Mirrorless Camera & New Full Frame Coming Second Half 2012? [CR2]

[D_Rochat]

Will it replace the 7D? Not in a million years. This obsession that full-frame fanboys have with APS-C is just ridiculous. APS-C fills a much-needed niche that has only gotten more significant with the killing off of the APS-H sensor.

There will definitely be a 7DII and there may even be a 7DX (Enthusiast version with add on grip/Professional sports and wildlife version with one-piece integrated body and grip).

I can't speak for others, but my view on the 7D being pushed to the xxD series isn't based on being a FF fanboy. I don't have anything against the APS-C and believe it serves a purpose. However, I've said before that Canon seems to be restructuring the xD line and with the rumoured addition of 2 more FF models, the line seems to be getting a little heavy. That's not even mentioning the 2 extra 7D models you think the will create.

Lets say the 7D replacement comes with all sorts of upgrades that make it better than the mkI but it happens to be branded as a 70D. What's wrong with that? Why would the badge make it less desirable?

Who really knows though. We could both be way off and Canon could throw another curve ball.

 

[cptobvious]

My prediction: Canon will put the 5D2 sensor in a 60D-like (plastic) body, with 60D-like AF. I don't think a Rebel body would be big or weighty enough to balance with many EF lenses. If they put a FF sensor in a 7D body with 7D AF, I think it would cannibalize 5D3 sales.

 

[Neeneko]

My prediction: Canon will put the 5D2 sensor in a 60D-like (plastic) body, with 60D-like AF. I don't think a Rebel body would be big or weighty enough to balance with many EF lenses. If they put a FF sensor in a 7D body with 7D AF, I think it would cannibalize 5D3 sales.

Rebel bodies have no trouble balancing EF lenses. I still use a 300D for most of my shooting and it handles just fine with EF lenses including some rather large ones I use.

 

[unfocused]

Lets say the 7D replacement comes with all sorts of upgrades that make it better than the mkI but it happens to be branded as a 70D. What's wrong with that? Why would the badge make it less desirable?

Who really knows though. We could both be way off and Canon could throw another curve ball.

Well, certainly it doesn't matter what any model is called. My (over)reaction is to the minority of commenters who seem to feel that the bigger the sensor they have the more of a photographer they are.

For the sake of argument though, I just don't see Canon re-branding the 7D as a 70D. Manufacturers don't usually take an existing product and down-brand it. They've spend the last 2 1/2 years building the 7D brand and have done a very good job of it. The 7D is a very well-positioned product that has had remarkable success and customer satisfaction. Having invested a significant amount of resources into the brand, I don't see them throwing it away.

However, you are right about the curve balls. Canon has thrown so many in the past year, I really will not be surprised by almost anything they might do.

 

[takoman46]

I think that if Canon brings an entry level FF body to the line up, it will be significantly crappier than even the 5DmkII. Since the 5DmkIII is obviously the successor to the 5DmkII, then an "entry level" body should logically be placed at a bar below the 5D line in performance and build quality. I wouldn't get my hopes up that this new entry level FF camera will be all that impressive. I'd expect disappointments in ISO performance, resolution, image quality, continuous shooting, and AF system at the minimum compared to the 5DmkIII. I also wouldn't be surprised if it is even set a bar below the 5DmkII in terms of ISO performance, resolution, and image quality. It also would make sense for Canon to price the camera lower than $2000. Maybe this will fill the 7D price point and the 60D successor will inherit the 7D's strengths and come in at a price point just under the new entry level FF camera?

 

[Terry Rogers]

Well, certainly it doesn't matter what any model is called. My (over)reaction is to the minority of commenters who seem to feel that the bigger the sensor they have the more of a photographer they are.

[/quote]

I'm not sure who the commenters you are reffering to are that implied a larger sensor makes them a better photographer. However, a larger sensor does offer several advantages that gives photographers more tools to work with. Namely, more bokeh with similar framing with the same apeture compared to a crop camera. Generally better high iso noise performance. Larger pixel size, minimizing lens imperfections and motion blur compared to a high pixel density crop camera. Do these make someone a better photographer, of course not. Do they allow more creative freedom under difficult shooting conditions? Definitely.

 

[studio1972]

The Cine-DSLR will obviously be full-frame.

Surely it will not be full frame. The C300 isn't, after all.

 

[tron]

I do not believe we will see an entry level FF. 5DmkII is doing fine!
There is no point replacing it with something different mainly in ... the name!
A high megapixel camera would be perfect for studio and landscapes and prevent people from switching to Nikon.
Also it is about time for a new high end APS-C camera (7DmkII ?)

