UPDATED: Canon EOS 80D Specifications

[slclick]

The 80D, more attention than the 1Dx2

I think the 80d is much more a serious potential prospect for a lot of us. Much of the interest in the 1dx ii is highly academic in nature I would reckon. (of course a lot of folks will buy it, but more people won't due to the high cost)

Oh I am more aware of the realities of cost and budgets. It's just unusual for a XXD body to generate this much buzz, the previous incarnations did not. Thanks for the tip though

 

[rrcphoto]

so what's the general opinion?

is canon the next kodak and should file for bankruptcy tomorrow before it's too late?

 

[slclick]

so what's the general opinion?

is canon the next kodak and should file for bankruptcy tomorrow before it's too late?

analogous to 'A new model came out, my older version will no longer work' yet on a much more vast scale. So fun!

 

[Tugela]

Image processing engine DIGIC6 - Upgrade. Nothing big here. It is expected they'd use a newer processor.

Digic 6 is not a new processor, it is a 2013 processor.

 

[expatinasia]

One SD card slot - Stagnation. Not only is it just UHS-1, but it's a single slot. C'mon Canon. Nikon has been offering dual slots on the D7100 and D7200 no problem. Give people the option for data integrity and security. This is truly to deter people from using it commercially. My proof is simple, if this thing had 2 slots, who would buy a 7D2? All the event shooters who either are on a super small budget (single camera) OR looking for a backup camera would no longer get the 7D2. The 7D2 would truly end up being a specialist camera for sports and wildlife and that's it. And I think that camera would fail if that's the only folks who bought it. A lot of pros are using the 7D2 as a backup. Not for its IQ, but for the cheapest way in the Canon system to run 2 slots and decent AF. The 7D2 has a wider appeal than credit is given to it for, but the 80D can seriously chip away at that. I think it has with AF at least. It lacks speed and 2 slots. Those who aren't sports or wildlife shooters can give up the 10fps, for a quite capably fast 7fps. But those who need 2 slots, need 2 slots.

That is your opinion, however the only time I use both slots of my 1DX is when I am shooting an all day (sport)event or doing lots of video, but I am always shooting to just one slot.

I never write to both cards at the same time.

I like to have them, but I do not think it will deter that many people away from buying the 80D - very, very few.

SD cards are very reasonably priced and it is easy to have a few which acts as a security shield to some extent.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

Image processing engine DIGIC6 - Upgrade. Nothing big here. It is expected they'd use a newer processor.

Digic 6 is not a new processor, it is a 2013 processor.

Well, he said "newer", not "newest". Digic 6 is newer than Digic 5, correct?

 

[RustyTheGeek]

But they already use USB 3.0 Check 1DxII, 5DS(R) and 7D2 interface specifications.

I know, that was essentially my point. At this late stage in the game in 2016, why didn't they simply do the same thing on the 80D? Include USB 3? Use a faster and more current SD card slot? Weird.

 

[Don Haines]

One SD card slot - Stagnation. Not only is it just UHS-1, but it's a single slot. C'mon Canon. Nikon has been offering dual slots on the D7100 and D7200 no problem. Give people the option for data integrity and security. This is truly to deter people from using it commercially. My proof is simple, if this thing had 2 slots, who would buy a 7D2? All the event shooters who either are on a super small budget (single camera) OR looking for a backup camera would no longer get the 7D2. The 7D2 would truly end up being a specialist camera for sports and wildlife and that's it. And I think that camera would fail if that's the only folks who bought it. A lot of pros are using the 7D2 as a backup. Not for its IQ, but for the cheapest way in the Canon system to run 2 slots and decent AF. The 7D2 has a wider appeal than credit is given to it for, but the 80D can seriously chip away at that. I think it has with AF at least. It lacks speed and 2 slots. Those who aren't sports or wildlife shooters can give up the 10fps, for a quite capably fast 7fps. But those who need 2 slots, need 2 slots.

That is your opinion, however the only time I use both slots of my 1DX is when I am shooting an all day (sport)event or doing lots of video, but I am always shooting to just one slot.

I never write to both cards at the same time.

I like to have them, but I do not think it will deter that many people away from buying the 80D - very, very few.

SD cards are very reasonably priced and it is easy to have a few which acts as a security shield to some extent.

The double slot is for redundancy..... for those professional users who don't get paid (or even sued) if the card fails and the images are lost. The vast majority of users just don't care and have never thought about data backups and redundancies, so why would you include that feature for them?

