5-4.5 STM kit lens.   18 or 22 MP.   Pretty decent AF, though not the 45 pt rumored for the D600.   Digic 5 of course, etc.   It will have touchscreen, and perhaps an articulated LCD, which would be a first for FF dslrs.

That might make an interestingly different competitor to the 24MP D600, which is definitely coming out in the fall, if anything in rumorspace can be said to be definite.