A Canon DSLR Rumor Roundup Heading into 2018

[Maiaibing]

Consider: the 5DS is now sitting without DPAF, touchscreen, 4K, Wifi, DPRAW or the larger base ISO DR performance of the 5D4 and 1DX2. So you can choose highest resolution or latest-gen tech.

So there is an argument for a one-time 'schedule quickening' for the 5DS to better line it up with the 5D4 so that there is no feature envy between the 5DS and 5D# lines.

- A

5DS/R DR is close enough to 5DIV. The rest is irrelevant for many. Meanwhile the 5DS/R files remain the best not only from any Canon DSLR but any DSLR in the industry. Latest-gen tech does not challenge that.

Of course Nikon's D850 seemingly will take the lead soon - but that hardly creates a "rush" for Canon.

 

[Talys]

To be honest, I think there are too many products in the line up and too many similar specced cameras. Its not a particularly simple line up. Naming structure has become a little odd like 750/760D 800D 77D I think these could all be amalgamated.

I would like to see a more streamlined product range in both APC, FF and mirrorless. With each having its own number designation instead of staggering with random numbers inbetween.

Entry, mid and high, 3 cameras in each sector would suffice. Maybe one or two specific cameras, Canon did change tactic from a camera to do all approach to specific niche products and unfortunately DSLRs are getting more and more niche. It did make sence and I like having separate cameras for a different approach, but with some of the competition making middle of the road cameras with high end specs I don't know how much relevance all the above models have. Granted these cameras don't deliver quite what they promote and its more for headline grabbing but its impressive what is coming out of mid range expansion like the A6000 series.

I like the idea of obvious segregation.

Crop
900D 90D 7D or this could be renamed 9D

FF
6D 5D 1D

Niche
Small crop like 200D, High mp camera like the 5DSR as a 3D.

A line up that looks a little more obvious and like Canon used to produce. I think it would make it easier to keep on a 3 year schedule.

I think that Canon should use the Model / Mark X numbering system for everything that is numbered with a "D" for pro/enthusiast gear, so, 80D Mark II, for example. It would be so much more consistent, that way, and besides, prevent Canon from running into trouble at 99D.

For consumer models, I think they should just ditch xxxD and xxxxD, and go with incrementing numbers that start with a letter: T8i, SL3, etc.

Mostly, I think this because there isn't really anything wrong with a zillion SKUs for the many, many market segments. It helps Canon and retailers "differentiate" essentially the same product, the same way that mattress manufacturers or home appliance makers do. They can discount something and put it in Costco or Amazon and then sell the same thing, with the tiniest of differences -- or none at all, save the product badge -- and put it in Best Buy, and then something else in the camera shop. It prevents the various retailers from having to price match, when a camera shop in a shopping center has a tough time selling at similar margins to Costco (often, they must pay a percentage to the mall).

At the enthusiast/pro level (let's just say, bodies > US$500), there could be some streamlining. When it came out, I thought the 77D was pretty cool, but actually, I take it back -- it doesn't really have a raison d'être. It isn't much different in price than an 80D, and is missing a lot of good stuff.

However, looking at it long-term, maybe it's the 80D that should go. I would be ok with 7D Mk3 having all the best features of the 7D + 80D, and in a body the size of 80D (I think this would be possible). Price may be an issue, though. Then 77D would be the entry-level enthusiast camera, as it hits an important price point. My main issue with 77D is lack of pentaprism and AFMA, which drops its desirability... just tons.

In my opinion, next 7D should have 4k video, or a version that has it, if only so that there's an APSC camera with 4k from Canon.

After that, the current lineup should be 3 FF cameras, 6D, 5D, 1D. I think that in the next iteration, Canon should just up the megapixel count of the 5D, and get rid of 5DSR. In the future, there would need to be numbering space for at least a FF mirrorless (4D?), and probably some new-fangled EF mount super megapixel camera. I don't think most people really want 150megapixels, though it would be great for the computer industry to sell high powered machines to process the ginormous RAW and TIFFs that would ensue

Finally... Make no mistake, I'm an OVF guy. But looking down the yellow brick road, I think that the path to success is to go mirrorless on nearly everything without pentaprism. So, a tiny number of APSC models with an OVF, maybe just something like a T7i and 77D.

But hell, what do I know!

