A Shake-up Coming to the APS-C DSLR Lineup? [CR2]

[Talys]

- I would take UHSII model, over one that didn't, if only for faster read times when offloading to PC.

UHS-II is backward compatible with previous SD versions, so you can get faster read times when offloading to PC by inserting a UHS-II card into whichever camera's SD slot.

This is true -- I actually thought of this and gave it a whirl, but it turns out that the UHS-II card that a friend lent me (along with a Sony camera) actually clears the buffer on my 6DII slower than a Sandisk Extreme Pro, despite costing something like three to four times the price.

The read time off to a PC is really nice, though.

Hopefully, at some point, the stars will align: Canon camera support, cheaper cards, readers being more common, and more of a need anyhow as file sizes get larger. Then, I'll just get a three 128GB cards and be done with it.

 

[tron]

- I would take UHSII model, over one that didn't, if only for faster read times when offloading to PC.

UHS-II is backward compatible with previous SD versions, so you can get faster read times when offloading to PC by inserting a UHS-II card into whichever camera's SD slot.

This is true -- I actually thought of this and gave it a whirl, but it turns out that the UHS-II card that a friend lent me (along with a Sony camera) actually clears the buffer on my 6DII slower than a Sandisk Extreme Pro, despite costing something like three to four times the price.

The read time off to a PC is really nice, though.

Hopefully, at some point, the stars will align: Canon camera support, cheaper cards, readers being more common, and more of a need anyhow as file sizes get larger. Then, I'll just get a three 128GB cards and be done with it.

I recall that Canon had already mentioned that for Canon 5DMarkIV too.

 

[tron]

Raise your hand if you yourself (no, not a spouse or whomever) would buy one of these proposed (and rumored) models. Yeah, that's what I thought. A bunch of guys on the internet complaining about things that aren't even up their alley.

I've been saving/planning for a 7D3 if the price and features are reasonable.

+1

I fully expect to buy two 7DIIIs, one for me and one for my spouse.

Yeah, bit you guys are only considering it because you're locked into the Canon system and are being forced to stay there, right? Because we all know that the D500 is better than the 7DIII can possibly be, right? And the D510 will be even better, right?

If all my gear were stolen I'd take a hard look at the D500 and Nikon glass. I don't know that I'd buy, but I'd seriously consider it.

When my 40D with many lenses (10-22,501.4,85 1.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 ) had been stolen I just switched to full frame 5DMarkII with 24-105 4L. Later I added lenses.True I already had other Canon lenses like 16-35 2.8 and 300 4L (non IS) but it never occurred to me to switch...

 

[Ditboy]

What makes the most sense to me and my prediction (at some point) the Rebel line is dropped and the M line replaces it.

 

[tron]

They all have a place. The rebels support the EF and EF-S series of lenses and can be a backup to a higher end camera.

 

[dak723]

Just wondering, when does adding another camera to the line qualify as a "shake-up?" Sounds more like business as usual.

 

[Scumbag]

The only thing that I can imagine would be a shake-up would be integrating support for full frame and crop within the one body.

The mirror would be sized for APS-C, and would only show the centre crop of the image. If you have an EF-S lens attached, then it would enforce cropping. If you have an EF lens attached then you would have the option of centre crop (you get what you see through the optical viewfinder), or entire frame.

Optical focusing would only be able to use focus points reflected by the mirror - though I guess with software smarts could be combined with the dual-pixel AF - particularly when a subject moves just outside the centre.

So what does full frame bring to the equation? Well I guess this is where there is alignment with video, and landscape, portrait, architectural type photography where you can primarily use the LCD screen for adjusting framing and reviewing shots.

To have a decent megapixels for the birders you will need to have presumably 50MP (or more) across the full frame. I guess they could do some clunky separate pixel resolution between the centre-crop and full-frame portion.

