Canon Announcements on April 23, 2013? [CR2]

[rpt]

I predict the new iPad 5!!!!!

Whoops, wrong company!!!!

LOL! Thanks. I needed a laugh. ;D

 

[J.R.]

I hope I'm wrong but I'm preparing to be underwhelmed ... AGAIN!

 

[Aglet]

Guys, I'll probably ask a very naive and somewhat a silly question... What exactly is the difference between different generations of Canon sensors? I mean, let's say Canon 5d ii and iii share the same sensor (correct?) however 5d iii overall has a better signal/noise ratio. That means that the improvements in the image quality do not necessarily require a new sensor technology? So, why do we all want Canon to have a new generation of sensors in their DSLR? Just curios

It is nothing but a bunch of gearhead whiners crying because "theirs" ain't the biggest this week. Ask yourself this: have you ever been able to walk through a gallery and point out which camera shot which photo? If the stuff was as bad as some of these idiots claim, nobody would use it.

Something else you might want to ask yourself: If this Sony technology is such a "game changer" why hasn't the game changed? Where are the stunning examples of what can be done? Why do we continue to see shots of the back of lens caps, mediocre landscape shots with shadows lifted 5 stops just to prove a point? Where are the game changing photographs from this so-called game changing technology?

If this represents such a huge advance in the state of the art of making art, where the heck is the art? Galeries won't hang your DxO curves.

yup, that under-acheiver, don't fix it cuz it's not all broke, set-the-bar-low attitude's gonna get you some spankin' new sensor system R&D fo' sho!'
seriously, whatsamaddawitchyoo?
why you no want improvements?

 

[traveller]

It is nothing but a bunch of gearhead whiners crying because "theirs" ain't the biggest this week.

I think it is more that people look at the improvements Nikon has delivered and the price point at which they have delivered and when they look at Canon they're left thinking "WTF am I buying Canon?"

Ask yourself this: have you ever been able to walk through a gallery and point out which camera shot which photo? If the stuff was as bad as some of these idiots claim, nobody would use it.

Most of the time you don't need to because it is written underneath the artwork.

Something else you might want to ask yourself: If this Sony technology is such a "game changer" why hasn't the game changed? Where are the stunning examples of what can be done? Why do we continue to see shots of the back of lens caps, mediocre landscape shots with shadows lifted 5 stops just to prove a point? Where are the game changing photographs from this so-called game changing technology?

To pick one gallery, that exhibiting the work of the principal behind www.luminous-landscape.com, I imagine that the work being displayed has changed over time from being dominated by Canon sourced material to Sony/Nikon material if what he displays on the web is anything to go buy (and the fact that he no longer owns any Canon DSLRs.) Information about his gallery is at:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/about/gallery.shtml

If you read enough of the essays from professional photographers that write for the above mentioned website then you start to realise that Canon no longer features like it used to as a tool used by artists, never mind photojournalists, etc.

Dilbert,

You are evidently a deeply unhappy person as you seem to only come on the forum these days to complain about Canon. All the pent up hate that you're holding inside you must be damaging to your inner artistic vision. If I were using equipment that was seriously frustrating my ability to produce the photos that I envisioned, or that my competitors could deliver, I would feel compelled to take action. I think that you want to take action, but are afraid to do so because you fear that it may be the "wrong" choice in the long term. This inaction means that you are constantly clutching at the straws that are new camera rumours. Because of this, rather than treating rumours as a bit of fun, every piece of (mis)information that damages your hopes of a new Canon "DXOMark-uber-camera", becomes a personal assault on your wellbeing.

You seriously need to draw a line in the sand and make a decision, either be happy with what Canon currently offers and work around that gear's weaknesses, or bite the bullet and change system. Your current course of (in)action is psychologically damaging to you and getting tiresome to everyone else.

 

[ewg963]

Looks like BMCC and Sony are the first out of the gates with announcements.

http://www.eoshd.com/content/10004/sony-show-cinema-eos-style-future-camera-range-based-around-full-frame-dslrs

Canon had better not disappoint.
If not any "new" tech at least a price drop to match the competition?

I love competition!!!! It's the name of the game. We'll see....

 

[klickflip]

There will be no big megapixel announcement in april.

First Canon has to replace some lenses like the EF 16-35 II L, the EF 17-40 L ...

Both lenses don´t work pretty with the big megapixel prototypes.

