anyone else notice that a new rebel has yet to be announced?

[sdsr]

Two questions:

What can Canon put into a T6i to make it interesting?

What can another brand put into theirs to make Canon envious?

At the moment I can't think of anything to answer either of those questions. Anyone?

Jim

Making it interesting to those who read this forum and making it something that consumers are going to want to buy are probably rather different things. I have no clue about the latter. To interest me it would have to be something like the Sony a6000 but with IBIS added, and that surely won't happen. As for Canon being envious, they may be noticing the slight uptick in mirrorless sales in recent months, but otherwise they seem to be doing rather well as it is (even if some might think they don't deserve to).

 

[jdramirez]

Interesting... such a vague term.

Back in my Canon xs days, I like the 60d over the t3i because of the auto focus points and the fps.

That was interesting to me.

What would Canon have to do to improve the t5i so someone in my similar position, a t3i or t3 owner, would be interested? We know it can't be better than the 70d. It can't be worse than the t5i.

How about this. Wi-Fi plus video out to your cell phone with wireless triggering and pinch and zoom focus capabilities. Zoom in using live view, control auto focus over your phone, take the shot and it auto shares to Facebook.

While we are at it... built in rf control over the 450ex-rt (guessing this will come out). Built in swivel bounce off the flash... just up and behind, but it would be better than head on.

You stay with sd... but also have a usb input to flash drive to copy.

Also have digital zoom that saves the original image and the in camera crop. Obviously a live mode function.

Auto saves to the stupid Canon cloud.

 

[Hannes]

I think canon have done the very sensible thing of updating their kit lens line up instead of the cameras. The new STM lenses are much nicer to use than the old kit lenses. Comparing the new kit lens to the old will make people want the newer lens, just getting rid of that old horrible focussing motor makes a massive difference. Also bearing in mind that most rebel user won't stray far from the kit 18-55 or possibly to the 55-250 the new lenses are going to be massively important for the appeal of the newer models despite the lack of updates.

What they should have done I think though it to have introduced a new 20-22 mpix sensor for the rebels to replace the ageing 18mpix as it would make the average consumer see the new sensor as an update. I'm pretty sure the 70D sensor will find its way into the 750D as it has always done in the past but it strikes me as being a little late but at least they have sensibly upgraded the 1200D to the 18mpix sensor instead of the now ancient 12mpix one. Nikon really beat them to it when it came to the entry level segment and I think Canon lost a lot of sales because of it.

As boring as these rebels are to us, these are what drives canon. I doubt there is any way Canon could survive on their single digit cameras, they need to bottom end to cover costs.

 

[ScottyP]

You'd think they'd put AFMA in it. It counts as a good user feature but really it also helps Canon increase user satisfaction by letting owners fix any minor manufacturing boo boos themselves.

Why wouldn't they do that? Otherwise most people with slightly out of whack lenses or bodies just suffer with it and tell people their Canon just wasn't very sharp. Maybe they buy a Pentax next time.

Then others have to deal with the hassle of sending their body and one favorite lens off for adjustment at Canon which is no fun for either the owner or for Canon, and it is all avoidable if they'd just include AFMA.

If the ketchup companies are smart enough to add "shake well before serving" to their labels, so that the user is more likely to have a positive experience with their condiments, why would a camera maker leave out AFMA?

 

[dgatwood]

Rebel T5 doesn't count? Why?

IMO, Canon hasn't actually updated the Rebel line since 2012. The T5 doesn't count, because it's basically just a cost-reduced T5i, which in turn is just a T4i with a few firmware changes and a couple of tiny mechanical tweaks (most of which were probably just cost reductions).

 

[jdramirez]

You'd think they'd put AFMA in it. It counts as a good user feature but really it also helps Canon increase user satisfaction by letting owners fix any minor manufacturing boo boos themselves.

Why wouldn't they do that? Otherwise most people with slightly out of whack lenses or bodies just suffer with it and tell people their Canon just wasn't very sharp. Maybe they buy a Pentax next time.

Then others have to deal with the hassle of sending their body and one favorite lens off for adjustment at Canon which is no fun for either the owner or for Canon, and it is all avoidable if they'd just include AFMA.

If the ketchup companies are smart enough to add "shake well before serving" to their labels, so that the user is more likely to have a positive experience with their condiments, why would a camera maker leave out AFMA?

