No 1Ds IV? [CR1]

[scalesusa]

I think that Canon will do something similar to the Nikon D700 thing. We are not seeing a D700s, because Nikon realized they made a mistake and hurt their D3 sales to some extent.

Canon will not put their top of the line Full frame sensor on future models, they will maintain a differentation between high end and mid level. I expect a incremental improvement in a 5D MK III, lots of little things.

 

[unexposure]

Canon will not put their top of the line Full frame sensor on future models, they will maintain a differentation between high end and mid level. I expect a incremental improvement in a 5D MK III, lots of little things.

irony-mode on:
Maybe, 5d mkIII will receive a plastic body, eat sd-cards, have a articulating-screen and some crazy toy-camera effects such as 3 more megapixels and some more fps in videomode but loosing features like lager lcd-display on top, fps in photo-burst-mode and mfa (does 5d mkII actually have mfa?).
irony-mode off:
your argumentation sounds plausible to me.

 

[neuroanatomist]

What is the point of the 1Ds Mk** well part of it is in having a bigger camera than the customer!

If want to impress the customer, you can walk in with a M9 or a Hasselblad.

Sorry, but wrong and wrong. If you want to impress the customer, show the customer your portfolio!

Today's customer would be pretty unimpressed by this guy's camera:

 

[unexposure]

Sorry, but wrong and wrong. If you want to impress the customer, show the customer your portfolio!

Today's customer would be pretty unimpressed by this guy's camera:

I guess, it depends on the kind of customers you speak of:
- Industry/Business-Type of Customers usually don't give a shit on what kind of gear you're using. They mostly look at your portfolio.
- Agency-Type of Customers really love the latest type of trendy-hyped dslr - even if it's crap for the job.
- Private-Customers, who actually visit you in your studio, are very impressed by "strange" cameras. A good friend of mine does largeformat for six years now - and the more casual digital slrs are, the more customers he gains. Pretty weird I guess, but to me it seems like "oldskool" has a revival in this special case of photography he does. The price for a LF-Print he sells begins at about 110$ for a single print, done in "casual" enviroment. Wedding-Portraits (no doku-stuff) beginns at about 2064$.
So I guess, for this kind of clients, impressive gear might indeed result in impressive income.

 

[peejay]

It's not possible. It's inevitable.

For Canon to stay in the game, when cameras like the Hasselblad H4D-31 are being introduced at the same price, it's time to release what they've been designing probably for the best part of a decade.

The revolution is nigh.

 

[scalesusa]

"AF as the 1DmkII....and better sealed....and under $2000...they would have a **real** winner on their hands...the last camera I would ever need to buy...but this current camera is too expensive for what you get" (btw...how many 5D's did Canon sell?...exactly)



In case any of you have noticed...Canon (and Nikon) aren't exactly struggling in the sales department. They're not short on cash. They way they do business is working for them. They are not going to change it.

In the fiscal year 2010 that ended March 31, 2010, Nikon lost 12,219 million Yen. Since then(April thru September 30, 2010), they have has better luck, making 10,639 million yen. They are hardly rolling in the cash, and have been pulling every trick they can think of to keep profitable. They are not going bankrupt, but are operating on a thin profit compared to FY 2008 and earlier.

Canon, on the other hand, was able to pull thru the sales slump in fairly good condition and since, have been doing very well indeed. However, they have also cut operating expenses drastically in order to stay in a good financial position.

 

[Etienne]

most of this is meaningless to me. My 5DII is pretty good. Improvements I would like :

Get rid of high ISO banding
Put in a great AF system
Slight improvement on build quality
AF in movie mode would be nice
Built-in Rack focus for movie mode would be great
Pixel-binning if it would help with high ISO
Forget the pixel race, file sizes are big enough already.
6 FPS
Built-in radio wireless flash
Keep it under US$3000

That would be enough to get me to upgrade, and keep me from looking at Nikon specs

 

[Etienne]

I forgot something:

Give me an articulating LCD screen on the 5DIII.

