Canon Confirms 70D; Future of Semi-Pro DSLR is FF

[CanNotYet]

I think that NOT releasing 7DII with an APS-C sensor would be immensely stupid of Canon.

[list type=decimal]
[*]They have a whole bunch of professionals (birders and sports) that wants it as a 1st or 2nd body.
[*]They have a whole bunch of amateurs that cant afford/do not want to go to FF
[*]There is now NO other APS-C body with magnesuim build and weather sealing
[*]There is now NO other APS-C body that has AFMA and really good AF
[/list]

So Canon has three groups of potential customers. The pros that need APS-C for backup/reach, the current owners of 7D that wants to update, and the consumers that wants up from Rebel/XXD but dont want/cant afford FF.

One has also to remember the effort Canon has made in EF-S lenses. Where do I go if I have an EF-S setup, and want to upgrade, but not have to sell off half my gear?

So, bottom line is: To release a 7DII (even with small tweaking, like 6D to 5DII) is a good business decision, as they will make a lot of money on it.

 

[bardamu]

There really should be a place for a high-end APS-C camera - i.e. 7D / 7D mk ii...

Everyone points out that the 7D is well suited to birding, other wildlife, sports, back-up body for pros, etc. Which it is. But consider the benefits for macro as well:

I do (primarily) scientific macro photography, often at fairly high mag using focus stacking. On FF the FOV at 5x with the MP-E 65mm is about 7.2mm. With APS-C it is about 4.4mm. A 1mm object is rather lost in the first case, but not too dwarfed in the 2nd case. This has implications for getting a sensible histogram as well. Photography like this also benefits from a very good viewfinder. Solution: a 7D-like camera.

Weather-sealing is also potentially important when you're getting down-and-dirty for macro shots (at low tide for example... salt water is not good stuff for cameras). Plus, consider that Canon's telephoto-macro lens is a 180mm non-IS with slow AF. APS-C gives you potentially a 160mm IS with fast AF.

In my case I'm reluctant to upgrade from my 550D to a 7D because it seems odd to have 2 cameras with near identical sensors, in fact the 550D sensor is reportedly a little better than that in the 7D. I'd prefer to upgrade the camera and the sensor simultaneously. Not sure how much longer I can wait though, esp with the 7D getting so cheap these days.

 

[wjm]

There is always that chance that maybe an APS-H 10fps 7DII with EF-s compatability is coming. I think it would be a fantastic idea If it plays out.

I think this is physically impossible. The image circle of a EF-s lens is too small to 'expose' the whole APS-H sensor.

 

[aj1575]

1. Stopp dreaming of an APS-H Canon Camera in the future. There is no justification for that. The price gap to a FF is too small, the focal-range conversion is arkward, it just does not fit. In the near future we will have APS-C and FF for DSLRs.

2. A EOS 70D and the 7DII will most certaily come in the near future, both with APS-C. This is only my guess, but it is logical at the moment. The gap between the xxxD and FF xD is too big, so there will be cameras in between. Seen from the productcycle, the time will come rather sooner than later.

I can understand that Canon thinks that semi pro will move to FF. The price of a 6D is where the 7D was when it came out, and it will only go down. On the other hand, it will always be cheaper to build a APS-C camera (twice as many sensors from the same waver, smaller pentaprism and shutter...). And do not forget the lenses, espacially the standard zooms, there is quite a gap between FF and APS-C in the price and the size-weight. And technology advances, that means not only that FF will get cheaper, but also that the IQ of APS-C will improve (as the one of FF), the question is, what is good enough for you?

We should also not forget that Canon has to think about its buisness; why should they tell us, that the EOS 70D or 7DII is coming in spring or fall, when many people are considering to upgrade to a 5D or a 6D, while the production of the 6D probably just shortly reached its full speed. People would buy less 6D's and wait for the 70D/7DII to have more options.

And my last input, considering Canon sensors. What I learned from different articles is, that Canon is still using a 0.5um process for their CMOS sensors, while Sony has already upgraded to 0.18um. This is one reason why Canon lacks behind in sensor technology. But this is not a technology Canon has to develop, these are just machines they buy from other companys to produce their sensors. Canon already owns machines that are capable of a 0.18um process, but does not use them for CMOS sensors yet. So I expect Canon will make the switch pretty soon (maybe the high megapixel camera is a hint for that; Canon also said that at the moment 18MP APS-C sensors are ideal for them, which makes sense in this context).

