Contradicting Information About Canon's Camera Plans in 2014

[Ellen Schmidtee]

Why would Canon feel compelled to rush into the high megapixel market when it's pretty much been a flop for Nikon and Sony?

In what sense is it a flop?

My understanding is the D800[E] is intended to serve a niche market of high end studio and landscape. Therefore I wouldn't measure it's success by comparing units sold to the 5Dmk3.

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

Next year is a Photokina year and it would be very surprising if Canon doesn't have anything to announce for the show.

By the look of things, the 5DIII/6D split of the 5D-series was somewhat rushed - without a unified vision/strategy behind it.
So, my expectation is that Canon will be working to address that.

The most likely candidate for Photokina announcement is the 5DIV, IMO.
Probably with more megapixels (~30?) and modern amenities like WiFi and dual-pixel AF.

I bought a 5Dmk2, and upgraded to 5Dmk3, but Canon would be hard pressed to sell me a 5DmkIV with ~30MP. I don't need that much, and it would have a price in computer resources needed to handle the images, and possibly at fps (or would require faster memory cards, read: money, to keep it the same).

And yes, I know about sRaw & mRaw, but DxO doesn't support those, and "ditch it for another software just so you could get a feature you don't want" shouldn't be in any salesperson's vocabulary.

I'd rather have video features, e.g. DPAF, over more pixels.



Other photographers might want higher MP, and if there's money in it, Canon should go for it. I'd just rather see it in a different cameras line, say new 1D-Studio.

 

[sanj]

Why would Canon feel compelled to rush into the high megapixel market when it's pretty much been a flop for Nikon and Sony?

In what sense is it a flop?

My understanding is the D800[E] is intended to serve a niche market of high end studio and landscape. Therefore I wouldn't measure it's success by comparing units sold to the 5Dmk3.

Agree. Why is it a flop?? Either for Nikon or Sony??

 

[scottkinfw]

Nitroman:

What specs would make you happy for an upgrade and how much do you think the camera would cost (not a flame, just curious, since I am not familiar with your current camera, and I am interested in a similar spec'd rig). Thanks.

Scott

I'm with privatebydesign

I have had the 1Ds Mark III since it was introduced five years ago and i've been desperately waiting for its replacement.

The 1Dx was not a replacement to the 1Ds3 - it was a full frame sports camera with 18mp. Why would i downgrade mp when i need more ?! Even the 22mp 5D III was not significantly enough of an upgrade to tempt me ...

I'd like a high megapixel full frame camera with higher DR and a sensor crop mode for tele-sports images. I can't see why Canon didn't introduce this as the technology has been there for some time now.

I do hope that Canon will introduce a high 40+ mp Eos 1 series body that will make replacing my old 1Ds3 worthwhile. I feel we've waited and waited and waited and waited for this upgrade and Canon has just kept us pros dangling and waiting .... Six years ago Canon were market leaders - that was why i switched from Nikon ... and i'm so tired of waiting !

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

I personally love the polar opposites here --

Upgrade the 1DX? I just don't see it. Though the price would drop on the original and could make a nice intermediary step between the 7D MKII and 1DX MKII

I can't imagine Canon waiting another year to release their big MP... They'll keep bleeding sales to the Nikon D800...

followed by:

Why would Canon feel compelled to rush into the high megapixel market when it's pretty much been a flop for Nikon and Sony?

Reality is between these 2 polarized opinions. The d800 market is a niche market, and the mk3 is more of a general purpose market. This whole line of debate has been debated over and over again. The d800 is not a flop for nikon/sony - but, the other side isn't ture either - re canon bleeding sales to the d800. this is especially true now with the A7R on the scene (same sensor pretty much as the d800, and with many who REALLY want the boost in mp's will be going that route because of the lens adaptor -I'm not a huge fan of the A7r, but with that adaptor anyone who wants in on bigger mp's can do it for a fraction of the cost of switching systems entirely or adding a nikon to the mix ($2400 for the body then add the adapter vs $3000 on a body then $500-10,000 on lenses)..

This is where I think nikon may have goofed a bit with their sony collaboration. Yeah, they got a kick ass sensor for the d800, but now they have the A7r to compete with --- my bet is this move by sony actually ends up hurting nikon more than canon - because:

big mp's is a niche market. it's not for everyone. Now I know it isn't the true test for sales, but looking at the amazon best sellers list -- the mk3 lands at 9th, and the d800 lands at 38th...