The problem is that Canon being Canon, will look at it taking away from people buying 5D, 1D, 6D, and 4K video camera sales. However if Canon are smart then it is an opportunity to sell wide angle EF lenses, and more lenses designed for video.

 

[gsealy]

They all have a place. The rebels support the EF and EF-S series of lenses and can be a backup to a higher end camera.

I agree. I just used my t4i today to do some quick shots at a juniors golf tournament. It's light and I can throw it in my small bag. These shots were not for artistic purposes. They were for Facebook and personal use. The main thing was to capture a lot of stuff. I didn't need to carry around the 5DIII and L lenses. Just shoot with a light zoom lens and that is that.

 

[jolyonralph]

The only thing that I can imagine would be a shake-up would be integrating support for full frame and crop within the one body.

The mirror would be sized for APS-C, and would only show the centre crop of the image. If you have an EF-S lens attached, then it would enforce cropping.

I really can't see this working. You'd be buying a 50mpx full-frame camera but not be able to view the full frame through the viewfinder.

Why bother when you could replace the mirror entirely with an EVF and have a system that switched automatically between FF and APS-C depending on the lens attached?

 

[ScottyP]

Maybe they're just going to do a major re-naming of the cameras. They are getting close to having to do that. 90d will be the end of that line's naming convention. T9i will end another naming convention at the model after next. Not at all sure where they think they are going to go, name-wise, after 77d.

They may also be reconsidering why they would have different number-names in the US vs Europe. (600d, 650d, 700d instead of T3i, T4i, T5i, etc). Numbers are numbers, no need to have different names in different languages if the names are numbers instead of words.

Maybe Canon are going to shake up the crop sensor line by resetting the model names/numbers in a way that makes sense and gives them room to continue.

 

[jeffa4444]

One of the shake-ups long overdue is more efficient lossless compression particularly on sensors giving 30 - 50MP and beyond. The larger files require more memory, more storage and faster processors in a perpetual arms race. Those file sizes multiple after heavy post in Lightroom & Photoshop ultimately slowing everything down. More MP without reviewing this will frustrate more people and give the tech a bad name.

 

[Velo Steve]

One of the shake-ups long overdue is more efficient lossless compression particularly on sensors giving 30 - 50MP and beyond.
...

One of the best ideas I have seen here. It seems obvious, yet we're all carrying around needlessly huge raw files. Even at 20MP or less, why waste the space?

 

[tron]

There is a limit to how much can improve lossless compression. For example compare a compressing program like winrar, 7z, etc when you use to compress normal versus best compression. The difference isn't huge and you spend more time to do it.

 

[dickgrafixstop]

What does the market need/want in a new DSLR? Finer resolution? Faster frame rate? Better low light performance? Less menus/options? Lighter weight? Faster autofocus? Improved video? Better audio?
Today's offerings do pretty well in all these areas given differences in price points. Pack the new ones with more
not photographic features? GPS? NFC? Bluetooth? Or maybe better in-camera editing? Improved remote
operation? None of the prime manufacturers seem to be particularly customer sensitive (except perhaps Fuji)
as to market requirements. We'll get what they give us, when they give it to us. The rest is chasing rainbows.

 

[Talys]

What does the market need/want in a new DSLR? Finer resolution? Faster frame rate? Better low light performance? Less menus/options? Lighter weight? Faster autofocus? Improved video? Better audio?
Today's offerings do pretty well in all these areas given differences in price points. Pack the new ones with more
not photographic features? GPS? NFC? Bluetooth? Or maybe better in-camera editing? Improved remote
operation? None of the prime manufacturers seem to be particularly customer sensitive (except perhaps Fuji)
as to market requirements. We'll get what they give us, when they give it to us. The rest is chasing rainbows.

Specifically regarding the 7D2, a little bit of everything, as most would agree that it is behind the D500 in featureset - and even the 80D in some areas. A flip screen would be nice

More broadly, cameras do get slight improvements even now, and there is no reason NOT to implement that into bodies for new purchases, because there are a multitude of reasons that people buy new cameras, and after all, camera manufacturers are trying to stay in business.

