Interview: DPReview speaks to the “father of the EOS-1”

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
572
545
I'm so sad...bought too many lenses (EF 100 f2,8 IS, 70-200 IS II, 16-35 f4, RF 24-105:love:) and cameras (5 d IV, R :love: )last year.
Now I'm bankrupt (but happy).
Can't afford the new EOS 1:cry::cry::cry:
PS: wouldn't need it anyhow for mostly landscapes and macro.
 

richperson

EOS M50
Sep 6, 2019
44
68
In a comment below the article Britton says the Mk III is "slightly lighter" than the Mk II.

Personally, as an owner of the old 1D Mk III who is thinking of updating it, I think the new model needs to be more than "slightly" lighter than the outgoing one. In my opinion the weight already crossed the line from "OK" to "not really OK" in in the move from the 1D Mk III to 1Ds Mk III, even though the latter is my main camera.

I'm not sure how much heavier the current model is than my cameras. It's hard to know what exactly is included in the listed specifications (caps, battery, viewfinder rubber etc.). Perhaps I should take a set of kitchen scales to the dealer.

I get that the new cameras have extra stuff like GPS and Ethernet jacks on board, but in the modern world we do usually expect things to get lighter and more compact over time. I've seen pictures of the innards of these 1 series cameras, with their multiple circuit boards, and can't help thinking there are savings to be made.
As someone who uses this primarily with big white lenses, I have no problem with the current weight, and hope they don't sacrifice the rugged structure at all. I'm sure some use this body with smaller lenses where it would be more noticeable, but I don't.
 

mpmark

EOS T7i
Aug 9, 2016
52
59
I'd be surprised if they really have "no" idea. I'd expect it to be more one of the following two options:
a) They do know, but are keeping it under wraps for now, and the easiest way to deflect further questions is to say "no idea at this time";
or
b) there are two or more options in play, maybe out being field tested, and they have not yet determined which one to follow through with.

Just my 2 cents though...
c) The current design becomes a full mirrorless, So much reasearch and 30 years of form factor desgin has been put into what you see in the 1DxII so why change that? Why does it automatically have to look different?
 
  • Like
Reactions: StoicalEtcher

melgross

EOS 7D MK II
Nov 2, 2016
414
219
I really can't take DPReview seriously though, which is a great shame because they do have some very good industry connections. I thought I'd look around a bit as I was there and took a look at their "The best cameras for family and friends photos in 2019". They decided that the Sony A6100 is the best camera for the job, they disliked the fact that the Canon M50 cropped and didn't AF in 4K video, in a photo review! Even though the M50 is over $100 less than the Sony and includes a lens when the Sony is body only, the kit prices were $400 different on a $650 camera kit!
What does that have to do with an interview?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SecureGSM

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,961
1,169
119
What does that have to do with an interview?
The point was I can't separate their gems of genuine insight and insider connections from their avalanche of BS anymore. DPReview just doesn't work as a factual delivery outlet anymore for me.

Or put another way, I used to look at interviews like this as a record of what was said, basically all the journalist did was edit for translation issues and coherence, now I believe DPReview edit in the Fox News/MSNBC format of pushing an agenda rather than presenting an unbiased representation of what was actually said. Unless I can see the entire interview on Youtube without edits I just don't believe them.
 
Last edited:

melgross

EOS 7D MK II
Nov 2, 2016
414
219
The point was I can't separate their gems of genuine insight and insider connections from their avalanche of BS anymore. DPReview just doesn't work as a factual delivery outlet anymore for me.

Or put another way, I used to look at interviews like this as a record of what was said, basically all the journalist did was edit for translation issues and coherence, now I believe DPReview edit in the Fox News/MSNBC format of pushing an agenda rather than presenting an unbiased representation of what was actually said. Unless I can see the entire interview on Youtube without edits I just don't believe them.
I don’t believe that at all. If they did that to the point of distorting the manufacturers statements and direction, manufacturers would refuse to be interviewed by them.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,961
1,169
119
I don’t believe that at all. If they did that to the point of distorting the manufacturers statements and direction, manufacturers would refuse to be interviewed by them.
And that is your prerogative. I have seen too much BS and outright lies from DPReview to trust them, or even take them at face value, anymore.
 

privatebydesign

Would you take advice from a cartoons stuffed toy?
Jan 29, 2011
7,961
1,169
119
....Still doesn’t make sense.
In your opinion. Lie to me repeatedly and display implicit and explicit bias over and over again and I am safer to assume everything you’d say is not simple reporting. Heck DPReview staff have even come on here trying to obfuscate and excuse their bias, it didnt work out too well...
 

