High Megapixel EOS on the Way as Mentioned by Canon

[RLPhoto]

I thought this was the year of the Lens.

 

[jrista]

Perhaps we're talking at cross purposes? The statement that, "...easily 4-5% never buy another lens," is what I doubt. The converse is that 95-96% do by additional lenses...that seems rather unlikely.

Yeah, I agree, hard to imagine that 95-96% of people buy additional NEW lenses. I think that as many as 30% of Canon DSLR owners probably buy at least one other lens, many of which would be used. I find it plausible that only 4-5% of Canon DSLR owners buy many new lenses from Canon, as that could easily account for the 30M lens differential between 70M DSLRs sold and 100M lenses sold.

 

[Don Haines]

100M lenses sold.... 70M cameras sold.

If it were only 4-5 percent that didn't but a second lens, (95-96 percent did), then with 70 million cameras sold the number of lenses sold would be 137.2 million lenses, and that's with the very doubtful scenario that NOBODY bought 3 or more lenses.

On the other hand, I remember reading somewhere that about 30 percent of kits sold had two lenses. If that's true then 70M cameras sold means 91M lenses. If 5 percent of those people buy just 1 extra lens, that's another 3.5 million lenses... or 94.5 million lenses. if those 5 percent of Canon users average 2.6 lenses each, then that gives us the 100M lenses sold number.

I think that the interpretation of the interview is that 4 to 5 percent of canon buyers buy additional lenses and that the other 95 percent just stick with whatever was in the kit that they bought. The math supports this view.

 

[jrista]

...
Unless those 4-5% are each buying multiple lenses. I mean, personally, I have purchased five different lenses than the 18-55mm lens that came with my original 450D kit. I know I'm not even remotely close to a "lens collector", as many people are.

Another thing I'd bet is, Canon only accounts for new lenses other than the kit bought. I am quite certain that more than 5% of DSLR buyers also buy other lenses, but I think there is a very significant market for used lenses. I'd be willing to bet that at least 30% of Canon DSLR owners buy another lens, and the majority of them buy one used.

I'm willing to bet that you underestimate how many kits get sold.

Go somewhere like Paris in summer, near the Eiffel Tower and do a visual survey. Most cameras (by a huge margin) will have a kit lens on them.

I'm also willing to bet that Canon are able to look at returned warranty cards and correlate that data.

I'm not sure what your reading, but that's in line with what I am saying. I'm saying that 70% or more of people never use anything but the kit lens. I'm saying that 30% of people probably have at least one other lens, and that the 4-5% (which, out of 70 million DSLRs sold in, what, the last decade, is still 3.5 MILLION PEOPLE) are buying most of the additional new lenses from Canon.

If 70% of Canon DSLR owners don't buy another lens, that means nearly 50 million people are running around with kit lenses. So of course the primary lens your going to see attached to Canon DSLRs is kit lenses.

 

[crashpc]

Well, That decades old 18Mpx sensor made it to the lowest model available. There must be something better, and I expect nothing lower than 22+Mpx full color sensor with advanced capabilities of dual pixel technology. The question is do I expect it blindly and will we get it before christmas?

 

[WoodyWindy]

We were told previously that there would be 3 EOS cameras in 2014, and so far we have seen just one, the white Rebel SL1 (if this counts as a new camera).

I won't count the white SL1 as a new EOS camera.

Are we not counting the 1200D as an EOS camera? ???

...
I count it, but maybe they just consider it a repackaging of the 550D/T2i...

 

[unfocused]

I think that the interpretation of the interview is that 4 to 5 percent of canon buyers buy additional lenses and that the other 95 percent just stick with whatever was in the kit that they bought. The math supports this view.

That's my interpretation as well. Honestly, I would have expected it to be higher, but then it just shows how abnormal (in so, so many ways) forum readers are.

Of course it fits in nicely with my personal theory – which is that one of Canon's strategies for the mature DSLR market is to pivot from selling one DSLR each to lots of people to instead start selling lots of cameras and lenses to fewer people.

Makes sense. With the world's largest installed base of DSLR owners, and in a saturated market where the cost of capturing new customers is growing, they are likely to be focused more and more on up-selling existing customers.

If I'm reading the interview correctly, they believe an inexpensive ultra-wide lens for APS-C buyers is one way to reignite/revive interest among Rebel owners and get them using their cameras in new ways. Pretty clever really.

That's one reason I've been saying the 7DII is likely to be 24 mp or more. Canon doesn't want an APS-C body to compete with the 6D or 5DIII, they want a body that complements their full frame offerings, so we all feel the need to own two bodies – if you want reach and high resolution, you need an APS-C body and if you want low-light performance and low noise you need a full-frame body.

