Official Canon Survey
Canon has sent invites to folks to participate in a survey geared towards video in SLR's.
Survey Here: http://survey.cusa.canon.com/Pub/2wS26J/Link.html
The survey is only for US residents. You can tell a fib and answer “yes” to that question.
It's nice to see Canon asking for feedback from the users.
thanks Rich
cr
Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.
53 Comments
Just a question: if the 7D had a FF sensor, how much would Canon have asked for it? As it is, the MSRP is well below 2000$ or Euros, the 5DII is about 2500, so a full frame that has all the advanced features of 7D should be aroud 3500-4500! How much is that hypothetical camera different from the 1DsIII? Does the difference in features justifies going from 4500 to 8000? I am not to say the conclusion, I guess it is pretty clear.
I got it. After a few posts, the system no longer allow the posts to indent. :)
David, let me make myself more clear: I do NOT think it is the technology (in this case, the video function) makes the price higher or lower. Rather, technology serves for marketing purpose (from the manufacturer’s point of view). Putting the video into the camera does not cost money or cost very little money. But promoting the video function costs millions of dollars. Unfortunately that money will end up on the price tag for each camera. By promoting, I don’t mean just print out the 1080p on the poster. Marketing is way more complicated than just printing out the poster.
As for liveview photography, I hold the same view as the handheld video. It is awkward. I prefer the optical viewfinder, at least for now. :)
Nonmem, marketing obviously costs money, but that is offset by increased sales, which you must admit video on the 5D2 has clearly added lots of sales that would not have been made without it. Its to every Canon DSLR user’s benefit for Canon to sell as many 5D2 & 7D’s as possible, Canon makes more money and they make us more advanced cameras for our money on the next round. Telling them to cut out popular features is shooting yourself in the foot even if you don’t want or use the feature.
Those wanting lower MP have the same problem because lens improvement is driven by increase in resolution. When the 1D came out at 4 MP the 16-35mm mark I was very usable, as the MP went up it was then found to be too soft and we got the much better 16-35mm mark II. Had Canon stopped at 10 MP like people suggest, lots of other improvements would not be made in lenses and such. Same is true of the 7D being APS-C and not APS-H, it motivates Canon to make better EF-S glass. People should be careful what they ask for because getting might mean losing elsewhere.
The 5D2 is very usable off tripod with a shoulder mount or stabilizer. It could also be valuable for some PJ uses where they may have the only video camera on the scene, while it might be jerky, for news reporting jerky video is still better than no video.
For family or party video I wouldn’t use the DSLR unless I was really into editing video and amature movie making as a hobby. I sure dont pull out my DSLR to shoot family stuff most of the time. I have P&S’s for that. My guess is family/amature video should be optimised for youtube uploading, 720p is the most you need, but how many family dads and moms can edit 720p anyway? But it’s nice to have the option.
The 5D2 and 7D are not family targeted cameras. They are semipro or low end pro cameras, and in todays world HD video can add a lot of sales to those cameras.
Depends on what the MP ended up being. If it was 18MP FF with the 7D’s AF and 8 FPS it would probably be priced between the 5D2 and 1D3 and be the infamous 3D instead of the 7D perhaps. While I’d love to have a custom built camera to all my wishlist specs for cheap, I think Canon made a smart move on the 7D and will look to the 1D4 to be the fast FF pro body.