Keith_Reeder

No apologies for not suffering fools gladly...
Feb 8, 2014
823
273
59
Blyth, NE England
And that’s your prerogative. Still doesn’t make sense.
You're denying an easily-confirmed fact - DPR is BS City where Canon is concerned, and has been for a long while.

The fact that they're as big as they are explains why they get the interviews. It says nothing whatsoever about their trustworthiness.
 

melgross

EOS 7D MK II
Nov 2, 2016
414
219
You're denying an easily-confirmed fact - DPR is BS City where Canon is concerned, and has been for a long while.

The fact that they're as big as they are explains why they get the interviews. It says nothing whatsoever about their trustworthiness.
Apparently those who run Canon aren’t as concerned as you two seem to be. But no matter what you both say, and want to believe, you can’t publish an interview like that that’s biased, and inappropriately edited. You can be sure the companies that are interviewed monitor what’s being published. DP has run a number of interviews with Canon the last few years. All have been positive, including this one, and respectful.

i think the problem here is your own biases, not theirs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BillB and unfocused

Jethro

EOS R
Jul 14, 2018
251
126
The point was I can't separate their gems of genuine insight and insider connections from their avalanche of BS anymore. DPReview just doesn't work as a factual delivery outlet anymore for me.

Or put another way, I used to look at interviews like this as a record of what was said, basically all the journalist did was edit for translation issues and coherence, now I believe DPReview edit in the Fox News/MSNBC format of pushing an agenda rather than presenting an unbiased representation of what was actually said. Unless I can see the entire interview on Youtube without edits I just don't believe them.
I don't disagree generally with what you're saying - the bias is pretty egregious, and they struggle to even mention Canon without adding a dash of snark. But, my take on the reporting of this particular interview was a tone of something approaching genuine reverence for the interviewee (his history in the development of Canon professional cameras etc). As well as (again genuine) surprise at getting to interview him at all. I'd be highly surprised if there was any misrepresentation, and personally I'm taking it literally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: melgross and BillB

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,155
1,090
Alberta, Canada
In your opinion. Lie to me repeatedly and display implicit and explicit bias over and over again and I am safer to assume everything you’d say is not simple reporting. Heck DPReview staff have even come on here trying to obfuscate and excuse their bias, it didnt work out too well...
And it provided a lot of humour for folks like me! Those were the days. :)

I strongly resisted the 1DX2 over weight but as stated, with my 400 DO II attached, it feels well balanced and the weight of the camera is less significant. It does make me feel conspicuous when the 24-70 F4 is attached and seems unnecessarily heavy.

I had more or less decided to wait on a pro R body but now ...?? Not enough pixels and I think I'll skip it. Besides, my wife has not yet agreed to this.:(

Jack
 
  • Like
Reactions: privatebydesign

hollybush

EOS M50
Feb 1, 2012
43
19
Using a huge, permanently-gripped camera for landscapes (tripod use) somehow feels... not right.
I do use a 1-series for that, although it's not all I use it for.

It has the advantage over the 5-series of having a proper viewfinder shutter. If you have a ball head (and I do), the multispot metering is useful. The weight is such that leaving an Arca-Swiss plate on permanently, as I do, doesn't make much difference. Finally, if I'm carrying a tripod the extra weight of a 1Ds Mk III over a 5-series isn't that much more as a proportion of the total being carried.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sanj

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
541
411
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
Using a huge, permanently-gripped camera for landscapes (tripod use) somehow feels... not right.
I've seen people shooting landscapes with 1D-something. Obviously you can get good results, it's not high res but has good DR. Also, a heavy camera will be a bit steadier in a tripod in wind. But overall it's not a landscape camera. I.e. I can hardly imagine someone buying it specifically for landscapes.
 

edoorn

EOS RP
Apr 1, 2016
239
156
I would think a 1D-mirrorless equivalent is in the works, but not up for a 2020 release; possibly 2021. A 5D-equivalent however would be quite likely....

On the photo clickbait sites we all love and loathe people seem to interpret this news as 'Canon won't ever do a 1D-equivalent mirrorless'; we all know that's not true :)