This doesn't mean that buying a new camera will have any meaningful benefit for an existing owner of a flagship in terms of producing better photography, which may be what you're driving at. But that is a reason not to upgrade; it isn't a reason not to iterate the product.

 

[BillB]

What does the market need/want in a new DSLR? Finer resolution? Faster frame rate? Better low light performance? Less menus/options? Lighter weight? Faster autofocus? Improved video? Better audio?
Today's offerings do pretty well in all these areas given differences in price points. Pack the new ones with more
not photographic features? GPS? NFC? Bluetooth? Or maybe better in-camera editing? Improved remote
operation? None of the prime manufacturers seem to be particularly customer sensitive (except perhaps Fuji)
as to market requirements. We'll get what they give us, when they give it to us. The rest is chasing rainbows.

Specifically regarding the 7D2, a little bit of everything, as most would agree that it is behind the D500 in featureset - and even the 80D in some areas. A flip screen would be nice

More broadly, cameras do get slight improvements even now, and there is no reason NOT to implement that into bodies for new purchases, because there are a multitude of reasons that people buy new cameras, and after all, camera manufacturers are trying to stay in business.

This doesn't mean that buying a new camera will have any meaningful benefit for an existing owner of a flagship in terms of producing better photography, which may be what you're driving at. But that is a reason not to upgrade; it isn't a reason not to iterate the product.

Also, the 7DII has a dual pixel sensor, but it does not have the current technology with the Analog to Digital conversion on the sensor itself, which has lower noise levels at low ISOs.

 

[Talys]

The only thing that I can imagine would be a shake-up would be integrating support for full frame and crop within the one body.

The mirror would be sized for APS-C, and would only show the centre crop of the image. If you have an EF-S lens attached, then it would enforce cropping. If you have an EF lens attached then you would have the option of centre crop (you get what you see through the optical viewfinder), or entire frame.

Optical focusing would only be able to use focus points reflected by the mirror - though I guess with software smarts could be combined with the dual-pixel AF - particularly when a subject moves just outside the centre.

So what does full frame bring to the equation? Well I guess this is where there is alignment with video, and landscape, portrait, architectural type photography where you can primarily use the LCD screen for adjusting framing and reviewing shots.

To have a decent megapixels for the birders you will need to have presumably 50MP (or more) across the full frame. I guess they could do some clunky separate pixel resolution between the centre-crop and full-frame portion.

The problem is that Canon being Canon, will look at it taking away from people buying 5D, 1D, 6D, and 4K video camera sales. However if Canon are smart then it is an opportunity to sell wide angle EF lenses, and more lenses designed for video.

This... makes zero sense. The camera would need a full frame sensor, but APSC mirror/prism. That's nearly all the cost of full frame, without a way of seeing the field of view in the viewfinder. You also couldn't use the autofocus sensor beyond the APSC mirror's boundaries, since no light would be reflected downwards.

If you want a crop capture on a full frame sensor, mirrorless will be the way to go, because the viewfinder can switch between crop and full frame with a push of a button. The Sony implementation of this is excellent.

 

[fingerstein]

Maybe the "big shakeup" will be WI-FI/NFC for 7D Mark III (!)

 

[sanj]

"The reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated."
—The dSLR

Matter of time. Sooner than anticipated.

 

[Treyarnon]

Any chance the 'extra' camera is a 7D3 with the AA filter removed?

The real surprise here is that the 7D3 has been delayed (when was the last full calendar year without a marquee 'xD' camera release?). I guess Canon have decided the camera needs more time in R&D - but the idea that releases are effectively being held for the moment, and then a big rush of new models next year (5Ds, 7D, 80D, the 'new' model - maybe a full frame mirror less too) ... kind of makes me wonder if Canon has some new tech in the pipeline that they want to get into the market as soon as possible