 

[RLPhoto]

There is always that chance that maybe an APS-H 10fps 7DII with EF-s compatability is coming. I think it would be a fantastic idea If it plays out.

I think this is physically impossible. The image circle of a EF-s lens is too small to 'expose' the whole APS-H sensor.

A crop mode like Nikon?

 

[aj1575]

There is always that chance that maybe an APS-H 10fps 7DII with EF-s compatability is coming. I think it would be a fantastic idea If it plays out.

I think this is physically impossible. The image circle of a EF-s lens is too small to 'expose' the whole APS-H sensor.

A crop mode like Nikon?

Makes sense, buy (and pay)an APS-H senosr, and then run it in a crop mode...

The other problem is the mirror. EF-S lenses use the space that was freed by the smaller mirror for APS-C. I think there also would not be enough space for an APS-H mirror. But, you are free to use third-party APS-C lenses (Sigma, Tamron) even on a FF Canon Body, and crop it on your own.

 

[Hillsilly]

A 7Dii has a value proposition problem. Go back a few years and there was a big performance difference (AF, FPS) between the 7D and the 5Dii, and buying a 7D made a lot of sense to people who didn't want to step up to a 1D4. But the 5Diii narrows the performance gap considerably. And given the overall IQ benefits of the 5Diii, I have doubts that there would be many, if any, 7Dii buyers out there.

We'll only see a 7Dii when Canon develops a next generation of APS-C sensors in which the image quality is noticeably better than a cropped 5Diii image.

 

[RLPhoto]

There is always that chance that maybe an APS-H 10fps 7DII with EF-s compatability is coming. I think it would be a fantastic idea If it plays out.

I think this is physically impossible. The image circle of a EF-s lens is too small to 'expose' the whole APS-H sensor.

A crop mode like Nikon?

Makes sense, buy (and pay)an APS-H senosr, and then run it in a crop mode...

The other problem is the mirror. EF-S lenses use the space that was freed by the smaller mirror for APS-C. I think there also would not be enough space for an APS-H mirror. But, you are free to use third-party APS-C lenses (Sigma, Tamron) even on a FF Canon Body, and crop it on your own.

If they could do it right as not to alienate current efs lens owners and give the extra reach/IQ when using FF glass. I'd buy one.

 

[Loswr]

The other problem is the mirror. EF-S lenses use the space that was freed by the smaller mirror for APS-C. I think there also would not be enough space for an APS-H mirror. But, you are free to use third-party APS-C lenses (Sigma, Tamron) even on a FF Canon Body, and crop it on your own.

Exactly. First off, the lens mount would have to be modified - there's a part of the mount of EF-S lenses designed to prevent them from mounting on EF mounts. If you physically remove that part of the mount on a lens like the EF-S 10-22mm, you can mount it on an APS-H body like a 1DIV - if you restrict yourself to the 12-22mm range, it's fine, but at 10mm the mirror hits the back of the lens.

Could Canon, in theory, design a mirror that doesn't have this issue? Likely - there could be a translational motion in addition to the rotation, so the mirror could move back as it flips up, for example, and clear a protruding EF-S lens. But frankly, this would just create confusion, IMO, and won't happen.

A 7Dii has a value proposition problem. Go back a few years and there was a big performance difference (AF, FPS) between the 7D and the 5Dii, and buying a 7D made a lot of sense to people who didn't want to step up to a 1D4. But the 5Diii narrows the performance gap considerably. And given the overall IQ benefits of the 5Diii, I have doubts that there would be many, if any, 7Dii buyers out there.

But the 5DIII sells for $3000... So, a 7D in the price range of a 6D, with APS-C but the performance features of a 5DIII (lots of AF points, many cross type, high FPS, etc.), would 'force' consumers to choose between a FF sensor and high performance, or step up $1K to the 5DIII. I think that would sound like a profitable situation to Canon.

 

[CanNotYet]

And given the overall IQ benefits of the 5Diii, I have doubts that there would be many, if any, 7Dii buyers out there.

