2009 Canon Rumors Awards!

I’d say a contender for the best lens is the new 100mm IS macro.

The sharpness of this lens (and “clearness” of images) is absolutely stunning.

But so is the original non-IS and thats half the price. The IS is a fine lens but woefully too expensive.

It has IS and is better build L, these alone would add another $500. It is the best lens and because it is 4 stop IS better for handheld and 2 stop IS for macro this lens can do a lot more the old IS cannot so it is worth the extra price and it is the best lens Canon has released in 2009.

Yes, you’re going out on a limb with the 1DMkIV. I’m very interested in that camera, but refuse to make a decision before mid-March. It’s just too early to tell how good it is at ISO 12,800.

Regarding the Rebel T1i and 7D. The 18-55 has a pretty good reputation for a kit lens but you say that it doesn’t have enough resolution for 15MP. So why is the 7D a great camera with even more pixels? I’m also interested in the 7D, particularly if the mythical 3D actually happens, but the 7D pixel density is so high that I would probably only use it on Canon’s long primes (e.g., 300 f/2.8 and 500 f/4) that are sharp enough for it. Furthermore, I really wish that Canon had implemented the 7D auto-ISO like Nikon did in the D3.

What about the 24mm TS-E 3.5L II. It’s been said to have even greater IQ than the 17mm (although I admit, that it’s not as fun as a 17mm to play with :-)

I agree that the design of the Rebel’s are a bit dated at this point. They need to update the body and add a more comfortable grip among other things.

Rebel T1i (EOS 500D) -the worst Digital SLR this year? Well, assuming that only Canon products are entered into these awards, there have only been three DSLRs launched this year, something had to ‘win’ this category!

Perhaps the choice was made because the T1i is the least interesting to those that already own a Canon DSLR. If I was making my choice for a first camera, the T1i would be a serious contender. The Japanese seem to agree with me: http://43rumors.com/page/2/

I think the IQ on this camera is the best of the rebel line. The knocks against it by CR guy were mostly in terms of handling, which is surely fair. The ergonomics on the camera ARE dated.

Fun Read! Generally agree with choices. As someone pointed out the new 100 IS macro could have vied for top honors here but I, too felt after handling it that it didn’t feel like an “L” lens and was too expensive for what it was. The 100 USM Macro is just hair below in performance for half the price.

Dieing to start using the new 1D Mark IV! Let’s see how good the files look above 3200 iso.

It would be nice to Canon take the Rebel line and make at least one of the versions a powerhouse SMALL camera body, kind of the way Pentax aimed the K7. I’d jump on that immediately.

Once Canon adds HD video to the S90 and G11, it will be lights out for the competition except maybe for Fuji (love their Super CCD chip).

“Overpriced toy for snobs”

That’s an ignorant statement.

It costs a pile of money to make one of these cameras. Every single camera is hand made in Germany and goes through the most thorough quality assurance testing in the industry.

You also get the right to use all of Leica’s LTM and M lenses, generally regarded as the best in the world as a range. I have yet to find a “bad” Leica lens. A few might be a bit overpriced for performance, but most aren’t.

Image quality is fantastic from the M9, especially when you mount a summilux or summicron.

The most important thing is that this camera is one of 4 options for a digital rangefinder. It is the ONLY full frame digital rangefinder. The 2 Epson’s are 1.6x and the M8 is 1.3.

Rangefinders are the choice of street photographers the world over, that’s hardly a “snob too”.

Get yourself an M.

Like with every other product that is made by a premium brand a lot of the money is paid for that brand name – you pay premium just because something is a Leica, a Patek, a Faberge etc. Yes, the quality is fantastic but you are paying mostly for the name. Buying it you go way past the point of diminishing return – assuming that you get something that is actually better than anything than the competition offers you are paying for it three, four, five times as much.

That is the definition of snobism – buying something for its perceived status value, not for its real value for money. Does the Leica offer great picture quality with extremely expensive glass (compared to competition) – no doubt. Does its value hold up when comparing dollar for dollar, pixel for pixel – no it does not.

You are buying into the legend, the status, the symbol, the brand name. The improvement of quality you get in quantifiable terms is not justified on $ per $ basis.

If that excites you so be it but please do not try to convince me that you would be able to tell a standard-size taken by a Leica from a picture take by a bog-standard Canon with vanila-type kit lens. Holding a Leica is no doubt a thrill but not one that can be explained rationally on the basis of dollars spent.

LOL.Stop complaining like a little Girl..

The 7D images are relative soft when you look at them at 100% magnification on a computer screen.

