5D Mark III/X Information [CR1]

[Smith]

Canon is a very conservative company. They will not be doing anything revolutionary in the 5DIII/X. For video they there's not much more they can do other than tweaking the CODEC to improve the quality. You can be certain that they will not offer a clean HDMI output.

Regarding the sensor it seems that Canon has not been making as much progress on per pixel quality as the Sony/Nikon sensors over the past few years. The pixel quality of the Nikon D7000, Sony NEX-7, and D800 are pretty darn good. The early reports are showing that the D800 is producing noise similar to a D700 which is insane considering the D800's 4.88um pixel pitch compared to the D700's 8.45um. Canon has gone on record to claim that the 1DX has a 2 stop improvement in noise, for JPEG only, and will not go on record to say anything about RAW. This 2 stop improvement is also comparing the 1DX's 6.95um pixel pitch to the 5.7um pitch of the 1DIV. One can reasonably assume that Canon has not drastically improved the QE of their pixels and/or read out noise.

The 22MP specs of the rumored new 5D seems consistent with Canon's conservative strategy. I would expect no more than a 0.5 stop improvement in noise and better AF. Although this seems like something that most people are happy with here's the problem. Canon is going to rape us on the price. Looking at their latest pricing strategy for their lenses I wouldn't be surprised if these modest 5D improvements will come at a very steep price increase.

It seems that Canon's executive management has changed strategy to focus more on improving profit margins rather than gaining market share. The best way to do this is to drastically increase prices. They probably figure that it's time to harvest the benefits of the fantastic market share gain they have earned over the past 5 years. Now that people are locked into the Canon system it's time to jack up the price.

 

[jaduffy007]

Am I to expect the same 61pt AF system that's in the 1D X?

 

[wickidwombat]

Am I to expect the same 61pt AF system that's in the 1D X?

the rumour says same but simplified which might be a good thing

 

[RedEye]

Everybody sure is poo pooing the potential specs for a new camera - but guys, it's been almost 4 YEARS since the last major release, and potentially longer if one were to measure the unknown internal development cycles of their labs. Let's keep our hopes up, chins up, wallets stacked, and hard disk space free..... The next one could be the last one you ever need .

 

[kapanak]

Everybody sure is poo pooing the potential specs for a new camera - but guys, it's been almost 4 YEARS since the last major release, and potentially longer if one were to measure the unknown internal development cycles of their labs. Let's keep our hopes up, chins up, wallets stacked, and hard disk space free..... The next one could be the last one you ever need .

Last one before the next one comes out. 8) :-*

 

[Ivar]

What I'm mostly worried about is the DR. Not only it has been less on the Canon side than the competition by raw figures for quite some years already, it is also less usable, shadow area does not tolerate much pushing.

Btw DR is not a goal by itself, but the tool to overcome harsh lighting conditions, targeting pleasant non-hdr like output. Add wrong exposure to the list, being it a different user wish after the shoot or biased mesurement due to tricky light conditions etc.

 

[Birdshooter]

Regarding the argument of 22MP not being enough to replace the 7D - because a 1.6x crop would not give enough pixels - Canon will probably argue that users should use a 1.4x TC to get the extra reach. - I am not saying this will get the results people are looking for - just that that is what I would expect Canon to argue.

Sorry don't agree with you:
7D + 400 MM F4 + 1.4x = 896 @ F5.6 (autofocused) (560 * 1.6)
5D (or 1D) + 400 mm F4 + 1.4x = 560 @ F5.6 (autofocused)


To add antother 1.4 behind it would be a 2x (1.4 * 1.4) resulting in:
5D (or 1D) + 400 mm F4 + 2x = 800 (still shorter) @ F8 (Manual focused)

 

[te4o]

Everybody sure is poo pooing the potential specs for a new camera - but guys, it's been almost 4 YEARS since the last major release, and potentially longer if one were to measure the unknown internal development cycles of their labs. Let's keep our hopes up, chins up, wallets stacked, and hard disk space free..... The next one could be the last one you ever need .

