New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]

[jrista]

So, please, what EXACTLY is so compellingly innovative about the A7r that makes it "pioneering new territory"?

Isn't it obvious? There are two things that make the a7R compellingly innovative: AvTvM likes it, and Canon didn't make it.

That seems to be it!

Digital cameras are a mature industry.... The last "groundbreaking innovation" was the invention of the digital sensor, which was in reality a refinement of work done with photo-diodes... the only thing in the last 10 years that comes close to innovation was dual-pixel technology.... a new and wonderful way of doing live-view focusing that for some inexplicable reason was also invented by Olympus and is on the OM-D EM-1...

Actually, I believe it was Fujifilm who first implemented "focal plane phase detection AF." The FPPDAF in the OM-D EM-1 is still based on that original Fuji design, from what I gathered. It isn't really "dual pixel" technology as Canon innovated recently, in which every single pixel in the sensor is capable of performing AF functions.

I will happily hand the original innovation to Fujifilm, though, as they had the technology back in 2009 or 2010. Canon's dual pixel tech is an evolutionary innovation on top of that (although it is certainly compelling, evolutionary or not). As for being particularly ground breaking...I dunno. The underlying concept is the same as dedicated phase detect AF sensors...which was simply adapted into CMOS sensors. Still feels like a long term evolutionary process than a revolutionary one...but maybe that is just me.

The "dual fast AF" of the OM-D EM-1 doesn't seem all that different than Canon's Hybrid AF. The EM-1's sounds better implemented, and certainly much faster (I really don't understand why Canon can't optimize their algorithms and achieve fast CDAF.) So, regarding the EM-1, I'm not really sure there is anything ground breakingly new there.

 

[jrista]

I don't recall reading that users of the 1dx needed or wanted more resolution? I reckon having a super high res option is good as long as you also have some good down sampling and maybe aps-c modes like the DX mode on the d800.

Generally i think that the people that use the 1 series cameras take a lot of shots with them (1500 at an event) I read that the d800 cranks out 50mb+ files and burns through memory cards like popcorn.

I thought canon realized that they didn't need to win the mp war to win the market with the pros who the 1 series cameras are aimed at. Maybe they will continue with 2 high end pro bodies, the 1dx and this one?

PS i don't understand why people post complaints about the large size of the 1 series cameras. One thing canon knows how to do is design and build cameras for the people that need and use them, that's exactly why the 1dx is what it is

The number of megapixels is up to the user. 1DX, D4 are pure sports cameras and newspaper do not often need higher resolution but there are many other areas where high resolution is needed, fashion, architecture, product photography, nature photography and more.
Canon is lacking a high resolution camera and we are many who wonder when will Canon response to Sony , Nikon.
Here in Sweden and in many other places we can now read that the new Sony 36Mp camera with adapter being tested and in combination with a variety of lenses like Zeiss, Leica, Nikon and Canon
and people are lyrical about the results with good lenses as Canon 17mm TS as one example
Janne

"High resolution" has fast become a relative term, though. It really wasn't that long ago that 21.1mp was considered VERY high resolution. The way you are using "high resolution" is entirely relative to the Exmor 36mp sensor. However if you slightly shift your perspective just a bit, the D800's 36mp sensor is compared, in relative terms, to 40, 50, 60, 80, 200mp medium format sensors, and it is considered "low" resolution when it comes to studio photography (one of the two primary areas where raw pixel count is of paramount importance.)

I am the first to admit, more megapixels is most certainly desired for many applications, and I'm eagerly awaiting the release of Canon's "big megapixel" camera, whatever it is, for my landscape photography. I want, and can certainly use, an "even higher resolution" camera than the 5D III. It should be noted, however, that the 5D III is not, by any measure, a "low resolution" camera, and it is eminently capable of resolving and capturing very fine detail (just check out the bird photography forum here on CR if you want some examples of how well the 5D III can resolve very fine feather detail in birds.) The 5D II was the worlds most used digital landscape photography camera until the D800 came along as well, and there is a tremendous amount of truly amazing landscape photos out there taken with this old, "archaic" camera that clearly demonstrates it more than qualifies as a "high resolution" camera.

