Canon exec confirms that the EOS-1D X Mark III is Canon’s last DSLR
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Well, you can accept the word of the Canon CEO that DSLRs will continue to be developed by his company…or you can choose not to accept it.Clairvoyant people can see the future sometimes long before other's can! Times change, technology changes. This was inevitable and is for the better. Let's just accept it, embrace it and not fight.
Our planet will die, when the Sun becomes a red giant. See, I’m clairvoyant like you.
Upvote
0
You never fail to impress.
But fighting for DSLR's is a losing battle. You will learn, be patient. Canon will soon provide mirrorless replacements for these DSLR's you talk about and the DSLR's will phase out faster than you think. Time will show.
All this way before the planet dies.
Upvote
0
I’m not ‘fighting for DSLRs’. Are you fighting for mirrorless?
I’m just trying to live in a world where facts outweigh opinions. Did you miss the EOS M line? It’s been nearly a decade since Canon came out with mirrorless replacements for their entry-level DSLRs, and they were the last major manufacturer to do so (well, arguably Nikon never really did until recently), but still >40% of ILCs produced this year were DSLRs.
How about this: every year, you can predict that Canon will abandon DSLRs. Eventually, you’ll be right.
Given that overall ILC sales have been dropping for the past several years, MILCs may not be around much longer than DSLRs.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Honestly, the longer this conversation goes on, the more pointless it becomes. Does anybody really care?
Or, more accurately, why should we care? Individually we cannot influence the market no matter how many posts we write expressing our opinion. Collectively, we might have some limited ability to influence the enthusiast market, since that's mainly who follows and participates in this forum, but the influence flows from the dollars we spend, not the posts we write.
This year, I voted with my wallet. I moved over completely to the R system and my wife migrated to the R as well. Aside from a couple of specialty lenses (100 Macro and Fisheye zoom), I've sold all my EF lenses and purchased basic kits of RF lenses for me and for my wife. It cost me a fortune, but I don't regret it for a minute. I loved DSLRs and will miss a few of their characteristics, but it wasn't enough to keep me from migrating to the R system.
I'm mildly interested in watching what Canon does with the Rebel and M systems, but it won't affect me personally. As I said before, I think citing data points as they exist today (for example, the number of Rebels being sold now) isn't particularly illuminating and proves nothing except they they are currently selling quite a few cheap Rebels. Will that be the case a year from now? I don't know or care. Five years from now? I'd bet not, but we will see.
Or, more accurately, why should we care? Individually we cannot influence the market no matter how many posts we write expressing our opinion. Collectively, we might have some limited ability to influence the enthusiast market, since that's mainly who follows and participates in this forum, but the influence flows from the dollars we spend, not the posts we write.
This year, I voted with my wallet. I moved over completely to the R system and my wife migrated to the R as well. Aside from a couple of specialty lenses (100 Macro and Fisheye zoom), I've sold all my EF lenses and purchased basic kits of RF lenses for me and for my wife. It cost me a fortune, but I don't regret it for a minute. I loved DSLRs and will miss a few of their characteristics, but it wasn't enough to keep me from migrating to the R system.
I'm mildly interested in watching what Canon does with the Rebel and M systems, but it won't affect me personally. As I said before, I think citing data points as they exist today (for example, the number of Rebels being sold now) isn't particularly illuminating and proves nothing except they they are currently selling quite a few cheap Rebels. Will that be the case a year from now? I don't know or care. Five years from now? I'd bet not, but we will see.
Upvote
0
In most companies, sales drive decisions.
I don't have the numbers, but I bet the R3, R5, and R6 are currently selling well and the 1DX3 and 5D4 are not. That would explain the decision.
Aside from the M line, there are no MILC equivalents right now to APSC cameras like the T8i, 90D, and 7D2. When the mirrorless equivalents come out (10R? 7R?) you'll probably see a drop in sales of the aforementioned mirrorslappers, and this in turn will drive business decisions in a few years' time.
This is all pure speculation. But, hey, this is a rumours site.
I don't have the numbers, but I bet the R3, R5, and R6 are currently selling well and the 1DX3 and 5D4 are not. That would explain the decision.
