Updated Canon 2016 Roadmap

[Don Haines]

To be perhaps more clear on this, I've never seen a professional at a sports event using something other than a "big body" DSLR. Rinse and repeat for events. CR took the 1DXII to Rwanda.

Agree on wildlife and sports, but what the 1D rigs 'are designed for' and what they are used for tend to be two different things. I think many people have learned to drop a 5D3 in the place of a 1DX unless it's absolutely necessary for framerate or survivability in terrible (arctic / desert / rainforest) sort of conditions. I see documentarians, independent filmmakers, and especially weddings/social events/concert folks get by with an overwhelmingly larger number of 5D3's than 1DX's out here in Southern California.

(Granted, SoCal ain't Rwanda. Pick the right tool for the job.)

However I agree that Canon's camera lineup (6D, 5D, 5Ds) doesn't really compare the same as Nikon's (D610, D750, D810), especially when it comes to the feature culling that Canon does.

Correction: I said Canon doesn't have the same market segmentation, not that they don't compare or compete. And you continue to conflate better sensors with better cameras, which I strongly disagree with. If better sensors made better cameras, we'd all own A7R II's and shoot Canon glass on it. The fact that isn't happening in large numbers today is testament to the notion that cameras have value propositions, and Canon's overall vale proposition is pretty damn great.

The D610 / D750 / D810 have lovely sensors, but they lack so many great pieces of tech: LiveView for Canon is far better, and Canon has DPAF, anti-flicker, better ergonomics/controls/menus, etc.

The only thing I truly covet from Nikon is spot metering at any AF point being deemed a $500 price point camera feature, while we have to give Canon $6k for it.

- A

There are so many variables involved, such as cost, size, features, glass, preferences, subject matter, lighting, etc, that the concept of a mass market camera designed for one particular application is ludicrous.... Cameras are designed for a range of activities under a range of conditions and there is a great deal of overlap between models.

To pick on CR guy for a moment..... of he goes to Rwanda with a 1DX2..... if the camera fails he is SOL for the trip. If I go on a trip to New York City and my camera fails, 30 minutes later I can have a brand new one. For one trip reliability is paramount, for the other it does not matter.... and this is just one variable.....

 

[Don Haines]

To be perhaps more clear on this, I've never seen a professional at a sports event using something other than a "big body" DSLR. Rinse and repeat for events. CR took the 1DXII to Rwanda.

Agree on wildlife and sports, but what the 1D rigs 'are designed for' and what they are used for tend to be two different things. I think many people have learned to drop a 5D3 in the place of a 1DX unless it's absolutely necessary for framerate or survivability in terrible (arctic / desert / rainforest) sort of conditions.

I can assure you that people take non-1 series Canon cameras to harsh climates.

As someone who bought a 7D2 for its tough build and have taken it to sea, on canoe trips, to the Arctic, and hikes on rainy days, I fully agree with that point....

 

[Don Haines]

<snip>
No, Canon have different ergonomics/controls/menus to Nikon. Imagine being used to Nikon and trying to use a Canon camera. Heck, there are even some Canon cameras that I can't use effectively because of layout not being familiar to me. Getting into a feature vs feature is not really very interesting. Reviews do that.

one of my best friends has a D500 and loves it. He finds the Canon user interface weird and hard to use, while I find the same of the Nikon interface. I think a lot depends on which one you are used to.

 

[Don Haines]

To be perhaps more clear on this, I've never seen a professional at a sports event using something other than a "big body" DSLR. Rinse and repeat for events. CR took the 1DXII to Rwanda.

Agree on wildlife and sports, but what the 1D rigs 'are designed for' and what they are used for tend to be two different things. I think many people have learned to drop a 5D3 in the place of a 1DX unless it's absolutely necessary for framerate or survivability in terrible (arctic / desert / rainforest) sort of conditions.

A "pro" uses the right tool for the job. A great example of this is in motor sports. You are looking at tens of millions of dollars in cars, spare engines, parts, and electronics.... Where a 1DX2 with a 600F4 is a trivial cost, and you see GoPros by the dozens......

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y20CLumT2Sg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6wI_lBj3mc

 

[Don Haines]

To be perhaps more clear on this, I've never seen a professional at a sports event using something other than a "big body" DSLR. Rinse and repeat for events. CR took the 1DXII to Rwanda.

Agree on wildlife and sports, but what the 1D rigs 'are designed for' and what they are used for tend to be two different things. I think many people have learned to drop a 5D3 in the place of a 1DX unless it's absolutely necessary for framerate or survivability in terrible (arctic / desert / rainforest) sort of conditions.

I can assure you that people take non-1 series Canon cameras to harsh climates.

As someone who bought a 7D2 for its tough build and have taken it to sea, on canoe trips, to the Arctic, and hikes on rainy days, I fully agree with that point....

