Will Canon Answer the D4s? [CR2]

[Eldar]

Wifi is such a cheap feature to implement and it does not compromise wheathersealing or structural stability of a camera at all. those, who dont need it, can switch it off.
And it is not for the facebook / instagram crowd, since they will not bother lugging around a big old mirrorslapper. It is for those photograühers who have to shell out 300 bucks for cam ranger - simply because canon refuses to put a 5 dollar wifi chip + antenna into a 2012 camera for 3 grand.

Luckily its getting cheaper to make up for canons marketing differentiation ploys ...
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19342.msg363433;topicseen#new

Owner of a 6d and a 5d3 here. In regards to wifi ---when i got the 6d I thought the wifi was kind of neat. I used it here and there (via the remote app). It took taking selfies to a new level! that, and every once in a while, like on vacation or something I'd use the remote transfer app to upload something to facebook. LOL...other than that, I have barely used the wifi. It has stayed in the off mode for like 98% of the time I have had the body.

That sounds like what my use would have been also. Almost everything possible in my house is wifi and it makes life simple, but I don´t see how it would help me if I had it on a camera, unless it was so fast it made image transfer faster or if I was into very advanced remote control operations (which I´m not).

 

[flowers]

Wifi is such a cheap feature to implement and it does not compromise wheathersealing or structural stability of a camera at all. those, who dont need it, can switch it off.
And it is not for the facebook / instagram crowd, since they will not bother lugging around a big old mirrorslapper. It is for those photograühers who have to shell out 300 bucks for cam ranger - simply because canon refuses to put a 5 dollar wifi chip + antenna into a 2012 camera for 3 grand.

Luckily its getting cheaper to make up for canons marketing differentiation ploys ...
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=19342.msg363433;topicseen#new

Owner of a 6d and a 5d3 here. In regards to wifi ---when i got the 6d I thought the wifi was kind of neat. I used it here and there (via the remote app). It took taking selfies to a new level! that, and every once in a while, like on vacation or something I'd use the remote transfer app to upload something to facebook. LOL...other than that, I have barely used the wifi. It has stayed in the off mode for like 98% of the time I have had the body.

Well said. It's a great camera and far, far more than just a "minor update" to mkII!

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

The 5D 3 really is nothing more than a 5D 2 with - at long last - a decent af-system in it. Hardly any improvement in IQ and resolution. Blatant lack of connectivity (not even wifi which canon manages to put into any 200 dollar powershot). It should really have been called 5D 2N.

The 5D 3 is really dated in every respect.

By now i've lost interest in the 5d line and bulky dslrs. Just waiting until a really good ff milc comes to market. Af issues in mirrorless are getting ironed out. The fuji xt1 seems to be tracking moving subjects @ 8 fps. Soon enough decent af performance will also be available in ff-sensored mirrorless cams. Looking forward to it. Sony A8R could already be the real winner.

I have often wondered what your smoking before you write posts like t his, it clearly isn't what I am smoking. 5d2-5d3 is one hell of an upgrade. Others here have already listed the features so I won't bother to repeat them. You claim that it is - "a 5D 2 with - at long last - a decent af-system in it"...well then we're looking at different cameras. It's not like it was a little bump in AF. I mean, they could have slapped the 7d AF system in it. Even if they did that, way improved over 9 points. But, to go from 9 points (and with the mk2 the center point was the only one worth anything) to 61 points plus all the servo stuff they added - that's a hell of a lot of improvement in AF. And we haven't even gotten to the benefits of high ISO work!!!!

They did not just put a decent AF system in it. They put one of the best AF systems to date in a dslr in it!!!! If it was as you claimed the 5d3 would have 9 points again but all cross points and none of the servo modes. But hey, live in your dreamworld where no camera to date is capable of taking a good picture because a mirror gets in the way...

 

[Loswr]

But hey, live in your dreamworld where no camera to date is capable of taking a good picture because a mirror gets in the way...

