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

[NormanBates]

* every DSLR they release from now on is going to have video, there's no point in disabling it, they don't save any money by doing that

* the video improvement I want most for the next generation of canon DSLRs, which is also the one that's most likely to happen, is a switch to a decent resampling algorithm (read: no more line-skipping, and therefore reasonable amounts of aliasing/moire; panasonic has done that already; canon should go there too, soon)

* the additional video improvements above that call not just for a split in a DSLR model, but for a completely different form factor: a real video camera; you can't get inbuilt ND filters, XLR inputs, and dedicated buttons, in a DSLR body; getting rid of the mirror and allowing for a bigger body will do the trick

* in any case, given how good the sony FS100 is, and given it sells for $5K, they can't go much higher than that in a DSLR form factor (yes, the sensor is bigger, but you also lose a lot of features by sticking to a DSLR body)

 

[NXT1000]

Splitting the “5″ series camera for stills and video has been asked for by a lot of still photographers who don’t care about video.

these people should be put in front of firing squad and shot.

 

[mreco99]

Splitting the “5″ series camera for stills and video has been asked for by a lot of still photographers who don’t care about video.

these people should be put in front of firing squad and shot.

save me a gun....

 

[dr croubie]

So here's my take on the situation:

currently:
1ds3 - ff, highest mp, decent fps, best af, best high iso, built like a tank w grip, f8 focussing.

1d4 - apsh, medium mp, highest fps, best af, best high iso, built like a tank w grip, f8 focussing.

5d2 - ff, highest mp, medium-low fps, decent af, best high iso, (weathersealed?), no grip, f5 focussing.

7d - apsc, medium-high mp, medium-high fps, medium-high af, decent high iso, weathersealed, no grip, f5 focussing

60d - apsc, medium-high mp, medium-low fps, medium af, generally reduced features of 7d.

550/600d - reduced features of 60d

1100d - My-First-Dslr.



so what if they merge the 1d & 1ds? and simultaneous with splitting the 5d lines?
i like the idea of:
1d5/1ds4, whatever it's called - ff, highest mp (maybe 30-40?), decent fps in ff mode, highest fps in apsh/apsc crop mode (don't nikons do this?), best af, best high iso, built like a tank w grip, f8 focussing, dual digic, best high iso.

3d - the "pro-video" version of the 5d3. fixed pellicle mirror, full time video af, raw video, (4k video??), maybe pushing the price tag of the 1d line, but well above the 5d3. rest of specs as 5d3 below, (dual digic?), best high iso.

5d3 - ff, high mp (30mp? depending how high the 1d goes), decent af (as current 7d, 19cross, or better, not as good as 1d5), lower fps than 7d, higher than 70d, f5 focussing, no grip, single digic, best high iso. video performance as 600d now, 1080@30fps, digital zoom, slowish video af as now.

7d2 - apsc, medium high mp (25ish?), ~7 fps, 2nd best af (same or better than 5d3), decent high iso (similar to 7d vs 5d2 performance).

70d and lower - cut-down versions of 7d2, with worse af/fps/specs & features accordingly. maybe keep the current 18mp sensor for now to boost sales of 7d2, depending on release order.


with this scenario, release dates? i'm still going for 1ds3-replacement, if it's called 1ds4 or what, being the next thing out. no way they'll bring out a 5d3 with the same sensor as the 1ds4 first. if we see a 5d3 first, then the 1ds4 is going to have much higher mp.

I'm definitely thinking that the most likely scenario will be 7d2/70d/650d all will share the same sensor and progressively reduced features. no way they'll bring out a 70d or 650d with >18mp before a 7d2. and it follows on from there, 7d2 trickles to a later 70d and later 650d (if 650d is before 70d, then it will have 18mp sensor and 70d will have the same as 7d2, or somewhere between 18mp and 7d2 sensor). It makes more economic sense to have the same sensor for lots of models, economies of scale etc.

we're almost at the limits of most lens' resolutions as it is (my 70-300 non-L worked fine on a 350d at release time, on my 7d it's just fuzzy. sold it to my sis and i'm buying the L version on the weekend). so we're not going to see the leaps and bounds of the sensor resolution we have recently.

my hope? add 1 or 2 bits of dynamic range for the 1d line, keep it the same mp as the 3/5d line just HDR. that'll get your pros buying them like they're going out of fashion...

 

[austinmaniac]

personally, i'd like to see a higher sync speed. it's what currently separates dslr and medium format. 1/250 just doesn't cut it for stopping action.

 

[lol]

If I were head of Canon going for a two model 5D3 approach, I'd make one photo-centric. Pretty much as we know the 5D2 but generally "improved" all round. It will include video in a similar way to the 5D2. The 5D3-V for lack of a better name would share the majority of the core electronics, but repackaged in a much more video friendly form factor, whatever that will be. It may or may not do stills too, but if so it would be very secondary.

