| This site contains affiliate links to products and services. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. |
All that’s needed is a spark sometimes
I received an email in response to the report the November 24, 2009 announcement day had been pushed back until January.
“Yes, it has been delayed until January now, this is the second time this has happened although this time not due to a technical issues but more marketing. If everything goes to plan (which hardly happens to be honest), January will be a killer month for announcements:
1Ds Mark IV together with the new duo of high end lenses. The 70-200 2.8 IS II and of course the 24-70 II IS.”
CR’s Take
The lenses I’m not shocked by, they’ve sort of become the lenses that will always be replaced. I’ll be taking a wait and see approach.
However, a 1Ds4 announcement already? I thought the 1D4 was early…. this would be crazy.
cr
<-- start Taboola -->
And then
Nikon D4 = Canon Scratching heads again
Nikon D4x = Canon we have no answer.
I’m still a believer that megapixels mean nothing especially when you don’t need them. I can make near identical prints with a 12mp sensor than I can with a 24mp sensor.
Kevin, that’s a good maths you’ve done here! Unfortunately you’re right, in 2009 Nikon is rocking the place.
Can anyone tell me by the way, why would Canon have 1.6, 1.3 and a FF sensors… when Nikon is offering either 1.6 budget DSLRs or professional FFs…
So today I can buy D3s for the same price as 1D MarkIV
But Nikon is a FF DSLR, and Canon would give a 1.3 crop sensor.
Doesn’t it sound like a ripoff from Canon to you?
Canon is not ripping off their customers. Their listening to their customers.
First off, NUMEROUS Nikon boards posted how FF sensors are a waste of time, due to less DOF, greater zoom, and lighter equipment. FF was claimed to be a thing of the past. Like Medium Format Sensors. They ripped on Canon offering FF sensors and Nikon just didn’t need them. Where are these posters now? Well, those benefits are exactly why a 1.3x sensor exists.
There are advantages to a smaller sensor. The 1D customer usually doesn’t make a print larger than 13″x19″ Because of that, Canon decided to shrink their sensor and increase pixel density to give them more reach. Now that 70-200 on a 1D is actually a 91-260. Compared to the Nikon D3 which is still a 70-200. The Canon photographer will have a tighter zoom and less cropping to do and will get a sharper sports picture than the D3 equipped photographer. Why not use a 7D/50D or D300S? Well, they don’t have the same autofocus or weather sealing. The D3 or 1D series camera are VERY tough.
It’s not why does canon offer a 1.3x sensor. It’s why doesn’t Nikon? You get better noise performance than a 1.6x sensor and more reach+DOF than a full frame. Win-Win for a sports photographer.
It’s not like it matters. The weakest component of any photography system is the one behind the viewfinder. Both Nikon and Canon make systems that are way better than any of us can shoot anyway. Too much talking. Going out to photograph something. That’s a better use of my time.