Trip reviews of group trips to Antartica on what worked and what didn't work. Decide for yourself how well Canon fared.

https://luminous-landscape.com/antartica-2007-what-worked-what-didnt/

https://luminous-landscape.com/antarctica-2009-what-worked/

Yes, the 5D2 has an unfortunate history of not dealing well with wet weather. That's why, despite the presence of a 5D2 in the next room, I got a 7D2..... (and an umbrella ) Apparently, even my old 60D with it's tilt/swivel screen was more waterproof than the 5D2

 

[FECHariot]

The camera used by the wedding photographer depends on the photographer. The cheap/amateur wedding photographers that I see use cameras other than the body + grip. The professionals use body+grip style (D# Nikon, 1D Canon.)

So you think a wedding photographer using a 5d3 without a grip is a cheap/amateur?

 

[Don Haines]

The camera used by the wedding photographer depends on the photographer. The cheap/amateur wedding photographers that I see use cameras other than the body + grip. The professionals use body+grip style (D# Nikon, 1D Canon.)

So you think a wedding photographer using a 5d3 without a grip is a cheap/amateur?

It is the concept that a "pro" is defined by their gear that I find funny.... Does this mean that if I shoot weddings with a 1DX and a 5D3 as my backup camera that I am a semi-pro?

A pro also looks at factors such as cost.... one has to keep the business profitable in order to survive and a lot of that depends on your market. You might be able to afford a 1DX2 for your business in the big city, but out here in a small town the market is smaller and the clientele is less affluent and that makes expensive gear an economic noose. Only a hobbyist spends more on gear than they make in profit...

 

[drmikeinpdx]

I'm a 5D3 owner. I'm very happy with what I have now and would only consider an upgrade if Canon figured out a way to allow a much higher flash synch speed... presumably with some kind of electronic shutter system. I'd pay a lot for that.

I have absolutely no interest in 4K video. How the heck can you post that stuff on Facebook or YouTube? Have you seen what those sites do to high-res video? LOL

 

[davidmurray]

i really wonder what 5D Mk3 user want from the 5D Mk4.

... truncated ...

[Snip]

On the other hand, the 5D4 will certainly be able to work the tripod well and take landscapes/studio work well (with limited detail).

- A

I find it hard to believe anyone could describe the successor to the Canon 5D3 as producing images "with limited detail".
Using my 5D3 and a 70-200 L f2.8 IS with a 2x extender I photographed a TV transmission tower/antenna that was about 5km distant. When I did the pixel peeping I found I could even see the steel cables that brace the tower against the wind.
Not a bad level of detail out of a 35mm DSLR.

 

[Mikehit]

The camera used by the wedding photographer depends on the photographer. The cheap/amateur wedding photographers that I see use cameras other than the body + grip. The professionals use body+grip style (D# Nikon, 1D Canon.)

So you think a wedding photographer using a 5d3 without a grip is a cheap/amateur?

It is the concept that a "pro" is defined by their gear that I find funny.... Does this mean that if I shoot weddings with a 1DX and a 5D3 as my backup camera that I am a semi-pro?
...

Would you consider a wedding photographer using an Rebel as their main camera a pro?

If they put a $2,000 lens on the front and their portfolio looked good, sure. But when booking a photographer I ask to see their portfolio, not their gear.

I wonder when people contract Alex Majoli, Magnum photographer, they are more concerned about the pictures he takes or the fact he could well be taking them with Olympus point-and-shoots?

http://www.robgalbraith.com/multi_page8c1c.html?cid=7-6468-7844

 

[Berty Rampkin]

I would like to see a body that has inbuilt ND filters (similar to C100).

 

[jeffa4444]

To be perhaps more clear on this, I've never seen a professional at a sports event using something other than a "big body" DSLR. Rinse and repeat for events. CR took the 1DXII to Rwanda.

Agree on wildlife and sports, but what the 1D rigs 'are designed for' and what they are used for tend to be two different things. I think many people have learned to drop a 5D3 in the place of a 1DX unless it's absolutely necessary for framerate or survivability in terrible (arctic / desert / rainforest) sort of conditions.

I can assure you that people take non-1 series Canon cameras to harsh climates.

As someone who bought a 7D2 for its tough build and have taken it to sea, on canoe trips, to the Arctic, and hikes on rainy days, I fully agree with that point....

Trip reviews of group trips to Antartica on what worked and what didn't work. Decide for yourself how well Canon fared.

https://luminous-landscape.com/antartica-2007-what-worked-what-didnt/

https://luminous-landscape.com/antarctica-2009-what-worked/

With respect they are 7 & 9 year old reports. The 5D MKIII is much better sealed than the MKII in fact the 6D is better sealed than the MKII. Ive been on Dartmoor in torrential rain caught away from protection and my 6D lived to tell the tail as did the EF 24-105mm fitted. The 5DS I have Ive been caught out in sudden sea spray and again after a careful clean down it was OK. The one failure I had was with an Olympus E500 in South Africa shooting African Penguins with a mixture of wind and sand it gave up permanently.
The worst thing to deal with is humidity that forms inside a lens or a camera Ive had this on the Camel Trophy and their is nothing you can do about it in the tropics.