+1 Yes, I am with you RedEye, My thought exactly - how can a self-respecting Japanese company come 4+ years later on the market with just minor improvements and firmware updates ? They'd have to go harakiri right after the launch!!
I'd bet the 25 yrs anniversary EOS has a lot of bang to offer, in fact so much that all of you will want to order 15 minutes later... Let's hope they make them fast and good enough.
22 MP at least if not 24-26 - just to tease the Nikon D3 & 4 a bit, >6 fps, lots of software improvements, recognition of all possible faces, light kelvins etc etc, adjustments for backlight and so on - we've seen some of these on the P&S dwarfs. Video to go, I have no idea there, but not for engaged profis - C300...
And there was a guy who appeared on this forum a year ago and mentioned he had seen some testing in South Africa where they printed a picture of some grass and a horse wanted to eat it... ???
So, I hope our Waiting has been not in vain!
No Nikons for me - too old to change - and I believe that this year is Canon's year, they will get the edge.
Pedro, was this good enough for the optimists?

Right Ivar, I agree with you too, 5D2 tolerates not much push, the next one will. I hate the red/green muddy shadows after serious PP. Taking PP back is always painful, isn't it?

 

[Edwin Herdman]

Regarding the argument of 22MP not being enough to replace the 7D - because a 1.6x crop would not give enough pixels - Canon will probably argue that users should use a 1.4x TC to get the extra reach. - I am not saying this will get the results people are looking for - just that that is what I would expect Canon to argue.

Canon (at least their workshop guys) HAVE argued this, but as Birdfollower says, it doesn't make sense. Luckily the latest rumors seem to indicate Canon is having a hard rethink about this one.

All the same specs are coming in. 22mp, 61pt af, 6.9fps. It could definitely take the spot of the 7D, if the previous rumor is true.

For some users, but you know the price will be higher and so there is really no correspondence here. The 7D still has a place. I just hope (looking at an earlier rumor) that Canon understands the need for a professional crop body. I feel vaguely betrayed that CR Guy isn't on board with this one, pushing for things that crop sensor users would like at a reasonable price. A full frame camera won't do it, on price concerns alone.

God help Canon if they announce a crop 7D MkII in Feb. No amount of focus points or FPS will save them from the wrath of the 5Dx hordes... (myself included)

What do you care about our crop bodies? And what if Canon releases a 5D X camera at the same time? That shouldn't mean anything to you, if you're set on a full frame body.

With the release of the D800, Nikon still haven't produced anything to match the 5D2.

Huh?

Strictly speaking, isn't this true? If the D800 launches at a medium to high four figures, the 5D II still is fine in its segment.

Also, somebody earlier said that the "initial reports" said the D800's detail was stunning. I'm seeing it varying from picture to picture - maybe the guy who did the French library interiors for Nikon was having trouble, though; the other samples look great.

 

[psolberg]

Canon is a very conservative company. They will not be doing anything revolutionary in the 5DIII/X. For video they there's not much more they can do other than tweaking the CODEC to improve the quality. You can be certain that they will not offer a clean HDMI output.

Regarding the sensor it seems that Canon has not been making as much progress on per pixel quality as the Sony/Nikon sensors over the past few years. The pixel quality of the Nikon D7000, Sony NEX-7, and D800 are pretty darn good. The early reports are showing that the D800 is producing noise similar to a D700 which is insane considering the D800's 4.88um pixel pitch compared to the D700's 8.45um. Canon has gone on record to claim that the 1DX has a 2 stop improvement in noise, for JPEG only, and will not go on record to say anything about RAW. This 2 stop improvement is also comparing the 1DX's 6.95um pixel pitch to the 5.7um pitch of the 1DIV. One can reasonably assume that Canon has not drastically improved the QE of their pixels and/or read out noise.

The 22MP specs of the rumored new 5D seems consistent with Canon's conservative strategy. I would expect no more than a 0.5 stop improvement in noise and better AF. Although this seems like something that most people are happy with here's the problem. Canon is going to rape us on the price. Looking at their latest pricing strategy for their lenses I wouldn't be surprised if these modest 5D improvements will come at a very steep price increase.

