Canon EOS 6D Announcement Soon? [CR1]

[Marsu42]

If Canon see the future as all cameras having phase detection pixels then wouldn’t they have started to develop the FF sensor at the same time as the crop? So it may well be ready to be market tested in a lower grade body.

Question is if Canon thinks their phase detection tech is the production-ready version (then they'd have developed a new ff sensor at the same time as crop) or if it the one on the 650d was only the first beta to be tested in a short-lived xxxd body and they plan to optimize or re-design the tech with these experiences (in this case it's doubtful they'll have a ff version ready in 2 weeks).

 

[tiger82]

What would sell? IMO, Take the 7D body and slap a FF sensor in it and either stay with the Dual Digic 4 or use the 5 or 5+ while keeping everything else the same. Call it the 7Ds (just like the 1Ds is the FF version of the 1D) and slap a $500 premium for the FF which will put it smack in the $1500-2000 vacant price point between the 7D and the 5D3 where the 5D2 is going extinct. I think people would buy a FF body capable of 6-8fps. Forget new vs old technology, what product is missing from their lines? A poor man's 1Dx.

 

[mathino]

What would sell? IMO, Take the 7D body and slap a FF sensor in it and either stay with the Dual Digic 4 or use the 5 or 5+ while keeping everything else the same. Call it the 7Ds (just like the 1Ds is the FF version of the 1D) and slap a $500 premium for the FF which will put it smack in the $1500-2000 vacant price point between the 7D and the 5D3 where the 5D2 is going extinct. I think people would buy a FF body capable of 6-8fps. Forget new vs old technology, what product is missing from their lines? A poor man's 1Dx.

...in that case, what would the purpose of 5D Mk III be ? I dont see Canon just slaping FF sensor in 7D. It would cut away sales of 5D Mk III. My bet is that 6D would be a bit better 5D Mk II (with same fps and better, still worse than Mk III, AF). No way it would do more then 4.5-5 fps. 6D will be firmware crippled.

 

[tiger82]

...in that case, what would the purpose of 5D Mk III be ? I dont see Canon just slaping FF sensor in 7D. It would cut away sales of 5D Mk III. My bet is that 6D would be a bit better 5D Mk II (with same fps and better, still worse than Mk III, AF). No way it would do more then 4.5-5 fps. 6D will be firmware crippled.

5D3 would still have superior IQ and ISO performance for those who want it. My thought on a 7Ds would be for us sports enthusiasts/shooters who would like to shoot the occasional landscape or want to be creative once in a while. Right now, I have a 5D2 and a 7D. Both are acceptable backups for each other but I lose fps and length going to the 5D2 and I lose IQ and composition flexibility going to the 7D. A FF version of the 7D would make a superb backup for someone with a 5D3, 7D, 1D4, or a 1Dx. It would also be an excellent all around entry level FF camera.

 

[Marsu42]

5D3 would still have superior IQ and ISO performance for those who want it.

That's just the point: It doesn't, at least not to the extent that people would buy the 5d3 over a 5d2 or entry level ff. Sure it has reduced banding, a nicer noise pattern and is better than the 5d2 when raising iso above 3200, but if people buy the 5d3 for this price at all than it's because it's in a package with higher fps and better af.

 

[tiger82]

I'm think opening up the FF market for non professional sports enthusiasts is a good idea. As long as you don't cannibalize too much of the market, it should work. I didn't want to go the 5D3 route because I didn't want to pay the premium for the capabilities I don't need. I went to the 5D2 and sent my 50D packing because I wanted to go FF at the expense of giving up my sports backup. A 7D with a FF sensor would appeal to me and Canon would still be able to offer a 5D3 as an upgrade path. An incremental improvement to FF for the 7D would be the best move. A new entry level FF with 5D3 class AF, sensor, and Digic 5+ doesn't make sense. Canon might as well build a camera between the 5D3 and 1Dx with 30+ mp and make the 5D3 the entry level FF

 

[mathino]

...Right now, I have a 5D2 and a 7D...

...funny is, that this is what Canon wants - us having 2 bodies (damn, they even share the same batteries...). Canon force you to buy 2 bodies. But if you want one body that can do everything - you should get 1D-X.

As a camera manufacturer I wont see one single reason to build "baby 1D-X" or "7Ds". I would rather upgrade 7D with new APS-C sensor + give it 10-12 fps then making 7D FF with 8 fps. With FF-7D-8 fps body they would shoot themselves in the knee (at least from 5D Mk III point of view).

