Canon's Next Full Frame Camera [CR2]

[johnroberts]

Having worked on various products I'd say metal, plastic, natural materials etc all have their place. My film EOS-3 has a "plastic" exterior with weather seals. I have never found it wanting even against the EOS-1V.

I'd be disapointed if it was built like an older style rebel but the newer ones like the 550 and up feel pretty good (minus any toxic grip issues like the 650D).

the one thing is weather sealing.. the other a magnesium alloy.

sure weather sealing would be nice.. but you can have that without a metal body.

I agree that it is possible for a non-metal body to be weather sealed. All the underwater housings for DSLRs prove that as they are all made of plastic. But I have never seen a plastic DSLR body that was weather sealed. So based upon past trends in construction, a plastic body would indicate no weather sealing.

 

[DanielW]

So... if its gonna be the same sensor, same processor, same image quality as MKIII and a decent AF (comparing to MKII) I seriously do not understand what people complain about here. This is an entry level FF body, priced (lets assume the specs and price are correct) $1.5K less than MKIII, so something is gotta go in terms of body features. Plastic body - so what - this is not a toy like plastic (I had a Rebel and it did not feel like a toy to me). For $1.5K less you get the same sensor as in MKIII, plus a (the way it sounds) decent AF. What else do you expect from an entry level model? You want MKII for the metal body - go for it, buy it now while they have it new or wait a bit and get a cheap used once this new FF is announced. Do you seriously expect a lot more from an entry level FF considering that even with these specs it will hurt MKIII sales. Read the forums and see how many people are sitting on the fence for a less expensive FF, who do not want MKII with its crippled AF and who do not think they can justify $3500- $3700 for MKIII. Some of these folks are still potential MKIII buyers - maybe not now, but in a year or so.

Lots of comparison with MKII. Why do you judge these new FF specs based on an assumption that this is supposed to be an upgrade from MKII? MKII was never positioned as an entry level FF. If you think the new sensor and AF are not worth the upgrade and you prefer to have MKII with metal body - go for it. But coming from 7D I do not want to compromise on AF. Not to that extent.

If Canon can give us MKIII less metal body, some fps, dual card slots, weathersealing and $1.5K off the price - I'm in.

It looks like we're sitting on the same fence

 

[Canon-F1]

So... if its gonna be the same sensor, same processor, same image quality as MKIII and a decent AF (comparing to MKII) I seriously do not understand what people complain about here. This is an entry level FF body, priced (lets assume the specs and price are correct) $1.5K less than MKIII, so something is gotta go in terms of body features. Plastic body - so what - this is not a toy like plastic (I had a Rebel and it did not feel like a toy to me). For $1.5K less you get the same sensor as in MKIII, plus a (the way it sounds) decent AF. What else do you expect from an entry level model? You want MKII for the metal body - go for it, buy it now while they have it new or wait a bit and get a cheap used once this new FF is announced. Do you seriously expect a lot more from an entry level FF considering that even with these specs it will hurt MKIII sales. Read the forums and see how many people are sitting on the fence for a less expensive FF, who do not want MKII with its crippled AF and who do not think they can justify $3500- $3700 for MKIII. Some of these folks are still potential MKIII buyers - maybe not now, but in a year or so.

Lots of comparison with MKII. Why do you judge these new FF specs based on an assumption that this is supposed to be an upgrade from MKII? MKII was never positioned as an entry level FF. If you think the new sensor and AF are not worth the upgrade and you prefer to have MKII with metal body - go for it. But coming from 7D I do not want to compromise on AF. Not to that extent.

If Canon can give us MKIII less metal body, some fps, dual card slots, weathersealing and $1.5K off the price - I'm in.

the choice is a bit more complicated then 5D MK2 or MK3.... there is the D600 too.

for upgrader it´s maybe no real choice.. but let´s not forget the new DSLR customers.
and my fear is canon will lose many of them to nikon.

 

[Bosman]

Do people realize many of the L lenses incorporate plastic or are mostly plastic, yet are weather sealed???