 

[Diko]

I don't really understand why a bunch of people here are so fanatically trying to defend CANONs interests instead of their own?

What I had to say I've said it. I am interested in my needs not in anyone else's needs. And I don't really need any basic knowledge in Economics.... I tend to understand CANON's steps (generally speaking). And I don't like them... That is my point of view.

And as a good agent acting in the free market will be unhappy with CANON's current doings. But that's me.

BTW my guesses are that Neuro is on that picture of CANONs 1D developers

I am a fan of big and heavy (for both bodies & lenses) due to the steady factor and also can't wait for the new CANON 1D (megapixel) and would love to combine it with that awesome Carl Zeis Otus babe. ;-)

 

[jeffa4444]

Sony may have crammed a full sensor into a smaller body similar to Olympus size BUT many are missing the point. The most important at part when you take photographs or video is the LENS. Sony does not have the same range as Canon and regularly comes out behind Canon & Nikon in lens tests.
Canon far from being a company that will not be around in a couple of years is innovating and pushing into new areas like its Cinema EOS range of cameras.

The new EOS-1 will have a 45MP sensor.

 

[Lawliet]

(I really don't understand why Canon can't optimize their algorithms and achieve fast CDAF.)

Canon can't, or at least doesn't, read the sensor fast/often enough. The more updates you have the more aggressive can the lens be driven. I.E. CDAF always means babysteps, C is limited to 30, while others are in the three digit zone. No surprise they're faster.
Thats where Sonys RX10 gets interesting...they get all of its 20MP at at least 60fps and process full raw files into frames for video. I'd love to have the same tech doubled to ~40MP, in a body that takes Canon lenses (plus the flashy stuff, be it RT or Profoto TTL ) and offers a fast sync speed

 

[eml58]

Ignorant "besserwissers" don´t add value to anything anywhere!

Eldar, I don't even know what that means and I agree with you, too funny.

 

[jrista]

(I really don't understand why Canon can't optimize their algorithms and achieve fast CDAF.)

Canon can't, or at least doesn't, read the sensor fast/often enough. The more updates you have the more aggressive can the lens be driven. I.E. CDAF always means babysteps, C is limited to 30, while others are in the three digit zone. No surprise they're faster.
Thats where Sonys RX10 gets interesting...they get all of its 20MP at at least 60fps and process full raw files into frames for video. I'd love to have the same tech doubled to ~40MP, in a body that takes Canon lenses (plus the flashy stuff, be it RT or Profoto TTL ) and offers a fast sync speed

The rate they read frames shouldn't be that big of a problem when it comes to Hybrid AF. They don't need to CDAF the whole entire movement, only the fine tuning after PDAF had done it's job. At 30fps, they should be more than capable of doing that at, well, 30fps (which should mean that the CDAF fine tuning should be very rapid after the initial PDAF moves the lens the majority of the way.) Now, I haven't used one of the EOS-M cameras with the updated firmware, maybe they already solved this problem...

 

[mkabi]

Since people are coming into a Canon forum to diss and dismiss Canon... lets diss and dismiss Sony.
Look at how entirely STUPID sony is for releasing PlayStation 4 without either 4K or 3D support... I mean seriously, are they sleeping on the job over there?

They are releasing 4K TVs and 3D TVs, the least they can do is include it in the PlayStation 4.
Now we all have to believe that 4K and 3D is a gimmick, if they dont' even believe in their own technology such that they don't even include in the next iteration of the PlayStation.

Now they are wasting their time with FF MILC... tsk... tsk... tsk...

 

[eml58]

So, please, what EXACTLY is so compellingly innovative about the A7r that makes it "pioneering new territory"?

Isn't it obvious? There are two things that make the a7R compellingly innovative: AvTvM likes it, and Canon didn't make it.

That seems to be it!

Sad, but ultimately it does seem to be it.

But I do see some light here, AvTvM has clearly been over to at least SonyRumours, that's a positive step, I think ??.

