A Brief 2013 Canon Roadmap [CR1]

[sanj]

If my 1D X is a brick, then I like bricks!

Amen...!

 

[sanj]

Do people actually care about APS-C cameras anymore?

I do! I do not own one yet (just sold my 7D) but am really interested in seeing what the next APS-C camera is like... If 5D3 like focus and stop and a half better noise, I am SOLD.

 

[sanj]

Do people actually care about APS-C cameras anymore?

Small sensors are the future, FF is the past. Expect to see more Pros drop FF and get APS-C/DX and M4/3 in the future.

In 5-7 years (maybe a lot sooner) people will look at FF the same way they do MFD today. Sensor technology gets better every generation -- the next generation m4/3 sensor will be better than a present-day 5D3, count-on-it.

Nope. Naaaa. Says who?

 

[Marsu42]

Small sensors are the future, FF is the past. Expect to see more Pros drop FF and get APS-C/DX and M4/3 in the future.

On thing won't be in the past: ef lenses are designed for ff sensors, you cannot "update" that fact. So for more mp an expensive ff lens will still have an edge on ff over aps-c, simply you don't just use the center.

 

[M.ST]

Small sensor cameras are only the future for hobby photographers and as a additional camera for pros which don´t want to use TC´s.

Compare the price of a APS-C camera body with the EF 70-300 IS (L) with the price of a ff camera with an EF 500 mm lens and you know why hobby photographers mostly prefer the APS-C solution if they need a long focal lenght lenses.

In the last few month a lot of pros add a medium format camera to the gear.

Even Art (Art Wolfe) now use a Phase One for Landscapes and the 1D X for wildlife shots.

RE to the big megapixel talk:
I can confirm that a Canon camera with over 40 megapixels is in the field test. But I can´t say if this product hit the market. There a a few different versionen in the field.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Small sensor cameras are only the future for hobby photographers and as a additional camera for pros which don´t want to use TC´s.

In the last few month a lot of pros add a medium format camera to the gear.

Even Art (Art Wolfe) now use a Phase One for Landscapes and the 1D X for wildlife shots.

RE to the big megapixel talk:
I can confirm that a Canon camera with over 40 megapixels is in the field test. But I can´t say if this product hit the market. There a a few different versionen in the field.

I know plenty of pro shooters and some regularly use a 7D. As to medium format, I know of only one pro shooter who uses Digital Medium format. In fact all the pro landscapers I know are currently using either 5DII/III's or a 1DX due to their superior live view functionality. I've met a few amatuers using D800's who don't seem to have any tangible requirement for the 36mp other than bragging rights. There are very few photographers who need to enlarge to a massive size.

 

[Loswr]

18-200mm is equivalent to 29-320mm on FF, and both Nikon and Canon offer 28-300mm full frame lenses. My 28-300L does very well as a 'one lens solution'.

Neuro, problem is that the 28-300 is $3k. The 18-200 and 270 can be had for $500-$600. Big difference for a dad wanting to take decent pictures on vacation. Also, I don't think I'd want to carry the L-series glass around my neck all day at Disney World. I think on technicallity Roger is incorrect, but on intent he is spot on.

While I personally don't mind carrying the 28-300L around for a day at an amusement park (and have done so, in fact), that's a Canon-centric viewpoint (not misplaced here, just saying) and Roger doesn't seem to have that mindset.

While the IQ is not as good as the Canon L-series lens, Nikon's 28-300mm FX-format lens is cheaper than both Canon's and Nikon's 17-55mm f/2.8 IS/VC offerings, and it's about the same weight and (retracted) size as those 17-55/2.8 lenses. True, it's about $400 more than the APS-C superzooms, but a FF camera is more costly, so that's not unreasonable at all, IMO, and doesn't make the 'one lens solution' club very exclusive for (Nikon) FF shooters.

 

[K-amps]

In some ways, Canon is like Intel... Nikon like AMD... AMD once beat Intel to the 1Ghz mark, caught it napping, because Intel was both arrogant and lazy... but then it came back with a Bang and AMD is still playing catch up after a decade...

