*UPDATE* A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: A Bit of EOS 70D Info [CR1-CR2]

Marsu42 said:
TrumpetPower! said:
Shutter lifecycle is irrelevant. Almost nobody ever wears out a shutter on any DSLR, let alone a consumer model,

Not so: Shooting brackets (3+ shutter cycles per shot), focus stacking (10-20+ cycles) and using live view with quick af (one cycle very af action) I'm now on 125k cycles on my 60d after about two years.

I wrote, "almost nobody." Clearly, there are people who wear out a shutter. But very few.

And, I'll also note: it's taken you two years to reach the official shutter count, and you've probably got at least another year, quite reasonably two, left before your 60D will need a replacement shutter. You, one of the exceptional people who might actually wear out a shutter, are probably going to wind up spending an average cost of about $0.25 / day on the camera's shutter. Over the course of a month, it'll cost you less than many spend on a single drink at Starbucks. I hardly think that qualifies as something that should even be on anybody's radar.

Dual memory card slots are irrelevant to all but a very small minority of shooters, too...essentially, the only ones who care are those who need a redundant backup, and they're all shooting with two bodies anyway.

That doesn't make sense: Another body doesn't protect you from card failure, i.e. coming home and the data isn't readable but the camera thought it was written just fine. For many, no dual cards disqualifies a 70d or 6d as a backup body for a "pro" first camera 7d2/5d3 - probably what Canon intends.

I'll agree that dual cards are useful for backups for professionals doing event photography. I just don't see the 70D positioned as such a camera.

Look at it this way: the difference in price between what's listed in this rumor and the 7D from reputable retailers is $50. What pro is even going to bother to pretend that the 70D is a reasonable alternative to a 7D? If you're making money at this and $50 is going to sway your decision, you're not going to be making money for long. The price difference between the 5DII and the 5DIII is $500, again not enough to be a factor in a business decision -- if you can't afford the extra $500, you're in the worng business. (Not that you should just blindly get the more expensive camera, just that price should be pretty far down on your list of decision-making criteria. If you don't need anything that the extra $500 gets you, don't spend the $500. But if anything that extra $500 gets you will be useful, you shouldn't be hesitating to get it just because it's an extra $500.)

Cheers,

b&
 
Upvote 0
c.d.embrey said:
So you think that 61 point autofocus is important on a 1Dx, but irrelavant on a 70D ??? The nice thing about Nikon is that they treat all their customers with respect. Nikon has no second class citizens when it come to autofocus and metering.

In a marketing driven world, having lesser specifications won't win the sales war.

So why not pay your money (or not) and take your choice, instead of constantly proclaiming Nikon's superiority and more consumer friendly business ethic to the rest of us? As for your comment about specifications and the sales war, are Canon losing market share? If you don't want to shoot Canon, no problem, I just wonder why you continue to hang around on a Canon forum and tell us all about it.

And, FYI, I won't be upgrading my 7D until Canon offers a genuine upgrade, so I'm not defending their strategy, I'm just tired of the same old commentators with nothing new to say that seem to surface every time Canon -RUMOURS- (not even announces) a product.
 
Upvote 0
Well, I'm kind of due for an update ... maybe the 70D will offer something more than just an increase in megapixels, for me at least. But looking at the direction Canon has been going with its cameras, I'll probably stick to my brace of 30D's for another two-three years ... and then go micro-four-thirds.

Anyway, whilst y'all going on about low-light and high-ISO performance, I want low-ISO performance ... ISO 50 ... or better yet, ISO 25.
 
Upvote 0
c.d.embrey said:
So you think that 61 point autofocus is important on a 1Dx, but irrelavant on a 70D ???

Troll harder.

You're the one obsessing over the number of points in the autofocus system.

All I've been writing about is the actual performance of the autofocus system.

So Canon used 61 points to create an autofocus system that's faster and more accurate than any other. So what? What matters is that the system is faster and more accurate, not how many points it has.

b&
 
Upvote 0
insanitybeard said:
So why not pay your money (or not) and take your choice, instead of constantly proclaiming Nikon's superiority and more consumer friendly business ethic to the rest of us?

My problem is with Canon's dis-respect of the vast majority of their customers. If it wasn't for xxxD an xxD sales there would be no R&D money to support xD development.
 
Upvote 0
Sella174 said:
Anyway, whilst y'all going on about low-light and high-ISO performance, I want low-ISO performance ... ISO 50 ... or better yet, ISO 25.

Um...why?

The 5DIII (I'm not personally familiar with crop cameras) is noise-free at ISO 400. It's just as noise-free at ISO 200 and ISO 100. There's no more noise to be cleaned up, so what's there to be gained by ISO 25?

About the only purpose would be for slower shutter speeds with wide apertures in bright light, but that's what neutral density filters are for -- not to mention, an uncommon and somewhat specialized area of photography where anybody serious about it is already going to know that you can't get good results with low ISO alone.