It seems that Canon's executive management has changed strategy to focus more on improving profit margins rather than gaining market share. The best way to do this is to drastically increase prices. They probably figure that it's time to harvest the benefits of the fantastic market share gain they have earned over the past 5 years. Now that people are locked into the Canon system it's time to jack up the price.

excellent argument. couldn't have said it better myself. they just replaced their top man in the hopes of jumpstarting what has been a dissapointing streak of financial results. Although I think in terms of marketshare they are in relatively weaker position than say 10 years ago and are facing really tough competition from nikon and sony to a degree they never did back when they were the only credible digital game in town. It used to be canon doing the leading, now you see others pushing the evenvelope with mirrorless, evf and EVIL systems, trasnlucent mirrors, embedding phase focus sensors in the image sensor, contrast based focus that is fast and works, in camera IS for slr bodies, bigger MPs in aps-c and 35mm, big ISO figures (although it seems canon did as least catch up here), list goes on.

this is off course a good thing for the consumer and should be received with open arms. I hope to see even stronger pressure from sony and nikon because that means canon will really have to push the bounds to stay relevant and we all benefit from that.

 

[sublime LightWorks]

You have to wonder, if Canon had released a 5Dmk3 in September (before the 1Dx was announced) and it basically had:

1) generally the same 21M sensor as today
2) the 7D functional feature set (AF system, metering, horizon guide, auto ISO, etc.)
3) a Digic-V processor or dual Digic-IV's like the 7D
4) a slight improvement in the high ISO noise, say 1/2 stop better due to improved sensor manufacturing
5) a 5-6fps shoot rate
6) used the same batteries and grip as the 5Dmk2
7) added a 60 fps video frame rate
8 ) additional firmware options

This for $2499......

How many people would be completely happy with that camera?

You're basically looking at off the shelf technology and mainly adaptation costs involved in the construction and integration, along with improved firmware. Yet what you'd have would kick the crap out of 80% of the market.

I know that for a lot of mid-range, general studio, and wedding shooters, that's a solid camera and offers just about all that is needed in that market segment. When you realize the image quality of a 3 year old 5Dmk2 still beats a vast majority of the competition, these tweaks remove the negatives of the current body and flesh out it's feature set nicely.

Looking at prosumer and up, it would still leave room for a 7Dmk2, an enhanced version of the 7D, same 18M pixels, but improved APS-C sensor, 10 fps. It leaves room for a 5Dx with higher megapixels, and the 1Dx for the pro market.

i would rather have the current rumoured camera at 3k

Understood. But you do realize the rumored camera will NOT have a better noise performance at high ISO (low light) than the 1Dx....it will be worse.

You might ask why....it's simple. The 1Dx has the latest 18M FF sensor and represents the best Canon can currently do with the sensor technology ready for mass production. A 22M FF sensor will have more pixels and won't be able to produce images with less noise at the same ISO settings.

So, you're going to trade off more noise for those extra pixels for $3k. Frankly, I'd take what's in the package I outlined for $500 less and be able to use my existing grip and batteries making it about $800 less than the rumored option, and shoot cleaner images at ISO 3200 and 6400.

 

[Mark D5 TEAM II]

More marketing bravado from Maeda, the same guy who said: "nobody complained about the 5D AF so we re-used that exact same AF module on the Mark II". :

The fact of the matter is if Canon had no idea what the specs were for the D800 before it was released then it would be too late now to add or tweak features to the Canon model that is intended to go up against it. I'm sure they had more than an inkling about what's coming out from Nikon, and the 5-6 prototypes they reportedly were testing included a mix of 18-22MP versions and 30+ MP versions.

 

[JR]

I think we need to wait until the first real test report to make final judgement on the new camera performance. We have also seen the opposite claim that the D800 is so much worst then the D700 in noise and that Nikon users are frustrated.

The 1DX might end up to be one notch below the new D4 in noise comparaison but I would assume the opposite for the new 5DmkIII versus the D800. Either way until we see RAW image, it is very hard to assess...

 

[Martin]