I think here you are just plain wrong. Yes, the 5DIII has superior IQ, but most of the potential customers are used to APS-C quality or less (think iPhone), and they actually don't care if the 5DIII is 10, 15 or even 50% better, since it is way outside their price limit for a camera. Especially with lenses added. Most will just be satisfied with a 15-85 and a 70-300 IS USM (non-L), or just the kit 18-135! Most of the potential customers will never exceed that 3000$ line.

And for the pros wanting a backup, they will accept the hi-iso limitations etc, because their style of work does not require noiseless pictures in the dark. They value the reach much more.

We'll only see a 7Dii when Canon develops a next generation of APS-C sensors in which the image quality is noticeably better than a cropped 5Diii image.

Not necessarily true, because of the reasons above. If it is at least 5-10% better than the current 7D, most customers will accept it as good enough, when combined with other upgrades, like wide-tele AFMA, GPS/WiFi, bigger screen etc. etc.

 

[jrista]

Hi CR folks

I think people should not be reading more into what Masaya said than what he ACTUALLY said. Remember, the unquoted parts of that interview are simply DPReview's 'take' on it... nothing more (and nothing less, I have respect for DPReview). Quite a bit of what is written in this post assumes incorrectly.

What Masaya actually said about 70D and/or 7DmkII in the interview is very little, and not concrete about those models nor related to the possibility of which models will still be produced, and when, etc, but rather he is talking about market segmentation. ???

So, careful and critical reading and analysis of what Masaya said specifically regarding APS-C and 70D / 7DmkII is required. His words are in bold in this part of that link / article, which I'm copying & highlighting below:

DPR: ... the future of APS-C at the semi-pro level is in doubt, he says:
'That's something we're considering at the moment. From our semi-pro users there's still demand for APS-C but in the future, I think we will see an increase in the number of full-frame models.'
DPR: Either way, that doesn't close the door on an EOS 70D though - when asked when we can expect one, Maeda promises: 'some day in the future. Without fail.

I'm a manager in the Australian Government, and part of my job is to write very specific documentation / policy and to read critically. (I'm not trying to boast, just applying some of my skills here).

So, my take on what Masaya actually says is as follows:
- Canon realises a significant proportion of semi-pros currently demand APS-C
- In the future, Canon believes there will possibly be more demand from semi-pros for FF
- That doesn't mean some or many semi-pros will still want / prefer / need / demand an APS-C
- Which in turn means that Canon needs to determine how to market future models like 70D and 7DmkII
- the feature set and segment positioning of the 70D (& 7DmkII) might be quite determined by the 700D / entry level Canon APS-C DLSRs
- A 7DmkII is still likely on the cards. I think planning, research & development of the 7DmkII has happened some years ago, and R&D are being finalised soon - then ready for production (nowhere does Masaya hint that a 7DmkII is off the cards)
- the 7D has been a popular and long-living successful camera for Canon (ie good profit). I think Canon realise if they create another successful, and perhaps 'noticably improved in some aspects' 7DmkII, they can get a lot of mileage out of it, that is: good profit again.
- Canon is smart and would be very conscious about brand loyalty, and if they remove a 'top of the line APS-C, while the competition offer good top of the line APS-C sized DSLRs, then some folk who don't want to (or can't afford) the jump to FF, may go to other brands.
- equivalent FF lenses are often significantly more expensive than APS-C (when I write 'equivalent' - I mainly mean in terms of 'effective' focal length. (I do realise there are many other aspects to be considered than focal length, but I don't want to write pages here on that!)

Well... feel free to comment on what I've written and determined from the interview!

Totally apart from DPReview's interview - I believe we'll see some high level APS-C cameras. There are serious Canon EF-S lenses (eg 15-85mm, 17-55mm, 10-22mm, 60mm macro, etc) and many EF lenses (eg 70-300mm L, 100mm macro, etc) that just work so well on APS-C too!

Cheers and regards. Wishing all a wonderful weekend... it's Friday evening here in Australia! YAY!! 8)

Paul

+1!! Very well said! Couldn't agree with you more!

I think there is a lot of mirrorless and full-frame fever going around. Everyone expects the DSLR to simply disappear, and for mirorrless, preferably full-frame mirrorless, to take over by next year. As I've said for some time, and you so concisely put...it is more about market segmentation (1/2.3" vs. APS-C vs. FF), proper positioning products into the correct market segment (APS-C /w 70D & 7D II), and expansion into new market segments (EOS-M). Canon is probably the most wiley, financially wise, and shrewed camera manufacturer in the world. They won't destroy any market segment or camera type that fits into a segment with significant demand. The 7D is still a camera in significant demand. There is obviously a greater and growing call for better and more FF models, and I believe that was Masaya Maeda was talking about...the expansion of FF, rather than the contraction of APS-C.