Cheers,

b&
 
Upvote 0
c.d.embrey said:
insanitybeard said:
So why not pay your money (or not) and take your choice, instead of constantly proclaiming Nikon's superiority and more consumer friendly business ethic to the rest of us?

My problem is with Canon's dis-respect of the vast majority of their customers. If it wasn't for xxxD an xxD sales there would be no R&D money to support xD development.

And, yet, that vast majority of Canon's customers is bigger than anybody else's vast majority, and happier too.

So you think Canon sucks. We get that. So stop whining about how much Canon sucks and get yourself a Nikon so you can be happy.

Or do you just get a kick out of being the guy who gets all the attention in the room by loudly demanding to know who farted and pointing fingers at your least-favorite people?

b&
 
Upvote 0
TrumpetPower! said:
You're the one obsessing over the number of points in the autofocus system.

All I've been writing about is the actual performance of the autofocus system.
b&

No, I've been obsessing about the better autofocus of lower-end Nikons vs the lack-luster performance of lower-end Canon models.

Have a nice day :) :) :)
 
Upvote 0
TrumpetPower! said:
As for the rest of your specs...well, they're meaningless.

This is a typical fanboy response.

When a Canon has better specs, it wins hands down.
But if a Nikon has better specs, then this is irrelevant in the 'real world'.

FYI, this is not how things work with buyers.
Buyers look at the price and the specs and then ponder if the camera offers good value.

The D7100 offers exceptional value.
If Canon doesn't match that, then they'd better offer the 70D for cheap.
 
Upvote 0
TrumpetPower! said:
Um...why?

... so what's there to be gained by ISO 25?

About the only purpose would be for slower shutter speeds with wide apertures in bright light, but that's what neutral density filters are for -- not to mention, an uncommon and somewhat specialized area of photography where anybody serious about it is already going to know that you can't get good results with low ISO alone.

Over here in Africa we used to shoot with ASA 50 as standard, so I guess it's just something I'm used to from my film days. Using ISO 100 my shutter speeds go to 1/2000~4000 easily, but usually around 1/1000 most of the time. ND filters are a hassle.

My point was more that low-light and high-ISO performance isn't that important to everybody. Maybe I'm the only one, but at least that doesn't make it everyone.


On another point ... the 30D has a pretty crummy AF and I haven't really seen anything improve in the later models. Unfortunately for me the benchmark is the EOS 3 camera ... anything else since then has just been toy-grade.
 
Upvote 0
TrumpetPower! said:
tiger82 said:
[T]he 5D Mark III does not present such a technological leap[....]

Erm, that's complete bollocks.

Best autofocus system of any camera on the market at the time of its release, best high ISO performance of any camera on the market at the time of its release, best video of any consumer DSLR....

There's a whole hell of a lot more to a camera than just its megapickle count.

Anybody who claims that the 5DIII isn't a big deal isn't a photographer or is just plain clueless.

It may well be the case that the advancements made in the 5DIII aren't relevant to your particular type of photography. And, if all you do is low ISO work of static subjects, you'd be exactly right.

But that's such a marginal part of photography that's already been so well served that it's ludicrous to suggest that that's all that matters.

Cheers,

b&

+1

To call the the MkII is a "superb" camera, and then in the same sentence say that the MkIII isn't good enough makes me think you haven't even held one, let alone put one through it's paces. Have fun with your DXO sensor scores, but on the whole, it's undeniably in a different league than the MkII.
 
Upvote 0
x-vision said:
TrumpetPower! said:
As for the rest of your specs...well, they're meaningless.

This is a typical fanboy response.

When a Canon has better specs, it wins hands down.
But if a Nikon has better specs, then this is irrelevant in the 'real world'.

FYI, this is not how things work with buyers.
Buyers look at the price and the specs and then ponder if the camera offers good value.

The D7100 offers exceptional value.
If Canon doesn't match that, then they'd better offer the 70D for cheap.

Why do you hate Canon so much :) :) :)

Nice to see someone else who lives in the real world :) :) :)
 
Upvote 0
tiger82 said:
TrumpetPower! said:
tiger82 said:
[T]he 5D Mark III does not present such a technological leap[....]

Erm, that's complete bollocks.

Best autofocus system of any camera on the market at the time of its release, best high ISO performance of any camera on the market at the time of its release, best video of any consumer DSLR....

There's a whole hell of a lot more to a camera than just its megapickle count.

Anybody who claims that the 5DIII isn't a big deal isn't a photographer or is just plain clueless.

It may well be the case that the advancements made in the 5DIII aren't relevant to your particular type of photography. And, if all you do is low ISO work of static subjects, you'd be exactly right.

But that's such a marginal part of photography that's already been so well served that it's ludicrous to suggest that that's all that matters.

