Future of APS-C Given 6D Pricing

[Hillsilly]

I see the 6D is now $1649 from some suppliers. Even here is Australia, the global HQ of the Canon overpricing division, 6D's are $1800 (GST Excl). With the upcoming 7Dii and 70D, for the first time ever, we'll likely have APS-C bodies priced higher than FF bodies. Wow! This really complicates buying decisions. And not just across Canon's own range, but across the board.

And while I'm sure the 70D and 7Dii will have features to match their price and should appeal to many, given the image quality gains, you'd have to be very aware of your needs to forgo the 6D. The same with people looking at buying into another system with a higher end camera - eg Olympus OM-D, Panasonic GH3, Pentax K5ii. If your sole criteria isn't smaller and lighter, why would you bother?

And personally, while I've been considering a Fuji Xpro1 for fun, my logical side is telling me that it is inferior to the 6D in many ways and that I'd be very silly to buy one.

So after some crystal ball gazing, I've come to the following conclusion. The 70D will move up in specs to become the 7D replacement and will sell for a similar price to the 6D. At that price range, people will need to choose between speed, performance and better AF or the better image quality of the 6D.

But we won't see APS-C bodies selling for more than FF bodies. Instead, the 7D replacement will be a full frame camera selling in the $2000 - $2200 range. It will be a 6D with beefed up AF specs. Maybe the features of the 5Diii but with the 6D sensor to keep some differentiation (Or a 5Diii light if you want to think about it that way). This will become THE camera for the masses. And while it will cannibalize 5Diii sales, this will be more than compensated by the increased sales to those seeking the allure of a FF camera that ticks most boxes and those who would have chosen a 6D, but can spend a bit more.

Anyway, just wanting to put my prediction out there.

 

[ScottyP]

Kinda agree except "the masses" will continue to shoot Rebels, not a $2,200 7d2.

 

[Malte_P]

i think the chance that the 7D MK2 will be fullframe is way below 1%.

APS-C will still be wanted and needed by some for the extra reach.
even when you have a 800mm and a TC you will still have more reach using an APS-C camera.

so a PRO 7D MK2 makes absolute sense.

i think the 70D will cost around 1300-1400 euro at start.


it´s the REBEL line im worried about. they seem to get not much love from canon.
i see no reason to upgrade from a 550D to a 700D.
and if the 70D has the same old sensor i will keep my 550D until the next round of new cameras.

i have 2300 euro waiting here in my piggy bank for something impressive from canon.
but there is nothing new in canons line that really make me wish to spend it.

 

[Malte_P]

I see the 6D is now $1649 from some suppliers. Even here is Australia, the global HQ of the Canon overpricing division, 6D's are $1800 (GST Excl).

haha good joke.. try that in EURO!

 

[moreorless]

i think the chance that the 7D MK2 will be fullframe is way below 1%.

APS-C will still be wanted and needed by some for the extra reach.
even when you have a 800mm and a TC you will still have more reach using an APS-C camera.

so a PRO 7D MK2 makes absolute sense.

Indeed, I'd expect something pretty similar to the 5D3 but with an ASPC sensor, 10-12 FP, priced around the same as the 6D at launch but maybe dropping a bit less over time.

That still leaves room for say a non sealed, 5-6 FPS, old 7D AF 70D with the same sensor priced around the same as the D7100.

 

[M.ST]

The 7D Mark II will be a APS-C camera.

The prototype is much faster than the 6D, the AF-system is a big step higher and you have first time an outstandig image quality in an APS-C-body.

 

[siegsAR]

So, 70D < 6D < 7DMkII. :

The difference; even with Digic 6(assuming) on the 7DMkII, 6D will still have higher IQ - that and the fact that it is full frame.
TBH, i don't care about the specs, its the pricing that I'll be most interested in.

..snip..
The question is if Canon is able so sell high priced 7D Mark II´s in times you can get a D7100 for less money.

The more reason they should price it a little cheaper. LOL.

 

[Don Haines]

I'll take a kick-ass focusing system over better IQ any day of the week. If the picture is out of focus, it doesn't matter what the IQ is or if it has 100 stops of dynamic range.

 

[aj1575]

My crystal-ball tells me, that the 7DII will have a similar price tag as the 6D had at the beginning (2000-2300$), the 70D will come out somewhat below of what the 6D is at that time (1300-1500$). Both will be APS-C and maybe even share the sensor; the 7DII will have a much better AF-system and higher frame rate.

For me, there is another question. Will the new APS-C sensors be good enough for most of us? It is similar to what we see in the computer market. There are always faster processors in high end machines, but the speed of slower processors is already good enough for most people. So instead to buy the fastes machine, the opt for smaller machines and tablets who do what they need, while using less space and costing less.

