|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
Weekly thing?
An email claiming Canon will announce the T1/2000D on July 7, 2009 arrived a short while ago.
“It was scheduled for last tuesday, but since three delays caused so much expectations, management area decided to wait a little more and announce it next week with a lot of fanfare.”
That seems doubtful, I can't see the T1/2000D garnering a lot of “fanfare”.
Another suggestion is Canon is waiting for the D3000 announcement. It's rumored Nikon will omit video from it. All signs point to the T1/2000D having video. +1 for Canon.
Still, no CR3 sources have said anything in regards to the T1/2000D.
cr
WE ARE WATCHING YOU CR GUY.
If next tuesday the 2000D isn’t in my hands…
I WILL CRY.
A LOT.
“+1†would be a flip screen, not video.
That would be a Blah +1
I use to own a G2 a long time ago (which had the flip screen) it was sort of OK, but it was the first thing to break too.
Personally, I would see it as a negative.
when it would be a flip screen like the nikon, you can leave it for me. When you you would make it flips at the side like in some Olympus compacts, I’m ok with it when it doesn’t mean a smaller screen.
Anything about a new lens (EF-S 35-something 1.8) to go with the 2000D?
Tell us something about the 1D mk4, not for a point&shoot camera!
I hope they’re not dumb enough to make it EF-S, that would cut out a increasing FF market.
The FF people already have an excellent (albeit expensive) 35 1.4 L, in general all relevant focal lengths are covered pretty good for FF.
But Canon needs to give the more ambitious crop camera users a reasonably well-performing normal-equivalent prime. Making it APS-C only makes it lighter and cheaper. Nikon recognized the need for such a lens in their recent DX-only AF-S 35 1.8.
Not everyone with FF is rich enough to buy a L prime. ;-)
I don’t see much point of EF-S primes really. If they work well on FF they’ll work fine on a crop body. Why restrict it?
Just because Nikon does it, doesn’t mean Canon should. :-P
+1 While I still have EF-S body, I refuse to buy crop lenses. They won’t fit 5D and that is the end of story.
Yes, and about a 1.3 crop semi-pro that would be to the 5D mkII what the 1D mkIII is to the 1Ds mkIII.
(Can’t hurt to dream.)
well, I am saving up my money for crop body upgrade down the road, but if it comes to a 35mm lense I guess I’d go for the sigma 30mm 1.4 instead, for its slight aperture advantage compared to a rumored EF-S by canon
Who forever want’s to make videos with a foto-camera?
Me
I don’t really know about the +1 for Canon about the video ability. I as a student don’t have too much money. And loving to take photos, I certainly don’t need video. So if I can save 50 bucks, Nikon has me. On another note, between supposed 350 Euros for a D3000 and 650 Euros for a D5000 theres some room for a D4000 ;-)
I’m not going to buy a DSLR without video if a P&S can.
I’m buying a car, but my bike is faster.
I too would prefer the Sigma’s 1.4 over the rumored Canon 3xmm’s 1.8, but I am a bit hesitant towards Sigma lenses regarding AF issues. First, I am not too happy with my 10-20’s performance and this is at least in part due to some problems with AF. And that’s already in a focal length and aperture range where precision AF is not even close to crucial.
I also tried a Sigma 50 1.4 in a store recently, and it showed the inconsistent AF behavior many people complain about.
Maybe I will try my luck with a Sigma 30 1.4 when I have the time and the nerves to thoroughly test the lens and go through several samples.
Well, they can (in theory) be made lighter and cheaper, which is a good thing if you use primes only occasionally on your crop cam.
Although I also hope to go FF one day and prefer a FF-enabled lens if I have the choice, Crop cameras will continue to be around, so selling the crop-only lenses when switching to full frame should not cause any significant loss. And you don’t have to struggle with a perhaps suboptimal focal length perhaps several years before making the switch. That’s why I picked a 17-55 IS over the 24-70 (but I also have a 24-105 and 70-200 f4 IS). And even if I switch to FF in a year, I would probably still keep a crop body around, both as backup and for the focal length advantage.
However, if Canon decided to do their own version of micro FourThirds… now *this* could really kill EF-S in the medium to long term.
Me too
Another vote here
Instead of updating the semi pro models they are concentrating on the little stuff… whats next Canon new’s disposable dslr? pfff
Of coure I want =)
I’m a poor boy from a poor third world country.
Do I deserve to enter to the DSLR photography through the little and disposable door?
I don’t do video. I’d like to improve my craft photographywise.
it doesn’t bother me at all what they are doing in little stuff. Still doin well with my two years old 30D. But instead of the little stuff pixelrace they should have kept the 12 MP as nikon did. Noisewise this is an ideal amount. But if they get involved in more MP’s you at least get a possibility to do sRAW1 shots at let’s say 8 MP and some slightly improved noise performance…or am I wrong?
I think that 12 mp for an entry level camera is more than excelent.
It also makes a goof pixel density ratio.