With the right mix, they have the potential to significantly increase their sales of DSLR bodies even if the customer base remains stagnant.

 

[unfocused]

no news here: "we look forward to the advent of high-resolution model of the EOS". We are all looking forward to that. This poor guy works for Canon and he is looking forward to the same thing we are.

Pretty much my thoughts.

This guy is a lens designer. Naturally, he wants to and tries to design lenses with the maximum resolution possible. A lens designed today needs to stay current for 10-15 years or more. Must be a real challenge.

I got the feeling from the interview (and I readily admit I found it very difficult to comprehend the machine translation) that this wasn't a prediction, but rather just an indication that the lens designers are trying to keep pace with sensor improvements.

I don't know how long it takes to design a new lens, but I would expect that they start working on new and improved designs years in advance of new sensor developments.

 

[Don Haines]

no news here: "we look forward to the advent of high-resolution model of the EOS". We are all looking forward to that. This poor guy works for Canon and he is looking forward to the same thing we are.

Pretty much my thoughts.

What?!!!

That there is heresy! How dare you blaspheme and validate Nikon's 36MP D800/D810 or Sony's cameras?

You should be saying that a high MP will be hard to work with, your computer is not fast enough, storage cards too small, pixels will be smaller and noisier, etc.

Exactly!
Everyone knows that a high megapixel Nikon is the devil's spawn, while a high megapixel Canon will be a godsend.....

 

[Orangutan]

no news here: "we look forward to the advent of high-resolution model of the EOS". We are all looking forward to that. This poor guy works for Canon and he is looking forward to the same thing we are.

Pretty much my thoughts.

What?!!!

That there is heresy! How dare you blaspheme and validate Nikon's 36MP D800/D810 or Sony's cameras?

You should be saying that a high MP will be hard to work with, your computer is not fast enough, storage cards too small, pixels will be smaller and noisier, etc.

These comments perplexed me until I noticed the author.

Just to reiterate, I think few of us actually oppose the prospect of high MP sensors. In fact, I'd say most of us do look forward to them. The nuance here is that we know that all great features have trade-offs. I'd be happy to have a very high MP camera, so long as IQ (at all ISOs) doesn't suffer, and I have lenses that can take advantage of it, and frame-rate can keep up, and I can afford a computer to process the images at a reasonable speed, etc. Eventually this will happen.

Trade-offs, it's all about trade-offs.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I'd prefer 24MP and 6fps and more DR over 50MP and 3-5fps and same DR without question.

Although I'd prefer 40MP, 6fps, and more DR and CRISP non-waxy works 4k video and 2k raw video, even more without question ;D ;D.

(and my last suggestion there really is not unreasonable in any way!

The D810 already does 36MP at 6fps and has tons of DR.

The 5D3 already does 2k raw video with a hack.

Lotsa stuff will do 4k soon and some already does, so for those saying I'm dreaming, well I should not be and don't forget this next camera has to look in a few years still too, if anything my dream is almost conservative at this point so go away Canon apologists who are saying anything more than the same DR, 30MP and 2k compressed video is enough!)

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Unlike many Google translations, this one is a bit more readable...

I note the comment that the 16-35 mk2 was good for APS-H ;-)

The multiple aspheric lens surfaces allow them to ease some of the compromise between reducing distortion and field flatness. The two front lens elements make quite a significant contribution to this and will likely be seen again in new ultra wide zoom designs.

I still want a TS-E14 though ;-)

Actually, I was going to ask someone to translate the translation.

I have often made the assertion on DPR that the 16-35 II was designed for APS-H because 1.) it was introduced alongside the 1D III and 2.) the edge/corner performance obviously was not up to FF standards MP counts of the time period notwithstanding. Of course, I was criticized for this viewpoint (which I still hold). It looked to me like the interviewer made the reference to APS-H but the interviewees did not touch on the reference.

hah, good catch and guess surmising

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Because, there are survey results 4-5% of customers who bought the kit lens is that it does not use only kit lens.

Would indeed be interesting to see an accurate translation of this. Do 5% never buy another lens? If so that is an amazing stst

I could believe that easily 4-5% never buy another lens. I know people with DSLRs that bought a kit and are just fine with their kit zoom. They take pictures only once in a while such as on a trip or at some big event. It just depends on how much they get into photography.

wouldn't the is does NOT only use the kit lens, imply the opposite though?

I also find this confusing, but read somewhere (trying to find the source) that 80-90% of DSLR owners (that would be Rebels & their Nikon ilk) never remove their kit lens. Alan's math makes sense in that regard, plus, not every SLR or DSLR owner throws away their body after two years. People have bought my old bodies, and I bet many of them still own them.

yeah I guess that could be

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

no news here: "we look forward to the advent of high-resolution model of the EOS". We are all looking forward to that. This poor guy works for Canon and he is looking forward to the same thing we are. I'm looking forward to Christmas too. The only difference is I know Christmas is coming.....this year.