+1

I like how, "AF issues in mirrorless are getting ironed out," while the 5DIII's AF (same sensor as the 1D X) is merely 'decent'. I wonder if this sort of bias results from one to many mirrorslaps to the head?

 

[flowers]

But hey, live in your dreamworld where no camera to date is capable of taking a good picture because a mirror gets in the way...

+1

I like how, "AF issues in mirrorless are getting ironed out," while the 5DIII's AF (same sensor as the 1D X) is merely 'decent'. I wonder if this sort of bias results from one to many mirrorslaps to the head?

Haha. Maybe all mirrorless owners were bullied and called ugly when they were young and they now have a fear of mirrors which is reflected (pun intended) in their choice of camera systems.

 

[AE1Pguy]

The 5D 3 really is nothing more than a 5D 2 with - at long last - a decent af-system in it. Hardly any improvement in IQ and resolution. Blatant lack of connectivity (not even wifi which canon manages to put into any 200 dollar powershot). It should really have been called 5D 2N.

The 5D 3 is really dated in every respect.

You REALLY don't know what the 5D III is, man. The 5D III was a complete and total overhaul of the 5D II. New body, better sealing, RADICALLY improved AF, improved metering, significantly bumped frame rate, improved ergonomics, etc. etc.

Use of wireless options like WiFi and GPS requires punching holes in the magnesium body...something that compromises ruggedness and sealing. So it isn't a cut and dry point there, and I would suspect that currently, more pros prefer to have the rugged body and sealing rather than the WiFi (otherwise, Canon would have stuffed a WiFi chip in it already.)

The 5D III is current and advanced in EVERY respect EXCEPT the image sensor. Get your facts strait, bub!

Exactly. Only facebook-loving amateurs want Wi-Fi, it's only really useful for reporters and guess what? No reporter wants their camera to have Wi-Fi if the weathersealing gives out before they can even send out the pictures.

Nonsense. I have no use for Facebook whatsoever. I bought a 6D so I could use WiFi to control HDR shot sequences and so forth with my iPhone or iPad. It's the best remote control ever.

On the other hand, I didn't need a 5D III, and even if it had WiFi, I still would have been happy with the 6D.

 

[V8Beast]

Owner of a 6d and a 5d3 here. In regards to wifi ---when i got the 6d I thought the wifi was kind of neat. I used it here and there (via the remote app). It took taking selfies to a new level! that, and every once in a while, like on vacation or something I'd use the remote transfer app to upload something to facebook. LOL...other than that, I have barely used the wifi. It has stayed in the off mode for like 98% of the time I have had the body.

I used to think wifi on an SLR was a dumb gimmick, but I now wish I had it on my 5D3. Some of my editorial clients now want to art direct shoots in real time. Fortunately, this isn't for every shot, but just for the more important ones that may be used as cover images. Without wifi, my ghetto solution is taking a pic of my camera's LCD screen with my smartphone, then texting in to the client. Wifi would sure make this agonizing process less painful.

Being able to trigger the camera remotely and seeing the images on my phone would also save tons of time when I have to rig the tripod up someplace that's difficult to access (like the top of my van ) I'll probably just have to suck it up and get a Cam Ranger.

 

[V8Beast]

Out of curiosity, what constitutes IQ?

A sharp, in-focus image would top my list ;D

 

[Orangutan]

In terms of per-unit manufacturing cost, sure, I wouldn't expect it to be much more than that either. My point is you don't just drop in a wifi chip and be done with it. You have to design the camera with all these various factors in mind from the getgo, and for each additional feature you add, like WiFi, and GPS, etc. you increase the overall complexity of the product as a whole. The up-front R&D cost increases, the prototyping/testing phase increases, and the extra money spent on R&D has to be recouped somehow.