I think 80% of Canon rebel users primarily use the 18-55mm, a 75-300mm, a 55-250mm, and then the 50mm f/1.8.

So the max aperture range is 3.5 to 5.6 for the first three lenses... and the 50mm is really quite soft from f/1.8 to f/2.8ish... So you will tend to stop down the 50...

Would yall say that rebel owners who have a good f/1.4 (or a 100L which has a really shallow depth of field) lens is probably around 10%. Maybe a 35L, the 100L, a 50L, etc.

I'd think 90% of the rebel market don't have a need for it... and probably another 5% wouldn't use it. I would want AFMA, but I suppose I'd be ok with afma being @ the X0D or higher.

 

[wsmith96]

You'd think they'd put AFMA in it. It counts as a good user feature but really it also helps Canon increase user satisfaction by letting owners fix any minor manufacturing boo boos themselves.

Why wouldn't they do that? Otherwise most people with slightly out of whack lenses or bodies just suffer with it and tell people their Canon just wasn't very sharp. Maybe they buy a Pentax next time.

Then others have to deal with the hassle of sending their body and one favorite lens off for adjustment at Canon which is no fun for either the owner or for Canon, and it is all avoidable if they'd just include AFMA.

If the ketchup companies are smart enough to add "shake well before serving" to their labels, so that the user is more likely to have a positive experience with their condiments, why would a camera maker leave out AFMA?

If I were canon, the thought of allowing afma to the mass population of ma and pa photographers would be terrifying to me and my call centers. Afma is a great tool for those who know how to use it, but any increase in my call center activity would reduce my profit margin on the rebel line. Enthusiasts, sure offer this option to allow them to grow with their camera. Most who can afford a single digit model probably have an idea of what they are doing. Mainstream usually has no clue what they are doing, but they don't know it. All they know is that if they screw it up, it would be canon's fault for making such crappy gear and social media would spread that word.

 

[ecka]

Rebel T5 doesn't count? Why?

IMO, Canon hasn't actually updated the Rebel line since 2012. The T5 doesn't count, because it's basically just a cost-reduced T5i, which in turn is just a T4i with a few firmware changes and a couple of tiny mechanical tweaks (most of which were probably just cost reductions).

IMO, for now, Rebel SL1 is the best choice and if I'd want something better I would aim for 70D.

 

[dgatwood]

You'd think they'd put AFMA in it. It counts as a good user feature but really it also helps Canon increase user satisfaction by letting owners fix any minor manufacturing boo boos themselves.

Why wouldn't they do that? Otherwise most people with slightly out of whack lenses or bodies just suffer with it and tell people their Canon just wasn't very sharp. Maybe they buy a Pentax next time.

Then others have to deal with the hassle of sending their body and one favorite lens off for adjustment at Canon which is no fun for either the owner or for Canon, and it is all avoidable if they'd just include AFMA.

If the ketchup companies are smart enough to add "shake well before serving" to their labels, so that the user is more likely to have a positive experience with their condiments, why would a camera maker leave out AFMA?

If I were canon, the thought of allowing afma to the mass population of ma and pa photographers would be terrifying to me and my call centers. Afma is a great tool for those who know how to use it, but any increase in my call center activity would reduce my profit margin on the rebel line. Enthusiasts, sure offer this option to allow them to grow with their camera. Most who can afford a single digit model probably have an idea of what they are doing. Mainstream usually has no clue what they are doing, but they don't know it. All they know is that if they screw it up, it would be canon's fault for making such crappy gear and social media would spread that word.

Just bury it deep in the custom functions menu so the newbies won't discover it accidentally. Better yet, make it mindless. Have the camera remember each lens it sees, and when it detects a new one, ask the user to set the lens to each end of its zoom range and point it at something close and far away. Then have the camera calculate the AFMA values by computing the difference between the AF-sensor-computed OOF amount and the DPAF-computed OOF amount several times in rapid succession.

 

[henrywang]

Rebel T5 doesn't count? Why?

IMO, Canon hasn't actually updated the Rebel line since 2012. The T5 doesn't count, because it's basically just a cost-reduced T5i, which in turn is just a T4i with a few firmware changes and a couple of tiny mechanical tweaks (most of which were probably just cost reductions).

As I saw it, the T5 to me was just a repackaged T2i because of the lack of flip out screen :-\
I was pretty shocked when they actually dared to release something like that...