 

[expatinasia]

One SD card slot - Stagnation. Not only is it just UHS-1, but it's a single slot. C'mon Canon. Nikon has been offering dual slots on the D7100 and D7200 no problem. Give people the option for data integrity and security. This is truly to deter people from using it commercially. My proof is simple, if this thing had 2 slots, who would buy a 7D2? All the event shooters who either are on a super small budget (single camera) OR looking for a backup camera would no longer get the 7D2. The 7D2 would truly end up being a specialist camera for sports and wildlife and that's it. And I think that camera would fail if that's the only folks who bought it. A lot of pros are using the 7D2 as a backup. Not for its IQ, but for the cheapest way in the Canon system to run 2 slots and decent AF. The 7D2 has a wider appeal than credit is given to it for, but the 80D can seriously chip away at that. I think it has with AF at least. It lacks speed and 2 slots. Those who aren't sports or wildlife shooters can give up the 10fps, for a quite capably fast 7fps. But those who need 2 slots, need 2 slots.

That is your opinion, however the only time I use both slots of my 1DX is when I am shooting an all day (sport)event or doing lots of video, but I am always shooting to just one slot.

I never write to both cards at the same time.

I like to have them, but I do not think it will deter that many people away from buying the 80D - very, very few.

SD cards are very reasonably priced and it is easy to have a few which acts as a security shield to some extent.

The double slot is for redundancy..... for those professional users who don't get paid (or even sued) if the card fails and the images are lost. The vast majority of users just don't care and have never thought about data backups and redundancies, so why would you include that feature for them?

I know what the card slots are for, but like I said I think people make too much noise about them. I love to have them on the 1DX and find it useful when it automatically moves from one to the other when full but I never write to two cards at the same time even at major international sporting events.

I do not think just having one slot will be a deal breaker for those buying the 80D, and even if they are worried, they just swap cards out at regular intervals - back up problem solved (to some extent).

 

[Don Haines]

One SD card slot - Stagnation. Not only is it just UHS-1, but it's a single slot. C'mon Canon. Nikon has been offering dual slots on the D7100 and D7200 no problem. Give people the option for data integrity and security. This is truly to deter people from using it commercially. My proof is simple, if this thing had 2 slots, who would buy a 7D2? All the event shooters who either are on a super small budget (single camera) OR looking for a backup camera would no longer get the 7D2. The 7D2 would truly end up being a specialist camera for sports and wildlife and that's it. And I think that camera would fail if that's the only folks who bought it. A lot of pros are using the 7D2 as a backup. Not for its IQ, but for the cheapest way in the Canon system to run 2 slots and decent AF. The 7D2 has a wider appeal than credit is given to it for, but the 80D can seriously chip away at that. I think it has with AF at least. It lacks speed and 2 slots. Those who aren't sports or wildlife shooters can give up the 10fps, for a quite capably fast 7fps. But those who need 2 slots, need 2 slots.

That is your opinion, however the only time I use both slots of my 1DX is when I am shooting an all day (sport)event or doing lots of video, but I am always shooting to just one slot.

I never write to both cards at the same time.

I like to have them, but I do not think it will deter that many people away from buying the 80D - very, very few.

SD cards are very reasonably priced and it is easy to have a few which acts as a security shield to some extent.

The double slot is for redundancy..... for those professional users who don't get paid (or even sued) if the card fails and the images are lost. The vast majority of users just don't care and have never thought about data backups and redundancies, so why would you include that feature for them?

I know what the card slots are for, but like I said I think people make too much noise about them. I love to have them on the 1DX and find it useful when it automatically moves from one to the other when full but I never write to two cards at the same time even at major international sporting events.

I do not think just having one slot will be a deal breaker for those buying the 80D, and even if they are worried, they just swap cards out at regular intervals - back up problem solved (to some extent).

I was agreeing with you

 

[expatinasia]

I was agreeing with you

Cool. I thought you might be, but wasn't sure. Was just before my breakfast and the first coffee of the day...

 

[Mark D5 TEAM II]

Re: GPS.

The GPS icon appears on the 80D LCD screen, but then again, that icon will also appear if you attach the external GPS receiver on compatible Canon bodies.

Another thing I want to clarify, is the electronic level single-axis again or double-axis like in the higher models? From the LCD display it looks like single-axis again.

 

[Ozarker]

Re: Canon EOS 80D Specifications

wow, those fanboys are funny

just for the record, my company worked as an OEM in imaging technology development with Canon; even though that is some years ago, I probably know a lot more about Canon technology, production and marketing than you.