And we all know that Christmas only comes once a year....
(unless you are Denise Richards in a 007 movie featuring some bad dialogue .)

 

[sanj]

no news here: "we look forward to the advent of high-resolution model of the EOS". We are all looking forward to that. This poor guy works for Canon and he is looking forward to the same thing we are.

Pretty much my thoughts.

What?!!!

That there is heresy! How dare you blaspheme and validate Nikon's 36MP D800/D810 or Sony's cameras?

You should be saying that a high MP will be hard to work with, your computer is not fast enough, storage cards too small, pixels will be smaller and noisier, etc.

Exactly!
Everyone knows that a high megapixel Nikon is the devil's spawn, while a high megapixel Canon will be a godsend.....

WELL SAID!!

 

[zim]

Because, there are survey results 4-5% of customers who bought the kit lens is that it does not use only kit lens.

Would indeed be interesting to see an accurate translation of this. Do 5% never buy another lens? If so that is an amazing stst

I could believe that easily 4-5% never buy another lens. I know people with DSLRs that bought a kit and are just fine with their kit zoom. They take pictures only once in a while such as on a trip or at some big event. It just depends on how much they get into photography.

wouldn't the is does NOT only use the kit lens, imply the opposite though?

I also find this confusing, but read somewhere (trying to find the source) that 80-90% of DSLR owners (that would be Rebels & their Nikon ilk) never remove their kit lens. Alan's math makes sense in that regard, plus, not every SLR or DSLR owner throws away their body after two years. People have bought my old bodies, and I bet many of them still own them.

yeah I guess that could be

Nope you were right the first time it does imply the opposite, 95% do buy an additional lens. Doubt that would include second hand but may include third party. Maybe they are all 50 1.8s and 40 stm's ;D
It's an interesting little snippet, probably nothing more than some simplistic maths division by marketing but if it is a properly researched stat it is very impressive

 

[Lawliet]

Another thing I'd bet is, Canon only accounts for new lenses other than the kit bought. I am quite certain that more than 5% of DSLR buyers also buy other lenses, but I think there is a very significant market for used lenses. I'd be willing to bet that at least 30% of Canon DSLR owners buy another lens, and the majority of them buy one used.

And even if your average enthusiast has lets say 5 or 6 lenses, the same person will also buy multiple bodies over time while the lenses are used over a longer timeframe. That dillutes the ratio towards that 1.5 lenses per body.
Then one should factor 3rd party lenses in; how would Canon account for lets say a 5D3 with Tamrons 24-70/70-200 and Sigmas f/1.4 primes? A quite reasonable setup that looks like an expensive doorstopper from the isolated sales/registration numbers.

 

[JPCanonUser]

The line says that 4-5% dont buy lenses other than the kit lens.

 

[wockawocka]

I'd like a 35mm sensor with bigger pixels rather than more of them.

 

[M_S]

I'd prefer 24MP and 6fps and more DR over 50MP and 3-5fps and same DR without question.

Although I'd prefer 40MP, 6fps, and more DR and CRISP non-waxy works 4k video and 2k raw video, even more without question ;D ;D.

(and my last suggestion there really is not unreasonable in any way!

The D810 already does 36MP at 6fps and has tons of DR.

The 5D3 already does 2k raw video with a hack.

Lotsa stuff will do 4k soon and some already does, so for those saying I'm dreaming, well I should not be and don't forget this next camera has to look in a few years still too, if anything my dream is almost conservative at this point so go away Canon apologists who are saying anything more than the same DR, 30MP and 2k compressed video is enough!)

Video:
They have to beat the Sony 7s in regard to low light for now, or that camera will bind some customers for the body. I am thinking in buying one myself at the moment, although I have just bought a 5D Mark 3. Raw would be nice as this is at least possible, 100fps or 120fps would be very welcome in the video department for HD for slow motion work native in HD and not that upscaling from 720p, 4K in 25fps or 30fps. C-Log for grading possibilities and some stuff like zebras and focus peaking whilst recording, Pro Res codec, clear HDMI out from the start....So much stuff to improve upon video-wise.....And if all that would be in that camera for under 3600$, this would be a killer camera.

Stills: Better DR, Pixelcount is OK on the Mark 3, maybe 26 MP for kicks. Very nice to handle in post and cf card wise. I don't need 36 MP at this moment. Improved fps when battery grip is attached (8fps). GPS and Wifi on board. Ethernet-connector on the battery grip.