Canon do not care about me, as a customer. I need to wait to long for the new product which for me is 5dmarkIII. To be honest I do not think that they will do enything worth staying with them. Despite the fact i am heavy invested in Canon's gear, now i am considering switching back to nikon with it d800 and great AF and many many other benefits. I originally came from Nikon D300, to Canon's team, but i am really dissapointed with the gear. In my opinion Canon does not move forward, they make everything to let us think they make a huge steps, but thats only marketing., thats only few paid photographers who push good opinions in the web. I will lost a lot selling my Canon gear, but i really think thay its not worth staying with them. It's strange i know but-Canon is a step behing Nikon, they just dont have good ideas, they dont think in revolutionary way, they only slightly rebuild old products, the dont satisfy thier costumers, imho they just look at Nikon product and want to have something similar, but worse...why not...well...people will not sell their gear and switch to Nikon.hmmm i probably will . I am preaty sure thet 5d3 which is really awaited by many people will be so close to old one, that we will be badly suprised. Thats how i think about canon. Nikon always gives something extra in terms of value and imaging, something new, revolutionary and better, Canon just follow their ideas in let me say-unprofessional way. Give me one example of Canon product which was revolutionary (Camera-no, Lens-maybe (f1.2), Speedlight-NO!, ISO-NO, AF-NO NO NO!,dynamic range-NO!!!! etc etc,) look at Nikon to compare (D3, D3s, D3x, D800, Flashes, D7000)...no comment. Unfortunately I regret buying Canon at the moment. Few days ago a spoke with person who owns a camera service, and his opinion about Canon built quality was so bad, i could not belive. To proof he showed me a lot of in camera mechanisms of canon and nikon. After that i was really suprised. Only canon 1series are built nice. 5d and lower models are just toys in comparison to all Nikon models. I know it all sounds strange cause i am Canon owner, but I am trying to be honest with me and other people.

 

[moreorless]

Canon is a very conservative company. They will not be doing anything revolutionary in the 5DIII/X. For video they there's not much more they can do other than tweaking the CODEC to improve the quality. You can be certain that they will not offer a clean HDMI output.

Regarding the sensor it seems that Canon has not been making as much progress on per pixel quality as the Sony/Nikon sensors over the past few years. The pixel quality of the Nikon D7000, Sony NEX-7, and D800 are pretty darn good. The early reports are showing that the D800 is producing noise similar to a D700 which is insane considering the D800's 4.88um pixel pitch compared to the D700's 8.45um. Canon has gone on record to claim that the 1DX has a 2 stop improvement in noise, for JPEG only, and will not go on record to say anything about RAW. This 2 stop improvement is also comparing the 1DX's 6.95um pixel pitch to the 5.7um pitch of the 1DIV. One can reasonably assume that Canon has not drastically improved the QE of their pixels and/or read out noise.

The 22MP specs of the rumored new 5D seems consistent with Canon's conservative strategy. I would expect no more than a 0.5 stop improvement in noise and better AF. Although this seems like something that most people are happy with here's the problem. Canon is going to rape us on the price. Looking at their latest pricing strategy for their lenses I wouldn't be surprised if these modest 5D improvements will come at a very steep price increase.

It seems that Canon's executive management has changed strategy to focus more on improving profit margins rather than gaining market share. The best way to do this is to drastically increase prices. They probably figure that it's time to harvest the benefits of the fantastic market share gain they have earned over the past 5 years. Now that people are locked into the Canon system it's time to jack up the price.

This seems to be an arguement based on very little hard evidense, some claims about two cameras that have yet to find there way into many peoples hands that offer very different features(most obviously high ISO capabilities).

The main negative of Canon's position to me seems to be that because all there DSLR sensors are made in house they tend to see the light of day less often. In reality we've not seen a new design since the 7D 2 1/2 years ago so its really impossible to judge whether they've kept up with Nikon/Sony's more recent advancements or not.

The pricing and features are really a total unknown aswell, of course the 5D mk2 lagged behind the D700 in AF and build but offered superior resolution and video. In terms of lenses Canon's prices seem very similar to Nikon's while in many cases(70-200's, looks like the new 24-70 aswell) offering superior performance.

 

[Lee Jay]

Regarding the argument of 22MP not being enough to replace the 7D - because a 1.6x crop would not give enough pixels - Canon will probably argue that users should use a 1.4x TC to get the extra reach. - I am not saying this will get the results people are looking for - just that that is what I would expect Canon to argue.

And if I already use 3 stacked 1.4x TCs (or a 2x stacked with a 1.4x) on my 18MP 1.6-crop camera?

We don't have nearly enough pixel density right now to exploit good optics, especially in the center of the image circle.

The other problem with that argument is that they aren't proving f/8 AF sensor, making the TCs occasionally useless. Added pixel density doesn't have that problem.

 

[sublime LightWorks]

You have to wonder, if Canon had released a 5Dmk3 in September (before the 1Dx was announced) and it basically had:

1) generally the same 21M sensor as today
2) the 7D functional feature set (AF system, metering, horizon guide, auto ISO, etc.)
3) a Digic-V processor or dual Digic-IV's like the 7D
4) a slight improvement in the high ISO noise, say 1/2 stop better due to improved sensor manufacturing
5) a 5-6fps shoot rate
6) used the same batteries and grip as the 5Dmk2
7) added a 60 fps video frame rate
8 ) additional firmware options

This for $2499......