Seems like you may have some inside info here.. I don't know how or what exactly you are testing but if its the big MP prototypes I really wish it will concentrate on noise in shadows at low ISO first , then DR not just on MP.
I get the feeling the 47mp monster that has been mentioned recently might be overkill and 40mp max may be a perfect balance when considering lens's performance too.
Also other considerations for a potential MFDB competitor should be be flash sync that would help a lot of people struggling with canon 1/200th sec for location flash scenarios ( and please don't pipe up with speed lights HSS everyone, as for proper professional work speed lights don't cut it, especially when it comes to power and ability to use bigger modifiers). So is it possible to feedback to Canon that 1/500s + flash sync for external units should be a priority to help this camera be used in a proper high end way.
This together with L primes will be a game changing camera at half the cost of a hassy or phase one but with much much more features and usability. 8)

 

[insanitybeard]

Dilbert, I'm genuinely interested. For somebody who obviously dislikes Canon and all it stands for, why are you still posting here? So you can educate newcomers to come towards the light (eg, Nikon) before they settle for any of Canon's rubbish?

 

[Loswr]

Dilbert, I'm genuinely interested. For somebody who obviously dislikes Canon and all it stands for, why are you still posting here? So you can educate newcomers to come towards the light (eg, Nikon) before they settle for any of Canon's rubbish?

It's been a little sad to watch the evolutionary descent from human to troll.

 

[mb66energy]

I likely would never consider getting another high mp body unless it actually delivers enough more when coupled with a lens..

Canon's lenses are already being used to resolve image detail that is higher than the current FF DSLRs: all of the crop sensor DSLRs currently require higher spatial resolution of light from lenses than of the FF DSLRs.

That's not what I observe. With the 2.8 40 or 2.8 24 or the 2.0 100 I have some lenses which are very good in my own experience, several serious reviews (photozone, the-digital-picture, dxomark) and user reports (fred miranda, others).

Using the 40D and the 600D shows no dramatic difference in terms of useful resolutions. Lens flaws are better visible with higher resolution but the sheer IQ isn't much increased.

We all know (or believe?) that the D800 from Nikon (and other newer products with same sensor base tech) have the DR advantage compared to Canon. This is a real advantage. But if you look at DxOmark you will find that the useful resolution between 5D mkii and D800 is comparable despite the fact that there is a 22 : 36 MPixel difference. The same applies to the comparison between 40D and 600D:

2.8 40 & 2.0 100: 40D: 7 from 10 Mpixel compared to 7D: 9 from 18 MPixel

I think there is no essential difference in IQ (resolution-wise) between 7 or 9 MPixel, a linear scale difference of roughly 15%.

 

[mb66energy]

[...]

Correction: Canon's IQ hasn't changed or improved over the last years for anything besides those moving from the 1D series to the 1DX. Nikon, Sony, Pentax, are all delivering new sensors with better performance.

What is Canon doing?

Nothing. What a joke of a company.

For the last years you are basically right.

In 2005 I testet a Nikon D70 vs. a Canon 350D. Both with a standard lens. 350D produced photos, D70 produced "digitallish image like results". I decided for a 20D which was far superior just to the D200.
These days Canon was way ahead because these digital cameras produced non-digital looking images.

Now the products of both companies show the capability to produce fine images - quality-wise. Nikon has some advantages.

Oh, I forgotten about the topic of this thread ...

Just let us wait what comes and if a product isn't interesting, skip it. My two 40Ds substituted the defect 20D (repaired it now with 1ml Isopropanole to clean the trigger switch), my 600D was added to allow for flexible video (need macro, strong tele for educational short videos (non-art, just functional!)). And I will replace my 40Ds if sensors have 10 to 15MPix real true color capability (meaning 40-60MPixels in bayer patterns).

 

[docsmith]

But that is exactly the reason that has most people on this forum up in arms, they AREN'T keeping up with advancements in new technology, they are simply rereleasing the same camera over and over again in different configurations. The average consumer may not notice or even care, but we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans do!

Fine. But, 'we dedicated shooters and die hard Canon fans' make up an infinitesimal fraction of their market. The vast majority of dSLR buyers are 'average consumers'.

And last week one of them came to me for advice on which camera to buy, saying all their friends had Canon. My recommendation? Nikon, followed by showing him DxO's evaluation of the Canon vs Nikon cameras and telling him to visit some stores and try them both. He bought Nikon. I just can't in all honesty recommend Canon DSLRs to anyone.

I should probably just ignore this thread, but I hope you showed your friends this from DXOMark:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Which-lenses-should-you-choose-for-your-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-vs.-Nikon-D800-Competition-is-closer-than-expected

There was a thread dedicated to this here in CR last week. Turns out even DXO, when they connect the lens to the camera and evaluate the "system" are seeing that Canon and Nikon are a lot closer than it would appear. Roger/lensrentals found something similar when selecting his camera.

 

[David Hull]

It is nothing but a bunch of gearhead whiners crying because "theirs" ain't the biggest this week.

