Congratulations Canon to another great Camera release!!

[Zlatko]

So why the heck did Canon "cripple" the 5DIII by omitting so many features? Why doesn't the 5DIII have fabulous built-in creative filters like Toy Camera and Grainy Black & White? Is Canon just being greedy?

This is the first time I've heard anyone complain about this feature, and it is in jest. I agree that it is possible for a feature to have zero or even negative marginal value, and that in-camera art filters on a pro body would have no or negative marginal value (if they were high enough in the decision tree to be accessible they would have a negative marginal value because of the resulting clutter, otherwise it would be about 0)

I don't agree that AFMA on rebel bodies is such a feature.

For one, AFMA is completely usable even if it's buried under layers of menus, because it doesn't need to be manipulated during day to day shooting -- it is only adjusted in controlled (e.g. non time critical) settings. Even on the 5DII (for example) it's buried in a 3 layer menu (go to the right tab, then select AF/other, then select micro adjust).

I don't understand why putting that in the Rebel would overly complicate things. They do already have equally confusing items (e.g. such as a two axis white balance adjustment which would have even many advanced users scratching their heads)

Art filters by contrast in cameras that have them tend to occupy spots close to the top of the decision heirarchy (sometimes they are actually hardwired into the manual controls which would be incredibly annoying for most 1D and 5D series users). They need to be done this way to be quickly accessible.

Of course, different users have different expectations.

Of course, but my point is that one of the reasons people buy inexpensive cameras is because of budgetery constraints, not because they are unsophisticated users.

I do agree with you that Canon's point of view seems to be that the Rebel line is unsuitable for the more sophisticated user. A savvy user on a budget probably shouldn't buy a rebel.

I simply don't believe your contention that Canon's reason for omitting this feature from their Rebel (or there XXD bodies from which it was removed) is to avoid adding "unwanted features". In fact on the contrary it looks like the point is to send a message to advanced users who might otherwise purchase rebel series bodies that they really should step up and buy one of their more expensive offerings.

So you understand that if the 5DIII were loaded with beginner "creative filters" and "scene modes", it may well drive a potential purchaser to a competitor's product that was more rationally designed for its intended buyer. Not only would it cost something to include these features in the software, but it may well cost a manufacturer sales and good will, and earn it a reputation for poor and bloated design. Remember how many people complained about the useless "Print" button on the 5D (never mind that some people actually used it)? Likewise, loading a basic camera with advanced features may well turn away potential buyers. They may prefer a competitor's model that isn't cluttered with features they didn't want and would never use.

My point is that when people on gear forums say there is "no reason" not to include some feature, in fact there may be a very good reason from the manufacturer's perspective. There may be a 100,000 good reasons ... i.e., a great many customers for that camera, not the small number of people who frequent gear forums to commiserate about how they feel cheated. You can probably find a small number of people who insist that some sports car should come "standard" with a towing hitch so they can tow their motorcycle or boat. But that's not a convincing reason for a car company to design their sports car with a towing hitch, and that towing hitch may well turn away a lot of their potential buyers.

And if the point is to send a message, as you say, to advanced users that they really should step up, well that is a perfectly valid business decision. It's not so different from the business decision to omit lots of cool features from the "crippled" 5D3 that are found in the much cheaper SL1. That omission sends a message too.

 

[M.ST]

The big innovation is, that there is no innovation and you pay a lot more than for a 650D.

We need a 7D mark II with a cf card slot, a 5D Mark IV or higher with a cf card slot and a lot of lens replacements or new lenses.

 

[aznable]

The big innovation is, that there is no innovation and you pay a lot more than for a 650D.

We need a 7D mark II with a cf card slot, a 5D Mark IV or higher with a cf card slot and a lot of lens replacements or new lenses.

you forgot aps-h sensor for 7d and a 20 stop BSI sensor for 5d mk iv

 

[Hillsilly]

My Car analogy - a tale of two industries.