Just go over to DXO-mark and compare a alpha 99 to a D5200 or a D7100. Why should you buy the Sony? it's only marginaly better. Even if you compare a 5DII with the new Nikon APS-C cameras, it is not a clear picture. The new APS-C senosr are damn good, and if Canon manages to make an even better one than Nikon has, then I don't see the reason to go FF. Especially since it is not only the camera that costs a little more, its just everything that gets more expensive (24-70 f2.8 of f4 lenses for 2000$/1400$, more expensive filters, a heavier and more expensive tripod do manage the aditional load)

I think if we are honest, the new APS-C sensors are (will be) good enough for 98% of the people, no matter if there are 1500$ FF bodies or not.

 

[emag]

7DII will be the kundalini of crop cameras, 'professional' in every way. I'd be surprised (shocked) to see it come out a penny under $2700 US and would not be surprised at 3K+ at launch. Might not have the low light ability of 6D/5DIII...but it will be an exceptional camera. Worth waiting for if you're interested in such a camera. In the range of what I would spend, but with a 60D and an astro modded 40D my crop needs are met. 6D/5dIII and some glass/lighting gives me more bang for my buck. I think we're past the point where Canon/Nikon need to blow each other out of the water on an annual/biennial basis. Both companies make exceptional equipment. IMHO, they could both get out of the P&S segment, I make phone calls with the last P&S I'll ever buy.

 

[c.d.embrey]

For most people Full Frame makes no sense. But a lot of Very Serious Photo Enthusiasts think they need Full Frame. And CaNiSony marketing wants you to buy FF.

Do you shoot landscape and print really, really HUGE ??? Then you need something like a Nikon D800E. At 13x19 even a pro-pixl-peeper will have a hard time telling what camera was used (M4/3, APS-C or FF).

But people have the right to buy what they want and not what they need.

 

[Jon Gilchrist]

Just my $.02, but I think the 7D2 is going to be beefed up to the quality level of the 1-series, but with APS-C. Rugged high end sports camera, weather sealed, excellent AF and pretty much everything else. Priced somewhere between the 5D3 and the 1Dx. There is currently no camera in this niche, by anyone.

The 70D will move up to where the 7D1 was, with better AF and perhaps another fps or two and priced just below where the 6D was on release.

 

[unfocused]

My crystal-ball tells me, that the 7DII will have a similar price tag as the 6D had at the beginning (2000-2300$), the 70D will come out somewhat below of what the 6D is at that time (1300-1500$). Both will be APS-C and maybe even share the sensor; the 7DII will have a much better AF-system and higher frame rate...

...The new APS-C senosr are damn good, and if Canon manages to make an even better one than Nikon has, then I don't see the reason to go FF. Especially since it is not only the camera that costs a little more, its just everything that gets more expensive (24-70 f2.8 of f4 lenses for 2000$/1400$, more expensive filters, a heavier and more expensive tripod do manage the aditional load)

My crystal ball says pretty much the same thing. I expect the 70D to come in at about the same $1,200 (U.S.) range as the D7100. That still leaves plenty of room for the 7D. I expect price at introduction to be about the same as the 6D, but they could well hold it to under $2,000.

Only question I have is whether or not they will share the same sensor.

With three sensors for three full frame bodies, there is some reason to believe that Canon could well put different sensors in the 70D and the 7D. (Perhaps a 24 MP sensor in the 70D and a 20 MP sensor in the 7D that offers a little less noise at higher ISOs.)

I think if we are honest, the new APS-C sensors are (will be) good enough for 98% of the people, no matter if there are 1500$ FF bodies or not.

For most people Full Frame makes no sense. But a lot of Very Serious Photo Enthusiasts think they need Full Frame. And CaNiSony marketing wants you to buy FF.

Do you shoot landscape and print really, really HUGE ??? Then you need something like a Nikon D800E. At 13x19 even a pro-pixl-peeper will have a hard time telling what camera was used (M4/3, APS-C or FF).

But people have the right to buy what they want and not what they need.

I agree with both statements. In fact, I think they are a little conservative. The advantages of full frame sensors are purely in the margins (high ISO, wall-sized prints, extremely narrow depth-of-field shots).

I never understand those who think that one format will supplant the other. It's like suggesting that a four-door sedan makes a sporty two-door coupe obsolete. Different models, different purposes. No doubt People fail to understand that Canon and Nikon don't want us to pick one model over another, they want us to have one of each.

 

[x-vision]

My crystal ball tells me that the 70D will be a lighter, slimmer 60D - and will be announced at $999 body only.