I think it is more that people look at the improvements Nikon has delivered and the price point at which they have delivered and when they look at Canon they're left thinking "WTF am I buying Canon?"

I don't disagree here. I am not sure why Canon seems to be cranking up the prices lately. I was a bit surprised that the 5DIII came out where it did. If I were starting out now, I might start with Nikon however, that is not an automatic “given” since IMO Canon’s lenses are better. Those who put such stock in DxO measurements might want to notice that the 5DIII coupled with any of their latest lenses out performs the D800 when it is coupled with the Nikon equivalents. Not that I think that matters too much but when you consider a camera you are buying into a system and with the exception of read noise which only impacts low ISO shooting (and is easy to work around in most cases) the two systems look pretty much equivalent.

Ask yourself this: have you ever been able to walk through a gallery and point out which camera shot which photo? If the stuff was as bad as some of these idiots claim, nobody would use it.

Most of the time you don't need to because it is written underneath the artwork.

But if it weren't you would be hard pressed to tell.

Something else you might want to ask yourself: If this Sony technology is such a "game changer" why hasn't the game changed? Where are the stunning examples of what can be done? Why do we continue to see shots of the back of lens caps, mediocre landscape shots with shadows lifted 5 stops just to prove a point? Where are the game changing photographs from this so-called game changing technology?

To pick one gallery, that exhibiting the work of the principal behind www.luminous-landscape.com, I imagine that the work being displayed has changed over time from being dominated by Canon sourced material to Sony/Nikon material if what he displays on the web is anything to go buy (and the fact that he no longer owns any Canon DSLRs.) Information about his gallery is at:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/about/gallery.shtml

If you read enough of the essays from professional photographers that write for the above mentioned website then you start to realise that Canon no longer features like it used to as a tool used by artists, never mind photojournalists, etc.

Yea... so what... Michael Reichmann likes Sony; he has his reasons and states them on his website. For every “Luminous Landscape” I can point you to some Canon photographer doing excellent work as well. Look up Pete Souza, there is a guy who could probably talk his boss into buying him any equipment he wants yet he chooses to shoot with a 5DIII (previously a 5DII) and... IMO he does absolutely excellent work (If you don't like Obama go back and look at his work with Reagan). There are plenty of others. Everyone has an opinion but the fact remains that great work is being done with all of these systems and the fact that Nikon’s current gear performs a bit better in a few corner cases doesn’t seem to be changing that much.

 

[David Hull]

Guys, I'll probably ask a very naive and somewhat a silly question... What exactly is the difference between different generations of Canon sensors? I mean, let's say Canon 5d ii and iii share the same sensor (correct?) however 5d iii overall has a better signal/noise ratio. That means that the improvements in the image quality do not necessarily require a new sensor technology? So, why do we all want Canon to have a new generation of sensors in their DSLR? Just curios

It is nothing but a bunch of gearhead whiners crying because "theirs" ain't the biggest this week. Ask yourself this: have you ever been able to walk through a gallery and point out which camera shot which photo? If the stuff was as bad as some of these idiots claim, nobody would use it.

Something else you might want to ask yourself: If this Sony technology is such a "game changer" why hasn't the game changed? Where are the stunning examples of what can be done? Why do we continue to see shots of the back of lens caps, mediocre landscape shots with shadows lifted 5 stops just to prove a point? Where are the game changing photographs from this so-called game changing technology?

If this represents such a huge advance in the state of the art of making art, where the heck is the art? Galeries won't hang your DxO curves.

yup, that under-acheiver, don't fix it cuz it's not all broke, set-the-bar-low attitude's gonna get you some spankin' new sensor system R&D fo' sho!'
seriously, whatsamaddawitchyoo?
why you no want improvements?

I would love to see Canon improve their performance in this area and I am sure that they will, but I have no interest in improvement for improvement's sake which is how I read many of these comments.

As I said, I have yet to see anything put up as an example of what you can do with Sony/Nikon that I couldn't replicate with Canon gear. I don't see any game-changing impact on the state of current "ART" as a result of it. I see excellent photographers doing inspiring work with both systems. This technology has been around for a while and I have yet to see anything come out of it that makes me say… “OMG, I need to put all my Canon stuff up on e-bay and convert to Nikon so I can do this work”.

So, yes from a technology perspective, improve it please, but from a photographic perspective, for me at least, it is sort of a “non-starter”.

 

[Etienne]

There will be no big megapixel announcement in april.

First Canon has to replace some lenses like the EF 16-35 II L, the EF 17-40 L ...

Both lenses don´t work pretty with the big megapixel prototypes.

i'd be interested in the new 16-35 !

I have the 16-35 2.8L II, it's my most heavily used lens.
I'd upgrade if they improve it, but I'd rather have a 18-28 2.8, or 17-24 2.8 that was cracking good everywhere and a little smaller and lighter.