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

You'd think they'd put AFMA in it. It counts as a good user feature but really it also helps Canon increase user satisfaction by letting owners fix any minor manufacturing boo boos themselves.

Why wouldn't they do that? Otherwise most people with slightly out of whack lenses or bodies just suffer with it and tell people their Canon just wasn't very sharp. Maybe they buy a Pentax next time.

Then others have to deal with the hassle of sending their body and one favorite lens off for adjustment at Canon which is no fun for either the owner or for Canon, and it is all avoidable if they'd just include AFMA.

If the ketchup companies are smart enough to add "shake well before serving" to their labels, so that the user is more likely to have a positive experience with their condiments, why would a camera maker leave out AFMA?

If I were canon, the thought of allowing afma to the mass population of ma and pa photographers would be terrifying to me and my call centers. Afma is a great tool for those who know how to use it, but any increase in my call center activity would reduce my profit margin on the rebel line. Enthusiasts, sure offer this option to allow them to grow with their camera. Most who can afford a single digit model probably have an idea of what they are doing. Mainstream usually has no clue what they are doing, but they don't know it. All they know is that if they screw it up, it would be canon's fault for making such crappy gear and social media would spread that word.

Utter nonsense.

If anything, it might reduce calls, since it is VERY common that lens and body are not matched and at least this might allow a few to get things matched. And it's just NOT rocket science, it's ridiculous how fearful everyone has become of any with a hint of tech over the last couple decades, everything has been dumbed down and then dumbed down some more.

And if someone is not capable of resetting to zero, if they mess it up, then they are not capable of using a DSLR in the first place. I mean how hard is it to simply hit reset or place MFA back to 0? If you can turn the knob to +3 or -3 you can also turn it back to 0.

 

[wsmith96]

You'd think they'd put AFMA in it. It counts as a good user feature but really it also helps Canon increase user satisfaction by letting owners fix any minor manufacturing boo boos themselves.

Why wouldn't they do that? Otherwise most people with slightly out of whack lenses or bodies just suffer with it and tell people their Canon just wasn't very sharp. Maybe they buy a Pentax next time.

Then others have to deal with the hassle of sending their body and one favorite lens off for adjustment at Canon which is no fun for either the owner or for Canon, and it is all avoidable if they'd just include AFMA.

If the ketchup companies are smart enough to add "shake well before serving" to their labels, so that the user is more likely to have a positive experience with their condiments, why would a camera maker leave out AFMA?

If I were canon, the thought of allowing afma to the mass population of ma and pa photographers would be terrifying to me and my call centers. Afma is a great tool for those who know how to use it, but any increase in my call center activity would reduce my profit margin on the rebel line. Enthusiasts, sure offer this option to allow them to grow with their camera. Most who can afford a single digit model probably have an idea of what they are doing. Mainstream usually has no clue what they are doing, but they don't know it. All they know is that if they screw it up, it would be canon's fault for making such crappy gear and social media would spread that word.

Utter nonsense.

If anything, it might reduce calls, since it is VERY common that lens and body are not matched and at least this might allow a few to get things matched. And it's just NOT rocket science, it's ridiculous how fearful everyone has become of any with a hint of tech over the last couple decades, everything has been dumbed down and then dumbed down some more.

And if someone is not capable of resetting to zero, if they mess it up, then they are not capable of using a DSLR in the first place. I mean how hard is it to simply hit reset or place MFA back to 0? If you can turn the knob to +3 or -3 you can also turn it back to 0.

I utter nonsense your utter nonsense. You would be surprised that what you and I would take for granted would cause chaos for others. I understand that you are proficient with your equipment, and that's fine. I also agree with you that more and more equipment, no matter what it is, appears to have training wheels attached to it. There is a reason for this which was explained in my previous post.

Let me approach it from a different perspective to explain my point. If my parents wanted a new PC, there is no way I would ever let them have a machine with Linux on it. EVER! If they are somewhat proficient, then Windows is fine. If they had no clue what they were doing, then I would buy them a Mac. Btw, I'm not ragging on macs - they just happen to be the easiest computers to work on.

 

[wsmith96]

You'd think they'd put AFMA in it. It counts as a good user feature but really it also helps Canon increase user satisfaction by letting owners fix any minor manufacturing boo boos themselves.

Why wouldn't they do that? Otherwise most people with slightly out of whack lenses or bodies just suffer with it and tell people their Canon just wasn't very sharp. Maybe they buy a Pentax next time.