 

[9VIII]

I'm still hoping Canon, someday, brings back APS-H. It's a long dead meme at this point, but that sure would shake up the enthusiast level market.

I'd like that. I was out shooting with my trusty 1D4 today. I would love a similar camera with the latest AF and possibly a few more mp's.

You're in luck, Canon already produce such a camera! It's called the 1DX mark II:

https://downloads.canon.com/nw/camera/products/eos/1d-x-mark-ii/specifications/canon-eos-1dx-mkii-specification-chart.pdf

He was getting nostalgic about APS-H format, while 1DX and Mk2 are both FF cameras. Currently I think only Sigma offers APS-H based cameras. Back in the day due to FF yields, APS-H might have been prefered in order to reduce cost of cameras, I dont see why Canon/Sony/Nikon would produce a APS-H camera today when they dont seem to have yield issues.

No matter what the yields, APS-H will be lower cost, and the mirror is smaller so it could still have some sports application, and with almost every Full Frame body doing heavy cropping on 4K video maybe APS-H would be outright superior in that application.
Remember Canon is still making their 120MP prototypes in APS-H, it's a format they do still appreciate to some extent.
If Canon were to make a "cheaper" Big MP camera, then APS-H might be the ideal there too.
I do worry that if they do a 50MP APS-C body it might end up with excessively small pixels if they try to give it DPAF as well, but with APS-H they could probably pull it off while maintaining similar same IQ as the 80D.
Actually 40MP might be preferred overall because the pixels line up almost perfectly with an 8K video frame.

 

[rrcphoto]

The same source says the roadmap shows a replacement for the EOS 5DS and EOS 5DS R coming in 2018 as well.

That's when I stopped reading... CR-3

not sure why.

it has to be coming soon. canon said a 120MP DSLR was in development in September of 2015. Can't see it being anything but a 5Ds replacement.

Simply too soon. Would welcome a 120 MPIX camera any day. But Canon will want to let 5DS/R run its course. Canon FF DSLR's show progressively longer replacement cycles.

it's been "in development" for nearly 2 years now, next year will be three. doesn't take them longer than that.

 

[rrcphoto]

Remember Canon is still making their 120MP prototypes in APS-H, it's a format they do still appreciate to some extent.

they don't do that because it's the largest sensor they can do using single exposure without stitching

 

[RGF]

Canon's camera structure makes sense but is somewhat fragment. Pardon me if my description of the segments is off slightly.

FF Crop
Sports/Action 1DX M2 7D M2
High Quality/general purpose 5D M4 80D
High Resolution 5Ds/sR N/A
Entry Level 6D M2 Rebel

What is missing? Segments are well defined and differentiated.
Weak cameras are 7D M2, 5DsR, and might argue that the 5D M4 will face a challenge from Nikon D850. The D850 is positioned against both the 5DM4 and 5Ds. Canon is trying to split the market (sandwich their products above and below the D850), though that strategy may not work well if the D850 matches its specs.

 

[Jopa]

The rest is irrelevant for many.

Mostly true. I don't mind if they update the sensor to increase DR, and maybe add an extra FPS. The Wifi card is around $40. 4k? I have a 1dx2 for that purpose.

 

[unfocused]

...by the time 2018 rolls around, both the EOS 80D and EOS 7D Mark II are going to be ready for an update. Canon cannot wait 5 years again for a sequel to the EOS 7D Mark II.</p>

Why would the 80D be ready for an update? It's perfectly slotted for the market and has superior performance. More likely, the 7DIII will come in 2018 and then, after it has been on the market for awhile with a new sensor, the 90D will surface in 2019, with the same sensor as the 7DIII, restoring the relationship that Canon had with the 7D and 60D.

 

[ecka]

Perhaps there would be no camera "cannibalism" if Canon series were not starving for competitive features.

 

[RGF]

Perhaps there would be no camera "cannibalism" if Canon series were not starving for competitive features.

Cannibalism happens when someone makes a choice between two competing products. If Canon products were so vastly superior to competitors and there was no product overlaps, then there would not be any cannibalism. However the second someone has to pick between products, one product cannibalizes the other. Marketing 101

 

[Mikehit]

Perhaps there would be no camera "cannibalism" if Canon series were not starving for competitive features.