I think that it is more probable that 7D successor would have 10-12 fps and 61 point AF then 7D FF with 8 fps.

 

[tiger82]

7D successor with 10-12 fps and 61 pt AF would eat into 1Dx sales even at a $4k price point.

 

[kdsand]

That's why I don't really anitcipate an announcement for this soon. I'm not saying never, but I just feel like it won't be all that soon. It'd be more likely that the 7D's replacement would come sooner than an entry level FF. The 5D Mark II, contrary to what people will tell you, when it was released in 2008, it was not considered entry level.

I concur. The 7D fills an important slot in canons line up.
Its a great tool for consumers & pros alike and has given the rebel line trickle down tech for several years but after the 60D & the t4i there is a real need for a new 7D(?). Heck don't fix what ain't broke just update the sucker. Improve & update the sensor, improve ISO and put in the new processors which should help with a lot of functions.

Some joker on another site was going on about the 7D being a fail for canon. I think its the opposite - it has given canon a lot of momentum but is starting to lag now. It needs a spruce up - please no bells or whistles though.

 

[unfocused]

I still see Canon's path as pretty obvious and easy.

6D & 70D = Same basic feature sets and construction, one full frame and one APS-C, improved autofocus (to 7D level), slower frame rate than higher end models. High ISO performance better but not as good as next level up.

7DII & 5DIII = Same basic feature sets and construction, one full frame and one APS-C. 7D gets an autofocus similar to 5DIII. Faster frame rate in 7D due to smaller file sizes. High ISO performance improved in 7D but still below full frame 5DIII.

5D HD = High resolution version of 5DIII with apprx. 46 megapixel sensor. Slower frame rate and much more limited at high ISOs. Basically the same camera as the 5D and same pricing, but with a high resolution sensor installed.

Nicely fills out the line, giving consumers and pros more choices and helps transition buyer to two bodies each. I'm guessing we will see the 6D first. The 70D, 7DII and 5D HD may not come until 2013.

 

[Marsu42]

I still see Canon's path as pretty obvious and easy.

I'm bookmarking this so I can quote you in 2013

Nicely fills out the line, giving consumers and pros more choices and helps transition buyer to two bodies each.

But why would Canon want to split the former two bodies (40d/5d) into *five* different ones (70d/7d2/6d/5d3/5dhd)? Sure this gives people more choices, but Canon is about making money and this variety also creates confusion and more support and manufacturing costs.

Imho if they expand the ff line they'll drop one of the crop cameras, i.e. no 7d2 but a bumped up 70d. And your "5d hd" might be very well an expensive "1d hd" at first because the people really wanting a $3000 36mp sensor have switched to Nikon by now.

 

[7enderbender]

1. It's sad to see that many people are ready to settle for the 5D Mark II sensor, which is around 4 years old...
2. It's a lot more sad to see that not so many people are sick of Canon using the same/similar sensors for all cameras and their 'mix & match' strategy.

I don't know about the numbering myths, such as even & odd numbers in high-end product names but, if the rumored 6D - or whatever - is real, I'm sure even Canon isn't stupid enough to release it with 5D Mark II's sensor, which is totally NOT fine!

If 5d Mark III is really worth $3500, then the D800 is definitely worth more that $3000. So it's pretty clear to me that with lower profit margin, Nikon is trying to win back some market share and in the light of this, I see no reason for the rumored D600 to cost more than $2000. Will/Can Canon position the rumored 6D at around $2000? I doubt that...

If Canon don't radically change their strategies pretty soon, I believe we won't see any products to excite the masses like the 5D Mark II did. It'll always be customers on both sides of the satisfaction line and that will only help Nikon gain market share - which I don't care a bit but Canon should.

I don't get it. So it makes you "sad" that people like me are quite content with their 5DII. But also makes you "sad" that some people want something different. So what is it now?

And here's the thing. The "old" sensor is still professional grade and delivers. Sure, we all want to see improvements at some point, but we are reaching a point where (thank heavens!) the digital market is maturing a bit. Consumers are more than happy. Prosumers should be happy. Pros use whatever is available anyway and make it work. Maybe we're coming back to a point where 4-year old camera isn't considered ancient. Which would increase perhaps the demand for better build quality instead of esoteric megapixel and technology terms and adding useless features.