Cheers,

b&

So you are saying the 5D Mark III's AF and ISO performance is better than the 1DX? My point is many people upgraded just to have the latest and greatest. I would bet you 95% of 5D Mark III upgraders never go above ISO 640

-1
I'll take that bet.
That's a joke right? Or at least exaggeration for the sake of creating a point?
 
Upvote 0
c.d.embrey said:
TrumpetPower! said:
c.d.embrey said:
Why would I pay the same price as a Nikon D7100, for a camera with fewer features ??? Will the 70D have 51 point autofocus ??? Will the 70D shutter be tested 150,000 cycles ??? Will the 70D have a 2,016 pixel RGB 3D Matrix Metering System ??? Will the 70D have dual SDXC slots ???

Shutter lifecycle is irrelevant ...

Dual memory card slots are irrelevant ...

As for the rest of your specs...well, they're meaningless. What matters is the actual real-world autofocus and metering performance, ...

So you think that 61 point autofocus is important on a 1Dx, but irrelavant on a 70D ??? The nice thing about Nikon is that they treat all their customers with respect. Nikon has no second class citizens when it come to autofocus and metering.

In a marketing driven world, having lesser specifications won't win the sales war.

Nikon only has second class citizens when it comes to their customer service ;)
Better specs don't equal respect, they are trying to compete.
 
Upvote 0
Personally I think Canon has painted themselves into a corner with their mid-range cameras. The xxxD range offers exceptional value in terms of what you get and what you pay for it. The 1D and 5D series are workhorses. Where does that leave the xxD, 7D and 6D cameras? Let's face it, on paper the 700D has a better AF system than the 6D - except for centre-point zero-light capability. What's going to differentiate the 70D from the 7DII and the xxxD line?
 
Upvote 0
stipotle said:
Nikon only has second class citizens when it comes to their customer service ;)
Better specs don't equal respect, they are trying to compete.

About the only thing stoping many people from switching is Nikons abysmal service recornd in the USA. At one time Nikon had a good reputation ... but NOT anymore.

BTW Nikon has had better focusing and metering for a long time, I've never understood Canon's lack of competitivness in this area. I guess focusing and metering aren't at the head of the list for Canon users ;)
 
Upvote 0
Sella174 said:
Personally I think Canon has painted themselves into a corner with their mid-range cameras. The xxxD range offers exceptional value in terms of what you get and what you pay for it. The 1D and 5D series are workhorses. Where does that leave the xxD, 7D and 6D cameras? Let's face it, on paper the 700D has a better AF system than the 6D - except for centre-point zero-light capability. What's going to differentiate the 70D from the 7DII and the xxxD line?

I think the 7DII will remain the flagship APS-C camera w/ all the bells and whistles, maybe like a 5DIII just w/ crop sensor. 70D will have to fit somewhere between the 7DII and t5i, much like the 60D fit between the 7D and T3i.

Both 70D and 7DII might share the same sensor (not 18MP) and DIGIC 5 processor, WiFi and GPS, but the 7DII would have dual DIGIC 5, faster fps, dual card slots, better weather-sealing, 100% VF coverage, and different controls. 7DII is the workhorse for sports and wildlife photographers. I imagine the 70D would get the 7D's current AF system and the 7DII would get an AF system like the 5DIII. The 70D will differentiate from the t5i w/ the features the 60D differentiated from the t3i: different controls, weather-sealing, more fps, bigger body, etc.
 
Upvote 0
c.d.embrey said:
I've never understood Canon's lack of competitivness in this area. I guess focusing and metering aren't at the head of the list for Canon users ;)

When I switched from Pentax to Canon in the mid-1990's, I was pretty chuffed with their auto-focus system. The metering system was somewhat iffy, but coming from an S1a with no meter whatsoever the Av and Tv modes were kind of neat. Eventually I switched to digital - the EOS 30D - from an EOS 3 and an EOS 300v. Well, the 300v has a better AF system than the 30D ... faster and more accurate ... and it was an "entry-level" camera!

I think Canon figured a DSLR didn't need a good AF system, simply because it is digital - as opposed to a film camera. So it will sell because it is digital and not because it has a good AF system (or at least as good as the last film cameras). Well, now they're in a corner ... 9, 11, 19, 61 ... big jump that last one. A 70D with 11 points won't hack it against the 700D and is hardly an improvement on the 60D; and 19 points will just make it a tweaked 7D; but how many the 70D will actually have will depend on the 7DII.

I think Canon should rationalise their line-up and merge the 70D and 7DII, as that's the only sensible thing to do. But they won't.
 
Upvote 0
x-vision said:
TrumpetPower! said:
As for the rest of your specs...well, they're meaningless.

This is a typical fanboy response.

When a Canon has better specs, it wins hands down.
But if a Nikon has better specs, then this is irrelevant in the 'real world'.

FYI, this is not how things work with buyers.
Buyers look at the price and the specs and then ponder if the camera offers good value.

The D7100 offers exceptional value.
If Canon doesn't match that, then they'd better offer the 70D for cheap.

+1
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.