Aside from the M line, there are no MILC equivalents right now to APSC cameras like the T8i, 90D, and 7D2. When the mirrorless equivalents come out (10R? 7R?) you'll probably see a drop in sales of the aforementioned mirrorslappers, and this in turn will drive business decisions in a few years' time.
This is all pure speculation. But, hey, this is a rumours site.
Upvote
0
well one thing positive for me as a DSLR lover who enjoys the OVF much more than EVF, the phasing out of DSLRs either mean the 1DX III which is a huge upgrade to my 10 years old 5D3 will get really cheap to buy brand new and work it's way before my retirement. and it's less tempting to upgrade, yes the R5 and adapter works well and I doubt it would really cause noticeable decentering effects, but then with banned travel due to COVID and that the R5 basically provide me no new opportunities to get something done which I previously can't do I likely just spend the money elsewhere. From 40D to 5D3 my usable high ISO goes from 1000 to 6400 with similar pixel peeping quality, which makes handheld nighttime snapshots doable, and faster shutter astronomy photos works, but then although DR improved a lot, it don't really get that sort of day and night difference. and the AF just works fine for me even for sports photos, plus I don't ever record serious video these all makes me reluctant to spend big money
Upvote
0
Well, the DSLR's have three main levels, the XXX, the XX and the X series, right now the R has only X series and no XX or XXX in the lineup, therefore I would guess that canon is working hard on RXX and RXXX cameras that will allow replacement of the entire DSLR's line. The R and RP may be the RXX but canon needs RXXX as well. The question is, the technology is already there, how can they "reduce" the features to make "less expensive" bodies.
Upvote
0
Yes, Canon needs to produce cheap cameras as well as exotica.
They can reduce the features by:
- eliminating the EVF
- using a low-resolution fixed LCD panel
- no top plate LCD
- lower build quality
- plastic camera/lens mount
- cheap F4-5.6 kit lenses
- re-using the RP sensor
Upvote
0
The end of plate cameras was a tragedy?
The end of rangefinders was a tragedy?
The end of twin-lens reflexes was a tragedy?
The end of film SLRs was a tragedy?
... and now the end of DSLRs is a tragedy?
Would you like to still be travelling by horse and cart, living without electricity too?
I love DSLRs, and I still use my 5DMkiv as well as my R5.
RF series and other MILCs are still far from perfect, and DSLRs are still fun to use and produce great shots.
But living in the past is a mistake.
You'll end up getting a MILC even if you don't already have one, and when you do you'll appreciate that they can make photography easier and can make some fields of photography possible that were near-impossible previously.
Upvote
0
Yes it does!
Ultimately I think we'll see M migrating to RF mount. It will make the bodies a little bigger but not by enough to make any significant difference.
It's in Canon's interest to migrate to RF which allows faster data transfer between lens and body, and in combination with AI tech will enable faster and more advanced subject recognition, better tracking etc. This would be a killer selling point to novices who want a simple, cheap, light camera that does the thinking for them.
Upvote
0
YES. Yes, sir, I am fighting for mirrorless, I can smell the roses.
Upvote
0
Yes it would, but I think Canon's solution (hinted at in my post above) would be to have a smaller maximum aperture.
They've done that a lot recently (RF100-400mm, RF 600mm F11, RF 800mm F11).
Keeps the price down too, so another big selling point for future budget/novice RF models.
With MILCs there's no need for anyone to worry about the dim viewfinders that would result with small apertures on DSLRs.
Little need to worry about noise or slow shutter speeds either, with modern sensors and IBIS.
(I think IBIS will find its way into budget RF models, as competitors will likely have it)
Could be completely wrong of course, but that's how I see things developing.
Upvote
0
I don’t get that. Why does anyone care if DSLRs continue to be developed or not? If you prefer mirrorless, buy mirrorless. Do you think everyone should make the same choices you do? For those that prefer DSLRs (and the data clearly show many do), why do you want their choices to be taken away? Makes no sense to me, seems quite selfish, IMO.
Upvote
0