And he has said he will likely spend less time now on CR once he has that a7r, another positive step, right ??.

Man I hope he gets a good price for all that Canon Crap he owns & buys the a7r, and is Happy with it.........

Not likely, damn, more Sad.

 

[RLPhoto]

So, please, what EXACTLY is so compellingly innovative about the A7r that makes it "pioneering new territory"?

Isn't it obvious? There are two things that make the a7R compellingly innovative: AvTvM likes it, and Canon didn't make it.

That seems to be it!

Sad, but ultimately it does seem to be it.

But I do see some light here, AvTvM has clearly been over to at least SonyRumours, that's a positive step, I think ??.

And he has said he will likely spend less time now on CR once he has that a7r, another positive step, right ??.

Man I hope he gets a good price for all that Canon Crap he owns & buys the a7r, and is Happy with it.........

Not likely, damn, more Sad.

And Perhaps AvTvM will actually take photos with his new A7. : : :

 

[KitsVancouver]

Canon has officially, publicly announced the technology: August 31st, 2010 ...
...ANY given company has its Business Plan ahead for 1,2,3,5, 10 & 20 years. Each one in its own pace and milestones. Each subject to some extend to modification. What I mean is that we might be seeing technology developed as early as 2006.

My problem with this general line of reasoning is that it assumes that Canon (or any other company) purposely withholds a new technology in order to boost profits.

Whether you believe it or not, it happens. We saw a very recent real-life example in the world of video processors. NVIDIA announced their 780 ti video card just days after AMD announced their new R290X. It's widely known in the semi-conductor and PC world that NVIDIA was holding back releasing the full power of an existing chip design based on what the competition was.

 

[JohnDizzo15]

Regardless of what Canon is doing, there are other companies that most photogs have bought into that do the same thing or worse i.e. apple and most continue to buy in. Bleeding out tech, coming out with things later than others, charging 50-200% more than the competitors for the same or less hardware, disabling compatibilities unnecessarily, withholding bs features from one model only to help create product separation for the next model. To me, canon isn't even as guilty as they are (if they do happen to be guilty of any of those things). Bottom line, they are not alone if they are trying to make a profit through these measures. If you're going to blast canon for it, you might see if you can head over to all the other forums for the other companies you have purchased products from to do the same thing.

Can we all please just recognize that none of these companies are non-profits with YOUR specific desires/needs at the forefront of their business decisions? Go out and take some pictures please.

 

[sanj]

I am of the opinion that the new Sony full frame cameras are indeed innovative. I appreciate their efforts.

 

[CarlTN]

Regardless of what Canon is doing, there are other companies that most photogs have bought into that do the same thing or worse i.e. apple and most continue to buy in. Bleeding out tech, coming out with things later than others, charging 50-200% more than the competitors for the same or less hardware, disabling compatibilities unnecessarily, withholding bs features from one model only to help create product separation for the next model. To me, canon isn't even as guilty as they are (if they do happen to be guilty of any of those things). Bottom line, they are not alone if they are trying to make a profit through these measures. If you're going to blast canon for it, you might see if you can head over to all the other forums for the other companies you have purchased products from to do the same thing.

Can we all please just recognize that none of these companies are non-profits with YOUR specific desires/needs at the forefront of their business decisions? Go out and take some pictures please.

Interesting perspective you have. To compare Canon to Apple though, is rather silly, don't you think? And if your main complaint with Apple has to do with the products they make, or the lack of control you as a consumer have over their products, or them as a company in general...well that's amusing!

 

[JohnDizzo15]

Regardless of what Canon is doing, there are other companies that most photogs have bought into that do the same thing or worse i.e. apple and most continue to buy in. Bleeding out tech, coming out with things later than others, charging 50-200% more than the competitors for the same or less hardware, disabling compatibilities unnecessarily, withholding bs features from one model only to help create product separation for the next model. To me, canon isn't even as guilty as they are (if they do happen to be guilty of any of those things). Bottom line, they are not alone if they are trying to make a profit through these measures. If you're going to blast canon for it, you might see if you can head over to all the other forums for the other companies you have purchased products from to do the same thing.