I dont think Canon is going to pay Panasonic a licencing fee to make micro 4/3 cameras. They’re competing with the Rebel line at the same price points.
The big fight for sales is entry level, so I think we can expect a lot more EF-S stuff, maybe even a few primes.
*good
Not me…i just need to be able to take photos…no interest in video.
Okay, let’s have the 2000D just the photo mode, and the upcoming 60D an 1080p@24fps mode and both you and me are satisfied ;)
It doesn’t bother me either but i want to know and see that they ARE doing something about the 60D of 7D what ever its called, the 50D was a joke in my opinion, it was a 40D with some tweaks. and what i meant instead up upgrade the 50d i just keep hearing about these entry level cameras, and its not only Canon nikon too.
I don’t use it often, but I like having it. Options=good.
It won’t be a micro FourThirds. It will be a micro APS-C/1.6X that’s fully EF-S compatible.
I wrote “their own version of Micro Four Thirds”, lets call it EF-ML (for “mirrorless”) for now. A mirrorless variant of the EF-S mount with reduced flange focal distance, probably APS-C sensor size, but maybe smaller like (µ)4/3s. EF(-S) lenses could be used with an adapter.
ANd Canon would indeed never build a µ4/3s camera, but not because Panasonic wouldn’t let them (AFAIK µ4/3s is a pretty open standard), but because Canon will prefer to stick with a “closed” system like the proprietary EF(-S). And looking at the market share, they seem to fare pretty well.
Me!
So, video will prevent you from improving your craft “photographywise”? How?
According to Nikon’s #1 fanboy Ken Rockwell:
“Some Canon users have been salivating over Nikon’s great 35mm f/1.8, wishing there was something like it for Canon.
There is, it’s been available since 1995, and I reviewed it two years ago: the Canon EF 28mm f/1.8 USM.
It costs over twice what the Nikon does, and the Canon lens isn’t quite as sharp at f/1.8, but if you want a fast standard lens with great handling for Canon 1.3x and 1.6x cameras, this is it. If you need faster or slightly sharper, you also have your choice of the Canon 24mm f/1.4 L or 35mm f/1.4L, of which there is no equivalent in Nikon.
All these Canon lenses also cover full frame, which the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 doesn’t.”
Micro 4/3 is a sensor size. I doubt Canon would make one. But a mirrorless APS-C body would be interesting.
I want a cheaper FF and not a APS-C camera with video.
I want a cheaper FF camera and not a APS-C camera with video.
Consumers don’t need EF-S prime lenses. We need Canon produce cheaper FF cameras!
The EOS 5D MII price is still high for most of people.
I bet that people could have a FF camera, they would need to buy good lenses too.
If Canon wants to increase the sales of the L glass (expensive) they need to reduce the price of FF cameras.
i want a aps-h 60d
i want cheap 2.8 zooms
i want everything
i want a cheap low noise fast frame rate ff like ten megapixels runing 7 fps
af in video
and millions of dollers so i can buy it all
oh yeah not a rebel camera i hate how cheap anything below xxd feels
True.
These cheap plastic amateur cameras need video because the amateur people think can make professional videos.
It’s good for Sandisk and Lexar that will make a lot of money selling 16GB and 32GB SDHC memory cards.
IT’S CONFIRMED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Canon launching two new EF-S Lenses with 2000D…
1. EF-S 35mm f1.8
2. EF-S 16-120 f2.8-4 IS
Now it’s time for NIKON to CRY!!!!!
I know, bad com. what I want to express is: I don’t wanna do videos, I just want to improve in stills. nobody is forced to use it, I know ;-)
yes please!
wait what?
from where you got such a confirmation ????
Confirmed where and by whom?
Sorry I don’t believe you without some form of proof. Otherwise it’s just another rumour.
ew gross, 1.3? yuck
LOL it also needs to play video games, Halo, WOW, Resident Evil…
It is confirmed he made it up ;)
you do realize he said that….
“ANd Canon would indeed never build a µ4/3s camera,…”
from your mother
My friend is a top notch in Canon,Malaysia…
Could you ask him when they are going to release the 2000D, pretty please with sugar in the top?
Dear Canon, it’s an open letter to you. It’s a matter of fact Canon lacks a quality yet pocket friendly walk around EF-S lens (something between 17-105 range, though you have made two good yet cheap lens i.e. 18-55 IS and 55-250 IS. But you can not say 18-55 range is good for walk around purpose and again 55-250 lacks wide angle part. You have your 17-85 IS USM in your arsenal.. but its optically very mediocre. Your arch rival and other rivals are coming up with very good walk around solutions,optically very competitive yet not so high priced. It’s true in third world countries of Asia and Africa and South-America, you have a huge customer base who use DSLRs but not maximum of them specially beginner, amateur and serious-amateur can not afford your very best L-series lenses. We are in urgent need of an optically potent EF-S walk-around lens and of course which must not be ridiculously higher priced. It’s the call of this hour from this part of Canon world!!!