 

[lecoupdejarnac]

It does sound very strange with the 5DII still selling.

Unless the "entry level" full frame is also a mirrorless camera. That would be really interesting.

 

[itsnotmeyouknow]

It does sound very strange with the 5DII still selling.

Unless the "entry level" full frame is also a mirrorless camera. That would be really interesting.

that would really be a curveball. I wouldn't expect it, though. You'd have tp think about what lenses you would use espcially regarding flange distance etc

 

[stabmasterasron]

I think that if Canon brings an entry level FF body to the line up, it will be significantly crappier than even the 5DmkII. Since the 5DmkIII is obviously the successor to the 5DmkII, then an "entry level" body should logically be placed at a bar below the 5D line in performance and build quality. I wouldn't get my hopes up that this new entry level FF camera will be all that impressive. I'd expect disappointments in ISO performance, resolution, image quality, continuous shooting, and AF system at the minimum compared to the 5DmkIII. I also wouldn't be surprised if it is even set a bar below the 5DmkII in terms of ISO performance, resolution, and image quality. It also would make sense for Canon to price the camera lower than $2000. Maybe this will fill the 7D price point and the 60D successor will inherit the 7D's strengths and come in at a price point just under the new entry level FF camera?

How could it be crappier than the 5dmkii? This new entry level ff will either have the sensor of the 5dmkii (unlikely) or from the 5dmkiii or 1dx(also unlikely, i think), or it will have a completely new sensor. So if it has one of the other, current sensors and digic 5, it will be at least equal in iq to those corresponding cameras. If canon makes a new sensor, why would they make a sensor crappier than the 4 year old sensor from the 5dmkii? I don't see how any new ff camera, entry level or not would take a step backwards from the 5dmkii.

 

[Musouka]

All the talk about an entry-level FF camera without video had me thinking.

Sony was first out of the gate with a $2000 FF camera back in August 2009 in the form of the A850. Wonder why it hasn't taken the market by storm... It also was the last FF camera from Sony to date.

A quick eBay search returned 2 results only; priced at $1600 (BO) & $1725 (Package).

 

[nentraC]

It does sound very strange with the 5DII still selling.

Unless the "entry level" full frame is also a mirrorless camera. That would be really interesting.

your comment got me thinking it could be the:

"Mirrorless Camera & New Full Frame Coming Second Half 2012? [CR2]"

should be

Mirrorless Camera "a" New Full Frame Coming Second Half 2012? [CR2]

whit a great video all time AF couse thers no miror in the way.

 

[ssrdd]

these guys trying very hard to make us forget how bad is 5Dmk3. So this NEW rumor...

Would you care to explain how the 5D mkIII is a "bad" camera please?

its best for the stills, but not for video, even after 3years of its big brother..
i have been playing with it since i got one, and very much disappointed, it might be 0.5% improvement in video.
in dslr video segment , it seems nikon started the revolution and it took over it agin with d800. 5d's are all in between.

I don't use it for stills though.

 

[Heidrun]

Well, certainly it doesn't matter what any model is called. My (over)reaction is to the minority of commenters who seem to feel that the bigger the sensor they have the more of a photographer they are.

I'm not sure who the commenters you are reffering to are that implied a larger sensor makes them a better photographer. However, a larger sensor does offer several advantages that gives photographers more tools to work with. Namely, more bokeh with similar framing with the same apeture compared to a crop camera. Generally better high iso noise performance. Larger pixel size, minimizing lens imperfections and motion blur compared to a high pixel density crop camera. Do these make someone a better photographer, of course not. Do they allow more creative freedom under difficult shooting conditions? Definitely.
[/quote]


The bigger the sensor is. The more wide angel i can get

 

[nentraC]

these guys trying very hard to make us forget how bad is 5Dmk3. So this NEW rumor...

Would you care to explain how the 5D mkIII is a "bad" camera please?

its best for the stills, but not for video, even after 3years of its big brother..
i have been playing with it since i got one, and very much disappointed, it might be 0.5% improvement in video.
in dslr video segment , it seems nikon started the revolution and it took over it agin with d800. 5d's are all in between.

I don't use it for stills though.