First we have the car industry. The industry is very competitive, with several dozen manufacturers fighting for each sale. While the cars are built for a price point, every possible enhancement is crammed in. The car industry loves low-cost features and they know the absence of them will drive some buyers to other makes. Everything from multiple baby seat anchor points to bluetooth connectivity and ipod connections are being crammed in there. If it doesn't add significantly to the cost, its in. And those items that aren't standard features can often be added through the dealership as an option extra or through aftermarket suppliers.

Behind the scenes, designers and engineers are working on new technologies to make cars more efficient, safer, and better to drive. Competition has made the following almost universally standard - Air conditioning, ABS, rear reversing cameras, self parking cars, voice activation, WiFi, airbags (often up to 10), traction control, blind spot monitoring, GPS, seats that remember the preferred position of different drivers, keyless entry...I could go on, but you get my point.

And then we have the camera industry, which has only two big players in DSLRs. While the big guys are seen to be competitive, the fact that they can drop key, low cost, technologies to drive customers to higher priced models, and get away with it, suggests that competition isn't that fierce.

Now, I'm not knocking Canon. If it is a successful strategy, great. And consumers can research the features of cameras before buying them. And they can choose to buy different cameras that might meet their needs better. But I think any comparison with the motor vehicle industry is a little tenuous.

 

[Marsu42]

We need a 7D mark II with a cf card slot, a 5D Mark IV or higher with a cf card slot and a lot of lens replacements or new lenses.

What's so important about cf cards (or was that irony)? For my money, I want dual sd cards - smaller and also very fast.

This is not far from the truth. In October 2011, Canon announced that the 50 millionth EOS cameras and 70 millionth EF lens was produced. 1.4 lenses to each body.

It's be really interesting if the ef-s lenses are included - but even if not this proves Canon marketing's efficiency, they manage to make people buy new camera bodies all the time - just like Intel/AMD convince users to change their mainboard/memory alongside their cpu but at the same time market them as "changeable".

 

[elflord]

My point is that when people on gear forums say there is "no reason" not to include some feature, in fact there may be a very good reason from the manufacturer's perspective. There may be a 100,000 good reasons ...

Yet you haven't stated any for the feature that we are discussing (AFMA). Instead, you have brought up two features that are not analogous -- art filters and the print button (my comments about the art filters apply to the print button -- it's at the top level)

Also you mention it costs something to add a feature in software but gross costs are not the same thing as marginal costs. The marginal cost of putting AFMA in rebel bodies would not be very substantial (they already have the software for this)

But that's not a convincing reason for a car company to design their sports car with a towing hitch, and that towing hitch may well turn away a lot of their potential buyers.

You're doing a great job of coming up with analogies that are not relevant, but not such a great job of addressing the issue at hand (which is again, AFMA)

And if the point is to send a message, as you say, to advanced users that they really should step up, well that is a perfectly valid business decision.

Well, you are welcome to defend it as a business decision. However, Canon's policy of going out of their way to cripple their lower end products does make them less attractive (and difficult to recommend to someone on a tight budget!)

Also, whatever you might say about the "majority of rebel users" -- I wonder how many 5-series and 1-series users start out as Rebel users ? (I did) There is a delicate balance here -- they do want to be able to encourage these people to ultimately upgrade to a 5 or 1 series body but they don't want to make the entry level body so awful that these users start out with a different manufacturer.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Also, whatever you might say about the "majority of rebel users" -- I wonder how many 5-series and 1-series users start out as Rebel users ? (I did) There is a delicate balance here -- they do want to be able to encourage these people to ultimately upgrade to a 5 or 1 series body but they don't want to make the entry level body so awful that these users start out with a different manufacturer.

As did I. So for us at least, and I suspect there are lots of others like us, it seems their 'cripple the low end to drive up-marketing' strategy is working rather well.

