New Product Announcement Invites for July 23, 2012

[Rocky]

... The shutter release on my 40D is becoming increasingly erratic.

That's an easy fix if you are brave enough to open it up, and are comfortable with a soldering iron. I've fixed 4 or 5 bad shutter buttons. Unless of course you're talking about the shutter itself dying, in which case it is a considerable amount of work to remove and replace.

There is an easier way. You will find it in U tube. Just do a "40D shutter release repair" or even a "20D shutter release repair". Basically, you pour a spoon of rubbing alcohol into the empty battery compartment with the camera tilted to avoid alcohol getting into the top LCD and push the release button 10 to 20 times. then AIR DRY the camera. I use this method on my 20D, It works.

 

[simonxu11]

Stop dreaming, maximum is 1.85x

 

[Rocky]

Something close to the fuji system would be awesome.
C'mon Canon. Still hoping for aps-c.

APS-C is the minimum, but something like the Leica M9 would be amazing!

C'mon Canon. Give us a full frame mirrorless or go home.

+1

I doubt that we will get FF mirorless this time. FF mirroreless will be "big" and too expensive due to a brand new sensor/microlens and phase detection on sensor. We know that the sale volume will not be as high as the 1D X. On the other hand regardless what the sensor size will be, Canon will need a new sensor that has the on sensor phase detector. It seems to me G1X size sensor will be a good compromise. There is not such a big difference between 1.7 and 1.6 (based on width) or 1.85 and 1.6(based on length) compare to APS-C. The same sensor can be used in the "G series" later. It is a "one stone to kill two birds" approach. I think Canon will take this approach.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

It seems to me G1X size sensor will be a good compromise. There is not such a big difference between 1.7 and 1.6 (based on width) or 1.85 and 1.6(based on length) compare to APS-C. The same sensor can be used in the "G series" later. It is a "one stone to kill two birds" approach. I think Canon will take this approach.

+1
The G1X sensor is developed and a plug-in solution. I do not think the T4i sensor is quite up to fast phase detect AF. Of course, if Canon goes to their pellicle mirror technology, we might see a aps-c, but this is unlikely.

 

[Rocky]

It seems to me G1X size sensor will be a good compromise. There is not such a big difference between 1.7 and 1.6 (based on width) or 1.85 and 1.6(based on length) compare to APS-C. The same sensor can be used in the "G series" later. It is a "one stone to kill two birds" approach. I think Canon will take this approach.

+1
Of course, if Canon goes to their pellicle mirror technology, we might see a aps-c, but this is unlikely.

Agree. Canon had the pellicle mirror 50 years ago and give it up in just 5 years. Then Canon try it agin about 20 years ago and give it up again. There must be something that canon does not like besides the lost of about 1 stop of sensitivity to the film.

 

[unfocused]

I agree, at best it will probably be the same sensor as the G1X, which is essentially an APS-C sensor cut down to an unappealing aspect ratio.

The Fujis are still more appealing: cool design and nice, standard APS-C sized and proportioned sensor. I just don't want to invest in a non-compatible lens mount.

 

[Daniel Flather]

My bets are on an entry level mirror-less camera.

 

[crasher8]

My bets are on an entry level mirror-less camera.

+1….with an EF converter (which won't come cheap)

 

[Kernuak]

Announcing the first digital mirrorless Canon cameras in July so that they're finally in store before Christmas?

The 650d was preati quick in stores after it was anounced. Dont mistake the a consumer grade camera whit a pro one

So was the 5D MkIII come to that.

 

[traveller]

I agree, at best it will probably be the same sensor as the G1X, which is essentially an APS-C sensor cut down to an unappealing aspect ratio.

What's so magical about the 3:2 aspect ratio? Most medium and large format film stock is squarer than 135. If this aspect ratio helps make the whole system more compact, then I'm all for it. If it was simply to appeal to previous Powershot G-series owners, then I don't see the need.