Nikon does have a loyal user base, but it's smaller than that of canon's. Nikons only way to really gain market share is to take loyalists from canon. what's the average canon users glass investment? i know many say its easy to switch, but that takes a lot of floating around money and time and effort to get the most for the resale, then there the repurchasing ---not enough have done that for nikon to gain market share. Now there's the A7r - which many canon loyalists can now buy and use their canon glass...a nice stop gap for those who may have sold the lot to go nikon...well, nice for canon because what are the real chances sony is here to stay with this concept? Is the A7r to be followed by a a7rII...or will it be abandoned like so many other sony products?

Maybe, just maybe, canon was rushing a big mp body...but then caught wind of what sony was doing and said, well, we can wait and put more time into making our big mp body better...because the the a7r I think hurts nikon more than it hurts canon...IMO

 

[unfocused]

I personally love the polar opposites here --

Upgrade the 1DX? I just don't see it. Though the price would drop on the original and could make a nice intermediary step between the 7D MKII and 1DX MKII

I can't imagine Canon waiting another year to release their big MP... They'll keep bleeding sales to the Nikon D800...

followed by:

Why would Canon feel compelled to rush into the high megapixel market when it's pretty much been a flop for Nikon and Sony?

Reality is between these 2 polarized opinions. The d800 market is a niche market, and the mk3 is more of a general purpose market.

You are right. I admit I made an overstatement just to stir things up a bit and try to get people to see a different perspective.

If Nikon's goal was to fill a niche, they may be hitting exactly what their purpose was. I guess I assumed that their purpose was to produce a competitor to the 5D line that would rival it in sales. If that's the case, then it has been, if not exactly a "flop," at least disappointing.

...big mp's is a niche market. it's not for everyone. Now I know it isn't the true test for sales, but looking at the amazon best sellers list -- the mk3 lands at 9th, and the d800 lands at 38th...

Exactly.

I've often said the the 5DIII was originally targeted to meet a specific market – wedding and event photographers. Which happens to be about the only viable commercial market remaining in photography. That doesn't mean it isn't a great all purpose camera, it just means that Canon identified a professional base and focused on that base.

It seems to have paid off. The first wave of purchasers seemed to draw largely from that base and their satisfaction with the camera could be seen in the glowing comments on this and other forums.

Now the street price has come down and the 5DIII is riding a wave of popularity from enthusiasts, perhaps driven in part by pent-up demand for the 7DII and by the release of the 6D. I think the 6D may actually help 5DIII sales because it has sparked interest in full frame and then once the serious consideration of the feature set begins, buyers rationalize the purchase of the higher end model – and yes, this part is autobiographical

On the other hand, I have never been able to identify a clear, sizable market for the D800. Yes, it may be great for landscape photographers, but how many professional landscape photographers do you know? The number is a tiny, tiny fraction when compared to wedding and event photographers.

It's actually not hard to understand the genesis of both the 5DIII and the D800. The major complaint about the 5DII was the autofocus system. This forum and others were filled with comments about how people didn't want more megapixels, they just wanted a better autofocus and clean high ISO. Canon delivered exactly what people said they wanted.

On the other hand, Nikon users complained about how Canon had so much better resolution. Yeah, they tried to pretend they really liked their low megapixel Nikons, but it was pretty clear they felt shortchanged. Nikon responded by giving them what they said they wanted. It just doesn't appear that the demand was as great at predicted.

Nikon does have a loyal user base, but it's smaller than that of canon's. Nikon's only way to really gain market share is to take loyalists from canon.

Or to grow the base. But that's the problem all DSLR manufacturers face. The customer base is aging out and isn't being replaced by younger customers. Part of that is generational preferences (iPhones etc.) but part of it is economic as well.

The poor economic conditions in the U.S. and Europe have hit younger people particularly hard. College graduates are underemployed or unemployed. Studies have been done that show that recessions have a life-long impact on the earning power of students who graduate during a recession. DSLRs are an expensive hobby that requires substantial discretionary income and many in the next generation simply don't have that income.