 

[elflord]

Also, whatever you might say about the "majority of rebel users" -- I wonder how many 5-series and 1-series users start out as Rebel users ? (I did) There is a delicate balance here -- they do want to be able to encourage these people to ultimately upgrade to a 5 or 1 series body but they don't want to make the entry level body so awful that these users start out with a different manufacturer.

As did I. So for us at least, and I suspect there are lots of others like us, it seems their 'cripple the low end to drive up-marketing' strategy is working rather well.

I suspect that there are many more who are not "like us" -- we have more disposable income than the typical hobbyists.

 

[jdramirez]

Also, whatever you might say about the "majority of rebel users" -- I wonder how many 5-series and 1-series users start out as Rebel users ? (I did) There is a delicate balance here -- they do want to be able to encourage these people to ultimately upgrade to a 5 or 1 series body but they don't want to make the entry level body so awful that these users start out with a different manufacturer.

As did I. So for us at least, and I suspect there are lots of others like us, it seems their 'cripple the low end to drive up-marketing' strategy is working rather well.

I suspect that there are many more who are not "like us" -- we have more disposable income than the typical hobbyists.

Interesting question, but I'm 90% sure that the rich ladies who want a "nice" camera make up less than 2% of the market for 5D and 1D buyers. I'd guess that 70% are professionals or are used in a professional capacity with the remaining 25% being hobbyists.

 

[EchoLocation]

Also, whatever you might say about the "majority of rebel users" -- I wonder how many 5-series and 1-series users start out as Rebel users ? (I did) There is a delicate balance here -- they do want to be able to encourage these people to ultimately upgrade to a 5 or 1 series body but they don't want to make the entry level body so awful that these users start out with a different manufacturer.

As did I. So for us at least, and I suspect there are lots of others like us, it seems their 'cripple the low end to drive up-marketing' strategy is working rather well.

I suspect that there are many more who are not "like us" -- we have more disposable income than the typical hobbyists.

I started out in the DSLR world with a 550D and soon after bought a 24-105 new. Later I bought a 5D classic and was sold on FF for good.
I was waiting with credit card in hand to pre order the 5DIII for 2800 bucks or less, but alas, it wasn't to be. One of the main reasons for me choosing Canon at first was their more reasonable pricing than Nikon(at the time(2009)).
By the time the 24-70 II was announced and the 6D vs D600, I had had enough and was sick of the new pricing strategy(everything expensive(except the 40mm, which I don't need) and the lack of exciting products(less exciting specs than the competition, similar or lower rated reviews to the competition, No RX1 competition, and slow 2.8 primes.)
I chose to buy a used D700 and a 24-70 from Nikon. I was worried about switching brands, but at this point, i'd feel like a fool if i hadn't.
To be honest, i'm pretty much done with big DSLRs and heavy glass. I'm not a Nikon fanboy at all. My next camera will either be an RX1 or any FF mirrorless camera or SL1 sized full frame.
I truly hope Canon, Nikon, Fuji, or Sony make this in the next year before I start another year of travel. I'd be happy to switch back to Canon if they can create that sense of confidence in their pricing, and exciting new products that has been missing the past couple of years.

 

[jdramirez]

Also, whatever you might say about the "majority of rebel users" -- I wonder how many 5-series and 1-series users start out as Rebel users ? (I did) There is a delicate balance here -- they do want to be able to encourage these people to ultimately upgrade to a 5 or 1 series body but they don't want to make the entry level body so awful that these users start out with a different manufacturer.

As did I. So for us at least, and I suspect there are lots of others like us, it seems their 'cripple the low end to drive up-marketing' strategy is working rather well.

if you can't afford the prostitute, get out of the brothel.

I suspect that there are many more who are not "like us" -- we have more disposable income than the typical hobbyists.