And that the 7DII will be a 7D with a new sensor and the same 19-point AF system - but with higher sensitivity and accuracy.
Announced at $1700 or maybe even $1600.

Those hoping for a 1DIV replacement will be disappointed.
That's what the crystal ball says, don't shoot the messenger. 8)

 

[RMC33]

The 7D Mark II will be a APS-C camera.

The prototype is much faster than the 6D, the AF-system is a big step higher and you have first time an outstandig image quality in an APS-C-body.

Uh.. the original 7D produced amazing images and still does.

 

[aznable]

I see the 6D is now $1649 from some suppliers. Even here is Australia, the global HQ of the Canon overpricing division, 6D's are $1800 (GST Excl).

haha good joke.. try that in EURO!

1357 + vat (1629 incl.)

 

[jaell]

For most people Full Frame makes no sense. But a lot of Very Serious Photo Enthusiasts think they need Full Frame. And CaNiSony marketing wants you to buy FF.

Do you shoot landscape and print really, really HUGE ??? Then you need something like a Nikon D800E. At 13x19 even a pro-pixl-peeper will have a hard time telling what camera was used (M4/3, APS-C or FF).

Sorry, but this is a pretty narrow notion of why people want FF. Here are a number of legit reasons why FF is appealing even to non-pro/non-Very Serious Photo Enthusisasts:
'[list type=decimal][*]Better results when cropping images. Bigger sensor means you can extract a portion of an image and still retain better IQ than with a comparable APS-C. I mean, essentially what a APS-C is is a cropped sensor, so cropping an image from a crop sensor is losing that much more detail. In other words, maybe you don't need a 13x19 print, but if you want a 11x14 of a portion of an image (think about cropping a landscape image to portrait orientation), you're better off with FF. Personally, I've had plenty of shots where I crop 1/3 or more of the original image away, and I want the resultant image to look good at large print sizes. That is more likely to happen with FF
[*]No crop factor for wider angles. This is a big one for anyone who does landscape, architecture, and/or travel photography. An APS-C sensor with a somewhat wide lens (say, 24mm) gives the equivalent of a 39mm lens on a FF body. I dunno about you, but I've had plenty of occasions where I needed a wide angle better than 39mm. For landscape photography, if you're good with setup and software, you can stitch multiple images together. Or you can plow more money into wider-angle glass. But ultimately, the $ difference between a 6D and whatever high-end APS-C body you like is going to be a lot less than the price difference between a good 24mm lens and a 16mm lens (16mm on a crop is roughly 24mm on a FF).
[*]Related to #1, you don't "lose" reach with a FF. An APS-C sensor crops the amount of the image that the sensor captures, so your 200mm tele on an APS-C isn't really a 320mm--you can get the same effect by simply taking the same shot on a FF and cropping. Or, if you REALLY want that "reach," shell out for an extender. Yes, pixel density is higher on APS-C sensors... but that's not always a good thing, because...
[*]DLA. The worst FF DLA is f/9.1 (1DM4), and most of the up-to-date models don't have DLA issues until f/10 or so. APS-C sensors, with their smaller pixel sizes, start bumping up against DLA around f/6.9. So if you shoot with smaller apertures on an APS-C body, you're going to start losing detail because of the "advantage" of the smaller pixels. Get a decent long lens with a widest aperture of f/5.6. Put a 1.4x extender on it. If you stop down for whatever reason, on an APS-C body you're going to start losing IQ.
[/list]

So yeah, I think APS-C has limitations that aren't restricted to a subset of photographers. If you want to get the full benefit of wide-angle glass, if you often crop images and want the crops to retain their quality even at decently large sizes, and/or if you shoot with narrower apertures and want to retain the sharpness and IQ you get with wider apertures, then FF makes a lot of sense. It's not all about the size of the prints, and reducing it to that is just plain wrong.

And for me, I grew up shooting film, manually metering and focusing. A slower/less-precise AF system is an easy trade-off for me. I'd rather have a superior (sized) sensor and compromised AF than a sensor that results in IQ compromises, but a nicer AF.

 

[RGF]

My crystal ball tells me that the 70D will be a lighter, slimmer 60D - and will be announced at $999 body only.

And that the 7DII will be a 7D with a new sensor and the same 19-point AF system - but with higher sensitivity and accuracy.
Announced at $1700 or maybe even $1600.

Those hoping for a 1DIV replacement will be disappointed.
That's what the crystal ball says, don't shoot the messenger. 8)

Based upon Canon's recent price history (some what driven by the formerly strong Yen) prices are likely to be higher. I would not be surprised if the 70D comes in at least $1299 and could be as high as $1599 with the 7D M2 could easily approach, if not top $3000.