Can we all please just recognize that none of these companies are non-profits with YOUR specific desires/needs at the forefront of their business decisions? Go out and take some pictures please.

Interesting perspective you have. To compare Canon to Apple though, is rather silly, don't you think? And if your main complaint with Apple has to do with the products they make, or the lack of control you as a consumer have over their products, or them as a company in general...well that's amusing!

I think you completely missed my point.

I don't care whether these companies are doing it or not. What I was saying was that people should stop saying companies are horrible simply because they aren't tailoring their business decisions to that specific consumer's specific need as a consumer.

You are right. It is silly which is exactly the view I thought I expressed.

 

[Woody]

I really don't understand why Canon can't optimize their algorithms and achieve fast CDAF.

I am sure the lenses play a part too. Canon's USM/STM lenses may have been optimized for PDAF. I suspect a well tuned CDAF algorithm may require certain mechanical response not possible with Canon lenses.

 

[sanj]

And have a look at their new camera. No mirrorslapping any more. Not big and bulky, but small and light but still very solidly built. "Full frame" 36x24mm sensor. Better than any sensor in any old Canon DSLR out there.

Small and light. Now, mount a 70-200/2.8 on it and you have a POS from an ergonomic standpoint.

Better than any old Canon sensor? If I shoot at ISO 3200, does the Sony give me more DR and less noise? Did someone appoint you the universal arbiter of "better" when we weren't looking? :

I do not think these cameras are designed for the long lens sports/wildlife shooters. It is meant for, I believe, compact lenses and for travel, candid type of work. And they seem brilliant for that.

 

[Diko]

Regardless of what Canon is doing, there are other companies that most photogs have bought into that do the same thing or worse i.e. apple and most continue to buy in. Bleeding out tech, coming out with things later than others, charging 50-200% more than the competitors for the same or less hardware, disabling compatibilities unnecessarily, withholding bs features from one model only to help create product separation for the next model. To me, canon isn't even as guilty as they are (if they do happen to be guilty of any of those things). Bottom line, they are not alone if they are trying to make a profit through these measures. If you're going to blast canon for it, you might see if you can head over to all the other forums for the other companies you have purchased products from to do the same thing.

Can we all please just recognize that none of these companies are non-profits with YOUR specific desires/needs at the forefront of their business decisions? Go out and take some pictures please.

Interesting perspective you have. To compare Canon to Apple though, is rather silly, don't you think? And if your main complaint with Apple has to do with the products they make, or the lack of control you as a consumer have over their products, or them as a company in general...well that's amusing!

I think you completely missed my point.

I don't care whether these companies are doing it or not. What I was saying was that people should stop saying companies are horrible simply because they aren't tailoring their business decisions to that specific consumer's specific need as a consumer.

You are right. It is silly which is exactly the view I thought I expressed.

Actually I don't find it silly. As absurd as it is (yes, I do acknowledge it's absurdity in a way) look at the new iPhone 5c & the "new" EOS Rebel SL1/Kiss X7 in White. I always thought that crippling just comes as is with a lower price tag... Now it comes, but with style! ;D ;D ;D

The last time I checked both companies were STILL quite everything else but NON-profit 8)
So then they have tailored the design according to the true needs of the majority of consumers.

[sarcasm] Now my dream will come true and I will probably get the ORANGE 1DXs for Christmas 2014.

I know - I am the only person on this forum to actually ask for better ISO & DR in the same body... I have to admit quite unnecessary features indeed. [/sarcasm]

 

[Woody]

OK, coming back to the topic, I don't think we should take this CR1 rumor too seriously. Most rumors from NL are almost always wrong. So, let's not get too excited arguing about this vaporware.

 

[unfocused]

OK, coming back to the topic, I don't think we should take this CR1 rumor too seriously. Most rumors from NL are almost always wrong. So, let's not get too excited arguing about this vaporware.

But it wouldn't be Canon Rumors Forum if people didn't argue over insignificant differences in products that don't exist.