 

[jrista]

thanks pj for these informations and your hermeneutics on it. So what Canon could do with a 7DII is to equip it with the 6Ds FF sensor and built in 1.6 crop mode, improve the weather sealing and they're done. Anyone?

Doubtful, at least not with the 6D sensor. The entire point of buying a pro-grade crop body is, well...either to have pro-grade features with added reach (when money is no object), or because money is an object and you simply can't afford a full-frame body. Since we now have a $2000 full-frame entry in the lineup, the 6D, that largely eliminates the "can't afford FF" argument, except for those who literally need something like the 1D X.

It should be clarified though, that reach is not the same as crop. Crop is simply a composition and framing thing. Reach requires a higher density sensor. The 6D sensor is FAR too low density to come anywhere close to offering the kind of reach the 7D offers when cropped down to 1.6x. You need more pixels in less area to improve reach, and that is what the 7D line offers...a smaller sensor with more pixels. A 24mp 7D Mark II offers something unique that no other FF camera could offer.

You would need a 63mp FF sensor to offer the same kind of reach with a 1.6x crop mode. You would still need a 47mp FF sensor to offer the same kind of reach as the 7D with a 1.6x crop mode. A 21mp 6D sensor doesn't come even remotely close.

 

[jrista]

flawed logic.. you will always have more reach with a crop and a 1.4 TC.

And how many people are actually using a 1.4TC on an APS-C body? Its quite rare imho. I can also say add more n more extension rings if u just care about reach....flawed logic


Only advantage of APS-C is reach and price. But u dont have to save a lot more to get a better FF body than the endlevel APS-C. Yes, i hate APS-C or anything smaller than FF Still using it tough :
I just think there are too many Canon DSLR models and levels. They should have entry, advanced and pro. Why there is like super entry (xxxxD), normal entry (xxxD), upper entry (xxD) advanced (7D) upper advance (6D) end Advanced (5D) and pro (1dX)? Its just too many imho. And all APS-C produce the same image quality. mostly the rebels even produce better images then the 7D cuz they get updated more often :
I would NEVER get a 7D if it gives the same IQ as the cheapest DSLR from Canon. Paying so much money just for a better body material is ridicoulus imho. Or wow 10 FPS? Press and pray is not my style... If i wanna be somewhat professional id at least get a 5D.

First off, if you honestly think people who use cameras like the 7D, 5D or 1D lines simply "press and pray", your a fool. Not only are you a fool, your an insulting fool. You can't simply "press and pray" to produce high quality, artistic photography or photojournalism. Especially as AF system increases in complexity (the 7D AF system is quite a bit more complex than the that found in lesser models, and the 5D III/1D X AF system is even more advanced). You have to learn the AF system and understand how to use it effectively, in a variety of situations, in order to utilize it properly to help you produce quality photography. It is most assuredly NOT "press and pray". If that is how you approach photography when you find a higher-end body in your hands, you do not deserve to use a higher-end body. Foolish notion!

The simple fact of the matter, though, is the 7D gives BETTER IQ than the cheapest Canon APS-C. The notion that sensor is the sole factor in IQ is fundamentally flawed, and why so many on this forum do not understand the true value an APS-C camera like the 7D. There are numerous other features offered with the 7D, not the least of which are its superior AF system and higher frame rate over the xxxD and xxD lines, that lead to better results in more cases. An increase in the number of usable outcomes is a very valuable thing, and more often than not those features are in addition to the image sensor, not solely because of the image sensor.

Let's drop the notion that sensor is the end-all, be-all of image quality. It is not. I'd offer that frame rate and AF system are critical, if not the most critical, factors in IQ for a significant amount of photographic endeavors. Pretty much anything that involves automatically locking focus on non-stationary subjects, or requires actively tracking subjects in motion, can greatly benefit from the additional features the 7D offers over the xxD and xxxD lines. I'd also be willing to bet that the keeper rate for the 7D is far higher than that from either a 60D or 650D, or any other prior version of those lines, thanks to its superior features...despite the fact that the image sensor is the same.