Then others have to deal with the hassle of sending their body and one favorite lens off for adjustment at Canon which is no fun for either the owner or for Canon, and it is all avoidable if they'd just include AFMA.

If the ketchup companies are smart enough to add "shake well before serving" to their labels, so that the user is more likely to have a positive experience with their condiments, why would a camera maker leave out AFMA?

If I were canon, the thought of allowing afma to the mass population of ma and pa photographers would be terrifying to me and my call centers. Afma is a great tool for those who know how to use it, but any increase in my call center activity would reduce my profit margin on the rebel line. Enthusiasts, sure offer this option to allow them to grow with their camera. Most who can afford a single digit model probably have an idea of what they are doing. Mainstream usually has no clue what they are doing, but they don't know it. All they know is that if they screw it up, it would be canon's fault for making such crappy gear and social media would spread that word.

Just bury it deep in the custom functions menu so the newbies won't discover it accidentally. Better yet, make it mindless. Have the camera remember each lens it sees, and when it detects a new one, ask the user to set the lens to each end of its zoom range and point it at something close and far away. Then have the camera calculate the AFMA values by computing the difference between the AF-sensor-computed OOF amount and the DPAF-computed OOF amount several times in rapid succession.

Sounds like you should talk to Canon. I believe that would be an awesome use of automation.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

If anything, it might reduce calls, since it is VERY common that lens and body are not matched and at least this might allow a few to get things matched. And it's just NOT rocket science, it's ridiculous how fearful everyone has become of any with a hint of tech over the last couple decades, everything has been dumbed down and then dumbed down some more.

And if someone is not capable of resetting to zero, if they mess it up, then they are not capable of using a DSLR in the first place. I mean how hard is it to simply hit reset or place MFA back to 0? If you can turn the knob to +3 or -3 you can also turn it back to 0.

From this, can I presume that you have never worked product techsupport with the general public? ;D You would be surprised at what confuses the "average" customer when it comes to changing settings on a technologically advanced product.

I think that AFMA is the last thing that the average camera user needs. Even so called experienced photographers have problems with (as evidenced by the threads on many of the forums)

No one ever got into trouble by underestimating the capabilities of the average person. ;D ;D

 

[Antono Refa]

They can make an APS-C version of their 120MP APC-H sensor. Etc.

That would make for a 66MP sensor. Does any of Canon's lenses have the resolving power to match that?

 

[jdramirez]

They can make an APS-C version of their 120MP APC-H sensor. Etc.

That would make for a 66MP sensor. Does any of Canon's lenses have the resolving power to match that?

Depends on who is buying... some people have more money than sense.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

You'd think they'd put AFMA in it. It counts as a good user feature but really it also helps Canon increase user satisfaction by letting owners fix any minor manufacturing boo boos themselves.

Why wouldn't they do that? Otherwise most people with slightly out of whack lenses or bodies just suffer with it and tell people their Canon just wasn't very sharp. Maybe they buy a Pentax next time.

Then others have to deal with the hassle of sending their body and one favorite lens off for adjustment at Canon which is no fun for either the owner or for Canon, and it is all avoidable if they'd just include AFMA.

If the ketchup companies are smart enough to add "shake well before serving" to their labels, so that the user is more likely to have a positive experience with their condiments, why would a camera maker leave out AFMA?

If I were canon, the thought of allowing afma to the mass population of ma and pa photographers would be terrifying to me and my call centers. Afma is a great tool for those who know how to use it, but any increase in my call center activity would reduce my profit margin on the rebel line. Enthusiasts, sure offer this option to allow them to grow with their camera. Most who can afford a single digit model probably have an idea of what they are doing. Mainstream usually has no clue what they are doing, but they don't know it. All they know is that if they screw it up, it would be canon's fault for making such crappy gear and social media would spread that word.

Utter nonsense.

If anything, it might reduce calls, since it is VERY common that lens and body are not matched and at least this might allow a few to get things matched. And it's just NOT rocket science, it's ridiculous how fearful everyone has become of any with a hint of tech over the last couple decades, everything has been dumbed down and then dumbed down some more.