 

[Don Haines]

The worst thing to deal with is humidity that forms inside a lens or a camera Ive had this on the Camel Trophy and their is nothing you can do about it in the tropics.

That's one of the reasons why I love the 70-200F4.... as a constant length lens you are not pumping air through it every time you zoom and that's WAY better for dealing with high humidity....

 

[3kramd5]

...
You sound like a number of folks here (you are not the only one at all) that wants 'one FF sensor to rule them all' -- great for everything: high resolution, huge base ISO DR for exposure / post-processing lattitude, low high ISO noise, etc. In the SLR world, there's only one sensor that does that: the D810 (or the two D800s that immediately preceded the D810).

I think the sensor in the Pentax K1 is about to join that list - it may even best Nikon's D810! Pentax just need more lenses.

Pretty sure it's the same sensor.

The camera used by the wedding photographer depends on the photographer. The cheap/amateur wedding photographers that I see use cameras other than the body + grip. The professionals use body+grip style (D# Nikon, 1D Canon.)

So you think a wedding photographer using a 5d3 without a grip is a cheap/amateur?

It is the concept that a "pro" is defined by their gear that I find funny.... Does this mean that if I shoot weddings with a 1DX and a 5D3 as my backup camera that I am a semi-pro?
...

Would you consider a wedding photographer using an Rebel as their main camera a pro?

If by "wedding photographer" you mean "person who professionally photographs weddings," then of course: yes.

 

[3kramd5]

...
If by "wedding photographer" you mean "person who professionally photographs weddings," then of course: yes.

Well then maybe I have a different idea about what it means to be "professional" to you. Someone getting back $1000 to shoot a wedding with a Rebel style/sized camera doesn't fit my definition of "professional", regardless of if it is their "job."

That's kinda weird.

I don't see what pay rate or equipment used have to do with one doing something professionally. Is Willie Nelson not a professional musician because he uses this piece of garbage?

But hey, to each his own.

FYI:

pro·fes·sion·al
prəˈfeSH(ə)n(ə)l/
adjective
adjective: professional

1.
of, relating to, or connected with a profession.
2.
(of a person) engaged in a specified activity as one's main paid occupation rather than as a pastime.

noun
noun: professional; plural noun: professionals

1.
a person engaged or qualified in a profession.

pro·fes·sion
prəˈfeSHən/
noun
noun: profession; plural noun: professions

1.
a paid occupation, especially one that involves prolonged training and a formal qualification.

 

[unfocused]

Hah! Once again, dear Dilbert doubles down on his wrongheadedness. Just digging himself a deeper hole. Why is it so difficult for some people to simply admit they are wrong?

By the way, without going down the rabbit hole of "professional" I will say this: If you are in business, it is very bad strategy to buy what you don't need.

Good business practice follows the old saying, "cash is king."

Your cash is the most flexible asset you have. It can quickly be converted to anything you need. In contrast, should you need to convert an asset into cash, you will likely lose a portion of your investment and lose precious time trying to convert that asset.

That's why smart business people buy the least expensive item that will do the job. If a 6D will do the job, it's bad business to buy a 1D. Of course, you must look at the life of the equipment (cost per use) and the appropriateness of the equipment to the job you have to do. (If you need the features of a 1D, you need a 1D.) No smart business person pays for features they don't need if they can avoid it.

 

[3kramd5]

That's why smart business people buy the least expensive item that will do the job. If a 6D will do the job, it's bad business to buy a 1D. Of course, you must look at the life of the equipment (cost per use) and the appropriateness of the equipment to the job you have to do. (If you need the features of a 1D, you need a 1D.) No smart business person pays for features they don't need if they can avoid it.

Then again, there are likely additional people who will judge your worthiness in part on how expensive your equipment looks, so while a 6D may do the job, merely having access to a 1D may land you more work and thus be a worthwhile marketing investment.

 

[Mikehit]

that says more about the customer than about the professionalism of the photographer (which is what dilbert was talking about)

 

[3kramd5]

that says more about the customer than about the professionalism of the photographer (which is what dilbert was talking about)

I don't think so. He was pretty specifically talking about equipment, not professionalism.

And sure, using equipment insufficient to the task is not an act of professionalism, but who wants to raise a hand to say that a single-battery body isn't up to the task of taking pictures primarily of people standing still, people posing, people dancing, and still lifes?

Not I.

 

[PureClassA]

Really surprised we havent heard about a new 50 L prime considering the new 35. I hope Canon surprises us this year. Really waiting for that one