That’s in comparison to other cameras at 100% magnification.

However, if you make same size prints of a 7D image and say a 450D image, the 7D will look the same or better (depending on the size of the print).

I’m suprised to see the Nikon D3S overlooked. It may be better than the 1D MK IV, and certainly better than the Leica.

I suggested the T1i to a friend looking to get into photography. He was also planning to use the video mode for some instructional videos he was putting together. Sure, the 1080p mode is crippled (makes me wonder why they bothered to put it in there, what can you do with 20fps?), but 720p is all he really needed and will still be a huge step over some SD mini-cam, probably even a step over Canon’s GL-2 which is more expensive than the Rebel…

Obviously, the most expensive camera wins. In all seriousness, the 7D has proven how good it is, the 1d MK IV seems like a great camera but hasn’t been out long enough to justify its win in your awards.

the 7D did what the 500D didn’t and that was a much better movie mode. had that not been the case I would have rated it higher because its a camera that can easily be had by anyone because of its price range. Cheaper price means better lenses in my opinion. The xxxD/rebel lines show that they can take very good photos so you wont be missing out.

I love the 100 mm macro lens and the IS is welcoming but I’ve never played with tilt-shift but I think you’re choice is quite sound on this one but i think because of how good the 100 mm lens was, a IS would be something many would look at as being the icing on the cake – shame about the price.

the powershot choice is fine by me but I think other companies are making far better cameras in that compact camera category.

nikon D5000 is fine camera but I would have chosen for the “third party” ( should that even be the right name for this category – maybe non canon camera category ) would be the EP-1. style, lenses and picture quality stand out at a much lower price than the much lauded M9. again i think chosen for price and reputation rather than overall price/function.

Agreed. First thing that came to mind when he said it one without touching it was, wait for it…….. Why not give it a Nobel Peace Prize.

Why does “everyone” want the 5D/5D II Series to disappear? I love my 5D II.

Every plastic product is engineered with a plastic appropriate to the cost, strength, dimensional stability, temperature rating, chemical and solvent resistance, etc for its intended purpose. fillers like fiberglass are sometimes added to enhance mechanical properties. All of these things trade off with one another, and you select the best you can get for the cost.

More expensive lenses might use a more expensive plastic that is stronger and more dimensionally stable, but all lenses are made of engineering plastics and not from materials like polystyrene (PS), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polypropylene (PP) and polyethylene (PE).

As it is a fine rumors site, I don’t take your claims for real either. ;-) Have fun with your 1DIV whenever you’ll get a grip on it. These toys are too expensive for my needs, so what does it matter. They surely serve to stir up the flame towards 7D upgrades containing some of their goodies…and that’s enough for me. Maybe someday we’ll see an affordable 7D like FF body, if not I’ll wait out the 7D Mk II…

The 1D Mark IV is definitely a 2009 camera, it far eclipses the 7D for functionality and image quality, but the 7D wins on value for money.

Yeah, the 7D is soft – or more what I’d describe as “mushy” as others have described the images that come from it.

Great post. My comments below:

Best New DSLR
I’d give this one to the 7D. Yeah, the 1D4 looks to be great, but it’s basically meeting expectations, and, at $5k, it’s really not a tool for the masses.

Everyone was expecting the 60D, and Canon surprised us with a new niche to do battle with the DX00 series from Nikon. The 7D has a great AF system, was the first DSLR in the world to do 1080p at 24fps and offers improvements over even cameras higher up the Canon food chain. It was good enough to get me to lay down the money to upgrade from my 20D.

Reading about the softness issue at small apertures was a bit of a disappointment, but I normally don’t shoot at anything smaller than f/7.1, so I can’t say that I’ve experienced it. The jury’s still out for me about the overall sharpness at all apertures and ISO settings. I’m getting sharp images, but I don’t quite seem to be getting ‘tack sharp’ images with my 24-70 L and 70-200 f/2.8 L IS. Still, I’m happy with the 7D.

For the 7D2, I’d like to see Canon drop the resolution to at least 16mp (I’d even be fine with 14mp) to help with the defraction issues at small apertures and to improve noise levels (which are already pretty good). And add full-time AF in video mode that can match a good camcorder. Oh, and DIGIC V. I might actually sell my 7D for a 7D2 with those specs.

Best PowerShot.
I agree with the S90 vote. I almost bought one for Christmas, but I think I’m going to wait for the next iteration before I jump in. Sounds like a great little camera, though, and the high ISO shots look fantastic for such a compact design.

How about this for a new category:
Lens I’d most like to see in 2010: 50mm f/1.4 II

+1

I couldn’t agree more and have rarely heard it expressed better.

