BalasmicVinegar: So checking various UK sites, the 7D MK II is to retail around £1600. The 6D which is full frame retails at £1300. So is the 6D going to be replaced by a 6D MK II? A 5D is 'only' £700 more than a 7D MK II.
Canon seem to have got their pricing a bit messed up.
So the lack of wifi and swivel touch screen doesn't bother you? And yes I do get it.
So checking various UK sites, the 7D MK II is to retail around £1600. The 6D which is full frame retails at £1300. So is the 6D going to be replaced by a 6D MK II? A 5D is 'only' £700 more than a 7D MK II.
BalasmicVinegar: The question is do I buy a 7D mk II to replace my 50D or do I save £1000 and buy a 70D which has wifi and a swivel touch screen?
Thought about the 6D but that would mean changing my fabulous 15-85 Canon lens. The 6D doesn't have a swivelling touch screen either.
Come on Canon, get with the times. I can see the 7D MkIII released as a film camera.
The question is do I buy a 7D mk II to replace my 50D or do I save £1000 and buy a 70D which has wifi and a swivel touch screen?
Each time I hear about the demise of Kodak I think how sad it is that such a great company has so fundamentally lost its way.
No doubt all of us on this site cut our teeth on an Instamatic 126. If not then it is inconceivable that rolls of Kodak film didn't spool through our cameras from time to time.
I purchased my first digital camera in 1999. It was a Kodak DCS 210. A sub megapixel camera for £400. The batteries lasted about 30 mins and the 8MB card held about 27 photos. Even then I knew that Film was on the way out.
Canon's first consumer DSLR probably sealed the fate of film. The rest is history. I haven't shot a roll of film for eight years. Digital is more convenient, cheaper, more environmentally friendly and with the quality of the equipment all together better than film.
I wonder how many great companies will still be here in 2112? Microsoft? Apple? Marks & Spencer? Ford? BMW? Mercedes? Is it unthinkable that some of these names may no longer exist?
Stunning. Beautiful picture.
Having just purchased an IXUS 220, I'd say that this camera is the ideal size. I have an EOS 50D plus an 15-85mm lens and battery grip. The whole thing weighs almost 2KG. The IXUS weighs < 150g and fits in a trouser pocket without causing embarrassment.
I was considering the S100 or G12 but I know that if I had purchased one of them then Canon would have joined the mirror less 4:3 brigade or I'd be constantly wishing I'd brought my 50D along instead. The sensor on the IXUS 220 is I believe almost the same as on the S100. It's also about half the price.
When digital cameras started to appear I wondered why manufacturers continued with the SLR body shape. After all, it is only this shape, with the lens in the middle because the 35mm cassette unspooled from one side and spooled up on the other. A mechanical shutter also seems strange as well because the sensor could be made to 'record' electronically rather than remain live all the time. I think eventually they will disappear.
I really cannot see any point in this picture ;)