I started out in the DSLR world with a 550D and soon after bought a 24-105 new. Later I bought a 5D classic and was sold on FF for good.
I was waiting with credit card in hand to pre order the 5DIII for 2800 bucks or less, but alas, it wasn't to be. One of the main reasons for me choosing Canon at first was their more reasonable pricing than Nikon(at the time(2009)).
By the time the 24-70 II was announced and the 6D vs D600, I had had enough and was sick of the new pricing strategy(everything expensive(except the 40mm, which I don't need) and the lack of exciting products(less exciting specs than the competition, similar or lower rated reviews to the competition, No RX1 competition, and slow 2.8 primes.)
I chose to buy a used D700 and a 24-70 from Nikon. I was worried about switching brands, but at this point, i'd feel like a fool if i hadn't.
To be honest, i'm pretty much done with big DSLRs and heavy glass. I'm not a Nikon fanboy at all. My next camera will either be an RX1 or any FF mirrorless camera or SL1 sized full frame.
I truly hope Canon, Nikon, Fuji, or Sony make this in the next year before I start another year of travel. I'd be happy to switch back to Canon if they can create that sense of confidence in their pricing, and exciting new products that has been missing the past couple of years.

 

[elflord]

Interesting question, but I'm 90% sure that the rich ladies who want a "nice" camera make up less than 2% of the market for 5D and 1D buyers. I'd guess that 70% are professionals or are used in a professional capacity with the remaining 25% being hobbyists.

I don't follow what you mean here. Would you elaborate ? Your numbers don't add up and neither does your logic.

My point is that I believe that many of those 25% started out as Rebel users (I notice you too started out as a Rebel user ... are you a "rich lady who wants a nice camera" too ?). Also, I wouldn't completely dismiss the 70% (who may also have started off as Rebel users) -- many pro photographers are in a position of being able to choose their equipment so if they have a strong affinity with a given brand when they are hobbyists / students, they are likely to stick with it as professionals.

Whatever percentage of the potential 5 series user base start out as Rebel users, they aren't going to make up a large percentage of the Rebel user base but they are still strategically important to Canon (and other manufacturers who might want to lure them away)

 

[neuroanatomist]

Probably stating the obvious, but the vast majority of Rebel/xxxD buyers will never upgrade, per se, nor will they buy lenses beyond the initial kit. They may buy a new camera if theirs breaks, and that will be whatever is the current Rebel/xxxD. For the minority who will upgrade, Canon tries to give them reasons to do so, which makes sense from a business perspective. Cars are no different - if you want certain features, you've got to go up a trim level or two to get them.

 

[Zlatko]

Well, you are welcome to defend it as a business decision. However, Canon's policy of going out of their way to cripple their lower end products does make them less attractive (and difficult to recommend to someone on a tight budget!)

This is where we disagree. The SL1 is no more "crippled" by the lack of AFMA than the 5DIII is "crippled" by the lack of creative filters and scene modes.

Canon has a nice 2,500 word article on their web site on AFMA and how to do it. That's about 5 typewritten pages, single-spaced. Who has time for that? Advanced users and pros ... and no one else.

Tell the typical buyer of the SL1 that they can "micro-adjust the autofocus" and they will say, "I don't need that." Tell the typical buyer of the 5DIII about all of the creative filters and scene modes they're missing on the 5DIII, and they will also say, "I don't need that."

AFMA would be no more of a selling feature on the SL1 than creative filters and scene modes would be on the 5DIII. Some people here would scream in protest if creative filters and scene modes showed up in their 5DIII. That would be a case of more features making a product less attractive.

When Leica introduced a "snapshot" mode on their $6K rangefinder, that feature was greeted with ridicule and scorn by their user base. It was something they would never use.

The lesson for the manufacturer is that you don't include features just because you can, or just because they're cheap. That approach is as likely to turn away some buyers as it is to attract others. Instead, you choose a package of features that make sense for the intended user and how they're likely to use the product. Camera makers don't just compete to offer more features, they also compete to offer more intelligent, more coherent design.

 

[elflord]

Well, you are welcome to defend it as a business decision. However, Canon's policy of going out of their way to cripple their lower end products does make them less attractive (and difficult to recommend to someone on a tight budget!)

