The Next DSLR from Canon Will Be...

nhz said:
JennyGW said:
I hear an awful lot of demand for 4K video and gps and touch screen and all sorts of fancy stuff that I have no interest in whatsoever as a stills photographer. I kinda resent paying the extra money for all of this stuff I will never use, plus it just adds crud to the buttons, dials and menus.

I realise this probably (ok definitely ;) ) won't happen, but it would be awesome to see the 5Div as a pure stills camera with nothing added that isn't towards making a higher quality stills image.

Curious does any brand have such a beast?

With cameras sometimes Less is More, as in less features means much higher price.

I also regret that most cameras are a bit like Christmas trees, but it probably keeps the price down because all these extra features that you don't need means potential extra buyers = more sales volume, lower price.

Most features add VERY little to the real production cost of a camera, much of it is just some electronics, buttons and software. The only real cost is in development. Of course there is another cost for adding these features: missing shots because of all the stuff that gets in the way, but you only notice that after buying ;-)

As others have pointed out, there are a few cameras that go a little bit in the direction you want (e.g. Nikon Df) but nothing that really gets back to basics - probably because there would not be enough buyers.

The above writer make a good point.
Medium format cameras will offer the basics with outstanding sensor performance. Try one of those.
However the features of 4K and GPS and bitching about the cost would be like complaining my calculator has an % key and I never use it, So I think its crazy it has one.
What worth being upset about, is that adding these features on a high end camera has a high profit margin.
The manufactures all know that you may charge $100 for the feature on a $400 camera and will mark up the same feature triple on a high end camera only because they know the buyer will pay for it.
 
Upvote 0
privatebydesign said:
JennyGW said:
Curious does any brand have such a beast?

Nikon would argue the DF is your camera. With sales in the single digits I wouldn't expect to see a Canon version any time.......ever......

If I was just starting out, or had money to chuck about, the DF looks perfect for me. With a lot of Canon L glass it would be an expensive change to make. The DF also looks a bit fiddley to handle compared to the 5D?
 
Upvote 0
JennyGW said:
privatebydesign said:
JennyGW said:
Curious does any brand have such a beast?

Nikon would argue the DF is your camera. With sales in the single digits I wouldn't expect to see a Canon version any time.......ever......

If I was just starting out, or had money to chuck about, the DF looks perfect for me. With a lot of Canon L glass it would be an expensive change to make. The DF also looks a bit fiddley to handle compared to the 5D?

One thing Canon has always been ahead of Nikon is with the menus on the dslr's. Also, the ergonomics (dial placement, form factors) have been touted as superior as well. So, as for fiddly? Yeah I'd say the 5D series is less fiddly.
 
Upvote 0
I am not so sure about the next Canon EOS 5D Mark IV name is going to be this one, I'm thinking about in Canon they have a 5Ds (and 5Ds R) and maybe it is time to build a new name, for example an EOS 3D. Why a Canon EOS 3D, well, first because right now there are many "professional" or "semi-professional" cameras in the same stand; EOS 80D-EOS 7D Mk II, EOS 5 Ds (R included)-EOS 5D Mk III-EOS 6D, so, the EOS 1Dx Mk II is alone and like it happened in the past, the EOS 3 it was the closed brother of the EOS 1v, even if the EOS 3 it was a camera built waiting for a new EOS 1 model.

What it could be am EOS 3D? Maybe the first Pro DSLR with a ari-angle touch screen, with wifi, NFC and GPS and why not a new eye focusing system... I am not so sure about that because a camera like this is more possible to get in a new EOS 6D Mark II than in a Pro camera, everybody knows how it works Canon so, if Nikon have a D750...

Talking about resolution I'm thinking about the 31 mp (28 effective mp) Samsung camera but in 135 size...
 
Upvote 0
Xavitxaung said:
I am not so sure about the next Canon EOS 5D Mark IV name is going to be this one, I'm thinking about in Canon they have a 5Ds (and 5Ds R) and maybe it is time to build a new name, for example an EOS 3D. Why a Canon EOS 3D, well, first because right now there are many "professional" or "semi-professional" cameras in the same stand; EOS 80D-EOS 7D Mk II, EOS 5 Ds (R included)-EOS 5D Mk III-EOS 6D, so, the EOS 1Dx Mk II is alone and like it happened in the past, the EOS 3 it was the closed brother of the EOS 1v, even if the EOS 3 it was a camera built waiting for a new EOS 1 model.

