Canon DSLR Body Rumors for 2013
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
- Status
I'd lean towards the 5.5-6 fps. But anything under 5 just doesn't seem right.verysimplejason said:
Upvote
0
70D would pretty much have to supply at least 5fps to maintain its prosumer category which the 60D nearly lost due to lost features and downgraded handling.
7d2 can have the same AF as the 7D, it was good enough for most things once you figured it out, worked well in low light and action tracking. Adding ability to track the subject also using color cues from a more complex metering sensor would be a nice benefit to have to match some of the Nikon bodies.
but they'd better get rid of the banding and pattern noise problems for both new bodies, especially at low ISO. It's become a pathetic weakness already when competitors' cameras costing under $400, like the ultra tiny Pentax Q or D5100, can supply raw images without banding problems.
7d2 can have the same AF as the 7D, it was good enough for most things once you figured it out, worked well in low light and action tracking. Adding ability to track the subject also using color cues from a more complex metering sensor would be a nice benefit to have to match some of the Nikon bodies.
but they'd better get rid of the banding and pattern noise problems for both new bodies, especially at low ISO. It's become a pathetic weakness already when competitors' cameras costing under $400, like the ultra tiny Pentax Q or D5100, can supply raw images without banding problems.
Upvote
0
keithcooper
Canon Rumors Premium
Nope, as someone who does the above for a living, I -do- want a hefty 1 series body. I'd much rather see a genuine 1Ds3 replacement than something in a small body... The 1D X didn't amount to a significant enough upgrade for the work I do (important caveat, given it's a very good camera for many)Ricku said:
Upvote
0
Aglet said:
Same AF yeah, but what if they went with the trend and added the same AF as the 1DX/5D3 ?? Now, I don't know how that would affect 1DX sales, but if it would then the 5D3 would be killing off the 1DX more, people will get a 1D because they need specifically that, and a 7DII like that would be killer~
But anyways, the 60D was a failure and only survived with by slashing down the price immensely, and it's flip screen was nice... that's about it, no AFMA, not a significant AF or FPS or Sensor that makes it any more than a rebel.
Will the 70D change that? I sure think, and hope it will, because the 7DII will likely cost around 2,000 and the 70D will be the in between model at say 1,200? But rebels are quiet expensive on release.... *sigh*
Upvote
0
I hope the 7dii and 70D get new sensor tech with the newer 180nm process I was hoping they would have used with the 5diii... with better ISO, DR and banding performance than the 7dii/70D.
The 19 pt AF is fine for the 7Dii as long as the center is -3EV or -4EV sensitive.
On a separate note: I was wondering... Did Canon not make real updates to their 18mp APS-C sensors to protect the sales of the 7d?
The 19 pt AF is fine for the 7Dii as long as the center is -3EV or -4EV sensitive.
On a separate note: I was wondering... Did Canon not make real updates to their 18mp APS-C sensors to protect the sales of the 7d?
Upvote
0
K-amps said:
I don't think so... Some camera has to be first, unless they want to hold out and update every camera at the same time, and that would be a marketing and financial nightmare... and being as the big bucks (volume wise) are with the lower end cameras, it might even make more sense to see the new technology first in a Rebel or EOS-M body
Upvote
0
LetTheRightLensIn said:
Not quite. You still lose FWC when moving to a smaller pixel. Since both large pixel and small pixel sensors all use gapless microlenses these days, use of microlenses on sensors with smaller pixels really doesn't level the playing field like it did when it was first introduced. Microlenses improve Q.E. by increasing the number of photons that actually make it all the way to the photodiode, but photodiode capacity is entirely dependent on area...and in that respect, all else being equal (which is pretty much the case these days), larger pixels are still better.
There are other technologies that can still improve Q.E. on sensors with smaller pixels. Lightpipe tech for FSI sensors, BSI sensors, weaker CFA's, etc. are all techniques used on higher density sensors that can still help level the playing field. Even with those technologies, FWC of higher density sensors is usually less than 40k electrons/pixel, where as FWC with lower density sensors gets as high as 100k electrons/pixel. Granted, you can always downsample a higher resolution image and reduce noise, but generally you buy a high resolution camera for a reason, and the final output is usually upscaled, not downscaled.
In the end, once 180nm technology normalizes across the board for brands and sensor sizes/densities, I think the choices will boil down to two key things: resolution at the cost of noise or IQ at the cost of resolution. Personally, I'm fine with those choices...you can always own two cameras for different purposes.
Upvote
0
I translated what it said before I even read the comments. It even says in the post "3.0" variable-angle LCD screen" or something along those lines.that1guyy said:
"ﾓｲﾀｰ"="monitaa"-"monitor". The characters were distinct (just clearing up for the others who haven't seen the past comments).
Upvote
0
M.ST said:
Nice words. In recent years of development, Canon has been more about rumors, paper launches & products barely matching the price tag for the features offered.
Do not get me wrong - I sincerely hope they finally get back the title for innovation, however there is not much hard evidence this far for supporting the idea. I hope I'm wrong.
Upvote
0
jrista said:
I still wonder about another technology that could add some improvement to the overall QE and that's an old tech called "black silicon" from a few years back.
basically, I think it was a nano-structured surface that reduced reflectivity of the sensor (not sure if it can also work on the microlenses and AA filters) so that more photons got into the Si to do their work generating image electrons.
Even if such a surface treatment did not appreciably improve the QE, it'd still be nice to reduce the overall reflectance of the sensor+AA array which could help with overall contrast, flare and ghosting to some extent.
Upvote
0
M.ST said:
Can you comment on difference in sensors among 1Ds3, 5D3, and 1DX? Thanks for your knowledge.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
