The Future of the 1Ds & 5D Lines [CR2]

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I think someone from Canon initiated this discussion just to see customer reaction and get some ideas on what to do next. I am sure Canon reps are having fun reading this thread and are putting check marks and crosses next to each idea/suggestion

It started something like this:
Canon rep1: why not spilt 5d into two models?
Canon rep2: hmm, let's get some customer feedback first.
Canon rep1: hey, canonrumors, there is a rumor floating that...
Canonrumors: The future of the 5D line (CR2)!

The only problem with this, is they would have put this out there WOEFULLY too late in the game! They would have need to do this at least a year ago.

 

[V8Beast]

1. Canon needs to wake up and stop assuming that a FF is only for slow motion wedding and studio people. People want more speed! The only reason they don't get people checking off that they bought a 5-series for speed is because it has no speed, it's circular! Enough with the 3-4fps! Maybe not 10fps, since that gets a more expensive mirror box for FF but at least bump it to the old 40D/50D speed of 6.3fps, if not 7fps like D700 with grip.

Amen to that. I love my 5D in terms of its image quality, high ISO abilities, and dynamic range, but it's AF system and FPS make it a big pile of donkey dung for any subject that isn't stationary. In fact, the reason I never upgraded from a 5DC is because Canon put a joke of an AF system in the 5DII. When Nikon is putting a 51-point AF system in the D700 that shoots at 7 FPS, this simply isn't acceptable on Canon's part. I understand that the 5D and 5DII are fast enough for wedding shooters, but when you're shooting overweight brides and their four fat bridesmaid friends most of the time, I suppose you can get away with having such a lethargic body. However, if you're a Canon shooter, you're forced to chose between FF image quality OR speed. You can't have both, even with the $7K 1Ds, since its 5 FPS is slower that Canon's own prosumer xxD series!

If the next generation 1D gets a full-frame sensor - hence yielding a beast of a pro body that shoots 10 FPS with Canon's latest and greatest AF system - all for $5K, I'd buy one today. Unfortunately, I fear that if Canon does create such a camera by merging the 1D and 1Ds, it would fill the $7K price slot currently filled by the 1Ds MKIII. Who knows. Maybe Canon will surprise everyone and sell the 1D/1Ds amalgam for $5K.

Unlike Canon, Nikon really doesn't seem to give a $hit about potentially cannibalizing its product line, and puts 51-point AF systems and respectable frame rates in its prosumer line. In theory, the 5DIII will need a to shoot 7 FPS and have the 1D's 45-point AF system just to keep pace with the current D700. In reality, however, I think the best we can hope for is 5 FPS and the 7D's 19-point AF system. Again, if such a body existed with a pricetag under $3,000, I'd buy one today and relegate my beloved yet pokey 5DC to backup duty.

I hate to sound like a closet Nikon leg-humper, but the D3s offers the combination of speed and FF image quality that Canon has yet to offer. If I didn't have so much money invested in my Canon gear, I would have jumped ship a long time ago.

 

[Heidrun]

I have a 1D mk III. And i miss FF. Thats because i want to have wider lenses than the 16-35 is on my camera.
A FF and something like the one Nikon has ( 14-24 ) would be great

 

[V8Beast]

I have a 1D mk III. And i miss FF. Thats because i want to have wider lenses than the 16-35 is on my camera.
A FF and something like the one Nikon has ( 14-24 ) would be great

You bring up another good point. I know several people that have dumped their 1Ds MKIII's for 1DMKIV's because the 1Ds was just too freakin' slow. Unfortunately, that meant saying bye-bye to super wide angle shooting. The 1Ds is just ancient at this point, and IMHO, replacing it should be Canon's top priority. The 5DII is a year newer in comparison, so the need for replacing it isn't as dire.

 

[williamv]

Here's my suggestion for the 1Ds, 1D and 5D lines:

Merge the 1D and 1Ds lines. Create a FF 10FPS camera.

Upgrade the 5D along the same path as it has been going. Upgrade the focusing, the resolution and the other things that the market would demand, but don't change the general concept. the concept of the 5D has been a good one, so why kill it by morphing it into something else. I primarily take photos but now and then want to video, but two cameras are a hassle to take everywhere.

With the capacity freed from dropping one of the 1D line create a new line maybe the 5V. Make it a mirror less camera, with all the bells and whistles that a high end video user would want. Make it compact. Make it take the EF lens line, and have an electronic viewfinder. Allow it to capture medium size stills that have a super quick shutter speed because you're not limited by the mirror anymore. Canon could use the same lenses across both their video and still line, meaning they can increase demand for them without having to create another lens line and also provide an upgrade path for their video users. People would like to be able to use their accessories from one platform to another. Now I know they had a video camera previously with interchangeable lenses and I think it was less successful than Canon would have liked, but I think the timing was a little to soon for this type of camera. I think the time is now for such a device.