Sure, I also get that the two big and few small camera manufacturers are in the camera selling business. Like they have been over the last several decades. Business models shift and they've done a pretty good job with survival (other not so much) and actually turning a profit with proactive marketing and development strategies.

Let's cut them some slack here. We should all be grateful that especially Canon is still keeping up a business model that makes money by selling to consumers and P&S moms & dads - while maintaining a full and extensive pro line that isn't really much of a moneymaker but really just there to carry the image of the brand = with a few lucky exception like the 5DII for example that sold to pros and consumers alike. Why not milk that a bit more by shifting that technology out to people who so far couldn't or wouldn't afford it? I know quite a few people who would be more than happy to have a 5DII sensor in their cameras. We all have out preferences and I could easily dream up my preferred DSLR - which other than me maybe 5 people in the world would be interested in (think FD manual lens F1n style body with a 5D-type sensor...).

In real life and in the hands of a good photographer I challenge you to tell if an image was shot with a 5DII, 5DIII, 1DsIII, 1DX or 800E.

Maybe you should go back and read my post again, and of course the previous posts.

1. I'm not sad that people are content with their 5D Mark II's. Read again!
2. How'd you come up with the part the people wanting something different makes me sad?

One couldn't get my post more wrong! I wonder how you managed that...

It's very funny that you suggest, we should be "grateful" to a corporate company, cut them some slack and stuff like that. Are you a baseball coach or something?

I'm paying a premium for a Canon or Nikon product and I should be grateful? WTF???

And oh yeah, I can very well tell if an image was shot with a 5DII, 1DsIII, or 800E. I don't expect you to do it, because you think 5DII's sensor is still professional grade and you are grateful for it!

Sorry if I misunderstood you. I was paraphrasing what I thought you had said under #1 and #2 in your original posting.

And no, I'm not a baseball coach Not sure what it would mean if I was but there you have it. I actually don't care for team sports that much.

And no, "corporation" to me is not an ugly word. Sadly, it is used these days way to often as in "corporations are no people"-talk (when in fact they are at least persons legally - hence the name). And yes, I am indeed grateful to live in a day and age with free trade, open markets and great ideas taking on quickly, giving millions of people work and producing fabulous products that would have been unthinkable not too long ago. And not just in mainstream mass markets but also in relatively small niche markets like high end camera gear.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

...Right now, I have a 5D2 and a 7D...

...funny is, that this is what Canon wants - us having 2 bodies (damn, they even share the same batteries...). Canon force you to buy 2 bodies. But if you want one body that can do everything - you should get 1D-X.

Depending on what your work is, 2 bodies is already built into the equation and it has nothing to do with what the body can do, its about what your lenses can do. If lets say you do wedding work and love the way your 70-200 and your 24-70 (or 16-35...or whatever prime lens combo you have) works, then even if you have the almighty 1dx...your still left with either, rushing to switch lenses or picking up a second body to over more focal lengths. If you do studio work then things are moving at a slower tempo and you can take the time to use one body and ponder your lens selection. But if you want a wide shot and a tight shot of the bride and groom having their first kiss...only way your getting that is with 2 bodies (or a second shooter, still that means 2 bodies)

 

[tiger82]

A 7D and 5D2 is still a lot less than a 1Dx plus a backup. And the IQ or the aperture of a 28-300 doesn't match up to a 24-70 plus a 70-200.

 

[e_honda]

What would sell? IMO, Take the 7D body and slap a FF sensor in it and either stay with the Dual Digic 4 or use the 5 or 5+ while keeping everything else the same. Call it the 7Ds (just like the 1Ds is the FF version of the 1D) and slap a $500 premium for the FF which will put it smack in the $1500-2000 vacant price point between the 7D and the 5D3 where the 5D2 is going extinct. I think people would buy a FF body capable of 6-8fps. Forget new vs old technology, what product is missing from their lines? A poor man's 1Dx.

I'd buy that in an instant and so would a ton of other people. And that would be the problem for Canon: the market for the 5D3 would shrink substantially.