"Press and Pray"...hah. You really don't understand how to use an AF system, bub.

Regarding the use of teleconverters on APS-C. I use them. Hell, I've used teleconverters with both the EF 300mm f/2.8 L II and the EF 500mm f/4 L II on my 7D. I use both the 1.4x and 2x, and if Canon made a 1.7x, I'd use that too. Primes frequently have far more to offer from an IQ standpoint than sensors do. A lot of people complain about how "soft" the 7D is...that is true, sometimes...when using older lenses. Slap on pretty much ANY Mark II lens on a 7D, and that "soft" disappears, replaced by some of the sharpest detail you've ever seen. The Canon 18.1mp APS-C sensor is a good sensor...however it is a very, very high density sensor. If you use inferior glass with it, all the flaws OF THE GLASS are revealed. The only real drawback of the 7D is noise, and then, only at ISO settings above 2500 (and even then, with the increasing availability of advanced noise removal tools, such as Topaz DeNoise 5 (which has stellar random noise removal AND debanding!), high ISO noise is becoming less and less of a problem.)

If you have any experience with bird photography, or a lot of wildlife photography, you'll know that there is NEVER any end to the need for reach. You can always, always, always use more reach. The 5D III doesn't offer better IQ than the 7D in any reach-limited scenario. When you pair those cameras with say the EF 600mm f/4 L IS II and a 1.4x TC, the 7D will always extract more detail. If you are willing to move up to the 1D line (or, if the 5D III ever gets its f/8 patch), you could then slap on a 2x TC, and achieve 1200mm. However you'd still be short what the 7D w/ 600mm + 1.4x TC offers...a whopping 1344mm effective, and at a faster aperture to boot (f/5.6 vs. f/8). (Assuming reach was not your greatest need, the 1D X and 5D III certainly offer other non-sensor features that will help improve IQ...better AF systems, higher frame rate in the case of the 1D X, more features to help you nail the shot, etc.)

 

[nolken]

I would NEVER get a 7D if it gives the same IQ as the cheapest DSLR from Canon. Paying so much money just for a better body material is ridicoulus imho. Or wow 10 FPS? Press and pray is not my style... If i wanna be somewhat professional id at least get a 5D.

would you still pass on the 7D considering it can be had for $1025 right now, less than $400 more than the T4i?

I would hate to see the semi-professional aps-c body come to an end. as others have mentioned, crops do have their advantages. one thing that hasn't been mentioned is shooting video. yes, you can crop down a photo from a FF to give you the same "reach" as a crop, but you can't crop down video on a FF to get the same reach as a crop. Also, the reach gives you another advantage in video with perspective. the bigger sensor isn't needed so much for video. maybe if you need a really shallow DoF, but even then many times you can just throw on a longer lens and increase the distance between the camera and the subject. also EF lenses have less barrel distortion and allow you to shoot wide open on an aps-c, but you could cancel that argument out by saying you can't get as much light into the sensor with a crop.

maybe there will be a 7d mk ii, and it'll be able to utilize that second sensor to record 4k. that alone would sell me.

 

[jrista]

yes, you can crop down a photo from a FF to give you the same "reach" as a crop, but you can't crop down video on a FF to get the same reach as a crop.

That is an incomplete statement, at best. Reach and crop are different things. You can crop a FF image to give you the same Field of View as an APS-C image. Crop/framing/FoV are a compositional factor. Reach is something entirely different, and intrinsically dependent on pixel density. Reach implies more detail, and you don't get more detail simply by cropping the 6D, 5D, 1D...hell, even cropping the D800 won't give you the same amount of detail as the current 7D is capable of. If you crop the 6D FF sensor to the same FoV as an APS-C sensor, you have plain and simply cropped. You did not gain reach. The 6D pixel density is significantly lower than that of say the 18mp 7D. Reach can only be gained with higher pixel density. The only time your statement is true is when the FF sensor in question has the same or greater density as a comparable APS-C sensor. THEN, and ONLY THEN, could you crop and have the same reach as the APS-C.

 

[nolken]

that is why i quoted "reach". because it is not the same thing. someone else mentioned it on an earlier post, so for simplicity's sake I went with it.

 

[jrista]

that is why i quoted "reach". because it is not the same thing. someone else mentioned it on an earlier post, so for simplicity's sake I went with it.