What's equally funny is that you seem to have come here to bash Canon whilst dangling a 'I know Canon better than you' carrot whilst offering no further insight. If you've got an objective argument to make, fair enough. But with the drivel you've posted so far, I guess not. Or have you?

Besides the fact that if it "was some years ago" he now knows absolutely nothing simply due to the rate technology changes.

the rate of technology changes at Canon? That was funny :

Saying it doesn't quickly change is just foolish. Canon is constantly updating cameras and lenses. What was the name of "your" company? You did say it was "your" company some years ago, right?

That's like me saying, "I worked with IBMs mainframe computer line back in 1981. Though that was some years ago (35 years), I probably know a lot more about IBM technology, production and marketing than you.

Let me clue you in: A guy making a widget has no idea what marketing is doing or planing. The guy supplying the paint for the magnesium body of the camera doesn't know crap about the inner working of the camera or how it is going to be marketed. Canon goes to the paint supplier and says give me this and here are the specs we want you to meet. Period.

Don't be stupid. It's sort of like being the name dropper at a party. You don't know crap.

You won't name "your" company or the product either. Even if you do (maybe you produced the mirror box), that has nothing to do with you having some inside knowledge of Canon's marketing strategy, production techniques (except for maybe "your" product), or any in depth knowledge of Canon's technology.

Hell, I used to work for a company and we produced printed circuit boards for the MX ICBM Nuke Missile. I wouldn't claim to know anything at all about the finished product.

I get it. You are an expert. An expert is nothing more than a drip under pressure. :

"I used to work for a company that produced the prism so I know more than you about Canon's technology, production, and marketing than you." PALEEEEZE!!!!

 

[Ozarker]

Re: Canon EOS 80D Specifications

The main target buyer for the 80D is the same as that for the previous xxD models – xxxD owners looking to upgrade. In case it's escaped your attention, there are more xxxD owners out there than all MILCs combined, so it's a pretty large target demographic. Secondarily, it's targeted to owners of older xxD models 40/50/60D).

I would have agreed with you a few years ago, but times have changed. I don't think there's as many xxxD owners as there use to be, a lot have gone mirrorless or abandoned cameras all together for smart phones.

For example, I saw more people outside Notre-dame in Paris shooting with iPads than I did with Rebels. Go to any tourist photo spot and you'll see way more selfie sticks in use than DSLRs. I was recently up on Victoria Peak above Hong Kong with my 5D3 on a tripod taking long exposures of the cityscape at dusk, and numerous young people asked if they could take a photo of the display on my 5D3 with their phone or tablet. That's photography by the masses today... it's a world where there's little to no interest in products like Rebels or the 80D.

And even those still using Rebels, who want more camera, I really can't see the 80D being that satisfying. The 6D is far more alluring for only a little bit more money. And while there are a ton of Sony haters here it seems, Sony is scooping up a lot of the discrete camera business for good reasons: outstanding image and video quality in a very compact package.

The 80D is clearly a welcome addition around here as a backup body (which makes sense given the demographics of this forum), but I can't imagine it has much appeal beyond that.

People that exchange their rebels for smartphones either don't know anything about photography or they just don't take it seriously. Ok, or they just don't need the features, that DSLRs (or any other cameras with bigger sensors and/or exchangeable lenses) bring with them.

You can only superficially control your portable's camera settings. ISO 800 on my S4 is the maximum, fixed focus only accessible via a 3rd party app that either costs something or crashes my phone frequently. Depth of Field is only changeable in restricted measures, AF is a pain in the ass, even during daytime inside rooms that have no direct sunlight sometimes... you see what I mean. A fuckin selfie is no photography, or you "call it your focus in photography"...

When it comes to the 6D...
AF system is much better on the 70D already than on the 6D... if you need more reach, the 80D will be the way to go. If you need the fps, you either take the 7D mkII or the 80D... articulating screen for macros or photos from positions you can't look through your OVF? ByeBye 7D/6D... I could name more.

For many people, a decent photo I can share right now is far better than a great photo I can share when I get home from my trip.

I think anyone moving to an entry-level DSLR is either looking for better image quality shooting creatively where the 6D excels or wildlife/birds/sports where the 7D excels. Sure, there are some exceptions where the mix of features, IQ, and price the 80D offers is appealing, but it's a niche within a niche. My only point remains that even if one can clearly articulate the market for this camera, it's tiny compared to many others.