 

[tomscott]

In my opinion anyone who is a serious professional videographer wont use a DSLR and will use a video camera from a professional range. I know you get the enhanced depth of field, with the EF system, but by the time you have bought the extra equipment like a shoulder harness and all the other stuff that makes a DSLR like a pro video camera you are spending nearly double what a pro video camera would cost. Not forgetting it has serious flaws like zooming etc

I think the video thing has got out of hand, especially for them to create two cameras, one for and one without!! Most stupid idea i have ever heard! Even with the advanced video features, will it be worth the price hike? And a DSLR in the line up in the £2000 without video... people see features as a bonus, removing would be a mistake. The DSLR is designed for stills not video, ergonomically and lens wise... there is no digital zoom. Its just a nice extra that people can use when needed. Yes it has been used in the pro scene with good effect but surely a new range of camera would be a better way of marketing this. With better ergonomic features put more towards video professionals and can use the EF system. Its a 50/50 opinion because still is really important but for a videographer maybe not but its the same the other way round its nice to have high quality stills from video... so...

I just dont think the DSLR market isthe right one to implement in on professionally! A new homologation camera type would make more sense. Leave the video on the DSLRs for people that want to use it but create a newer market that is based on the EF system but aimed more toward video.

In my opinion the 5D is a slow camera for a niche market, the cameras speed allows you to stop compose and think about what you are shooting just like a medium format film camera did in the day. Is a homologation model what people want, then i feel a new re-branded faster full frame camera would be better marketing than a 5D split. I think that it would confuse people as canons range already does, too many cameras with similar features. They really need to split the range and have a real reason for people to spend the extra cash. The difference between the 60D and the 7D is micro adjust, weather sealing and more points. But for the 50D owners it is a serious downgrade for the same price and the 7D doesnt add much (more MP and new AF on a 50D) and an extra £400!! its obserd, in my opinion the 7D is what the newer 50D should have been. Its a joke.

Pro
1D
3D (Fast full frame camera, new 1ds without the price tag and size. A suped up 7D say 22mp)
5D (Similar to now with the improvements noted AF 30mp etc)

Semi
7D (APC version of the 3D)
60D (better version of the amateur model)

Amateur
600D
1100D

My 2 cent, i love canon products but the direction they are going in their product planning, direction and brand awareness is becoming very poor. A real shake up needs to happen, but as features get better, technology becomes available and socially accepted as the norm it is harder to distinguish the range. Which is why i think a newer type of camera needs to come into being. Help distinguish the features and become more specialist towards the needs of users in the EF format.

 

[polpaulin]

I am waiting for a PRO 1Ds , no AA filter , new sensor, no video, watever the price but a PRO camera

 

[unfocused]

Canon has yet to directly monetize video capabilities in DSLRs.

What does that even mean? And, this is a CR2 Source? There's no "meat" to this rumor, just repeating things we've heard before with a little pseudo-business speak thrown in to make it sound authoritative.

Canon is selling a whole lot of DSLRs with video capability. The cost of including video is minimal and it greatly expands their sales potential. In addition, it's added to their prestige and marketing (Look at all the publicity they got from one "House" episode). I would say they have "monetized" video capabilities pretty well so far.

 

[motorhead]

I wonder about technology though, can you offer a 9fps+ capability in a 30+mp camera?

Well, I think a practical solution would be
a single 1D model, 30 MP, shooting 10 fps with e.g. 12 MP and e.g. 3 fps with the full 30 MP.
I think this would make all customer quite happy.

It would not satisfy me and I suggest its shelf life would be very limited. 30MP was withdrawn by Canon if we are to believe the rumours because it was already yesterdays news.

And just to add to the video versus non video debate thats sprung up. I am a stills photographer and will never shoot video even if I'm forced to have it on the camera. I firmly believe that those who want video should buy a video camera designed for the purpose not con the rest of us into paying for something we don't want. And before anyone tells me (yet again) that its not costing me anything - Thats nonsense, we are all paying the R&D and production costs whether we like it or not as things are. Its about time the costs are born by those who want it.

 

[NormanBates]

In my opinion anyone who is a serious professional videographer wont use a DSLR and will use a video camera from a professional range. I know you get the enhanced depth of field, with the EF system, but by the time you have bought the extra equipment like a shoulder harness and all the other stuff that makes a DSLR like a pro video camera you are spending nearly double what a pro video camera would cost. Not forgetting it has serious flaws like zooming etc

all I read there was: "I'm not a videographer, I really have no idea about that market"

* "professional videographer" and "zooming" should never be in the same sentence

* "a pro video camera" comparable to a DSLR starts at $5K (without lenses)

* you've been out of the planet for the last two ryears, right?