Err, you are forgetting that Nikon used to be the 800 pound gorilla in the industry, not Canon.
So, according to your analogy, Nikon is now coming back to raclaim their leading position.

Nikon is already feeling the pressure and competatively pricing it's products trying to get back market share...

Again, incorrect.

Recently, Canon has been (grossly?) overpricing their products - in what looks like a misguided attempt to position themselves as the Apple of the camera industry (or something like that).

To see the results of this overpricing strategy, though, just look into the last quarterly results from Canon and Nikon.

Last quarter, Canon's DSLR sales were down compared to 2011.
Canon also lowered their outlook for the year ... for a second time this year.

In comparison, Nikon's DSLR sales were up compared to 2011.
Nikon also revised their yearly projections ... upwards.

FYI, Canon projects sales of 8.8 million DSLR units in 2012 vs 7.1 million for Nikon.
If the last quarter becomes a trend, it won't take too many quarters before Nikon passes Canon as the industry leader.

So, expect Canon's overpricing strategy to be abandoned sometime next year - after they have had two-three more quarters like the last one.

You are Cherry Picking data:

Nikon's price slashing will get them sales, but they will lose profitability.... which is what shareholders are looking for.

On the Canon side, I am not defending their high pricing (heck I have been one of the most vocal critic.. I own a 5d3 see)... But I do feel Canon needs; and perhaps had their rear end's kicked and I really hope they can get back to the 2005 ways... I think they will because of lower sales and stale sensor tech will catch up.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

"And finally: the rumored high megapixel DSLR (at least 46MP) could be announced during Q3. Unfortunately no specs here, except that it will have 6fps, and a newly designed sensor with very good low ISO performance. No hints about the name, but it will not have the “D” in the name. It's said to be something “very new” and specifically aimed at studio photography. Prototypes already undergoing tests."

6 fps on 46 MP - Would double digic 5 + be able to achieve that? Perhaps double digic 6 down the line...

probably not unless they do some serious rounding up from low 5 point somethings hah

 

[Don Haines]

Talking about lens caps was getting bit much.

But I'm not done talking about lens caps..... I want canon to come out with a 46 megapixel lenscap......

 

[Don Haines]

Do people actually care about APS-C cameras anymore?

That 1.6 times improvement in reach sure helps when you are taking pictures of wildlife....

 

[Don Haines]

Nikon uses their own sensors as well as Sony sensors. however, Glass is far more important than bodies, and the photographer is far more important than either.
I would not worry about a tiny difference in sensors.

I agree, but would have started with "camera in hand beats the camera left at home" I have some nice shots taken with an Iphone.... my real camera would have done a better job, but was nowhere near me.

 

[Don Haines]

18-200mm is equivalent to 29-320mm on FF, and both Nikon and Canon offer 28-300mm full frame lenses. My 28-300L does very well as a 'one lens solution'.

Neuro, problem is that the 28-300 is $3k. The 18-200 and 270 can be had for $500-$600. Big difference for a dad wanting to take decent pictures on vacation. Also, I don't think I'd want to carry the L-series glass around my neck all day at Disney World. I think on technicallity Roger is incorrect, but on intent he is spot on.

Have used a 28-300 on a 5DII. Have used an 18-200 on a 60D. Have used the 28-300 on a 60D.
The 28-300 is a nice lens on both bodies.... the 18-200 is... well... lets just say if it broke I would not purchase another. It has the worst lens creep that I have ever seen in a lens and it is the least sharp of any canon or sigma lens that I have ever used. Yes, it is a 1 lens solution, but it is not a good 1 lens solution.

 

[Loswr]

the 18-200 is... well... lets just say if it broke I would not purchase another. It has the worst lens creep that I have ever seen in a lens

Ever used the 70-300 DO lens? Tracked a bird that flew overhead, the barrel retracted so hard I swear the eyecup almost gave me a black eye...