One might agree on the fact, that the DSLR market is alot smaller than the phone photography market (in numbers at least). Else, you could possibly share your photos via NFC and mobile internet via your phone then? Well, when I think of photography, I don't think about the narcism of people that want to share their food or location they're at on the fly on instragram AND facebook AND google+ at the same time just eagerly waiting for feedback and comments/likes. That's not a hobby, that's a more a psychological condition (or going through puberty ^^).

They are a strange crowd. "My grandmother died today. She was raped, dismembered, and fed through the wood chipper" Then all 3000 of their "friends" LIKE the post.

The reason the DSLR market might be getting smaller is because it is so hard to hold up with the selfie stick.

 

[nhz]

Re: Canon EOS 80D Specifications

You won't name "your" company or the product either. Even if you do (maybe you produced the mirror box), that has nothing to do with you having some inside knowledge of Canon's marketing strategy, production techniques (except for maybe "your" product), or any in depth knowledge of Canon's technology.

Why would I have to name my company? I don't see the need and it wouldn't be clever given the paperwork that is involved. No, I didn't get inside knowledge of Canon's production techniques or technology (usually easier to take a product apart if you need that...) but I got a lot of insight in their marketing strategy.

And no, Canon DSLR technology changed very little since I started working in another area (where the rate of technological change is way faster). Despite all the new marketing mumbo-jumbo every year, most of it are incremental changes and revisiting the common parts bin.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

Re: Canon EOS 80D Specifications

You won't name "your" company or the product either. Even if you do (maybe you produced the mirror box), that has nothing to do with you having some inside knowledge of Canon's marketing strategy, production techniques (except for maybe "your" product), or any in depth knowledge of Canon's technology.

Why would I have to name my company? I don't see the need and it wouldn't be clever given the paperwork that is involved. No, I didn't get inside knowledge of Canon's production techniques or technology (usually easier to take a product apart if you need that...) but I got a lot of insight in their marketing strategy.

And no, Canon DSLR technology changed very little since I started working in another area (where the rate of technological change is way faster). Despite all the new marketing mumbo-jumbo every year, most of it are incremental changes and revisiting the common parts bin.

< Begin Scolding Rant (with ruler in hand) >

OK, I'll bite. I fail to see how this tangent is useful. I fail to see why a discussion about how much an individual is qualified to make comments and assumptions about Canon's thought process, design and marketing helps this thread. Instead of arguing about the best resume, let's turn attention back to discussing the camera.

CR Mods - Perhaps we need to create a section in the forum to discuss each individuals' vast experience and qualifications so we can establish who is the most qualified to boast? At least then we would have a place to send them when these tangents inevitably get started. In fact, the mods could simply move those posts there when needed to reduce the wasted space/noise in these longer gear threads to keep the thread more on topic and less distracting to read.

In addition, what parts of a camera are "new" and what parts are "common" is irrelevant. If a mechanism works and fulfills the design requirements, why change it? It's proven and already paid for and vetted. For all of it's glory, a DSLR is still simply a fancy box that gathers light and manipulates bits of metal and glass to capture that light. The parts that get changed and improved are most likely the parts that impact that the most in the digital realm. Software code, CPU, sensor, etc. Why completely redesign the mechanics and housing simply to say it's "new"? That would be incredibly expensive and ultimately result in a less reliable camera.

< End Scolding Rant (ruler put away after whacking knuckleheads) >

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: Canon EOS 80D Specifications

...but I got a lot of insight in their marketing strategy.

Despite all the new marketing mumbo-jumbo every year, most of it are incremental changes and revisiting the common parts bin.

Well, then...you should understand that Canon's goal is to profit from camera sales and not implement every new technology as expeditiously as possible, and that their marketing strategy has pretty effectively supported that goal for many years. Sadly, you don't seem to grasp those realities.

 

[K]

...but I got a lot of insight in their marketing strategy.

Despite all the new marketing mumbo-jumbo every year, most of it are incremental changes and revisiting the common parts bin.

Well, then...you should understand that Canon's goal is to profit from camera sales and not implement every new technology as expeditiously as possible, and that their marketing strategy has pretty effectively supported that goal for many years. Sadly, you don't seem to grasp those realities.

Generally speaking, in this modern electronics age - it is to a company's benefit to release the newest and best technology as soon as possible. There's rarely an advantage to holding back. However it doesn't mean the newest tech has to be cheap, or offered across all models. Lower end Intel CPU's lack tech that the highest end chips have. It makes sense. Segmenting, within market-driven forces, is reasonable.