I agree in principle, particularly as relates to current and previous camera models. However, I think you're looking backward rather than forward. Let's take Eye-Fi as an example: this is a card that plugs-in and works. Canon did not have to do any specific engineering to make it work...I think it was essentially a kluge, and it costs around $50, including a bit of flash. Why is this easy? Because it's using an existing internal bus. Think of laptops after the standardization of PCMCIA and the wide array of cards that became available. Once you have a standard bus design everything gets much easier. A well-designed internal bus would connect the memory card slot(s) and the WiFi and the GPS and the digital external mic and 4G and 5G and.... This is not to say that all design and integration issues will dissipate, but they will become vastly simpler than if you have to engineer a system where all components connect directly to each other.

I don't agree with AvTvM's simplistic expectation that any new feature that appears in any new camera should necessarily be available in all cameras released 6 months later. On the other hand, I'd prefer to phrase the question as "how can we make this easy" rather than "why isn't this easy."

 

[Orangutan]

I used to think wifi on an SLR was a dumb gimmick, but I now wish I had it on my 5D3. Some of my editorial clients now want to art direct shoots in real time. Fortunately, this isn't for every shot, but just for the more important ones that may be used as cover images. Without wifi, my ghetto solution is taking a pic of my camera's LCD screen with my smartphone, then texting in to the client. Wifi would sure make this agonizing process less painful.

Being able to trigger the camera remotely and seeing the images on my phone would also save tons of time when I have to rig the tripod up someplace that's difficult to access (like the top of my vanI'll probably just have to suck it up and get a Cam Ranger.

I believe there are SD to CF adapters that will work with WiFi SD cards. It might work on your 5D3...or not. It could be worth the time to scan the boards, or just pony up the $$ to try it out.

 

[dgatwood]

I think you are gravely underestimating the cost of adding WiFi. It isn't simply some chip you just buy and stuff into the camera. It has to be integrated into the camera! It requires changes to the body design to ensure the signal can get through without requiring that the user point a specific part of the body directly at a wifi access point and without encountering interference issues (all while still complying with FCC regulations regarding RF and all that!), it requires specific design changes to integrate it into the main boards along with all the other far more critical electronics, it requires updates to firmware to ensure it can be controlled and configured appropriately, etc.

Wi-Fi is not particularly directional. A pair of strip antennas glued to the inside of the bezel around the rear display should do the job nicely. That's how metal laptops get their signal out, and you don't have to point them towards the base station.

On the software side, the 5DMk3 cameras already have built-in support for Wi-Fi when used with their wireless grips. If anything, integrating the hardware into the body makes the software easier, because they don't have to do as much testing to make sure it correctly detects the absence of Wi-Fi hardware.

 

[AvTvM]

Meet the facts.
Wifi in a camera is easy and dirt cheap. Evidenced by the fact that even canon manages integrate wifi into dirt cheap cameras like the powershot a 3500 that retails at euro 90 [usd 120] including 20% sales tax.

 

[Arctic Photo]

Meet the facts.
Wifi in a camera is easy and dirt cheap. Evidenced by the fact that even canon manages integrate wifi into dirt cheap cameras like the powershot a 3500 that retails at euro 90 [usd 120] including 20% sales tax.

However, the 5DIII was designed before wifi made its entrance. It makes sense that Canon introducwd it in the 6D which is in the FF low and and also a new model to see how the market would react.

 

[Loswr]

...I'd prefer to phrase the question as "how can we make this easy"

Ok, but then why complicate things?

I believe there are SD to CF adapters that will work with WiFi SD cards. It might work on your 5D3...or not.

I'd just stick the Eye-Fi card in the 5DIII's SD slot, rather than mucking about with adapters.

 

[Orangutan]

...I'd prefer to phrase the question as "how can we make this easy"

Ok, but then why complicate things?

I believe there are SD to CF adapters that will work with WiFi SD cards. It might work on your 5D3...or not.

I'd just stick the Eye-Fi card in the 5DIII's SD slot, rather than mucking about with adapters.