* you know black swan had a scene shot with DSLRs? and that George Lucas' Red Tails also used DSLRs? and both of them in situations where the existence of cameras like the sony F3 or FS100 (or the Sony CineAlta F35, which was the main camera in Red Tails) is irrelevant (Black Swan used the DSLRs to shoot in the underground, without permits; in Red Tails, DSLRs were put inside the cabins of WW2 planes; in both cases, the size of a DSLR was deemed more important than the ergonomics of a real videocamera)

the rest of your post, though, is pretty sensible (e.g. the 50D vs 60D vs 7D part, but also the bit about a dedicated videocamera being more likely than a video-centric DSLR); it's just that the beginning cried for a "duty calls" post:
http://xkcd.com/386/

 

[awinphoto]

In my opinion anyone who is a serious professional videographer wont use a DSLR and will use a video camera from a professional range. I know you get the enhanced depth of field, with the EF system, but by the time you have bought the extra equipment like a shoulder harness and all the other stuff that makes a DSLR like a pro video camera you are spending nearly double what a pro video camera would cost. Not forgetting it has serious flaws like zooming etc

all I read there was: "I'm not a videographer, I really have no idea about that market"

* "professional videographer" and "zooming" should never be in the same sentence

* "a pro video camera" comparable to a DSLR starts at $5K (without lenses)

* you've been out of the planet for the last two ryears, right?

* you know black swan had a scene shot with DSLRs? and that George Lucas' Red Tails also used DSLRs? and both of them in situations where the existence of cameras like the sony F3 or FS100 (or the Sony CineAlta F35, which was the main camera in Red Tails) is irrelevant (Black Swan used the DSLRs to shoot in the underground, without permits; in Red Tails, DSLRs were put inside the cabins of WW2 planes; in both cases, the size of a DSLR was deemed more important than the ergonomics of a real videocamera)

the rest of your post, though, is pretty sensible (e.g. the 50D vs 60D vs 7D part, but also the bit about a dedicated videocamera being more likely than a video-centric DSLR); it's just that the beginning cried for a "duty calls" post:
http://xkcd.com/386/

+1... dont forget scenes shots in the TV show "house" and even a few scenes in avatar if i'm not mistaken. There is always a place for compact video cameras. It's not of the quality of a "red" camera, but for what it is, it's not a shabby performer. In the end I'd rather have that option in my bag rather than differ all video related jobs to someone else and lose money and a potential client.

 

[tomscott]

Ok then give me a few more examples, in my opinion those were almost experiments and for specific uses where they were seen as better in specific situations where a bigger camera wasnt suited not replacements 'yes we can..." but should you? Otherwise the whole industry would use them. Just because there are a few examples doesn't mean they are accepted as an industry standard. Canon was probably a partner and "see if you can" as good publicity comes to mind. The cameras were only used in specific situations they were not seen as a replacement.

Once you add a lens to the 5D say a 24-70mm or a prime your looking at £1000-1500 then the shoulder harness £1500 and a mic kit and your looking at £5000+. What i meant by zooming was that if you are using a zoom lens the shudder you get from zooming is not aesthetic compared to an electronic digital zoom. At the end of the day my comment concluded at a homologation model with the rumours of new video EF lenses.

Anyone serious about video would choose something like the XL2 orXH G1s.

 

[kencathy]

Canon should think twice about bifurcating the 5d mk iii with a pricier twin. There are alternatives, and we'd hate to lose a Canon devotee to a competitor!

 

[Bob Howland]

Ok then give me a few more examples, in my opinion those were almost experiments and for specific uses where they were seen as better in specific situations where a bigger camera wasnt suited not replacements 'yes we can..." but should you? Otherwise the whole industry would use them. Just because there are a few examples doesn't mean they are accepted as an industry standard. Canon was probably a partner and "see if you can" as good publicity comes to mind. The cameras were only used in specific situations they were not seen as a replacement.

Once you add a lens to the 5D say a 24-70mm or a prime your looking at £1000-1500 then the shoulder harness £1500 and a mic kit and your looking at £5000+. What i meant by zooming was that if you are using a zoom lens the shudder you get from zooming is not aesthetic compared to an electronic digital zoom. At the end of the day my comment concluded at a homologation model with the rumours of new video EF lenses.

Anyone serious about video would choose something like the XL2 orXH G1s.

Or an XA10 or XF100 camcorder, which are roughly similar to the 7D and 5D in price, except that the camcorders include a 10X zoom lens. I would suggest that posters who think that the 5D2 is a great video camera should download and read the user manual to the XF100/XF105, just to see what you're missing.