What it could be am EOS 3D? Maybe the first Pro DSLR with a ari-angle touch screen, with wifi, NFC and GPS and why not a new eye focusing system... I am not so sure about that because a camera like this is more possible to get in a new EOS 6D Mark II than in a Pro camera, everybody knows how it works Canon so, if Nikon have a D750...

Talking about resolution I'm thinking about the 31 mp (28 effective mp) Samsung camera but in 135 size...

The naming scheme threads have beaten this to death but I'll reiterate once again...3D won't happen for various reasons, number one being misleading. 4D won't happen due to 'shi'. Now, they have shown a willingness to put out a MklV in the past and so I believe it will happen here as well. The 5D line has a great legacy and why upset that track record?
 
Upvote 0
slclick said:
The naming scheme threads have beaten this to death but I'll reiterate once again...3D won't happen for various reasons, number one being misleading. 4D won't happen due to 'shi'. Now, they have shown a willingness to put out a MklV in the past and so I believe it will happen here as well. The 5D line has a great legacy and why upset that track record?

I agree. Anything other than "5D IV" would be so incredibly and unbelievably INNOVATIVE for Canon ... there would be no innovation left for the camera itself, just minor iterations of the same thing. Mirror, slap, slap, flap, flap.
 
Upvote 0
AvTvM said:
slclick said:
The naming scheme threads have beaten this to death but I'll reiterate once again...3D won't happen for various reasons, number one being misleading. 4D won't happen due to 'shi'. Now, they have shown a willingness to put out a MklV in the past and so I believe it will happen here as well. The 5D line has a great legacy and why upset that track record?

I agree. Anything other than "5D IV" would be so incredibly and unbelievably INNOVATIVE for Canon ... there would be no innovation left for the camera itself, just minor iterations of the same thing. Mirror, slap, slap, flap, flap.

So it is 5DIII Mark II then :D
 
Upvote 0
ecka said:
nhz said:
ecka said:
Well, honestly, even 5D3 should have had at least 1080@60p and now 4K is already too late. I mean, point & shoots and smartphones got 4K these days, so it's not a big deal anymore, like it was in 2014. Not having it in an expensive semi-pro camera is more of a disadvantage, than a bonus really. It's not the "future-proofness" we are talking about, we need it since two years ago. Canon is just lagging behind. They should start putting 4K in all of their $500+ cameras. The Sony a6300 got it. Do you think that the next EOS-M will have 4K? Or the 6D2? Even the 7D2 should have had 4K (and the touchscreen). Thank god there's MagicLantern :).
You don't even need a 4K display to appreciate the quality of UHD videos. The sharpness, the details and contrast look amazing even on 1080 displays. There is no discussion.

Why must every camera have video or even 4K? Most people have a smartphone, if they are really serious about video they hopefully buy a real video camera (with MUCH better ergonomics etc.). IMHO video on DSLRs is a kludge and always will be and I think that for only a small percentage of buyers it has real value (those who need better quality/flexibility than a smartphone can offer, but who don't have the money/requirements to buy a real video camera).

nhz said:
JennyGW said:
I hear an awful lot of demand for 4K video and gps and touch screen and all sorts of fancy stuff that I have no interest in whatsoever as a stills photographer. I kinda resent paying the extra money for all of this stuff I will never use, plus it just adds crud to the buttons, dials and menus.

I realise this probably (ok definitely ;) ) won't happen, but it would be awesome to see the 5Div as a pure stills camera with nothing added that isn't towards making a higher quality stills image.

Curious does any brand have such a beast?

With cameras sometimes Less is More, as in less features means much higher price.

I also regret that most cameras are a bit like Christmas trees, but it probably keeps the price down because all these extra features that you don't need means potential extra buyers = more sales volume, lower price.


Most features add VERY little to the real production cost of a camera, much of it is just some electronics, buttons and software. The only real cost is in development. Of course there is another cost for adding these features: missing shots because of all the stuff that gets in the way, but you only notice that after buying ;-)

As others have pointed out, there are a few cameras that go a little bit in the direction you want (e.g. Nikon Df) but nothing that really gets back to basics - probably because there would not be enough buyers.