Muddying down the terms, when they (crop and reach) both have very specific meanings just adds to the confusion, though. Reach and Crop are not interchangeable terms. They are all too often used interchangeably by individuals who do not fully understand the meaning of reach...but they really should be used in the appropriate contexts. Lets alleviate confusion, rather than try to be simple.



As for whether there will be a 7D Mark II, there is this:

*UPDATE* During my current travels, I missed an interview Masaya Maeda gave in Japan about the 7D’s successor. Below is a translated part of the interview that talks about the EOS 7D Mark II. It does reaffirm our thoughts that the 7D Mark II will enter new territory.

DKW: As for the readers of DigiKame Watch, there are many who are waiting for the EOS 7D’s sucessor. Up through the release of last year’s major firmware update, there were many who felt that a new model with even better specs would be released shortly…

MM: Yes, they would be correct. For us, it’s about looking at what the camera has the potential to be and then adding that to what it can currently do. I do think the current model is still very attractive to buyers. And while we are, of course, developing its successor, it’ll be one that incorporates a certain number of innovative technologies. We will not be putting out a product with merely better specs, but one that has evolved into new territory. But then again, we’re not talking about something a long time from now either.

Emphasis added by me. From the horses mouth, Canon IS developing the 7D's successor. The mention that it will use innovative technologies does not, by any means, indicate that the 7D II will be FF. On the contrary, I believe it means that the 7D II could very well be Canon's first camera to use a sensor manufactured with their 180nm Copper interlink sensor tech with lightpipe technology...which is fairly innovative indeed if that is the case. It would be the first APS-C sized sensor to use lightpipe technology, which to date has only been used on much smaller form factor sensors. It would also be Canon's first commercial DSLR product that uses 180nm process, so also innovative for Canon on that front.

 

[x-vision]

A 7Dii has a value proposition problem.

Well, it depends.

As I said in another tread, the whole point of the 7D series is to offer advanced specs at an affordable price.
Make it too expensive (e.g. $2000+) and the 7DII will have a value proposition problem.

If too expensive, the 7DII will get out of the enthusiasts' price range.
It will also become too expensive for pros looking for an inexpensive (but capable) second body.

That's why I've been saying that the 7DII will be priced at $1800 max.
At this price (and lower), it won't have a value proposition problem - provided that the sensor is very good.
Of course if priced at $1800, the 7DII will not be spec'd as a 1DIV replacement. That's for sure.

 

[jrista]

A 7Dii has a value proposition problem.

Well, it depends.

As I said in another tread, the whole point of the 7D series is to offer advanced specs at an affordable price.
Make it too expensive (e.g. $2000+) and the 7DII will have a value proposition problem.

If too expensive, the 7DII will get out of the enthusiasts' price range.
It will also become too expensive for pros looking for an inexpensive (but capable) second body.

That's why I've been saying that the 7DII will be priced at $1800 max.
At this price (and lower), it won't have a value proposition problem - provided that the sensor is very good.
Of course if priced at $1800, the 7DII will not be spec'd as a 1DIV replacement. That's for sure.

I think your mostly right. I think an actual $2000 ($1999) introductory price, maybe even a $2100 introductory price, wouldn't be unthinkable, though. I know a number of people who have purchased the 6D as a step up from the Rebel XSi. Granted, the 6D is not the same class of camera as the 7D, however these friends are indeed novice to enthusiast, not pros. Most have limited budgets. The price tag of the 6D was not enough to scare them off, despite its limited feature set.

There is also the real-world inflation in commodity prices to factor in. Base metals, precious metals, rare earth metals, and a whole host of other materials used in the manufacture of advanced CMOS technology and other electronics (hell, even the camera bodies) have all increased in price over the last four years. Some of them considerably, some even hundreds of percent. Even when the amount of commodity material used in, say, an image sensor is very small, a several hundred percent increase in cost can have a measurable impact. Canon could simply reduce their profit margin to maintain an $1799 price tag, but that would likely impact shareholder value as well. I see a compromise around a $1999, maybe $2099 price tag being realistic, and still something the target market for the 7D II could swallow.

 

[Don Haines]

you'll know that there is NEVER any end to the need for reach. You can always, always, always use more reach.

+10 - As someone who finds 4000mm (through telescope) woefully insuffient, I agree with you...