It's not only good for movies. I'm tired of lying on the ground, or kneeling in the mud to take a low angle shot. It can also flip over in storage so you don't get nose smudges on it. There are no negatives to the articulating screen. I love it on the old G3, and the new G12. My G3 has been given the kids-boot-camp treatment, and after 6 years the lcd is as good as new. The G12 screen appears even tougher.

 

[Rocky]

What is the point of the 1Ds Mk** well part of it is in having a bigger camera than the customer!

If want to impress the customer, you can walk in with a M9 or a Hasselblad.

Sorry, but wrong and wrong. If you want to impress the customer, show the customer your portfolio!

Today's customer would be pretty unimpressed by this guy's camera:

It seems that I have been misquoted. At the beginning of the tread I actually suggested to use "FINAL RESULTs"(equals to portfolio) to impress customer. The last statement is trying to say "If you want to impress customer, D1 may not be enough, go all the way out with Leica M9 and Hasselblad, both are a lot more impressive than D1". Something is lost in my expression. Sorry about that you do not get the "joke"

 

[Rocky]

Is there any chance that Canon is thinking about a square sensor that is 31.5mm on each side? This format will use ALL the existing EF lens and take the bulk out of the medium format. Just like the Rollieflex 127 in the OLD film days.

This topic has been covered before, and the conclusion was that it doesn't work for an EF dSLR because there is insufficient room for a mirror (to cover that field) between the lens and the detector. Canon would have to go EVIL to make an EF camera with a square super-FF detector. Then there is the issues with possible internal baffles on lenses (and the minor issue with tulip-shaped hoods).

A Pelical mirror set up may work, at least for shorter focal length. For super-telephoto, It will lost some view at the top.

 

[blufox]

Why a killer 5dMkIII is better than a High cost 1DsMk IV?
To understand this a small math will help -

say Canon makes 500$ profit on every 1DsMk IV body and just 200$ profit ona each 5d Mk III.

Now, number of 5d MkIII buyers = 50x(1DsMk IV buyers).

So effectively canon makes 10000$ profit for every 500$ profit it makes on 1Ds Mk IV.
So it is logical for Canon to listen to a 5dMKIII demand.

And honestly, they make more profit via lens sales than with bodies. They should try to keep customers loyal to Canon glass and perhaps pull in few more from Nikon camp with a well balanced 5d Mk III.

Thanks,

 

[epsiloneri]

A Pelical mirror set up may work, at least for shorter focal length. For super-telephoto, It will lost some view at the top.

Why would a pelical mirror need to be smaller, and why would the focal length matter?

 

[epsiloneri]

say Canon makes 500$ profit on every 1DsMk IV body and just 200$ profit ona each 5d Mk III.

Now, number of 5d MkIII buyers = 50x(1DsMk IV buyers).

So effectively canon makes 10000$ profit for every 500$ profit it makes on 1Ds Mk IV.
So it is logical for Canon to listen to a 5dMKIII demand.

But what if Canon makes a $3000 profit on each sold 1DsMk IV body and only $30 on each 5d Mk III? How do you know?

 

[Rocky]

A Pelical mirror set up may work, at least for shorter focal length. For super-telephoto, It will lost some view at the top.

Why would a pelical mirror need to be smaller, and why would the focal length matter?

It is the opposite. Since Pelical mirror does not move, it can be made bigger and be repositioned to be able to give us the additional 3.5mm area on the top and the bottom (May be??). A long lens actually need a bigger mirror due to the narrower object angle. You can try to draw it out yourself. or you can try to read some of the manual of film SLR in the 60's, they do mention the above effect. Now, DSLR never talk about this is due to the improvement of the mirror movement ( especiall, Nikon), the pivot of the mirror moves backward before swings up to allow a BIGGER mirror.

 

[Waleed Essam]

Aaaah... I don't know what to believe anymore. IMO it doesnt really make sense to have a FF 1Ds IV for 8000$ anymore... you can buy both 5DII (which is nearly the same for Landscape & studio) and a 1DIV (which is better for sports) for this price, and take one of them depending on your shoot.

However it also doesnt make any sense to me that the flagship camera is 1.3x crop and not FF!!