How many people would be completely happy with that camera?

You're basically looking at off the shelf technology and mainly adaptation costs involved in the construction and integration, along with improved firmware. Yet what you'd have would kick the crap out of 80% of the market.

I know that for a lot of mid-range, general studio, and wedding shooters, that's a solid camera and offers just about all that is needed in that market segment. When you realize the image quality of a 3 year old 5Dmk2 still beats a vast majority of the competition, these tweaks remove the negatives of the current body and flesh out it's feature set nicely.

That sounds more like what the 5D2 might have been, that's too little to last until 2015.

The D800 would already, just six months later have had 50% more MP, possibly 2 stops better low ISO DR, same fps with grip, vastly better video (if it used the dual digic iv in your list instead of the digic 5), better AF.

Way too conservative.

I hear your points and I did include the D800 in my thoughts, but I will also point out that the D800 is going to sacrifice performance at ISO 1600, 3200, and 6400. The D800 images available so far (all well lit I might add) show it's no match for the 5Dmk2 at those ISO levels. Actually it looks a lot like the 7D in that regard.

Now, keep in mind what I said regarding the market....mid-range, general studio, and wedding. I didn't say video users or people looking for a MF in a DSLR. In addition, what's in the package I outlined for $500 less list is able to use the existing grip and batteries making it about $800 less than the rumored option with a similar configuration, and about $1200 less than the D800 with it's required grip and special battery to achieve it's rated performance. This option will shoot cleaner images at ISO 3200 and 6400, and give those in the target market all they will need at a significantly lower cost. Not to mention, Canon would have spent very little to make that camera, compared with a whole new body. That means rebates to further entice buyers.

I completely understand this may not be the market segment where you fit. It was an open hypothetical question and still is...we're just conjecturing here on what if's and you may still disagree after all is said and done.

Personally I do hope the new 5D3/5Dx (whatever it's called) has all the specs that have been thrown around as it would make it an awesome camera for $3k. However, I seriously doubt that the 1Dx's AF system is going to be in this camera, nor will the 5D3/5Dx match the 1Dx in ISO noise performance. These will be lower in performance for the following obvious reasons:

1) 1Dx uses 2 Digic 5+ processors and one Digic 4 (3 processors total).
2) The Digic 4 processor in the 1Dx is dedicated to the AF and metering system.
3) The new metering system plays a huge part in the ability of the AF to detect and lock focus in low light conditions.
4) To be able to shoot 22Mpix images at 7fps, handle the full 1Dx's AF and metering system, plus the rumored improvements to video, etc. would likely require the 5D3/5Dx to have 3 processors just like the 1Dx, something Canon will likely not do in a body of this rumored price.
5) From what I've read so far (and this could be wrong), a single Digic 5 cannot handle 22Mpix at 7fps and run all the other camera functions alone, at bare minimum the 5D3/5Dx will require a Digic-5 and a Digic-4 to even have a prayer of coming close to the processing needs.
6) Noting the 1Dx has the latest 18M FF sensor and represents the best Canon can currently do with the sensor technology ready for mass production, a 22M FF sensor used in the 5D3/5Dx will have more pixels and won't be able to produce images with less noise at the same ISO settings.

This is why, when comparing the hypothetical 5D3/5Dx to the 1Dx for features and performance, folks are not factoring in reality in terms of whats needed to run that rumored body, nor are they realizing that the ISO noise performance, based on obvious sensor technology levels deployed by Canon, isn't going to be better than the 1Dx, it's going to be slightly worse.

There is simply no way Canon's 18Mpix FF sensor in the 1Dx just released is going to under perform a Canon 22Mpix FF sensor in an about to be announced 5D3/5Dx. Expect it to be worse in noise performance.

 

[necator]

Give me one example of Canon product which was revolutionary (Camera-no, Lens-maybe (f1.2), Speedlight-NO!, ISO-NO, AF-NO NO NO!,dynamic range-NO!!!! etc etc,) look at Nikon to compare (D3, D3s, D3x, D800, Flashes, D7000)...no comment.