This is where we disagree. The SL1 is no more "crippled" by the lack of AFMA than the 5DIII is "crippled" by the lack of creative filters and scene modes.

Canon has a nice 2,500 word article on their web site on AFMA and how to do it. That's about 5 typewritten pages, single-spaced. Who has time for that? Advanced users and pros ... and no one else.

Which other features would you suggest removing based on this doctrine ? Support for raw seems like a pretty good candidate -- how many pages does it take to discuss the finer points of that ? Also, what do you think of having a white balance adjustment on two axes (not even a color temperature slider -- a two axis amber/blue and green/magenta control instead). The Rebel also has in-camera correction for CA and vignetting, so it's not too much of a stretch to think that maybe AFMA belongs there.

So I'm afraid in conclusion I simply don't really buy your theory that Canon chose to remove AFMA to make a more minimal, focused and tightly integrated, easy to understand feature set. (the two axis white balance is the nail in the coffin for that theory -- there is no way the average rebel user understands what that feature does, let alone how to use it effectively)

I have already discussed at length why creative filters on the 5D are not analogous to AFMA on a Rebel body (basically the creative filters need to take up real estate near the top of the decision tree to be useful. 5D users would laugh at them but not really be too upset if they were, like AFMA, buried in a 3-level menu so that they didn't interfere with typical operation)

 

[Zlatko]

Well, you are welcome to defend it as a business decision. However, Canon's policy of going out of their way to cripple their lower end products does make them less attractive (and difficult to recommend to someone on a tight budget!)

This is where we disagree. The SL1 is no more "crippled" by the lack of AFMA than the 5DIII is "crippled" by the lack of creative filters and scene modes.

Canon has a nice 2,500 word article on their web site on AFMA and how to do it. That's about 5 typewritten pages, single-spaced. Who has time for that? Advanced users and pros ... and no one else.

Which other features would you suggest removing based on this doctrine ? Support for raw seems like a pretty good candidate -- how many pages does it take to discuss the finer points of that ? Also, what do you think of having a white balance adjustment on two axes (not even a color temperature slider -- a two axis amber/blue and green/magenta control instead). The Rebel also has in-camera correction for CA and vignetting, so it's not too much of a stretch to think that maybe AFMA belongs there.

So I'm afraid in conclusion I simply don't really buy your theory that Canon chose to remove AFMA to make a more minimal, focused and tightly integrated, easy to understand feature set. (the two axis white balance is the nail in the coffin for that theory -- there is no way the average rebel user understands what that feature does, let alone how to use it effectively)

I have already discussed at length why creative filters on the 5D are not analogous to AFMA on a Rebel body (basically the creative filters need to take up real estate near the top of the decision tree to be useful. 5D users would laugh at them but not really be too upset if they were, like AFMA, buried in a 3-level menu so that they didn't interfere with typical operation)

Let me ask you why they chose to omit the cool creative filters and scene modes in the 5DIII? (Hey, I would really like them. ) Or why they chose to include the green Auto mode on the mode dial of the 5DIII?

It's not just a question of whether something can be added without too much trouble, but whether it belongs on that camera in the first place. Snapshot mode on the Leica rangefinder obviously did not belong. Likewise, it is arguable that two axis white balance adjustment and other features don't belong on a Rebel. Some things we can guess at, but we'll never know. But not knowing doesn't stop gear forum people from complaining about all of the injustices foisted on us by nefarious marketing people infected with this wrong-headed desire to make a profit.