 

[Axilrod]

Honestly Canon needs to get this thing out there very soon with the D600 and Sony A99 around the corner. Granted at $2800 the A99 is going to be more costly than both of them, but it's specs are ridiculous:


24.3 Mpx Full frame CMOS Exmor sensor
SLT technology
New Bionz imaging engine
14 bit RAW recording
10 fps
ISO 100 up to 25.600
50 ISO extended (with lower dynamic range)
102 AF point AF (11 cross).
AF range
MF assist
Dual Phase detection system (with AF phase pixels on sensor)
30 sec and 1/8000 maximum shutter speed
Time Lag 0.05 sec.
Shutter life guarantee of 200,000 cycles
2.360k OLED electronic viewfinder
3″921k LCD with same tilting system of the A77
Full HD video recording at 1920×1080/50p (US: 60p) AVCHD 2.0 format.
Clean HDMI output
Built-in stereo mic
Auto HDR capability
New multi-segment low pass filter
Photodiode expansion technology
Light concentration technology
Selective noise reduction
Ultrasonic anti dust system
In body image stabilization
Two memory slots: SD and SD+MS cards
USB: 2.0
Announced on September 12, 2012
Available in stores in late October 2012
New accessories to be released with the a99: battery grip, flash, remote control, microphone etc.
Very light, weather sealed magnesium alloy body.With 730 g this is the lightest FF body on market!
Price unconfirmed yet but should be at around 2800 Dollars.

I'm definitely interested in this thing, I think this is going to seriously eat into 5D3 sales.

 

[tiger82]

What about the glass?

 

[crasher8]

Canon glass keeps you with Canon

 

[unfocused]

I still see Canon's path as pretty obvious and easy.

I'm bookmarking this so I can quote you in 2013

Please do. I'm, offering a money-back guarantee if I'm wrong.

Nicely fills out the line, giving consumers and pros more choices and helps transition buyer to two bodies each.

But why would Canon want to split the former two bodies (40d/5d) into *five* different ones (70d/7d2/6d/5d3/5dhd)? Sure this gives people more choices, but Canon is about making money and this variety also creates confusion and more support and manufacturing costs.

Imho if they expand the ff line they'll drop one of the crop cameras, i.e. no 7d2 but a bumped up 70d. And your "5d hd" might be very well an expensive "1d hd" at first because the people really wanting a $3000 36mp sensor have switched to Nikon by now.

I'm sure every manufacturer would produce just one model of anything if they could be confident it would sell and if they had no competition. But, they do have competition and if Canon doesn't meet the market demand, others will.

It is clear from the Rebel line that using modern manufacturing techniques, it's possible to offer minor differentiation and still keep the line profitable.

Consumers like choices. Ever go shopping for a TV, a car or even laundry detergent? I don't know about others, but if I'm spending $1,000 or more on a product I'm going to make sure I've compared every available model and picked the one that I think will work for me. If one manufacturer doesn't offer any choice, I'll go to the one that does offer some choice.

If having three (maybe four) full frame options and five or so APS-C options is beyond someone's brainpower, they probably aren't shopping for a DSLR anyway.

We've been through this discussion before on numerous threads. Both the 60D and the 7D have been great sellers for Canon. A full frame equivalent of the 60/70D is more of a threat to the 5DIII than to the next generation of the 7D.

7D owners have a high level of satisfaction and are fiercely loyal to the camera. Having just developed that market, it's unlikely that Canon is going to abandon it now.

A 6D is never going to satisfy most 7D owners, who want the extra reach , build quality and professional features that the 7D offers. And, despite the fantasizing that is going on, both the 6D and the D600 are going to be positioned well below the D800 and the 5DIII.

I'm the least confident in the high-megapixel camera. Not sure what the market is for that. But, I assume Nikon did some market research and they seem to be selling, so I imagine Canon is not going to concede that customer base and if they can slide a high megapixel sensor into the existing 5DIII body without major modifications, it's a financial winner for them.

All fun to speculate about. Good news is that after this week we'll know what Nikon is offering and that will give us a very good idea what the 6D will be like.

 

[kaihp]

I'm sure every manufacturer would produce just one model of anything if they could be confident it would sell and if they had no competition. But, they do have competition and if Canon doesn't meet the market demand, others will.

It is clear from the Rebel line that using modern manufacturing techniques, it's possible to offer minor differentiation and still keep the line profitable.

Consumers like choices. Ever go shopping for a TV, a car or even laundry detergent? I don't know about others, but if I'm spending $1,000 or more on a product I'm going to make sure I've compared every available model and picked the one that I think will work for me. If one manufacturer doesn't offer any choice, I'll go to the one that does offer some choice.

You may think so, but there is a lot of people that don't think that way. Consumers don't necessarily want many choices and many features. They just want a product that works well for them, and is well thought out and well designed - Apple's strategy is the current prime example of this.

Hmm ... can't imagine that I just wrote that, considering how anti-Apple I generally am