It is a dumb idea, Hasselblad has always been making dumb decisions these days...
Earthlight: Is this really still the same old 18mp sensor? What is this, some weird alternate reality where sensor development does not exist?
I believe that maybe Canon's been concentrating on development of that 46mp full frame sensor...
VivaLasVegas: This is my second day looking at it, this is the ugliest camera ever made.
Lavs12: So, Canon beefs up the rebel, doesn't update the 60D/7D higher/highest end crops and puts out 3 new FF. Oh, and started what will probably be some kind of 3 tier Mirror-less line, starting with entry level model, of course. The powershots just coming out look really nice, too. By seriously boosting L lineup recently, the incentive to go FF Canon has probably never been higher as they have pressed their advantage. Canon definitely knows this and is trying to create a direct pipeline to FF- L- lense nirvana for themselves. Think about the customer base they are trying to hook..... People who probably never took pictures before their phone could take some that that made them think, hmm this is fun. Right now strategy is camera phone-powershot/rebel-6D- L lense goodness(in bed forever=) then they can sell you whatever body they want that makes them the best sales demographics across the board which best maximizes profit margin.
60D is a great camera, and 17-55 is the best EF-S zoom lens on the market. IMHO, if you want a different experience and not wanting to wait for the new upgrade for it, just go for the 6D or 5DMK3. This Christmas would be a good time to get the best deal on it :)
I believe there are still some shooters will be expecting a 60D/7D upgrade, and Canon wouldn't just ignored it. I guess lots of Canon's revenue was generated by mid/lower end users, to me it's more profitable. I personally think that the future's line-up should be mirroless/large sensor point and shoot for casual users, mid/high end APS-C for those amateurs shoot sports and wild life, and FF cameras for the rest.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------Of course I'm talking about in a certain budgets, without a budget you sure can take the best of the best.
johnsaxon: I've been a professional photographer for 35 years, but have now retired from commercial work. When looking to buy a camera I would only look at image quality versus cost. The Mark II set a very high standard for quality and was about $2700 for the body if I remember correctly. So far I have never looked at one of the images from my 5D Mark II and felt any need for increased resolution or any other improvement.
Regarding the fancy metering, what are you doing other than averaging the light in the scene and then choosing an exposure value that will either blow the highlights or block up the shadows? I remember the old days when the film came with a little paper that said "open shade - 125th @ f8" - and by god it worked.
It's aggravating that Canon has jacked up the price of the 5D by almost a thousand dollars. Unless this model has a far superior sensor, which is likely not the case, just buy yourself a Mark II while you still can.
I totally agree with John, I am a 5D2 owner, and I personally do not see any incentive to upgrade to Mark 3. 5D3 is a excellent camera, however, it might be a good choice for the new full frame shooters.
Jahled, I think it is not a issue of money, it is just a personal favor.
Ben Tomohiku: Personally I think K-30 really looks like a Pentax, at least from the exterior better than K-01 or Q. Pentax is always so generous to adding better features on their cameras. I bought a Pentax K-X for my sister two years ago, at that time K-X is the best value entry-level dslr.However I am really sad that most of the people don't realize it, they're gonna say "Pentax? Never heard of it" every time when I recommend them some nice dslrs from Pentax, whatever. Pentax really should work on letting more people know about their business.
Exactly, however from my point of view, Ricoh's marketing for Pentax is not optimum. Feels like they're not even trying to compete with Canon or Nikon; and many people think that Pentax has the potential due to its solid experience on optic area (also from its Corp, Hoya).
Personally I think K-30 really looks like a Pentax, at least from the exterior better than K-01 or Q. Pentax is always so generous to adding better features on their cameras. I bought a Pentax K-X for my sister two years ago, at that time K-X is the best value entry-level dslr.However I am really sad that most of the people don't realize it, they're gonna say "Pentax? Never heard of it" every time when I recommend them some nice dslrs from Pentax, whatever. Pentax really should work on letting more people know about their business.
Ben Tomohiku: As I understand, they are trying to make photography even easier to people, I can't agree with that. It sounds "Fun", but not for me personally. I really enjoy the manual camera, because I feel taking control by using my knowledge from years experience. Maybe that crazy fully auto camera takes wonderful image, I would be happier to see my imperfect one taken by "Me". Lytro introduced a really nice concept, however I can see the day that Canon, Sony or Nikon etc purchase its technology and apply to more mature DSLRs.
I actually shoot film as well, maybe guys like me are old fashion.
As I understand, they are trying to make photography even easier to people, I can't agree with that. It sounds "Fun", but not for me personally. I really enjoy the manual camera, because I feel taking control by using my knowledge from years experience. Maybe that crazy fully auto camera takes wonderful image, I would be happier to see my imperfect one taken by "Me". Lytro introduced a really nice concept, however I can see the day that Canon, Sony or Nikon etc purchase its technology and apply to more mature DSLRs.
MP Burke: It;s too early to say whether this will catch on, but, if I'm reading it correctly, a 16MB file is being used to create images of about 1.2 MP.Thus it seems likely that if the resolution was increased to around 10MP, the file size would exceed 100MB. This alone may be a sufficient reason to restrict the application of this type of camera.
It spends too much space to record "light's" information in order to change the focus point I guess. I would rather focusing carefully on what I want on my 5D2, instead of take a cheesy light field photo and try to change the focus points.
That is a camera with phone's functions
Superka: I think Olympus has a huge problems in digital era. It have not made any good DSLR - competitors was always much better. 4/3 is a fail. I''m a fan of Olympus because of their OM-series (I still use it), but digital is not even close to it in terms of perfection. Olympus may disappear as Minolta did, or someone will buy it and throw this 4/3 away.
You're right, however in nowadays markets, Olympus can hardly compete with Canon, Nikon or Sony, 4/3 is not their favorite but the best choice.
So sad that few months ago already switched to 5D2 from my D300s and have couple L glasses, pretty hard to switch back again. Glad I finally see a real D800 here.
star shooter: .. and is there Nikon glass that can deliver the rez for 36megs?
Nice question.. I want to ask as well.However if the glasses can handle 24mp of D3x, it shouldn't be a big problem for them. Waiting for the test results.
T34: Well, so you think this lens will be the equal of a Nikon or Canon 24-70mm f2.8? Guess again! You get what you pay for in Life, Tamron lenses are Junk! For every Ten they make, maybe your lucky enough to get one that's actually sharp, the rest will be soft. Don't waste your money!
Agree with Nekrosoft, lots of sigma fast prime lens have shift focusing problems.
well, it gives people who couldn't afford an N or C 24-70 a very good choice. Choosing Tamron or Sigma has always been a budget choice. You will get what you pay for, so don't blame off brands. I meant, why not? Having one more budget choice is always a good thing, isn't it?
Nice replacement of 28-75!
Old Ed: I've been looking for the filter size, but no luck so far. Possibly a 77? Also, it will be interesting to learn if it focuses in the "Nikon" direction or not. BTW, I still have a Tokina f4-5.6 70-200 zoom that I bought back in the 70's. It still looks and works like new. I cannot say the same for my (then top-of-the-line) Nikkor f4.5 80-200; it is now unusable because of zoom creep. And the Nikkor cost about 3,000 USD, in today's dollars. So I'm a BIG Tokina fan. I just wish they had a more extensive line, and I'm sad to see them phasing out of primes.
i bed its gonna be a 67mm size, same as the canon's 70-200 f4. I like tokina too, they usually make some good quality lens, well made!
I'm not interested in such toys.