Canon and Nikon pinned a lot of their hopes on emerging markets in Asia, especially China. But recent monetary policies in China hurt that market as well.

So, for the time being, camera manufacturers really don't have any good prospects for growing their markets, other than repeat sales to existing customers or stealing customers from the competition, which as you point out, is no easy task.

So, I guess this all feeds into my original conclusion: I see no reason for Canon to rush into the high megapixel market when (perhaps this is a better way to say it) it hasn't been performing all that well for its competitors.

 

[mkabi]

Why would Canon feel compelled to rush into the high megapixel market when it's pretty much been a flop for Nikon and Sony?

In what sense is it a flop?

My understanding is the D800[E] is intended to serve a niche market of high end studio and landscape. Therefore I wouldn't measure it's success by comparing units sold to the 5Dmk3.

Agree. Why is it a flop?? Either for Nikon or Sony??

Cause its for a niche market.
Being a professional photographer is a niche market in itself, to be a niche within a niche... not really a successful business plan.

I'm sure the majority won't get it. So lets play with numbers here.... there are 7 billion people in this world. Obviously a camera company would ultimately like all 7 billion to buy one of their cameras. But not everyone can afford it, so lets assume that 1 billion can afford cameras, and 100 million can afford DSLRs. Of those 100 million, how many would be a professional photographer? May be 10,000 - 100,000?
If that niche market is 500 of 100,000... isn't it a flop?

A company like Nikon and/or Sony has a research and development department, marketing, packaging & distribution departments... you pay all these guys off... I don't know how much they invested into the project, but lets say they invested $2,000,000 to invent/create D800E, so you have to make that money back and anything after that money is made is profit.

 

[Ellen Schmidtee]

Why would Canon feel compelled to rush into the high megapixel market when it's pretty much been a flop for Nikon and Sony?

In what sense is it a flop?

My understanding is the D800[E] is intended to serve a niche market of high end studio and landscape. Therefore I wouldn't measure it's success by comparing units sold to the 5Dmk3.

Agree. Why is it a flop?? Either for Nikon or Sony??

Cause its for a niche market.
Being a professional photographer is a niche market in itself, to be a niche within a niche... not really a successful business plan.

Going straight to the end of your post, if Nikon made a profit on the D800 (and whatever lenses & other equipment it wouldn't have sold otherwise, e.g. by getting customers who would have otherwise bought an MF camera), then it's a success.

 

[dak723]

Have the cameras not increased in pixels over the years? An increase in resolution is inevitable. Why do we fear that?

Does higher resolution not translate into better IQ? Why the resistance??

Unless you go to a larger sensor, higher resolution means smaller pixels. Based on many things I have read, smaller pixels often means a decrease in image quality at the pixel level. The compensation is that you have more pixels to try and compensate for that. I am not a pro, so keep that in mind, but I was an original Canon Digital Rebel owner (6 MP). At least twice over the years I felt that the newer Canon Rebels with more MP must be better, so I purchased and returned the 14 MP model, and then a few years later I rented and wasn't particularly impressed with the 18 MP model. At the level of detail I got on my monitor (where I normally view my pics) or printing up to 8 x 10 prints, the 6 MP camera was just fine. I did not do any in depth analysis, but more megapixels didn't improve things enough (or at all) in terms of IQ for me to replace my 6 MP 300D. Only recently did my 300D finally begin to have problems, so I replaced it with the 6D. Because of the larger sensor, the pixel size is almost the same as it was with my 300D - and the image quality is considerably better. So, at least based on my amateur experience, jamming more pixels into the same size sensor doesn't so as much in terms of improving IQ as would would expect.

 

[eml58]

Why would Canon feel compelled to rush into the high megapixel market when it's pretty much been a flop for Nikon and Sony?

In what sense is it a flop?

My understanding is the D800[E] is intended to serve a niche market of high end studio and landscape. Therefore I wouldn't measure it's success by comparing units sold to the 5Dmk3.

Agree. Why is it a flop?? Either for Nikon or Sony??

Cause its for a niche market.
Being a professional photographer is a niche market in itself, to be a niche within a niche... not really a successful business plan.

Going straight to the end of your post, if Nikon made a profit on the D800 (and whatever lenses & other equipment it wouldn't have sold otherwise, e.g. by getting customers who would have otherwise bought an MF camera), then it's a success.