Cannibalism happens when someone makes a choice between two competing products. If Canon products were so vastly superior to competitors and there was no product overlaps, then there would not be any cannibalism. However the second someone has to pick between products, one product cannibalizes the other. Marketing 101

+1

'Cannibalising' and 'crippling' and 'segmentation' have become knee-jerk way of criticising Canon with people who use them often not understanding what they mean or that every manufacturer does it.

 

[tomscott]

I understand canons safety aspect to their products. They are excellent and so well refined and complete tools.

This is my argument with the 6DMKII its an amalgamation of all the best features of the top tier canon products over the last 5 years, ok yes 5 years... but its an entry level product and the fact you can have all those qualities means it is a great value proposition when 5DMKIIIs are more still more expensive (over £200) and the 5DMKIV is between £1-1500 more expensive. Ok it doesn't have 4K but I doubt anyone uses the 4K capture in the 5D because its such a poor codec, apart from the extra stop of DR and 4mp of resolution and a few AF advancements there isnt a huge deal of difference which is why £1000 imo isnt currently worth it. If you look at things objectively. Although day to day these do add up to a hefty upgrade and plan to buy one.

Dont get me wrong I think the 5DMKIV is (like the 5DMKIII) the best all round camera on the market. But when it comes down in price a little more it will be a better value proposition for what it offers, especially for current 5DMKIII owners there isnt a huge reason to upgrade as its an excellent camera and by the time they trade in your looking at £2000 to change, the MKIV is def not worth £2k more.

Canon isnt always safe like the 5DS/R which was so good to see! Innovation, market leading qualities in a body that people are used to! Otherwise the products have been a little too safe and too much repetition which is why there is canibalisim. If you are spending £3-3500 on a camera you want it to tick everything possible on the current trending features list whether you need it or not, it may not be relevant now but it will be down the line. Even £1000 is a lot of money to most consumers and getting people to part with that money and not seeing trending features is obviously a hard sell.

Again objectively 4K for the average person is not really suitable, the rig needs to be substantial to edit the video and most people wont have 4k monitors but maybe a TV. 4K is well and truly here but I would argue it is still a niche for prosumers delivering content. Saying that I dont see average wedding videographers using canons cinema line because its too big of an investment so most shoot with panasonic or sony cameras which offer similar features at less than half the price. Although their rigs do look like transformers and a complete pain to use as they weren't designed to primarily be video cameras.

I would say there is still plenty of a shake up coming. Stats look good in the short term as the brand loyalty lies but what about the long term, you cant rely on loyalty forever.

 

[jedy]

Maybe in the future Canon could be looking to their EOSM cameras as their consumer lineup, replacing consumer aps-c dslr's?? If you think about it, first time buyers/amateur hobbyists aren't going to have lots of lenses - possibly only the kit lens, so losing the ef-s mount might not be such a big issue. Also, consumers tend not to invest in newer bodies anywhere near as much as professionals so may be happy to continue using older cameras for longer (especially with a healthy secondhand market). As mirrorless tech gets better and more cost effective and are smaller, I could see this as a more attractive option for Canon's lineup in the future. Just a thought though!

 

[jedy]

Again objectively 4K for the average person is not really suitable, the rig needs to be substantial to edit the video and most people wont have 4k monitors but maybe a TV. 4K is well and truly here but I would argue it is still a niche for prosumers delivering content. Saying that I dont see average wedding videographers using canons cinema line because its too big of an investment so most shoot with panasonic or sony cameras which offer similar features at less than half the price. Although their rigs do look like transformers and a complete pain to use as they weren't designed to primarily be video cameras.

I agree that 4K in dslrs/mirrorless is extremely niche in its use - doesn't stop consumers demanding it, sadly. If only camera companies would focus on top notch HD video and leave 4K to the proper video cameras! The internet can't currently cope with huge volumes of 4K streams and TV still only offers a handful of HD channels, let alone 4K. Also, the cost to set up a computer to edit 4K is huge.

 

[ecka]

Perhaps there would be no camera "cannibalism" if Canon series were not starving for competitive features.

Cannibalism happens when someone makes a choice between two competing products. If Canon products were so vastly superior to competitors and there was no product overlaps, then there would not be any cannibalism. However the second someone has to pick between products, one product cannibalizes the other. Marketing 101

I know what the metaphor means . I'm just saying that Canons marketing politics are to blame.