 

[ishdakuteb]

So... if its gonna be the same sensor, same processor, same image quality as MKIII and a decent AF (comparing to MKII) I seriously do not understand what people complain about here. This is an entry level FF body, priced (lets assume the specs and price are correct) $1.5K less than MKIII, so something is gotta go in terms of body features. Plastic body - so what - this is not a toy like plastic (I had a Rebel and it did not feel like a toy to me). For $1.5K less you get the same sensor as in MKIII, plus a (the way it sounds) decent AF. What else do you expect from an entry level model? You want MKII for the metal body - go for it, buy it now while they have it new or wait a bit and get a cheap used once this new FF is announced. Do you seriously expect a lot more from an entry level FF considering that even with these specs it will hurt MKIII sales. Read the forums and see how many people are sitting on the fence for a less expensive FF, who do not want MKII with its crippled AF and who do not think they can justify $3500- $3700 for MKIII. Some of these folks are still potential MKIII buyers - maybe not now, but in a year or so.

Lots of comparison with MKII. Why do you judge these new FF specs based on an assumption that this is supposed to be an upgrade from MKII? MKII was never positioned as an entry level FF. If you think the new sensor and AF are not worth the upgrade and you prefer to have MKII with metal body - go for it. But coming from 7D I do not want to compromise on AF. Not to that extent.

If Canon can give us MKIII less metal body, some fps, dual card slots, weathersealing and $1.5K off the price - I'm in.

the choice is a bit more complicated then 5D MK2 or MK3.... there is the D600 too.

for upgrader it´s maybe no real choice.. but let´s not forget the new DSLR customers.
and my fear is canon will lose many of them to nikon.

Here is my choice as if you have asked me that question. If Canon low down the price of Mark II to $1500, I would take it over the new entry level stuff. However, that is my idea (I have Mark II, 7D and 30D already, no need another one.)

My 2 Cents

 

[thepancakeman]

I'm not saying that it will break if it's plastic, but rather wouldn't you expect a $2000 camera body to have better build quality; especially if it is going to cater to upper end enthusiasts and possibly professionals? I think it's pretty risky to be taking a plastic camera to shoots where you might encounter rain, high humidity, and extreme temperature changes (such as shooting outdoors in the cold and then going inside into a warm climate controlled environment where condensation will rapidly build on the camera). A plastic body will probably not have the same weather sealing as a metal body. When I first started shooting DSLR, I had my Rebel XT glitch out when condensation built on the body. But I vacuum sealed it with a few desiccant packs for a couple days and that luckily saved it.

Pretty sure we've been down this road before, but I'm too lazy to dig through old threads to find it...
My car has a bunch of plastic in it, and I'm pretty sure it does okay in rain, high humidity and extreme temperature changes. Matter of fact, the space shuttles used plastic in all kinds of different applications (http://www.glenair.com/html/plastics.htm), so long story short, no plastic doesn't bother me in the least.

 

[ablearcher]

[the choice is a bit more complicated then 5D MK2 or MK3.... there is the D600 too.

for upgrader it´s maybe no real choice.. but let´s not forget the new DSLR customers.
and my fear is canon will lose many of them to nikon.

Somehow I doubt that a lot of new DSLR buyers are jumping straight into FF market. Its mostly Rebels, 60D or 7D tops. This entry level FF will be perfect as a second body for many serious amateurs (with Rebels/7D) and likely for many pros with their MKII and even MKIII who do not want/can not afford spending another $3.5K on a body.

 

[Rocky]

I do not mind that is a plastic ( as long as it is good plastic and no funky coating. I would rather have the textured plastic)) body. However, It should include the micro-adjustment for AF ans some weather seal. I will trade these for a magnesium body ant time

 

[takoman46]

the choice is a bit more complicated then 5D MK2 or MK3.... there is the D600 too.

for upgrader it´s maybe no real choice.. but let´s not forget the new DSLR customers.
and my fear is canon will lose many of them to nikon.