The Fujis are still more appealing: cool design and nice, standard APS-C sized and proportioned sensor. I just don't want to invest in a non-compatible lens mount.

Everyone seems to be heaping praise upon the Fujis, but I think that they're both (I'm excluding the X10) too niche for Canon. The X100 is an enthusiast's second camera for use in certain circumstances, primarily when enjoying the camera experience is as important as getting the shot. The X Pro1 is Fuji gambling that there is enough of a market for a budget version of the Leica M9. This is not the market that I think Canon want to target; they need to find a camera that can be marketed to casul users in place of the small sensor point and shoots that will soon be totally obsoleted by camera 'phones. A secondary group is (primarily EOS) DSLR owners wanting an additional, smaller 'carry everywhere' camera. The Fuji X100 is too inflexible for both of these groups' needs; the X Pro 1 is too expensive and intimidating for the former group and too large for the latter group (and a bit too expensive for most). As for their 'retro' design, if retro means more physical controls then that's great (but this does have implications for body size); if it's simply copying fifty year old styling cues, Canon should leave this to German car manufacturers.

I just don't want to invest in a non-compatible lens mount.

I didn't want to take the previous quote you out of context, but I think that the last sentence is very important. No one is keen to spend money on a new lens system, particularly when there is so much uncertainty about which will last. If you had to re-purchase all your DSLR kit, which lens mount would you be confident investing in: EF, F, A, K, 4/3rds? There are two mounts in that list that I would have very high confidence in, with the third not far behind; of the other two, I would be very wary of one and wouldn't touch the other with a barge pole. I don't need to say which is which, as I'm sure that most people already know! So, out of the following mounts, pick the winners: micro-4/3rds, E, Q, 1, XF, [Canon(?)] ? Not so easy and the potential for an expensive mistake.

 

[Astro]

Alright fellow Canonites! Prepare for some more disappointment. 8)

try to make some photos with your gear and stop thinking about more gear.. that would be something.

 

[ablearcher]

My bets are on an entry level mirror-less camera.

I share this view. However, I don't have extra cash for toys. So.............. wake me up when they announce real stuff.... like a new reasonably priced FF body ....

 

[wickidwombat]

It seems to me G1X size sensor will be a good compromise. There is not such a big difference between 1.7 and 1.6 (based on width) or 1.85 and 1.6(based on length) compare to APS-C. The same sensor can be used in the "G series" later. It is a "one stone to kill two birds" approach. I think Canon will take this approach.

+1
The G1X sensor is developed and a plug-in solution. I do not think the T4i sensor is quite up to fast phase detect AF. Of course, if Canon goes to their pellicle mirror technology, we might see a aps-c, but this is unlikely.

the 16MP APS-H is also developed and a plug in solution that will leave every mirrorless competitor in its dust
including leica

 

[wickidwombat]

I agree, at best it will probably be the same sensor as the G1X, which is essentially an APS-C sensor cut down to an unappealing aspect ratio.

What's so magical about the 3:2 aspect ratio? Most medium and large format film stock is squarer than 135. If this aspect ratio helps make the whole system more compact, then I'm all for it. If it was simply to appeal to previous Powershot G-series owners, then I don't see the need.

The Fujis are still more appealing: cool design and nice, standard APS-C sized and proportioned sensor. I just don't want to invest in a non-compatible lens mount.

Everyone seems to be heaping praise upon the Fujis, but I think that they're both (I'm excluding the X10) too niche for Canon. The X100 is an enthusiast's second camera for use in certain circumstances, primarily when enjoying the camera experience is as important as getting the shot. The X Pro1 is Fuji gambling that there is enough of a market for a budget version of the Leica M9. This is not the market that I think Canon want to target; they need to find a camera that can be marketed to casul users in place of the small sensor point and shoots that will soon be totally obsoleted by camera 'phones. A secondary group is (primarily EOS) DSLR owners wanting an additional, smaller 'carry everywhere' camera. The Fuji X100 is too inflexible for both of these groups' needs; the X Pro 1 is too expensive and intimidating for the former group and too large for the latter group (and a bit too expensive for most). As for their 'retro' design, if retro means more physical controls then that's great (but this does have implications for body size); if it's simply copying fifty year old styling cues, Canon should leave this to German car manufacturers.