If 5D/7D series had dual CF slots or dual XQD slots, then 6D/80D could have dual SD slots. Otherwise, dual SD can be considered a better option than two different slots. The whole card format mixing decision was a bad idea.
Vari-angle touch screen is a great feature. Why high-end EOS cameras don't have those? I think at least one of the 5Ds/5DsR should have it.
Where's focus peaking, zebra, proper 4K, uncompressed video out, etc? DPAF is nice, but without the rest of the "must-have video package" it's not that important in $2000+ cameras. People with that kind of budget are thinking Sony(vs)Panasonic (not C100 vs C300 vs 1DX2), because these days Canon is a real lackluster in some departments. If DPAF is only for catching up with mirrorless, then why don't they implement the optional EVF usage on Canon DSLR hot-shoe? Why can't they put a radio transmitter (for flash) inside the camera body? There are dozens of things they could fix and improve. If others can do it, why can't Canon?

 

[Loswr]

There are dozens of things they could fix and improve. If others can do it, why can't Canon?

They can. Why should they?

 

[ecka]

Again objectively 4K for the average person is not really suitable, the rig needs to be substantial to edit the video and most people wont have 4k monitors but maybe a TV. 4K is well and truly here but I would argue it is still a niche for prosumers delivering content. Saying that I dont see average wedding videographers using canons cinema line because its too big of an investment so most shoot with panasonic or sony cameras which offer similar features at less than half the price. Although their rigs do look like transformers and a complete pain to use as they weren't designed to primarily be video cameras.

I agree that 4K in dslrs/mirrorless is extremely niche in its use - doesn't stop consumers demanding it, sadly. If only camera companies would focus on top notch HD video and leave 4K to the proper video cameras! The internet can't currently cope with huge volumes of 4K streams and TV still only offers a handful of HD channels, let alone 4K. Also, the cost to set up a computer to edit 4K is huge.

I think the question is - Why bother buying new expensive high-res cameras? If you don't have a proper UHD display and a computer to handle it in the first place. You have to upgrade all of your toys accordingly to keep everything in balance. Otherwise some things will always seem like overkill, while other (dated) things will struggle to keep up.
And another question is - Don't you know that 4K is being used for producing superior 1080p content? For downsampling, cropping, stabilizing, etc. It's not a gimmick. You don't need it, because you don't use it. But it doesn't mean that the stuff you are watching in 1080p wasn't shot in 4K or even more K.
Conservatism is bad for progress and development. And who's watching TV in the 21st century anyways? The Internet can't cope with 4K? Really? Well, maybe in Africa or North Korea. I'm watching 4K regularly (no problem) and it's beautiful on 40"(ish) UHD monitors. Even on 1080p display there's an obvious quality boost when viewing 4K (2160p) or 2.5K (1440p) content.

 

[BillB]

Again objectively 4K for the average person is not really suitable, the rig needs to be substantial to edit the video and most people wont have 4k monitors but maybe a TV. 4K is well and truly here but I would argue it is still a niche for prosumers delivering content. Saying that I dont see average wedding videographers using canons cinema line because its too big of an investment so most shoot with panasonic or sony cameras which offer similar features at less than half the price. Although their rigs do look like transformers and a complete pain to use as they weren't designed to primarily be video cameras.

I agree that 4K in dslrs/mirrorless is extremely niche in its use - doesn't stop consumers demanding it, sadly. If only camera companies would focus on top notch HD video and leave 4K to the proper video cameras! The internet can't currently cope with huge volumes of 4K streams and TV still only offers a handful of HD channels, let alone 4K. Also, the cost to set up a computer to edit 4K is huge.

How many consumers are demanding 4K? There are some 4k ranters on the forums, including this one, but how many sales would they add up to? My guess is that most DSLR consumers want decent quality hassle free video. At the other end, why would a consumer who really wants 4K buy a DSLR to get it?

 

[Mikehit]

because these days Canon don't build in functions that a small but very vocal and noisy minority believe they should pander to.

Fixed that for ya!

 

[Maiaibing]

Weak cameras are 7D M2, 5DsR,

When the Canon camera that makes the best picture files in the world from any DSLR and beats the 5DIII in each and every aspect except fps (but is close) gets designated "weak"... : : :