I think you are contradicting yourself.
Canon doesn't make smartphones :) and I don't want to buy a $500 smartphone to shoot 4K, just because my $3000 DSLR can't do it.
it's not contradicting at all. There is a big difference between adding features that cost almost nothing (like currently basic FullHD video) and adding features that require extra or newer chips, faster card slots, better heat dissipation etc. like full spec 4K.

Also, if a feature is very new or 'unique' of course a manufacturer is tempted to only offer it on the most expensive model initially, even if the production cost is close to zero. They will gradually add the feature to cheaper models ones the novelty wears off and people with money to burn have upgraded to the more expensive model.
 
Upvote 0
slclick said:
One thing Canon has always been ahead of Nikon is with the menus on the dslr's. Also, the ergonomics (dial placement, form factors) have been touted as superior as well. So, as for fiddly? Yeah I'd say the 5D series is less fiddly.

I watched a couple of DF reviews on YT and those dials are horrible, lol And they gave it a bad focusing system. Love the low light performance though.
 
Upvote 0
nhz said:
ecka said:
nhz said:
ecka said:
Well, honestly, even 5D3 should have had at least 1080@60p and now 4K is already too late. I mean, point & shoots and smartphones got 4K these days, so it's not a big deal anymore, like it was in 2014. Not having it in an expensive semi-pro camera is more of a disadvantage, than a bonus really. It's not the "future-proofness" we are talking about, we need it since two years ago. Canon is just lagging behind. They should start putting 4K in all of their $500+ cameras. The Sony a6300 got it. Do you think that the next EOS-M will have 4K? Or the 6D2? Even the 7D2 should have had 4K (and the touchscreen). Thank god there's MagicLantern :).
You don't even need a 4K display to appreciate the quality of UHD videos. The sharpness, the details and contrast look amazing even on 1080 displays. There is no discussion.

Why must every camera have video or even 4K? Most people have a smartphone, if they are really serious about video they hopefully buy a real video camera (with MUCH better ergonomics etc.). IMHO video on DSLRs is a kludge and always will be and I think that for only a small percentage of buyers it has real value (those who need better quality/flexibility than a smartphone can offer, but who don't have the money/requirements to buy a real video camera).

nhz said:
JennyGW said:
I hear an awful lot of demand for 4K video and gps and touch screen and all sorts of fancy stuff that I have no interest in whatsoever as a stills photographer. I kinda resent paying the extra money for all of this stuff I will never use, plus it just adds crud to the buttons, dials and menus.

I realise this probably (ok definitely ;) ) won't happen, but it would be awesome to see the 5Div as a pure stills camera with nothing added that isn't towards making a higher quality stills image.

Curious does any brand have such a beast?

With cameras sometimes Less is More, as in less features means much higher price.

I also regret that most cameras are a bit like Christmas trees, but it probably keeps the price down because all these extra features that you don't need means potential extra buyers = more sales volume, lower price.


Most features add VERY little to the real production cost of a camera, much of it is just some electronics, buttons and software. The only real cost is in development. Of course there is another cost for adding these features: missing shots because of all the stuff that gets in the way, but you only notice that after buying ;-)

As others have pointed out, there are a few cameras that go a little bit in the direction you want (e.g. Nikon Df) but nothing that really gets back to basics - probably because there would not be enough buyers.

I think you are contradicting yourself.
Canon doesn't make smartphones :) and I don't want to buy a $500 smartphone to shoot 4K, just because my $3000 DSLR can't do it.
it's not contradicting at all. There is a big difference between adding features that cost almost nothing (like currently basic FullHD video) and adding features that require extra or newer chips, faster card slots, better heat dissipation etc. like full spec 4K.

Also, if a feature is very new or 'unique' of course a manufacturer is tempted to only offer it on the most expensive model initially, even if the production cost is close to zero. They will gradually add the feature to cheaper models ones the novelty wears off and people with money to burn have upgraded to the more expensive model.

But, like you said, the extra features would attract more buyers and there would be no need for making a different product for each consumer party :), in your words:
- "potential extra buyers = more sales volume, lower price"
- "Most features add VERY little to the real production cost of a camera, much of it is just some electronics, buttons and software".

The more expensive models should offer more, like 4K@60p, less noise, higher bit rate, RAW video, etc.
4K@30p in 6D2 would at least be something.
 