2000D is coming because there will be a healthy battle always on.. Canon and Nikon both want this battle to live long. In the Canon pipeline…. 1. 2000D 2. 16-105 f2.8-4 IS 3. 35mm f1.8 4. 60D
Any dates?
forgive me, but you ask a bit too much. you want an inexpensive, compact, do it all lens, with good performance. at least one of those has to go if you expect that to become real.
It’s:
EF-S 16-120 f2.8-4 IS
or
EF-S 16-105 f2.8-4 IS
???
Entry level is where the money is…
I think the video/non-video debate will continue for a long time. I see the value of video on a DSLR. I think the average camcorder is the equivalent of a P&S, and so a DSLR w/ video offers similar benefits over a P&S – i.e. interchangeable lenses, manual controls, etc. Plus it means one tool to use for both still & video, rather than having to carry separate equipment just for video.
However, I personally probably wouldn’t use the video feature if I had it (I also don’t have kids yet, which is likely relevant to my choice). So I don’t like the idea of having to pay for a feature as significant as video if I don’t want it. Moreover, I think there are more important things Canon engineers could be spending their time on (existing features, no matter how great, can always be improved). I’d love to see Canon split their product line into versions with video and versions without (without being a little cheaper, of course). But I know that realistically this probably isn’t feasible. I think those who do not want video will likely just have to live with it as that is the direction the market is heading.
he also said “maybe smaller [than APS-C] like (µ)4/3s” and I don’t think canon is going to make a smaller sensor size which would probably not work on even ef-s lenses
Could we trade one for a direct print button?
Hey Gustafo, you said “16-120” earlier and now “16-105”! Which is it?
It’s not like anyone is forcing you to use the video feature. HD video is very demanding on chips/sensors, and it’s likely to help bring about improvements in the cameras, such as better liveview features, etc., so if you don’t use the video you could still benefit from it driving improvements in the cameras indirectly.
IF it’s true, then I’m a bit disappointed. I want some new L lenses, not EF-S lenses.
How about a new 24-70? Or an improved 70-200 2.8L IS?
That’s what I want to hear, enough of this “budget” stuff. LOL.
Such a POSH comment !
Cause of course you guies are professional photographers …
+ 1 for that!
no i just just dont like toy cameras that dont have pc ports and require toy to look at big ass lcd to check the setting that arnt in the viewfinder stuff like
wow lets just hate on entry cameras. yeah they’re not up to pro standards. duh, but it helps a lot of people make better images for their home life, and canon a lot of $$$ to put into R&D with stuff we do care about. so chill, no one is going to make you buy one, much less shoot an ad campaign with one.
Dude, what about the EF-S 18-200mm IS?
I don’t think that nikon will stay 12mp for long.
I guess you hate them because they made the world of photography cheap as every one can join thanks to those cheap dslrs
+1
Either one I would be happy with, but the 16-120 would be sweet. We need some further confirmation on this please.
Wonder what they would be price at? Nikon’s 18-105 VR goes for about $350 US, so I’m assuming it would be a fair bit more than that due to the larger aperture?
ok lets just hate me becuse i find missing features rediculus i got into photography shoting a rebel i now shoot a 40d and there is no comparison.
even with a cheap dslr your going to get crap results without nice glass so regardless it is not a wallet friendly art form
If I buy a DSLR, it has nothing to do with a P&S. I want good quality images, high dyn range, possibly low DOF.
Also, I’ve tried the 18km to my work with my car, the train and the bicycle. The latter always wins at under 30 minutes, although my car has higher pixels, eh, PS.
having owned with a rebel XT and currently owning a 1D mkIII I agree that the glass makes all the difference, but you need to realize that a lot of people buy entry level DLSR cameras as uber P&S cameras, not because they intend to be photographers, be that artistic professional or whatever else. A lot of people are better off with these cameras than with the alternative, and its simply not worth it to them to pay for a better camera. Obviously people who hawk all day on gear forums, like you and I, do care enough to pay the difference, and have entirely different expectations of performance. remember that camera companies make just as much, if not more, from the entry level sales as they do pro body sales, and that all feeds off the same technology base as all the other DSLR bodies, just at a reduced quality and cost. So the money Canon makes from these cameras goes into paying their workers to make all the cameras, the lenses, the flashes, etc… that we do want, and some of it goes to pay for development of better technology, like sensors, and AF that everyone benefits from. Its obvious that you don’t want a 2000D, probably only about 5% of the people who read this blog do, but that’s no reason to attack it by calling it ‘not a real camera’ lots of people have gotten good results from POSH cameras, some with luck and some with skill, just because you personally find it intolerable to use (as do I) does not call for this epic ballad of hate on the least expensive camera in Canon’s line-up.
The T1i/500D was announced 14 months after the XSi/500D. I would imagine that the T1/2000D will be the same which would be August
The T1i/500D was announced 14 months after the XSi/450D. I would imagine that the T1/2000D will be the same which would be August