Maybe what they can do is have the 5DII stay at 21-24 mpix and have the 1DsIV 32+ mpix so that they can differentiate...

Or maybe have the 1DsIV have exactly same specs of 1DIV (including FPS) but with a FF high mpix sensor using new processors...

I really don't know what to think... only time will tell.

 

[blufox]

say Canon makes 500$ profit on every 1DsMk IV body and just 200$ profit ona each 5d Mk III.

Now, number of 5d MkIII buyers = 50x(1DsMk IV buyers).

So effectively canon makes 10000$ profit for every 500$ profit it makes on 1Ds Mk IV.
So it is logical for Canon to listen to a 5dMKIII demand.

But what if Canon makes a $3000 profit on each sold 1DsMk IV body and only $30 on each 5d Mk III? How do you know?

Correct I would not know but then this means.
If Canon can get same 1D features(or a lil less) into a 5d and make 150$ as profit instead of 30$, you bet Canon will get more money.

See this is a simple rule.

More demand = more profit.
Also, lesser profit per unit with gazillion sales is better than more profit per unit with paltry sales.

No rocket science you see .

 

[jouster]

Why would ANY company think it's a good idea to improve a $2400 camera to replace a $8000 one? really? I mean....REALLY?

Maybe because four of the $2400 models earns more than one of the $8000? The 1 series (and its Nikon counterpart) is about having a presence at the high end, and about developing technology for trickle down to other products. It isn't and never has been about profit.






Btw, it's "pellicle".

 

[spam]

Why would ANY company think it's a good idea to improve a $2400 camera to replace a $8000 one? really? I mean....REALLY?

Maybe because four of the $2400 models earns more than one of the $8000? The 1 series (and its Nikon counterpart) is about having a presence at the high end, and about developing technology for trickle down to other products. It isn't and never has been about profit.

Of course it's about profit, everything is. The pro segment indirectly sell a lot of cheaper models too, and the 1D-series users are professionals who buy expensive L-series lenses.

And Canon make a profit even if you just look at the 1D bodies. How much more do you think a 1Ds costs to produce compared to a 5D? It's the same sensor, more metal in the body (which doesn't change a lot from geneteration to generation), they need two processors in stead of one, some extra chips for the buffer, better sealing and somewhat higher spec on shutter. Of course they sell fewer 1D bodies than 5D bodies so it's fewer cameras to divide the development cost on, but that's not how it works. Most of the development cost are common for many/all Canon bodies and it's basically only the body hardware that Canon would have avoided if they dropped the 1D-line.

Which I can't imagine that they'll do, but it's going to be difficul to charge quite as much for the coming 1Ds generations. So, as long as Canon want to keep their position in the market they'll also have to make a top of the line professional model, they might change the name, but that seem pretty unlikely too.

 

[GMCPhotographics]

Ok, if this rumour is true and there is no 1DsIV, then what needs to be upspecced in the 5DII to fill that void?
The 5DII and 7D are weather sealed, but that could easily be brought upto the 1D level.
I think a dual card slot would be a must.
I think that retaining the smaller form factor with the option of a battery or wireless grip is useful to many pro users (like myself).
I think that the current 7D AF is good, but the centre point on the 5DII is better in low light and with tin DOF primes. If a hybrid system or a tweeked 7D system to offer the best of both cameras would be very good.
An increase to 5-6 fps would be a hughe improvement.
An increase in high iso cleanness would be good, in line with the 1D4.
MP increase but with options to reduce RAW size according to previous models; eg a 21mp / 16mp / 12mp options ( the the awfull sraw 50% pixel clip sucks).
Retaining the ability to swap out viewfinder screens is important and missing on the 7D

 

[Stickman]

While the 5Dmk2 might have a similar sensor, its lacking everything else. Sure there are guys who are studio shooters who have switched to a 5D2, but the shooters that need the features of the 1D series understand that the sensor is only a part of the picture.


There is no way that Canon is going to sell a cheaper camera and suddenly include upper end features on it just so they can lose their flagship camera.