As for new DSLR buyers, I'm not sure that an entry level FF body would be a common choice. Everyone I know who buys their first DSLR simply decides by asking their friends and family who are experienced or even sometimes inexperienced DSLR shooters what they use and why they use it. So I doubt the market will really change between Canon and Nikon. When a beginner comes up to me and asks me what brand I recommend and why, I tell them this: Both Canon and Nikon have great cameras and you will probably be happy with either. But I recommend Canon because the user interface is more intuitive to a beginner than a Nikon. This has always resulted in the new buyer deciding upon a Canon because they are usually worried about the learning curve and by no means ready to dive into advanced operations of a DSLR. All the FF cameras offered will have advanced control layouts that facilitate shooting efficiency and that's something that I think new buyers are not ready for and don't really care to learn until they gain a better understanding of camera operation. In which case, that what upgrading is there for! muahahaha.

 

[takoman46]

I'm not saying that it will break if it's plastic, but rather wouldn't you expect a $2000 camera body to have better build quality; especially if it is going to cater to upper end enthusiasts and possibly professionals? I think it's pretty risky to be taking a plastic camera to shoots where you might encounter rain, high humidity, and extreme temperature changes (such as shooting outdoors in the cold and then going inside into a warm climate controlled environment where condensation will rapidly build on the camera). A plastic body will probably not have the same weather sealing as a metal body. When I first started shooting DSLR, I had my Rebel XT glitch out when condensation built on the body. But I vacuum sealed it with a few desiccant packs for a couple days and that luckily saved it.

Pretty sure we've been down this road before, but I'm too lazy to dig through old threads to find it...
My car has a bunch of plastic in it, and I'm pretty sure it does okay in rain, high humidity and extreme temperature changes. Matter of fact, the space shuttles used plastic in all kinds of different applications (http://www.glenair.com/html/plastics.htm), so long story short, no plastic doesn't bother me in the least.

I think you missed a bunch of previous posts including the ones about the weather sealing of plastic "camera" bodies, but point taken anyway lmao

 

[Canon-F1]

As for new DSLR buyers, I'm not sure that an entry level FF body would be a common choice.

i may have a different surrounding.

where i live most fathers or mothers would not buy a rebel camera.
as they would not buy anything below a middle class car, not even for their 18 year old sons and daughters.

it would look bad... especially in hard economic times.
i know it´s strange but that´s how it is.
but you are right that´s not the norm.

 

[Rocky]

the choice is a bit more complicated then 5D MK2 or MK3.... there is the D600 too.

for upgrader it´s maybe no real choice.. but let´s not forget the new DSLR customers.
and my fear is canon will lose many of them to nikon.

As for new DSLR buyers, I'm not sure that an entry level FF body would be a common choice. Everyone I know who buys their first DSLR simply decides by asking their friends and family who are experienced or even sometimes inexperienced DSLR shooters what they use and why they use it. So I doubt the market will really change between Canon and Nikon. When a beginner comes up to me and asks me what brand I recommend and why, I tell them this: Both Canon and Nikon have great cameras and you will probably be happy with either. But I recommend Canon because the user interface is more intuitive to a beginner than a Nikon. This has always resulted in the new buyer deciding upon a Canon because they are usually worried about the learning curve and by no means ready to dive into advanced operations of a DSLR. All the FF cameras offered will have advanced control layouts that facilitate shooting efficiency and that's something that I think new buyers are not ready for and don't really care to learn until they gain a better understanding of camera operation. In which case, that what upgrading is there for! muahahaha.

The control on 5D, 7D, even 60D is easier to use than any Rebel, due to the second control wheel. Rebel is aiming at price point, not convenience. As for whether to choose APS-C or FF, the price play a important role. Therefore a sub $2000 FF will draw more people that are upgrading from P & S. Also there are two types of P & S up-graders: 1. without any film photography background. 2 with film photographic background. The later one will have more tendency to go for the FF if the price is right.

 

[ishdakuteb]

As for new DSLR buyers, I'm not sure that an entry level FF body would be a common choice.

i may have a different surrounding.

where i live most fathers or mothers would not buy a rebel camera.
as they would not buy anything below a middle class car, not even for their 18 year old sons and daughters.

it would look bad... especially in hard economic times.
i know it´s strange but that´s how it is.
but you are right that´s not the norm.

wonder as if canon add an extra mode of "auto" into this entry level full frame camera?

 

[Rocky]

I think it has been shown that the hard plastics used to make DSLRs out of are anything but toy-like.