Cuz I forgot it has an SD slot. Silly me, I thought it was two CF's.

 

[AvTvM]

However, the 5DIII was designed before wifi made its entrance. It makes sense that Canon introducwd it in the 6D which is in the FF low and and also a new model to see how the market would react.

Sorry to disappoint you. Wifi in cameras was already invented in 2012. canon just believed they would get away forcing customers to buy their oem-wifi-grip-bricks for their mirrorslappers. As in the past. At 1000% gross margin.
They were right. A few of their customers don't mind.

Lack of onboard wifi does not make the 5d iii a bad camera. It just demonstrates that it is ... dated. A bit like a car without AC or a tube tv.

 

[Loswr]

Lack of onboard wifi does not make the 5d iii a bad camera. It just demonstrates that it is ... dated. A bit like a car without AC or a tube tv.

In 2014, I bet there will be far more 'dated' 5DIIIs sold than a7Rs. Also, there will likely be about 10 times as many CRT TVs sold worldwide as all MILC cameras combined.

 

[jrista]

In terms of per-unit manufacturing cost, sure, I wouldn't expect it to be much more than that either. My point is you don't just drop in a wifi chip and be done with it. You have to design the camera with all these various factors in mind from the getgo, and for each additional feature you add, like WiFi, and GPS, etc. you increase the overall complexity of the product as a whole. The up-front R&D cost increases, the prototyping/testing phase increases, and the extra money spent on R&D has to be recouped somehow.

I agree in principle, particularly as relates to current and previous camera models. However, I think you're looking backward rather than forward. Let's take Eye-Fi as an example: this is a card that plugs-in and works. Canon did not have to do any specific engineering to make it work...I think it was essentially a kluge, and it costs around $50, including a bit of flash. Why is this easy? Because it's using an existing internal bus. Think of laptops after the standardization of PCMCIA and the wide array of cards that became available. Once you have a standard bus design everything gets much easier. A well-designed internal bus would connect the memory card slot(s) and the WiFi and the GPS and the digital external mic and 4G and 5G and.... This is not to say that all design and integration issues will dissipate, but they will become vastly simpler than if you have to engineer a system where all components connect directly to each other.

I don't agree with AvTvM's simplistic expectation that any new feature that appears in any new camera should necessarily be available in all cameras released 6 months later. On the other hand, I'd prefer to phrase the question as "how can we make this easy" rather than "why isn't this easy."

Well, I can't disagree with anything you've said. I was looking backwards, thinking about the 5D III's design and the time and timeframe within which it was designed. Looking forward from now, I totally agree.

 

[Orangutan]

However, the 5DIII was designed before wifi made its entrance. It makes sense that Canon introducwd it in the 6D which is in the FF low and and also a new model to see how the market would react.

Wifi in cameras was already invented in 2012.

"Invented" is not the same thing as "robust." P&S cameras are, unfortunately, disposable items. People don't keep them long, and they buy cheaper, better replacements rather than get them repaired. A DSLR, on the other hand, must be designed to be used and repaired for up to 10 years. Even if the warranty is much shorter, you don't want to annoy your upscale customers with a flimsy product.

canon just believed they would get away forcing customers to buy their oem-wifi-grip-bricks

That wouldn't surprise me.

 

[jrista]

However, the 5DIII was designed before wifi made its entrance. It makes sense that Canon introducwd it in the 6D which is in the FF low and and also a new model to see how the market would react.

Sorry to disappoint you. Wifi in cameras was already invented in 2012. canon just believed they would get away forcing customers to buy their oem-wifi-grip-bricks for their mirrorslappers. As in the past. At 1000% gross margin.
They were right. A few of their customers don't mind.

Lack of onboard wifi does not make the 5d iii a bad camera. It just demonstrates that it is ... dated. A bit like a car without AC or a tube tv.

*!SIGH!*

I'm so sick and tired of trolls... blah.