I've been looking recently to find a replacement for a Sony video camera that I own. I saw the Sony NEX-VG10. That's the sort of thing that my proposed 5V should be like. There are things that aren't quite right with it: Limitations of recording format, Sony lenses (having to buy new system, not many lens types), issues with some of the controls, lack of zoom rocker.

If it was a Canon body that took the EF lenses, and some of the other limitations were fixed, and it was around $2000, I think I'd get one. I'd like to use my L series glass in a video camera. You can spend a fortune on add ons to get your DSLR camera working like a video camera, maybe as much as buying a new body specifically for filming, and think how nice it would be to have a camera designed for shooting video, rather than something you have to assemble from add on bits to make it work like a video camera.

 

[NotABunny]

Enough with the 3-4fps! at least bump it to the old 40D/50D speed of 6.3fps, if not 7fps like D700 with grip. ... When Nikon is putting a 51-point AF system in the D700 that shoots at 7 FPS, this simply isn't acceptable on Canon's part.

Canon 5D2: 3.9 FPS, 21 MP
Nikon D700: 5 FPS (8 FPS with MB-D10 Battery Pack), 12.1 MP

=> 21 / 12.1 * 3.9 = 6.8 FPS resolution-equivalent for Canon

The fact that some people prefer speed over resolution is another matter.

several people that have dumped their 1Ds MKIII's for 1DMKIV's because the 1Ds was just too freakin' slow

1D4: Dual DIGIC 4, 16 MP, 10 FPS
1Ds3: Dual DIGIC 3, 21 MP, 3 FPS

 

[V8Beast]

The fact that some people prefer speed over resolution is another matter.

I don't prefer speed over resolution. I want both speed AND resolution. The $1,700 7D shoots 8 FPS at 18 megapixels, so not only is the technology there, Canon has proven it can be done at a reasonable price point. I fully understand that resolution is king if you're making a living doing portraits or weddings, but in the type of editorial work that I do, images rarely run at 100 percent. If I shoot a six-page story for a client, there's usually only one - and at most two - two-page spreads in the entire layout. Even the 12 megapixel 5DC is plenty.

It's easy to fixate on FPS or megapixels, but in practice, the lame AF system Canon puts in most of its bodies hurts speed more than anything. Let's say I'm shooting pan blurs of cars going down a race track. I need an AF system that's both fast and accurate. It needs to focus quickly, and lock focus on to the correct part of the car. To get any decent amount of motion blur in the cars' wheels or background, you can only count on 30-40 percent of the images being sharp, even with the latest and greatest IS lenses. Throw a POS AF system like the 5D's into the mix, and you can cut that "hit rate" percentage in half. So, the faster and more accurate the AF system, the slower FPS rate you can get away with. If a body has neither a fast AF system or fast FPS, it's the worst of both worlds.

The 1DMKIV is an excellent machine in the AF and FPS department, but it still lags behind in image quality to the 1Ds and in high ISO performance to the Nikon D3s. Throw in the fact that the D3s has a full-frame sensor to the 1D's 1.3:1 sensor, and the only thing the 1D has on the D3x is megapixels. At the end of the day, you either deliver the product your client wants, or you don't. The only place blaming your equipment gets you is the back of the unemployment line. Do you really think you can tell your cleint, "Well, I should've gotten you the shot, but my camera's too slow, but that's OK because the other images I've submitted to you have a ton of megapixels," is really gonna fly?

 

[Bob Howland]

I stand by the prediction I've been making since December

An external raw video recorder?!? Exactly what serious videographers have wanted in the 5DMkII. I have a feeling that, regardless of the pixel count, the body of the 5DMkIII (or whatever) will be real star. For one thing, if Canon gets serious about video, I want to see if/how they handle viewfinder masking.

And there is no reason why Canon can't use the same body architecture for multiple cameras: (1) FF, low pixel count, a video camera that takes really nice still images (2) FF, high pixel count, a still image camera that takes really nice videos, (3) APS-C/APS-H, low/medium pixel count, a speed demon optimized for sport shooters.

 

[Heidrun]

The fact that some people prefer speed over resolution is another matter.