 

[Aglet]

I would love to see Canon improve their performance in this area and I am sure that they will, but I have no interest in improvement for improvement's sake which is how I read many of these comments.

As I said, I have yet to see anything put up as an example of what you can do with Sony/Nikon that I couldn't replicate with Canon gear. I don't see any game-changing impact on the state of current "ART" as a result of it. I see excellent photographers doing inspiring work with both systems. This technology has been around for a while and I have yet to see anything come out of it that makes me say… “OMG, I need to put all my Canon stuff up on e-bay and convert to Nikon so I can do this work”.

So, yes from a technology perspective, improve it please, but from a photographic perspective, for me at least, it is sort of a “non-starter”.

OK, a perfectly rational sentiment.
I'm similarly hoping Canon will improve in this one area tho. I still use my older Canon bodies for lots of shots, but I pull out the exmors when I know I'll be pushing the dark areas, cuz there are times I do need that unbanded performance. It's not all about DR, it's about the quality of that DR. And the ballyhoo over the 5d2 was, in my case, all for naught, as it was a very poor performer for my uses, left a bad after-taste. Improvements are inching along tho, 5d3's better and 6d looks pretty good so far. Might even buy one.

 

[dstppy]

Dilbert, I'm genuinely interested. For somebody who obviously dislikes Canon and all it stands for, why are you still posting here? So you can educate newcomers to come towards the light (eg, Nikon) before they settle for any of Canon's rubbish?

It's been a little sad to watch the evolutionary descent from human to troll.

Well you can blame Canon for that.

I blame other drivers for my aggressiveness. Doesn't mean it's actually them.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Guys, I'll probably ask a very naive and somewhat a silly question... What exactly is the difference between different generations of Canon sensors? I mean, let's say Canon 5d ii and iii share the same sensor (correct?) however 5d iii overall has a better signal/noise ratio. That means that the improvements in the image quality do not necessarily require a new sensor technology? So, why do we all want Canon to have a new generation of sensors in their DSLR? Just curios

It is nothing but a bunch of gearhead whiners crying because "theirs" ain't the biggest this week.

BS

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

There will be no big megapixel announcement in april.

First Canon has to replace some lenses like the EF 16-35 II L, the EF 17-40 L ...

Both lenses don´t work pretty with the big megapixel prototypes.

They probably don't, but the real reason of course is that they milked the old sensor line a bit too long . Canon has tons of lenses that could handle it just fine.

 

[wjm]

To pick one gallery, that exhibiting the work of the principal behind www.luminous-landscape.com, I imagine that the work being displayed has changed over time from being dominated by Canon sourced material to Sony/Nikon material if what he displays on the web is anything to go buy (and the fact that he no longer owns any Canon DSLRs.) Information about his gallery is at:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/about/gallery.shtml

If you read enough of the essays from professional photographers that write for the above mentioned website then you start to realise that Canon no longer features like it used to as a tool used by artists, never mind photojournalists, etc.

But please tell me why, if I look at the workshop section at "Luminous-landscape.com", I only see people with Canon cameras ...

 

[David Hull]

I would love to see Canon improve their performance in this area and I am sure that they will, but I have no interest in improvement for improvement's sake which is how I read many of these comments.

As I said, I have yet to see anything put up as an example of what you can do with Sony/Nikon that I couldn't replicate with Canon gear. I don't see any game-changing impact on the state of current "ART" as a result of it. I see excellent photographers doing inspiring work with both systems. This technology has been around for a while and I have yet to see anything come out of it that makes me say… “OMG, I need to put all my Canon stuff up on e-bay and convert to Nikon so I can do this work”.

So, yes from a technology perspective, improve it please, but from a photographic perspective, for me at least, it is sort of a “non-starter”.

OK, a perfectly rational sentiment.
I'm similarly hoping Canon will improve in this one area tho. I still use my older Canon bodies for lots of shots, but I pull out the exmors when I know I'll be pushing the dark areas, cuz there are times I do need that unbanded performance. It's not all about DR, it's about the quality of that DR. And the ballyhoo over the 5d2 was, in my case, all for naught, as it was a very poor performer for my uses, left a bad after-taste. Improvements are inching along tho, 5d3's better and 6d looks pretty good so far. Might even buy one.

I think it will get fixed eventually since:

1. I don't think Canon is going to go too long with a potential image quality deficiency even if it is pretty much a corner case.

2. It costs them something in terms of material cost, battery life and physical size to incorporate the separate chip AFE that they use in all their cameras. They will feel the pain on the low end first in terms of the Rebels and things like the SL 1 where cost, size and battery life are paramount.