Given that all of the magnesium alloy body DSLRs that I have are showing metal in various spots on the body due to the paint rubbing off, I'm not exactly sure that black plastic will be bad (the black won't rub off.)

The black coating on Rebel does got rubbed off. That is why Canon should take a lesson from other manufactures that do not use coating. Instead, they add texture to the plastic surface.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Depends on how you view things... I shoot professionally, and while the D800 DR is great at low ISO, at ISO 800 and beyond is canon's territory and frankly, daytime shots, the only time I'd be able to really take advantage of low iso DR, most of it would be washed away when I increase contrast as D800 shots tend to be muddy... I'm not taking anything away from what Nikon has produced, it's a very good and very impressive camera, but in no way is the 5d3 inferior or a bad sensor... I'm sure there are those product and or landscape photogs chomping at the bit for a much improved sensor, but in the end, either camera will satisfy 95% of all photogs... If you feel canon failed, that's your opinion... But it is, as a camera, an awesome tool.

The 5D3 doesn't really start doing better until more like ISO6400 not ISO800.

D800 shots are muddy???

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I'm not saying that it will break if it's plastic, but rather wouldn't you expect a $2000 camera body to have better build quality; especially if it is going to cater to upper end enthusiasts and possibly professionals? I think it's pretty risky to be taking a plastic camera to shoots where you might encounter rain, high humidity, and extreme temperature changes (such as shooting outdoors in the cold and then going inside into a warm climate controlled environment where condensation will rapidly build on the camera). A plastic body will probably not have the same weather sealing as a metal body. When I first started shooting DSLR, I had my Rebel XT glitch out when condensation built on the body. But I vacuum sealed it with a few desiccant packs for a couple days and that luckily saved it.

Wouldn't a metal body tend to expand and contract more than a plastic one?

I'm not sure weather sealing has much to do with what they use either. That said, I wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised if they put in less sealing than on the 5D3.

A good plastic can hold up pretty well.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Do people realize many of the L lenses incorporate plastic or are mostly plastic, yet are weather sealed???

Nonsense! All L lenses have solid metal construction! What do you think the L stands for?
LEAD

;D

 

[EchoLocation]

I'm a 5DC owner along with a 24-105 and a 50 1.4. I have been wanting better AF and AFMA for a long time now and never wanted the 5DII because of the AF.
I would love a 5DIII, but I believe it is a 2800 dollar camera that after a year of being on the market should be 2500 dollars. I would have preordered for 2800. The new 24-70 lens is very very expensive and this was my main choice for a single travel lens.
After seeing the comparisons between the 5DIII and the D800 I think that the D800 is much more of an improvement in sensor performance over the D700 than the 5DIII is over the 5DII.
From the rumored specs, I think most people agree that the D600 looks better on paper than this new Canon FF camera, especially after the improvements shown in the D800(mentioned above.)
I love Canon, and have been a loyal customer for years, but I am not heavily invested in the system. I don't like the direction of their pricing(one of the reasons I bought them in the first place was the relatively cheaper pricing than the Nikon version(Canon 24-70 I is cheaper than Nikon 5DII was cheaper than D700.) That is not the case anymore.
If Canon makes a FF mirrorless, I will be thrilled and buy it if it is around $3k with a lens.
However, at this moment, comparing a D600 for 1500 and a Canon FF, I will choose the D600. I wish this was not the case, but in my opinion(and based on rumored specs, and sensor performance of their current cameras), the Canon offering is a little low on features, low on sensor performance, and higher in price. I will gladly purchase a D600 and 24-70 for around 3300 dollars than the Canon versions for over 4300 dollars.
My .02 cents.

 

[rcha101]

How does this make sense? Why would I want a $2000 plastic 5DII equivalent when I can have the real thing for the same money? And I don't believe there is any noticeable difference between the 5DII and 5DIII sensor. So what gives?

Totally agree, Bought myself a 5DII this year for exactly that reason.

 

[mclaren777]

If this entry-level FF camera has the same noise sensitivity as the 5D3, a "silent" shooting mode, and options for setting minimum ISO/shutter speed, I'll surely be getting one.