I don't prefer speed over resolution. I want both speed AND resolution. The $1,700 7D shoots 8 FPS at 18 megapixels, so not only is the technology there, Canon has proven it can be done at a reasonable price point. I fully understand that resolution is king if you're making a living doing portraits or weddings, but in the type of editorial work that I do, images rarely run at 100 percent. If I shoot a six-page story for a client, there's usually only one - and at most two - two-page spreads in the entire layout. Even the 12 megapixel 5DC is plenty.

It's easy to fixate on FPS or megapixels, but in practice, the lame AF system Canon puts in most of its bodies hurts speed more than anything. Let's say I'm shooting pan blurs of cars going down a race track. I need an AF system that's both fast and accurate. It needs to focus quickly, and lock focus on to the correct part of the car. To get any decent amount of motion blur in the cars' wheels or background, you can only count on 30-40 percent of the images being sharp, even with the latest and greatest IS lenses. Throw a POS AF system like the 5D's into the mix, and you can cut that "hit rate" percentage in half. So, the faster and more accurate the AF system, the slower FPS rate you can get away with. If a body has neither a fast AF system or fast FPS, it's the worst of both worlds.

The 1DMKIV is an excellent machine in the AF and FPS department, but it still lags behind in image quality to the 1Ds and in high ISO performance to the Nikon D3s. Throw in the fact that the D3s has a full-frame sensor to the 1D's 1.3:1 sensor, and the only thing the 1D has on the D3x is megapixels. At the end of the day, you either deliver the product your client wants, or you don't. The only place blaming your equipment gets you is the back of the unemployment line. Do you really think you can tell your cleint, "Well, I should've gotten you the shot, but my camera's too slow, but that's OK because the other images I've submitted to you have a ton of megapixels," is really gonna fly?

I maybe takes one shot in the minute. I really want to change from 1d mk III to 1DS mk III or IV or perhaps 5D mk III when it arrives. I want the best resolution i can have for my pictures

 

[motorhead]

Heidrun,

I'm with you on this. Apart from landscapes, I shoot a bit of F1, British Superbikes and MotoGP which others might think lend themselves to high fps shooting. However I remain firmly in one-shot mode and don't use motordrive at all. Maybe I'm old school, but I prefer to use my knowledge of each discipline to time my shutter press. I believe, right or wrong, that I can achieve a better shot that way than if I used a "scattergun" method.

I have read books by world famous sports photographers and have yet to see any using and recommending anything other than the method you and I use.

So, I am firmly in the high resolution, high DR camp and have no personal need of high ISO's or ever increasing motordrive speeds.

 

[RuneL]

These are answers to various post without the quotes...

Have BMW stopped selling the 760i? Mercedes the S-class AMG? Audi the S8? Surely these cares make no sense and add a miniscule amount of cash-flow compared to the respective other models of each company.

Some people in this thread are looking forward to a more simplified 1D line - why? Is it hard to figure out now?

Dropping the 1Ds and morphing them into one 1D with FF makes sense, but I'd like the ability to crop it down, I want the speed of fps (high-ish isn't enough - I need at least teh current 1D IV or more) and af, the large buffer and the extra reach for sports, where I shoot either jpeg, s- or m-raw anyways - so who cares about full frame? I don't want to box with 50+MB files when there is a deadline and hundreds of pictures to go through. I don't have any strong need for full frame as it is, I see the neatness of it, but u know, the impact for me? I'd have to get extenders or new teles...

I like the 1D line as it is. If Canon breaks it I'm convinced a lot more people will just move on to Nikon, especially if the price goes up and Nikon keeps their current range. I know I will. Dropping it will also mean they lose the flagship and the cameras that cater to the pros.

The video part - well, drop the rolling shutter. Yeah, you get awesome quality and a huge varity of lenses, a pretty decent size, but god damn, that rolling shutter makes it hard. But once you are aware of the limitations you're good. I've made awesome looking stuff with mine using only the camera handheld and on a regular manfrotto tripod with a pan head. And autofocus - in a videocamera - really? Anyone needs this? What you need is proper follow focus and a proper screen for focusing. Af in a video camera? No. Just no.

Low light monsters? That is the Nikon D3S, not the 5D II. The low light monster in Canons line up is the 1D IV. Less noise than the 5D II.

What they do with the 5D doesn't matter to me. Same with the rest of the line up.





And blah blah blah. Who cares. They will keep making the cameras we know.

Edit: What I want that actually means something to every day use instead of fever nerd-gasm-fantasies: Better weather sealing, I don't want my drive/af buttons breaking in hard reain.
Better view finder info, I wanna see a change to lightmeter as I select ISO. Etc...