Upvote 0
AvTvM said:
slclick said:
The naming scheme threads have beaten this to death but I'll reiterate once again...3D won't happen for various reasons, number one being misleading. 4D won't happen due to 'shi'. Now, they have shown a willingness to put out a MklV in the past and so I believe it will happen here as well. The 5D line has a great legacy and why upset that track record?

I agree. Anything other than "5D IV" would be so incredibly and unbelievably INNOVATIVE for Canon ... there would be no innovation left for the camera itself, just minor iterations of the same thing. Mirror, slap, slap, flap, flap.

Oh the horror
 
Upvote 0
JennyGW said:
I hear an awful lot of demand for 4K video and gps and touch screen and all sorts of fancy stuff that I have no interest in whatsoever as a stills photographer. I kinda resent paying the extra money for all of this stuff I will never use, plus it just adds crud to the buttons, dials and menus.

I realise this probably (ok definitely ;) ) won't happen, but it would be awesome to see the 5Div as a pure stills camera with nothing added that isn't towards making a higher quality stills image.

Curious does any brand have such a beast?

Pentax K1 looks promising for Landscapes. Not sure about the lens support for Studio work.
 
Upvote 0
If the 5D MK IV doesnt come in March (The Photography Show, Birmingham, UK) then it will be September (Photokina). If its September then the 6D MKII maybe pushed into 2017 for an onsale date (maybe announced late 2016) or Canon could surprise us all and launch both at Photokina.
A professional mirrorless camera if they make one will be launched in Japan, sales of mirrorless have not been steller in the US with the Far East leading followed by Europe.

I personally think Canon will launch at Photokina as they did with the MKII which was ground-breaking which Im sure the 5D MKIV will be.
 
Upvote 0
I switched to the Sony A7II because I got tired of walking around with my 6D looking like a wedding photographer. It's certainly fine, and even beneficial, if you ARE a wedding photographer, but I felt a little creepy out in public with a big DSLR.

There is a lot to love about going mirrorless, aside from the less intrusive form factor. I'm an amateur landscape enthusiast, and the focus peaking, zebras, onscreen level, ability to see the modified image in the EVF before taking the shot, and the live view capabilities with the tilt screen to name a few are very beneficial. That being said, the Sony still feels more like a disposable electronic device than a finely tuned piece of camera gear that you'd want to use for a number of years.

For that reason and the vast number of affordable lenses, I'll probably come back to Canon if the 6D2 can fill some of the void.

Here's what I'd really like to see in the 6D2:
- Updated form factor - The existing DSLR physical design could use a refresh. It wouldn't take much, but I'd prefer not to stand out so much when I'm carrying it. Slimming some of the lines without sacrificing ergonomics would be great. I'd suggest not going retro, but coming up with something more forward looking.
- Some of the benefits of a mirrorless camera - mainly the focus peaking, zebras, and onscreen levels.
- Improved dynamic range over 6D
- Improved live view with a tilting screen - I wouldn't care for touch screen though, just good manual controls
- Improved auto-focus coverage
- Slightly higher resolution would also be nice
- On camera flash that can be used as a master as well as the ability to point it up for bounce flash
- Faster frame rate and 4K would be great but not something I really care to pay extra for - 1080p at 60 fps is more than enough for me

Another interesting thing the Sony has going for it is the ability to load apps. Sony's implementation is a little clunky, but it adds some interesting functionality. I may not want to go through the process of blending individual shots to make star trails, but having an app that does it automatically allows me to try things that I might not otherwise have tried.

Anyway those are my two cents.
 
Upvote 0
dilbert said:
slclick said:
4D won't happen due to 'shi'.

People said the same thing of Nikon, yet there was the D4, D4s. From Canon there has also been a 400D, 450D.
And 40D (my first DSLR). But maybe 4 is/sounds different than 40 and 400... It is interesting to note though that Nikon jumped from D300(s) to D500... although they did not have trouble making D4(s)...
 
Upvote 0
tron said:
dilbert said:
slclick said:
4D won't happen due to 'shi'.

People said the same thing of Nikon, yet there was the D4, D4s. From Canon there has also been a 400D, 450D.
And 40D (my first DSLR). But maybe 4 is/sounds different than 40 and 400... It is interesting to note though that Nikon jumped from D300(s) to D500... although they did not have trouble making D4(s)...

The Canon difference is putting the numeral first. The single digit has the shi sound not necessarily the 4XXXXX what have you iirc. Nikon's use of the D4 is similar to Canon's Mark usage.
 
Upvote 0