And if someone is not capable of resetting to zero, if they mess it up, then they are not capable of using a DSLR in the first place. I mean how hard is it to simply hit reset or place MFA back to 0? If you can turn the knob to +3 or -3 you can also turn it back to 0.

food for thought from another topic ---http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21908.msg417183;topicseen#new --- only 5% of the buying public buys more than 1 lens apparently. That leaves 95% with a kit lens. What to venture a bet as to what percentage of that 95% never even take a peek at their manual? What percentage of that 95% even knows what an AF point is? LOL....that is why AFMA won't be in a rebel! How many users are in P mode would end up messing with their AFMA because they have blurry shots - because they don't know their shooting at a slow SS? Or because the AF is locking on to other things (all point active!!!). I would love to have more faith in humanity that this wouldn't happen, but, time and time again I get questions from the first time DSLR user and yup, theynever even opened the manual, hell they don't know where it is and ----yeah they look at me like I'm Satan for asking....I paid $$$$ for this and it should just work. UGGGGGG....no no no no no....AFMA just has no place in the rebel line....

 

[crashpc]

They can make an APS-C version of their 120MP APC-H sensor. Etc.

That would make for a 66MP sensor. Does any of Canon's lenses have the resolving power to match that?

Depends on who is buying... some people have more money than sense.

Well, at least it´s nearly free on sensor side. You´ll have the image resolution up to lens resolution EVERY TIME, which is good approach. But there is still not processing power and bandwith to shoot 66MP at lovely 10+FPS and transfer it on the SD card. Then Postprocessing will be longer. I wouldn´t care, but I´m not alone on this planet....
I hope for something like 22+Mpx full color sensor. It would possibly add more resolution than "current" 32Mpx bayer sensors...

 

[Don Haines]

You'd think they'd put AFMA in it. It counts as a good user feature but really it also helps Canon increase user satisfaction by letting owners fix any minor manufacturing boo boos themselves.

Why wouldn't they do that? Otherwise most people with slightly out of whack lenses or bodies just suffer with it and tell people their Canon just wasn't very sharp. Maybe they buy a Pentax next time.

Then others have to deal with the hassle of sending their body and one favorite lens off for adjustment at Canon which is no fun for either the owner or for Canon, and it is all avoidable if they'd just include AFMA.

If the ketchup companies are smart enough to add "shake well before serving" to their labels, so that the user is more likely to have a positive experience with their condiments, why would a camera maker leave out AFMA?

If I were canon, the thought of allowing afma to the mass population of ma and pa photographers would be terrifying to me and my call centers. Afma is a great tool for those who know how to use it, but any increase in my call center activity would reduce my profit margin on the rebel line. Enthusiasts, sure offer this option to allow them to grow with their camera. Most who can afford a single digit model probably have an idea of what they are doing. Mainstream usually has no clue what they are doing, but they don't know it. All they know is that if they screw it up, it would be canon's fault for making such crappy gear and social media would spread that word.

Utter nonsense.

If anything, it might reduce calls, since it is VERY common that lens and body are not matched and at least this might allow a few to get things matched. And it's just NOT rocket science, it's ridiculous how fearful everyone has become of any with a hint of tech over the last couple decades, everything has been dumbed down and then dumbed down some more.

And if someone is not capable of resetting to zero, if they mess it up, then they are not capable of using a DSLR in the first place. I mean how hard is it to simply hit reset or place MFA back to 0? If you can turn the knob to +3 or -3 you can also turn it back to 0.

food for thought from another topic ---http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=21908.msg417183;topicseen#new --- only 5% of the buying public buys more than 1 lens apparently. That leaves 95% with a kit lens. What to venture a bet as to what percentage of that 95% never even take a peek at their manual? What percentage of that 95% even knows what an AF point is? LOL....that is why AFMA won't be in a rebel! How many users are in P mode would end up messing with their AFMA because they have blurry shots - because they don't know their shooting at a slow SS? Or because the AF is locking on to other things (all point active!!!). I would love to have more faith in humanity that this wouldn't happen, but, time and time again I get questions from the first time DSLR user and yup, theynever even opened the manual, hell they don't know where it is and ----yeah they look at me like I'm Satan for asking....I paid $$$$ for this and it should just work. UGGGGGG....no no no no no....AFMA just has no place in the rebel line....

and most of those people shoot in "green box" mode.... do you really want them to be doing a complex and precise calibration sequence on a tool that they do not know how to use? AFMA is hard for advanced users to get right....

 

[brianftpc]

Take a 7D and call it a 6Ti. its enough of an upgrade to the 5Ti to make sense to buy at the Ti series price point and lacks features included in the 70D to keep it from cannibalizing it