The camera industry is a little odd. They aren't subject to the same direct, blazing fast market forces the rest of tech industry is. Canon and Nikon can get away with things that other industries cannot because their customers get committed to a particular system. There's an investment in place that isn't easy to switch due to costs.

If all bodies were compatible to all lenses 100% - it would be a very, very different camera industry. Without being tied down to a collection of proprietary glass - anyone could shop any body - and this kind of competition would drive newer tech and features much more rapidly. Bodies would be much more capable than they are today and less expensive too. It would also force innovation in order to stand out. Features that exist today and now, but that are just a dream for DSLR's would probably already be incorporated.


All that said, does Canon hold back on trickling down tech to lower models? A little. Do they profit? Yes. They can do that because users are "stuck" with Canon. Nikon does the same thing, just with different features on that side. So crossing the fence doesn't help. You'll just gripe about other things. Beyond those two, there's no real DSLR competition. It's almost like US politics. Two parties, both rip you off just in different ways, no real alternatives. No reason for them to have to change.

The only real competition those two companies have, is at the point of entry. Someone for the first time deciding Canon or Nikon. Those people are not ready to spend $3,000 on a camera. So they have to pack as much tech as possible in the cheapest price point they can and appeal to a widest base possible. They aren't holding back on entry cameras at all. Cost of production is all that holds them back, and that is market driven because entry level consumers don't want to pay $500 more to have more advanced AF, or ISO 2 million.

Those that decide to move up, usually have some glass already and follow that path within their brand. Or, if they switch early on - either way, they are committing to a system. And in the mid-level to higher level equipment, the tech progress isn't so great where it COULD be, because the asking price of that gear is quite high.


Anyway, this thread is about the 80D - and to help it get back on track - I say the 80D has a pretty healthy set of upgrades and advancements. Canon did not go stingy on this camera. By example, the 6D was stingy.

 

[kphoto99]

...but I got a lot of insight in their marketing strategy.

Despite all the new marketing mumbo-jumbo every year, most of it are incremental changes and revisiting the common parts bin.

Well, then...you should understand that Canon's goal is to profit from camera sales and not implement every new technology as expeditiously as possible, and that their marketing strategy has pretty effectively supported that goal for many years. Sadly, you don't seem to grasp those realities.

All that said, does Canon hold back on trickling down tech to lower models? A little. Do they profit? Yes. They can do that because users are "stuck" with Canon. Nikon does the same thing, just with different features on that side. So crossing the fence doesn't help. You'll just gripe about other things. Beyond those two, there's no real DSLR competition. It's almost like US politics. Two parties, both rip you off just in different ways, no real alternatives. No reason for them to have to change.

In a very small way I can say that Canon does not profit from keep some features out of the Rebel line. When ever somebody asks me what camera to get I explain the pros and cons of different cameras. I make sure I explain that without AFMA they will have a hard time getting sharp pictures at large aperture and that to get AFMA they need to spend well over C$1K for 70D (now 80D). They usually decide that Canon is not the best camera company to start with.

So no, keeping features out of different models is not always the most profitable way of doing business. The difference is having a user be happy with a camera or thrilled to have the camera. For me I am happy with the 70D, but not thrilled with it.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

If all bodies were compatible to all lenses 100% - it would be a very, very different camera industry. Without being tied down to a collection of proprietary glass - anyone could shop any body - and this kind of competition would drive newer tech and features much more rapidly. Bodies would be much more capable than they are today and less expensive too. It would also force innovation in order to stand out. Features that exist today and now, but that are just a dream for DSLR's would probably already be incorporated.

Something we take for granted with most of these camera bodies is RELIABILITY. If the camera industry was as you wish above, totally committed to lightning fast adoption of bleeding edge technology before the competition, the cameras would suffer from the same problems of reliability and failure as computer, networking and smartphones do. It has been normal for over 20 years now for most of these products to ship ASAP with beta or incomplete buggy firmware/software with the intention of fixing it later via a firmware or software update.

Personally I am very glad that cameras are usually more solid and reliable out of the box and I believe this is due to the slower adoption of the newest technology. The emphasis still seems to be on delivering a new product that can stand on its own and a future firmware will merely make minor adjustments as issues are discovered and fixed. We all complain about it but I think many times it is for the best.

In essence, I would rather have a new camera with 10 new great features that are dependable and work to expectations rather than have 18 new great features, half of which disappoint and cause problems that I can't endure.