What do you want in the next 1D?

AF Fine Tune by different AF Point
AF Fine Tune by different AF Point

I found the tendency of Out of focus of different AF point is normally different

Well, actually I would like an intermediate camera between the 1D-III and the 50D, without built in verticle grip. You wouldn’t beleive how many people use **D’s with 4, 5 and 6’s and teleconverters on top. They use them for focal length equivalent gains and the smaller body size.

Of course, from a product planners point of view, it’s easy to say “why don’t these people buy a 1D series”, but they need to remember that quite often these people use their body for all types of photography, so maybe their passion is birds, but also want to take the camera on holiday with them, take family snapshots, etc without carrying a slab of a body, which aside from the size/weight, is not particularly conspicuous.

So, as a non Pro, I would like a baby 1D (or a better XXD) with the following:

Auto ISO:
1) The ability for the user to set the maximum ISO it can use.

2) I quite like the idea of the Canon system attempting to maintain a minimum shutter speed of 1/focal
length, as opposed to just using a static minimum shutter speed like the Nikon system, but it would be better if there was an option for the user to set auto ISO compensation. So, for example, if you are shooting slow moving subjects and you are quite steady with a camera (or maybe using a monopod), you could dial in an auto ISO compensation of -3 stops, so that instead of the camera choosing a minimum shutter speed of 1/320 @ 300mm, it would go down to 1/40 before changing ISO. On the other hand, if for example you are shooting fast moving subjects, you could dial in an auto ISO compensation of +3 stops, so that instead of the camera choosing a minimum shutter speed of 1/320 @ 300mm, it would select 1/2500 before changing ISO.

3) Intelligent to take Image Stabilized lenses into consideration when working out minimum shutter speeds.

AF points:
1) At minimum they should have focus points at the common thirds points. The amount of focus points in between doesn’t particulary worry me as long as it can accurately track focus and you don’t need to scroll through them all to get to common focus points when not tracking fast moving subjects.

2) To be able to recognise what you are tracking so that if you are tracking a fast moving object, the focus system realises what you are tracking and doesn’t readily jump to something else as quickly such as background or foreground. For example, if when shooting a bird in flight, jet fighter, or any fast moving object
that you are trying to follow for that matter, and the auto focus jumps to the sky, background trees, etc. momentariy, then it doesn’t matter how many megapixels
the sensor has because you lose the shot. Using the AE button to stop/start AF is not ideal. As far as I am aware, the 1D series has a custom function for this (CF.20) which allows you to change the sensitivity of the AI Servo tracking, but only delays it for 1 second on the slowest setting. Why not have scene recognition/colour pattern tracking to see what you’re tracking. It’s quite obvious if you have been tracking a subject for a few seconds that you don’t want to switch focus to a blank sky or a foreground persons head.
Also, if you are shooting a photo of a person at close range with a big aperture
lens, focusing and re-composing is no match for having a focus point exactly where you want it. In fact it can cause back-focusing.

Of course, a reliable eye controlled system where you could select the focus point anywhere in the view finder would be even better.

3) Ability to autofocus at f/8 so you can use lenses with teleconverters even if it makes them an f/8.

High ISO:
1) Forget megapixels. Extra mega pixels are only worthwhile if Canon are able to retain the ability to keep noise levels lower than previous models straight out of the camera. The 40D was worse than the 20D/30D and the 50D is worse again. And yes, that is even true when downsizing the photos. Don’t forget, an 8.2MP camera can already print nearly 15″ x 10″ @ 240PPI, so extra mega pixels are only useful for cropping on this type of body (that is or course, if there wasn’t the problem of diffraction limited appatures and the strain on a lot of the current lenses on a 15MP APS-C sensor).

Why not have an 8.2MP sensor, with modern sensor technology to make noise 3 stops better than the 40D? So ISO 6400 would be equivelent to ISO 800 on a 40D

Low ISO:
1) Ability to use lower ISO’s such as 50, 25, 12, etc. , so you don’t need to use ND filters as much.

File Formats:
1) Ability to shoot DNG format straight out of the camera.

View Finder:
1) 100% like the D300 has.

Joystick:
1) Better feel, not so fiddly. It’s not the best for selecting focus points, as it can be a bit fiddly with the thumb.

Flash Control:
1) OK, Canon need to use light to get around radio transmitter regulations in different countries, but why not have a slot in the flash heads/body to allow you to insert a radio module for your particular country if you want it? They are only small (look at the Sekonic RT-32 radio module).

Apperture Bracketing;
1) Sometimes DOF can be difficult to judge on the fly, especially if you are using a big apperture lens. Also, below f/2.8 with the standard focusing screen, what you seethrough the veiwfinder is miles off. Why can’t we have
apperture bracketing for DOF, it’s only firmware.