scyrene said:
By the standards of camera manufacturers, Canon's DSLR naming system (in Europe at least) is about the most coherent. The more digits, the lower the model. Single digit models, the lower the number, the better (7<6<5<1D) Within a line, newer cameras either get a mark II, mark III etc with each refresh*, or they go up a number (50D, 60D, 70D). The only exception is the 77D at this point**; that it's aimed between the XXD and XXXD lines is fairly understandable, although there is a risk of muddying the waters, and I suspect some of the naming conventions will have to change at some point, as they'll reach 900/950/999D-90/99D and have to try something new (assuming those budget lines still exist by then).
Personally I'd prefer the convention "the higher the number, the higher positioned (or newer) is the product. Think of BMW for example ... 118, 330, 540, 750 ...
And I find Canon's 3 different "Rebel" naming schemes Asia/Europe/America for the very same products absolutely the worst and most confusing naming scheme ever.
To me, a much less confusing system could look like this:
#### - year of release
X - 1 letter for product category [e.g. D for DSLR, M for mirrorless, P = Powershot, C = Compact ...]
Y - 1 letter or digit for sensor size [e.g. 0 = dwarf-sized, 1 = 1", A = APS-C, F = FF, M = medium format ...]
# - 1 digit for product class [e.g. 1 = "first base" ... 9 = "ultimate"]
## - 2 digits for product, higher number = higher position [assuming Canon won't release more than 99 products in a given category per year].
e.g.
2016-DF-990 = EOS 1DX II
2016-DF-750 = EOS 5D IV
2015-DA-650 = 7D II
2017-DA-450 = EOS 77D
2016-MA-550 = EOS M5
2017-MA-450 = EOS M6
etc. but *stupid* Canon prefers EOS REBELS to KISS our a..
;D