Interesting when putting the “quality” side to the measure, I’ve not seen a LOT of images of the new M9 but from what I’ve seen the problems that arise from bringing the lens that close to a digital sensor (Film never had to solve this problem as there was no micro lens) resulting in the micro lenses needing to bend the light at a steeper angle back to the photo sights has not been entirely resolved.

That sounds much more logical than the way I read the statement on the blog!

“Worst Digital SLR Winner: Rebel T1i More mega pixels and a gimped movie mode.”

“Runner-up: 7D The 7D is a great camera for most people.”

“The 20fps 1080p movie mode is ridiculous. Lower the bitrate or some other way to gimp the movie mode to keep it below the 7D and 5D2.”

“This source explains why there’s no 24p at the moment. I’m trusting the information is legit, I personally lack the technical knowledge of HD video in the 5D2. […] Still no 24p it looks like.”

Criticizing 15MP on APS-C sensor while being excited by 18MP on APS-C sensor for 2.5x price at the same time, as well as criticizing slow frame rate, i.e. 20 fps, when awating slower frame, i.e. 24fps, having already 30fps rate, reminds me Stanislas Lem’s thought: “Before I tried internet I hadn’t known there were so many idiots in the world”.

The new 24 TS is awesome, Santa Claus brought me one and it rocks.

That’s where you’re wrong, I bought mine on December the 24th, which counts as 2009. Are you one of those people who thinks where they live is the only place that counts? Technically, it WAS released in 2009. Grow a brain.

“This is THE camera that can guarantee that every picture will be in perfect focus in the area that you want it and fast.”

No camera can guarantee what is depended on user. As you have contradictorily stated you must learn zone focusing first so “perfect focus” is a function of the user abilities not the camera’s build quality.

Any tool is only as good as the person who uses it, a master will take a better picture with a disposable camera than a talentless snob who only buys it because its badge “Leica”.

I have used range finders before Leica is a fine brand, there is no argument about that, but the whole point of the argument is that one pays premium simply for the brand name regardless of the product’s quality.

I think the AutoISO he is talking about is an advanced mode that can be customized to hold certain minimal appertures and speeds, etc. I have recently “re-discovered” the value of a good AutoISO function, particualrly combined with M settings. I can keep the shutter speed and apperture I want fixed, and let the camera tweek the ISO to adjust the exposure. Great feature for concerts.

I think you are missing the point. Look at the target markets of the two cameras. People who by the 7D probably have lenses that can resolve all of the sensor. However, those that buy a T1i probably are going to use the kit lens or some other consumer lens, which can’t resolve all the sensor. If your primary audience won’t use all the pixels, why have them there? It just increases file sizes and cost with no increase in picture quality.

There is a huge difference between 24fps and 20fps. 24fps has long been the standard for film. It was needed by pros so that they could make video taken on the 7D to those taken with other sources easily. 20fps isn’t any sort of standard and results in relatively choppy video.

I find your last statement ironic.

I would like to hope for a 7D2 at 16 MP but I consider it very unlikely…anyway…while my 30D takes pictures I’ll wait for the 7D2, whatever the specs will be…

Where are the predictions?

Please look at the pictures. You can eaven look at it in pixel level.
http://www.dpreview.com/previews/leicam9/page9.asp

I don’t regret buying the 7D at all, despite the reported softness at small apertures. It would be nice to think that my toy has no weaknesses, but the reality is I just don’t take pictures with small apertures very often.

As far as overall sharpness goes, I was just going over some pictures I took at Christmas with the 24-70mm f/2.8 L, and I was pretty satisfied with the sharpness.

The 30D is pretty similar to my 20D, and there are a number of nice improvements you’ll appreciate. The new AF system is great. The 3″ LCD is huge. The new Q button’s menu gives instant access to all of the parameters you would want to change in one easy-to-access screen. No more staring at your camera asking, “How do I change that setting again?” It’s very intuitive and makes changing anything simple. Of course, the you can still make those changes with the dedicated buttons like what you have on your 30D. The Q menu just makes it easier for those settings you don’t change often and may forget how to access in a hurry.

I’m guessing the 7D will be on an 18-month product cycle, so if you need an upgrade, I wouldn’t hesitate (unless you’re a landscape photographer–then I’d say rent one before buying to see what you think of the reported softness issue). But if you’re happy with your 30D and can wait, the 7D will of course only get better.

Okay, you may be on to something there. I didn’t know the Sigma was that much sharper.

By all accounts the Tamron 17-50 VC is optically terrible.