Another analogy: Wordpress.com offers three price levels for blogs they host, from $0/year to $99/year $300/year. To get the ability to edit CSS on your blog (a "premium" feature), you have to go up from $0/year to $99/year. Of course, you get some other premium features bundled together for that price. And yet how much does it cost them to enable the "edit CSS" feature? This feature lets you make little tweaks, like adjusting the default width of images on your blog. It should be "standard", right? They could easily offer the "edit CSS" feature somewhere where it wouldn't bother anyone who didn't want to use it, and yet they don't. Should we cry about how the basic $0/year blog is needlessly "crippled"? Are they showing "contempt" for their customers, as some people on this forum would argue, or are they just making rational business decisions?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Yep, when clients are reacting when they see the photos from my 5d3, we ALL know they say "damn that's too bad you didn't have more DR or a 36 mega pixel camera". But, what one of my top models DID tell me that she hated my camera because it has too much detail and shows all her imperfections. Rebel is a rebel, no more no less. Whatever did we do when we had the 10d, 20d, 30d, 40d, 5d classic... The 60d has no reason it shouldn't have afma, but if the 70d doesn't have it, then panic

Yeah well maybe get out of the studio for once and shoot some giant landscapes that can't be lit with flashes or umbrellas....

You just dont get it [/shakes head]... The day landscapes pay me the money studio does, then I will look at things differently... then again, when I do go out and about, I know what i'm doing, i know what filters I need and I dont fret DR...

Wow so basically unless it makes money it may as not even well be considered photography right?
And maybe if you did get out and try some other types more often you'd realize that the filters you refer to only work for a very few specific types of scenes/scenarios.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Well, you are welcome to defend it as a business decision. However, Canon's policy of going out of their way to cripple their lower end products does make them less attractive (and difficult to recommend to someone on a tight budget!)

This is where we disagree. The SL1 is no more "crippled" by the lack of AFMA than the 5DIII is "crippled" by the lack of creative filters and scene modes.

You can add creative filters, with much higher quality, AFTER the fact. You can't refocus all the soft images after the fact from poor AF calibration. One doesn't affect the ability of the body to perform to spec the other one does. So I'd say that one of them is a bigger cripple than the other.

 

[rizenphoenix]

Most people who get Rebels leave the stock lens on - or at best, get a 50mm 1.8...

How would you know? Just because the people in this forum are so well-off that they don't use Rebels with L glass?

Because 80-90% of the people I see shooting with Rebels out in the field are doing so with the stock lens...mind you, it's only from my own experience and I realize there are many that use much more expensive lenses with them. I was one of them (I used the 70-200 F4 IS with it)

This is not far from the truth. In October 2011, Canon announced that the 50 millionth EOS cameras and 70 millionth EF lens was produced. 1.4 lenses to each body.

I would guess that for many who bought a rebel because out of cost consideration would look to 3rd part lenses to get more bang for their buck.

That being said most of the rebels I see done on the boardwalk have the kit lens on them.

 

[Zlatko]

Well, you are welcome to defend it as a business decision. However, Canon's policy of going out of their way to cripple their lower end products does make them less attractive (and difficult to recommend to someone on a tight budget!)

This is where we disagree. The SL1 is no more "crippled" by the lack of AFMA than the 5DIII is "crippled" by the lack of creative filters and scene modes.

You can add creative filters, with much higher quality, AFTER the fact. You can't refocus all the soft images after the fact from poor AF calibration. One doesn't affect the ability of the body to perform to spec the other one does. So I'd say that one of them is a bigger cripple than the other.

But you can't add the exact same creative filters, or as easily, if you have to process them on your computer. You need time ... and a computer. Oh, and you need to find or buy the creative filters somewhere. More time/money. So omitting them is an obvious loss for 5DIII users. Likewise, you can't fix all of the blurry images after the fact because you lacked the proper scene mode. Again, a huge loss for 5DIII users. SL1 users can instantly dial in the proper scene mode and get the shot. So why not include those features in a 5DIII? Are they just "crippling" the camera for the few users who would find those features valuable and possibly necessary?

As I've said before, the Rebel cameras do perform to their spec. Your theory that they have poor AF calibration and don't perform to spec is based on a different spec shared by a few people on gear forums. This is like a Ferrari owner complaining that a Kia doesn't perform to spec, especially at the race track.