I just dont know when Nikon started the revolution in DSLR video, couse i tought Nikon released the D700 and it vas a great DSLR but a month or two later Canon released the 5d2 and had a great video funktion and it destrojed the D700 in sales just because of the video and its quality (ok not just video but the overall package)

So im not realy sure Nikon started the Video revolution inDSLR's

 

[takoman46]

I think that if Canon brings an entry level FF body to the line up, it will be significantly crappier than even the 5DmkII. Since the 5DmkIII is obviously the successor to the 5DmkII, then an "entry level" body should logically be placed at a bar below the 5D line in performance and build quality. I wouldn't get my hopes up that this new entry level FF camera will be all that impressive. I'd expect disappointments in ISO performance, resolution, image quality, continuous shooting, and AF system at the minimum compared to the 5DmkIII. I also wouldn't be surprised if it is even set a bar below the 5DmkII in terms of ISO performance, resolution, and image quality. It also would make sense for Canon to price the camera lower than $2000. Maybe this will fill the 7D price point and the 60D successor will inherit the 7D's strengths and come in at a price point just under the new entry level FF camera?

How could it be crappier than the 5dmkii? This new entry level ff will either have the sensor of the 5dmkii (unlikely) or from the 5dmkiii or 1dx(also unlikely, i think), or it will have a completely new sensor. So if it has one of the other, current sensors and digic 5, it will be at least equal in iq to those corresponding cameras. If canon makes a new sensor, why would they make a sensor crappier than the 4 year old sensor from the 5dmkii? I don't see how any new ff camera, entry level or not would take a step backwards from the 5dmkii.

It makes sense for it to be crappier than a 5DmkII if it is an "entry-level" FF camera. The term "entry-level" means exactly that. The "5D" line is not "entry-level" right? So it would be outlandish to think that the "entry level" FF camera would outperform the 5DmkII. Although the 5DmkII is 4 years old, it is still only 1 generation old so it is impossible for Canon to add another FF camera to the lineup that is deemed "entry level" but yet outperforms a higher end FF body that is likely still widely used by many many photographers. Let me put it this way... think back on all the technological advances in the overall DSLR lineup. Did a T3i have better image quality than a 40D? No because the T3i is "entry level" and the 40D is 1 generation older but yet one step higher in the lineup of APS-C bodies. In fact even the 20D would beat out a T3i in image quality and that's even further back in tech! So it seems like wishful thinking for an "entry level" FF camera to be equal to or better than a 5DmkII right?

 

[sphax]

The entry level FF camera only has to be inferior to the 5D3. Thus it could be almost identical to the 5D2.

So they're gonna develop a brand new product that has "almost" the same properties of the 5DmkII ??? ... Just for people to buy it a bit more because it won't be a 4 years old design ??? ... That sounds like a huge investment for a small difference in sales !

 

[danski0224]

So they're gonna develop a brand new product that has "almost" the same properties of the 5DmkII ??? ... Just for people to buy it a bit more because it won't be a 4 years old design ??? ... That sounds like a huge investment for a small difference in sales !

Well, I see $3500.00 USD as a pretty steep price point for a hobbyist. I paid ~$2500 USD for my 5DII, and it was a stretch.

If they had something to market at the ~$2000.00 USD price point, and if it was equal to the 5DII for image quality, it will sell.

In comparison to my old EOS 620, which was my last "full frame" camera, I do not see any problems with the 5DII AF system. Those migrating from a current "low end" DSLR will not feel the same way. Canon will have to improve the "entry level full frame" AF system from the 5DII and yet keep it far enough away from the 5DIII.

 

[takoman46]

It makes sense for it to be crappier than a 5DmkII if it is an "entry-level" FF camera. The term "entry-level" means exactly that. The "5D" line is not "entry-level" right? So it would be outlandish to think that the "entry level" FF camera would outperform the 5DmkII. Although the 5DmkII is 4 years old, it is still only 1 generation old so it is impossible for Canon to add another FF camera to the lineup that is deemed "entry level" but yet outperforms a higher end FF body that is likely still widely used by many many photographers.

Wrong.

The entry level FF camera only has to be inferior to the 5D3. Thus it could be almost identical to the 5D2. Consider that the current price point ($2199) of the 5D2 is almost exactly where an entry level full frame camera would be. Maybe plus or minus $200.

An entry level FF camera would be put into the product lineup relative to the 5D3 and the 60D or its successor.

What you just stated doesn't make any sense in the benefit to Canon in sales. If a new camera offers around the same performance as the 5DmkII at a similar price... then why would people buy it? They would just keep using the 5DmkII. So if Canon were to do exactly what you stated, they would have to spend a lot of money in developing, testing, producing, and marketing a different camera that would hurt their existing 5DmkII sales (since they are keeping the 5DmkII in production in the forseeable future). Note that Canon has not indicated that the 5DmkII will be discontinued when the entry level FF camera becomes available.