 

[UncleFester]

The 5D II performs well enough in video to where many won't upgrade to III if the autofocus problem isn't fixed for stills. That's the 5D's biggest problem. I won't upgrade until I'm confident this problem has been resolved and will out-perform the II.

I'm not going to hold my breath.

 

[gene_can_sing]

It so obvious from reading these comments that the 5D3 need to be SPLIT into a regular edition with some video, and a optimized video edition. People can't really seem to meet in the middle. It's like Democrats and Republicans.

Think of it this way. A video editor and a 3D animator both buy the newest Macintosh. The video guy is probably going to buy a graphics card optimized for video and video capture and export (very expensive cards). The 3D guy is probably going to buy a graphics card that is optimized for 3D. The same computer, but optimized for different disciplines. It's really no different with cameras.

A big part of why the 5D2 was so successful was because of the video. I work in TV in LA, and everyone I know (and there are many), bought the 5D / 7D mainly for the video.

The market is evolving, and Canon needs to change with it.

Still photographers don't want the video and Video people don't need a huge mega-pixel count because it causes aliasing and line-skipping. As a video guy, I would be happy to have a 5d3 that took great video and good stills, but I don't need a 30 mega pixel image. That's way over kill for me. The opposite probably applies to a Still photographer.

As for the argument of "just go buy a video camera," that is such and OLD and DATED way of looking at things. That just sounds like something my Dad would say. Look at the new RED Epic, it's pretty small and not like a convential video camera. Try shooting cameras like the Red or the Panasonic AF 101 handheld. It doesn't work very well as it always needs some type of support because the size and ergonomic are terrible for hand held.

The small size of the DSLR's are it greatest strength. If you wanted to, you can use a cage and attache a monitor, a good mic to a good recorder, a matte box, a different handle, etc.... But if you want it just the bare basic camera for those stealth Subway shots in Black Swan, it's good for that too. It's as big as you want and as small as you want. Something that just CANNOT be done with current video cameras that are huge and have everything built in.

The DSLRs have their place in video for sure, especially when you need a small, portable camera which is great if you are shooting solo or with a small crew. James Cameron said in a recent interview that he's shooting an entire feature using 5Ds. So yeah, DSLR video is here to stay.

I think the Red Epic and the Scarlet and the DSLRs, all small cameras, are the way of the future. Who wants to film with a giant video camera when you can eventually have something that would do the same thing, but fits in one hand? I certainly don't.

But it's obvious that Canon cannot make both camps happy, so they should just do 2 versions of the 5d3.

 

[Loswr]

I’m told that there will be no more 1D after the next 1Ds.

Previously, you were told (also CR2?) that there would not be a next 1Ds.

I’m told there will be a shakeup in the Canon lineup by the end of 2011.

A shakeup in the lineup? How does a MkIII of anything represent a shakeup? By definition, a Mk# release is an incremental improvement in an existing product (as are the equivalent increments in the xxD and xxxD lines). The 1D was a shakeup - it was digital. The 5D was a shakeup - 'affordable FF in a small body'. The 7D was a shakeup - near-1D frame rates in an APS-C format. If this was about a 3D or a 9D, we could talk shakeup.

I fully expect there to be a 1DsIV, then a 5DIII, then a 7DII. The next shakeup is a few years away.

 

[Loswr]

The market is evolving, and Canon needs to change with it.

That's just it. Canon seems to lag quite a bit behind in their evolution. Not that they're using stone knives and bear skins, but they don't have a history of 'skating to where the puck's going.' I think they put video into the 5DII and were caught by surprise at the outcome. Three short years is not enough for them to catch up to the crest of that wave (or quite likely, they'll not want to risk doing so).

 

[gene_can_sing]

The market is evolving, and Canon needs to change with it.

That's just it. Canon seems to lag quite a bit behind in their evolution. Not that they're using stone knives and bear skins, but they don't have a history of 'skating to where the puck's going.' I think they put video into the 5DII and were caught by surprise at the outcome. Three short years is not enough for them to catch up to the crest of that wave (or quite likely, they'll not want to risk doing so).

I totally agree with you. Canon is tragically conservative. The success of the 5D2 was basically an accident because of the video. Canon totally didn't anticipate it.

They are the major camera company now, but if they don't start innovating again, they are going to lose to Sony and Panasonic who are very hungry and coming up with many modern and innovative products.

Not so sure on my history, but wasn't Nikon the dominate company back in the 80s? Wasn't it then a hungry and innovative Canon overtook Nikon? Same thing could very easily happen, especially with Sony since they are now making sensors for other companies and coming out with progressive products.