I'm sorry for you feeling to have the wrong camera.

But now for the (relative) revolutionary products from Canon:

• f1.2 lenses (you already mentioned). NOWEHERE else to find.
• Canon 5D (mk I): first affordable FF. Nikon for many years stated NOBODY needs a FF
• Canon 5D mk II: Nikon just started to sell FF (obviously their earlier statement was wrong)---then stating NOBODY needs >12Mp -> well look at D800 (wrong again?). Oh, 5D mk II also added video capabilities which made the video-departments to rethink their products/prices.
• Excellent tele lenses
• Oh, they were the first with in lens image stbilisation (which actually worked)
• Excellent Tilt/Shift lenses
• Oh, and especially the 70-200 f2.8 II should be mentioned: As good as a lens can be.
• Oh, and a dedicated macro-lens: mp-e 65mm. 5:1 magnification!

And that's for sure not all, and only recent history.
Now, I might sound like a canon-fanboy ... well, e.g. I hate the ergonomics of the 1-series. The flash-automatic-functions could be far better (nikon is said to deliver it). Canons 50mm lenses are medicore (yes, there is a f1.2 which is good for its aperture alone, but sharpness could be better) ...

Oh, and, the obvious question: What are you demanding for? Take me, e.g. a 5D and/or a 1Ds Mk II is still good enough for publications (Same would be true for Nikon, Pentax, ...). So, again, what is Canon actually lacking? Have your current cams stopped working? And why did you change from a D300 to Canon? That's not that long ago?! Could it be a gearhead speaking?

 

[EYEONE]

Give me one example of Canon product which was revolutionary (Camera-no, Lens-maybe (f1.2), Speedlight-NO!, ISO-NO, AF-NO NO NO!,dynamic range-NO!!!! etc etc,) look at Nikon to compare (D3, D3s, D3x, D800, Flashes, D7000)...no comment.

I'm sorry for you feeling to have the wrong camera.

But now for the (relative) revolutionary products from Canon:

• f1.2 lenses (you already mentioned). NOWEHERE else to find.
• Canon 5D (mk I): first affordable FF. Nikon for many years stated NOBODY needs a FF
• Canon 5D mk II: Nikon just started to sell FF (obviously their earlier statement was wrong)---then stating NOBODY needs >12Mp -> well look at D800 (wrong again?). Oh, 5D mk II also added video capabilities which made the video-departments to rethink their products/prices.
• Excellent tele lenses
• Oh, they were the first with in lens image stbilisation (which actually worked)
• Excellent Tilt/Shift lenses
• Oh, and especially the 70-200 f2.8 II should be mentioned: As good as a lens can be.
• Oh, and a dedicated macro-lens: mp-e 65mm. 5:1 magnification!

And that's for sure not all, and only recent history.
Now, I might sound like a canon-fanboy ... well, e.g. I hate the ergonomics of the 1-series. The flash-automatic-functions could be far better (nikon is said to deliver it). Canons 50mm lenses are medicore (yes, there is a f1.2 which is good for its aperture alone, but sharpness could be better) ...

Oh, and, the obvious question: What are you demanding for? Take me, e.g. a 5D and/or a 1Ds Mk II is still good enough for publications (Same would be true for Nikon, Pentax, ...). So, again, what is Canon actually lacking? Have your current cams stopped working? And why did you change from a D300 to Canon? That's not that long ago?! Could it be a gearhead speaking?

It's true about the FF. Nikon was waaaaaay behind on getting to FF. It took Nikon a full 5 years to go FF after Canon did it. People complain a bit about Canon being behind the times these days but Canon was so far ahead for the first three quarters of the last decade it's not even funny. Now, Nikon did eventually come around, and no doubt that the D3 was a helluva camera that slapped Canon around a bit.

In the last year Canon has been doing far more in terms of "changing the game" than Nikon has. The D4 is "just" an upgraded D3, the D800 is "just" an upgraded D700. The 1Dx is much more of a change in strategy than the D4. Now, it sounds like I'm bashing Nikon a bit but I'm just saying it terms of doing something different Nikon doesn't get any points for the D4 and D800.

 

[WoodyWindy]

And let us not forget the one innovation that is most relevant and critical to the current discussion:

EOS D30 - the first purpose-built DSLR (not derived from a film body)

Update: Self-correction, the Nikon D1 was first.