I just don't want to invest in a non-compatible lens mount.

I didn't want to take the previous quote you out of context, but I think that the last sentence is very important. No one is keen to spend money on a new lens system, particularly when there is so much uncertainty about which will last. If you had to re-purchase all your DSLR kit, which lens mount would you be confident investing in: EF, F, A, K, 4/3rds? There are two mounts in that list that I would have very high confidence in, with the third not far behind; of the other two, I would be very wary of one and wouldn't touch the other with a barge pole. I don't need to say which is which, as I'm sure that most people already know! So, out of the following mounts, pick the winners: micro-4/3rds, E, Q, 1, XF, [Canon(?)] ? Not so easy and the potential for an expensive mistake.

Fuji is fine and all untill you have to deal with their lack of service department
I'm still fighting with them about replacing my sensor in my x10 for the white orb issue
been about 6 weeks now lucky i dont really need the camera urgently :

 

[dlleno]

I just bought a refurbished 7D from Canon Direct for $1087. The shutter release on my 40D is becoming increasingly erratic.

Canon is pretty good (and fast) at fixing stuff like that for pretty reasonable prices. in a freak accident I was photographing a diesel truck on a test dyno, pouring smoke out of its exhaust. I was standing probably 50 feet away and to the side, when the exiting exhaust flew a small rock or piece of bark at me and hit the top housing right beside my finger. shutter was erratic ever since then -- but Canon replaced the top assembly for $100.

 

[RLPhoto]

Alright fellow Canonites! Prepare for some more disappointment. 8)

try to make some photos with your gear and stop thinking about more gear.. that would be something.

Seeing your portfolio would be something. ;D

 

[samirachiko]

I'd like to see the cheap full frame!! ;D

 

[moreorless]

Everyone seems to be heaping praise upon the Fujis, but I think that they're both (I'm excluding the X10) too niche for Canon. The X100 is an enthusiast's second camera for use in certain circumstances, primarily when enjoying the camera experience is as important as getting the shot. The X Pro1 is Fuji gambling that there is enough of a market for a budget version of the Leica M9. This is not the market that I think Canon want to target; they need to find a camera that can be marketed to casul users in place of the small sensor point and shoots that will soon be totally obsoleted by camera 'phones. A secondary group is (primarily EOS) DSLR owners wanting an additional, smaller 'carry everywhere' camera. The Fuji X100 is too inflexible for both of these groups' needs; the X Pro 1 is too expensive and intimidating for the former group and too large for the latter group (and a bit too expensive for most). As for their 'retro' design, if retro means more physical controls then that's great (but this does have implications for body size); if it's simply copying fifty year old styling cues, Canon should leave this to German car manufacturers.

I'd agree that a fixed prime camera and a system based on primes are probabley too small a market for Canon to go after with there first release but I wouldnt rule out some rangefinderlike styling.

The mirrorless market is I'd say clearly more style conscious than either DSLR's or compacts and the trend for retro looks is now reaching well into the mainstream, just look at any character using a camera in a hollywood blockbuster and the chances are its got 60's styling.

 

[pakosouthpark]

Something close to the fuji system would be awesome.
C'mon Canon. Still hoping for aps-c.

APS-C is the minimum, but something like the Leica M9 would be amazing!

C'mon Canon. Give us a full frame mirrorless or go home.

+1

 

[MK5GTI]

Canonwatch report that the mirrorless will use APSC size sensor. my guess would be the T4i sensor with hybrid AF?

but if thats the case, AF would be far from the competition, like the newer Sony and the lightning fast AF from the newer m4/3.

i hope the adapter to be EF-S compatible, since i have to deal with crop factor, and also hope that the thickness of the adapter won't be too much