And that's the bottom line, success for any Company is about wether or not the Product has generated Profits.

I don't know as I'm not privy to Nikon'd detailed P&L, but I'de be very surprised to find that the D800 hasn't been a financial success for nikon. From what I can perceive on the interment (dangerous), Nikon intend to bring in a D4x sometime early 2014, that would at least cement the fact that Nikon find the 36MP Sensor a success for them.

I owned a D800, purchased primarily as an Underwater replacement for my 5DMK II, I kept it 12 months & sold it along with the lenses I'de purchased, for me it wasn't that big an advantage over the 5DMK III considering what I felt were some inherent disadvantages (Menu system, horrible 105 Macro), so I currently use the 5DMK III and it works well.

The Sony a7r is another 36MP Body that is worth looking at over the coming year or 2, I recently purchased one, again to see wether or not the 36MP Sensor in a smaller form body could replace my 5DMK III for underwater Imaging, like it, don't like the EVF, time will tell, but I think Sony have a potential winner here, the Market at the moment seems to reflect that, the a7r is selling well, it certainly can't be considered a "flop" at this point, the opposite could be the case, but again, time will tell.

The High MP Market is becoming more competitive, a year ago it was Nikon & the D800, now we have Sony and the a7r, I would be very surprised if Canon didn't get into this Market, my best guess would be a Body +/- 40MP in 2014, probably a Pro 1 Body.

This high MP Market shouldn't be confused with medium format and the likes of Phase One, that's a whole different ballgame.

 

[Robert Welch]

The 5D release cycle looks to be between 3-4 years, so the idea Canon will be releasing a 5DmkiV next year seems premature. Considering the 5DmkIII, along with the 6D, are selling quite well (according to Amazon's best selling DSLR list), it would seem more likely Canon will continue milking the profits from this camera for 1-2 more years at least.

The D800 and D610 would be Nikon's best selling full frame cameras, and while they don't seem be be selling as well as the Canon FF models, they are doing quite well themselves. So I would seem off base to call them a flop. I know a lot of D800 owners personally, many who shot with D3/D3s/D4 have it as an extra body for times when more resolution is desirable. I've also known many who have owned one and sold it, so retention after the original sale may be a problem with the camera. It is a unique camera, and either it meets your needs or it doesn't. If it meets your needs, then there is nothing else that will. The Df is an interesting model, though. It already seems to list high on the best seller list. It will be interesting to see if it stays there. It's got a fantastic sensor, and many unique features.

But Nikon's line up seems a bit fractured, I think they have missed the boat on making a singularly popular camera, like Canon has with the 5DmkIII and even with the 6D. What the demand for a higher MP camera from Canon is really would be a hard question to answer. Maybe Canon hasn't found the market would be strong enough to support such a camera from them. Or maybe they are still looking to get some updates to more of their lenses in place to support a super high MP camera. It has been reported that next year is the year of new lenses from Canon. That would make sense as there isn't much of a need for a new camera in the lineup other than a high end, high MP model. And to release such a camera before there were sufficient lenses to really take advantage of the added resolution would probably hurt sales ultimately. There is probably need for improved wide angle zoom lens, something to compete with Nikon's 14-24. If Canon does release a high MP camera, the current WA lenses are not likely up to par to do such a camera justice. The 24-70 & 70-200 mkII models are certainly good enough, but the 16-35 or any other wide is in desperate need of improvement to bring them up to the same level as those lenses. The line of newer prime IS lenses could be expanded to include a 50mm, and maybe a few more, like the 85/100/135, and maybe the 20mm too, to round out the lineup.

 

[Marsu42]

The 5D release cycle looks to be between 3-4 years, so the idea Canon will be releasing a 5DmkiV next year seems premature. Considering the 5DmkIII, along with the 6D, are selling quite well (according to Amazon's best selling DSLR list), it would seem more likely Canon will continue milking the profits from this camera for 1-2 more years at least.

The one reason I can think of for early 5d3/6d updates is that Canon wants to push their dual pixel af tech as a company trademark to all available camera segments, if paired with a fast digic6 it's the one superior piece of technology Canon has to offer vs. the usual suspects.