 

[Marsu42]

Ever used the 70-300 DO lens? Tracked a bird that flew overhead, the barrel retracted so hard I swear the eyecup almost gave me a black eye...

Early adopters of new tech like DO have to endure some hardship ... if you wouldn't be such a Canon fanboy, you probably would/could/should have sued Canon for a couple of Million $$$ :->

 

[rpt]

Ever used the 70-300 DO lens? Tracked a bird that flew overhead, the barrel retracted so hard I swear the eyecup almost gave me a black eye...

Early adopters of new tech like DO have to endure some hardship ... if you wouldn't be such a Canon fanboy, you probably would/could/should have sued Canon for a couple of Million $$$ :->

That is what I like about the 100-400; you can lock it in place...
Hmmmmm... Gives me an idea! Why don't I track a bird overhead with the locking ring loose. Then I can sue them saying it was not mentioned on the barrel that I should lock it before tracking a bird overhead...
Neuro, Marsu, I'll give both of you 3% of the profits of this scam venture for being the inspiration.

 

[Don Haines]

the 18-200 is... well... lets just say if it broke I would not purchase another. It has the worst lens creep that I have ever seen in a lens

Ever used the 70-300 DO lens? Tracked a bird that flew overhead, the barrel retracted so hard I swear the eyecup almost gave me a black eye...

Yeah, but it only came down from 3 times zoom..... I had the same thing happen with the 18-200, it came down from 10 time zoom and I'm sure that had to hurt more

 

[Promature]

While I personally don't mind carrying the 28-300L around for a day at an amusement park (and have done so, in fact), that's a Canon-centric viewpoint (not misplaced here, just saying) and Roger doesn't seem to have that mindset.

While the IQ is not as good as the Canon L-series lens, Nikon's 28-300mm FX-format lens is cheaper than both Canon's and Nikon's 17-55mm f/2.8 IS/VC offerings, and it's about the same weight and (retracted) size as those 17-55/2.8 lenses. True, it's about $400 more than the APS-C superzooms, but a FF camera is more costly, so that's not unreasonable at all, IMO, and doesn't make the 'one lens solution' club very exclusive for (Nikon) FF shooters.

Admittedly I don't know much about Nikon, so good to know someone out there has a reasonably priced superzoon for FF. Since you mention that you actually carried the 28-300L at an amusement park all day, what are your impressions of the lens (from a father's viewpoint)? I'm curious because I'd use it for pretty much the same thing. I'm guess it doesn't do so well indoors, but that's not what it's made for.

 

[RVB]

Do people actually care about APS-C cameras anymore?

That 1.6 times improvement in reach sure helps when you are taking pictures of wildlife....

APS-C sensors only give a f.o.v of a longer lens but actual reach is no different. the focal length doesn't change..

 

[Loswr]

Admittedly I don't know much about Nikon, so good to know someone out there has a reasonably priced superzoon for FF. Since you mention that you actually carried the 28-300L at an amusement park all day, what are your impressions of the lens (from a father's viewpoint)? I'm curious because I'd use it for pretty much the same thing. I'm guess it doesn't do so well indoors, but that's not what it's made for.

Quite useable, IMO. Definitely need a Blackrapid strap or equivalent to carry it, though. Across the range, the IQ is basically equivalent to the 24-105L - not stellar, but very good and fit for purpose.

Depending on the body, it can do ok indoors, but really only on the wide end and you have to push up the ISO. The first shot below, from a trip at the beginning of this past summer, is with the 28-300L on the 5DII (35mm, 1/80 s, f/3.5, ISO 6400). The second, taken on another trip later this past summer, is with the 35L on the 1D X (1/160 s, f/2.5, ISO 6400).

Actually, I didn't plan on this being a formal comparison, but given that it was the same location, same focal length, same approximate framing, and same subjects (although from a different camera angle and separated by about 3 months in time), it actually makes a pretty good real-world comparison between the two setups (5DII+28-300L vs. 1D X+35L). The composite below are 100% crops from the two images (1D X+35L on the right). I think there's a clear winner...