Nikon has stepped ahead with d600->d610, so maybe Canon feels legitimized for two minor upgrades adding this better lv af and then some (wifi, red dots in servo and faster sd for 5d3, a bit better af for 6d)?

 

[pedro]

Have the cameras not increased in pixels over the years? An increase in resolution is inevitable. Why do we fear that?

Does higher resolution not translate into better IQ? Why the resistance??

Unless you go to a larger sensor, higher resolution means smaller pixels. Based on many things I have read, smaller pixels often means a decrease in image quality at the pixel level. The compensation is that you have more pixels to try and compensate for that. I am not a pro, so keep that in mind, but I was an original Canon Digital Rebel owner (6 MP). At least twice over the years I felt that the newer Canon Rebels with more MP must be better, so I purchased and returned the 14 MP model, and then a few years later I rented and wasn't particularly impressed with the 18 MP model. At the level of detail I got on my monitor (where I normally view my pics) or printing up to 8 x 10 prints, the 6 MP camera was just fine. I did not do any in depth analysis, but more megapixels didn't improve things enough (or at all) in terms of IQ for me to replace my 6 MP 300D. Only recently did my 300D finally begin to have problems, so I replaced it with the 6D. Because of the larger sensor, the pixel size is almost the same as it was with my 300D - and the image quality is considerably better. So, at least based on my amateur experience, jamming more pixels into the same size sensor doesn't so as much in terms of improving IQ as would would expect.

Good point, dak723. I am with you concerning the MP count. I just hope Canon don't increase it neither on a new 5D nor on the 6D. All I need is a great allround cam as the 5D3 is for me. Coming from the 30D it is all I ever need as an amateur. If Canon manages to improve IQ in the higher ISOs as well (25k, 51k) and keep the MPs at about the same amount as today, I might be a happy 5DV buyer about 6 to 7 years from now.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

The 5D release cycle looks to be between 3-4 years, so the idea Canon will be releasing a 5DmkiV next year seems premature. Considering the 5DmkIII, along with the 6D, are selling quite well (according to Amazon's best selling DSLR list), it would seem more likely Canon will continue milking the profits from this camera for 1-2 more years at least.

The D800 and D610 would be Nikon's best selling full frame cameras, and while they don't seem be be selling as well as the Canon FF models, they are doing quite well themselves. So I would seem off base to call them a flop. I know a lot of D800 owners personally, many who shot with D3/D3s/D4 have it as an extra body for times when more resolution is desirable. I've also known many who have owned one and sold it, so retention after the original sale may be a problem with the camera. It is a unique camera, and either it meets your needs or it doesn't. If it meets your needs, then there is nothing else that will. The Df is an interesting model, though. It already seems to list high on the best seller list. It will be interesting to see if it stays there. It's got a fantastic sensor, and many unique features.

But Nikon's line up seems a bit fractured, I think they have missed the boat on making a singularly popular camera, like Canon has with the 5DmkIII and even with the 6D. What the demand for a higher MP camera from Canon is really would be a hard question to answer. Maybe Canon hasn't found the market would be strong enough to support such a camera from them. Or maybe they are still looking to get some updates to more of their lenses in place to support a super high MP camera. It has been reported that next year is the year of new lenses from Canon. That would make sense as there isn't much of a need for a new camera in the lineup other than a high end, high MP model. And to release such a camera before there were sufficient lenses to really take advantage of the added resolution would probably hurt sales ultimately. There is probably need for improved wide angle zoom lens, something to compete with Nikon's 14-24. If Canon does release a high MP camera, the current WA lenses are not likely up to par to do such a camera justice. The 24-70 & 70-200 mkII models are certainly good enough, but the 16-35 or any other wide is in desperate need of improvement to bring them up to the same level as those lenses. The line of newer prime IS lenses could be expanded to include a 50mm, and maybe a few more, like the 85/100/135, and maybe the 20mm too, to round out the lineup.

I do remember seeing a CR post a while back about the issues with the big canon MP -- if the rumor/article is true, they were saying it was delayed due to battery issues (the increased processor needs led to heavy battery drain). I had read that here, not sure how far back that rumor/article was though - and it's not like it was a report from canon r&d or anything...so it may be true, may not be true. Either way, if it is true, I'd rather wait and have them get it right when they do release it rather than rush it out with battery issues