Najinsky: I love it when DPR engages in the rumour mill. The one thing it tells us for certain is you don't have one yet, or it would likely be covered by your NDA.
Probably just a white SL1 for the Asian market.
No, we don't have the camera. Just the same photo others have. It's not a rumor. It's a teaser. You folks need to read before commenting.
Lawrencew: Wow! It didn't take you guys long to copy what I did early todayhttp://eos-m.net/rumours/canon-white-world-teaser/
None of the above conspiracies is true. We don't have the camera. I wanted to post it right when I wrote it, at about 7:00 pm pacific, but also wanted someone else to read it. It was obvious enough I thought someone else would easily notice too, so I was hoping to post it last night. But I waited for another editor to look at it. He did so very late at night after I'd gone to bed, so I posted it in the morning. Simple as that. We don't have time to sit around conspiring to deceive or steal other people's stuff. There are billions of people in the world and hundreds of millions of them have computers; it's no surprise someone else would notice what a large camera company posted online. I saw the story, looked at the image in Photoshop, saved my images, and credited my sources. End of story.
andersf: so someone is doing "photoshop forensics" under the assumption that the person making the veiled marketing image would use an image of the new product underneath? Wouldn't you just pick any random body and make the image from that? The whole point is to reveal that it's a canon slr body and nothing more. An image of any canon slr body will do.
Actually, logically that is less likely, though certainly possible. The person making the veiled marketing image was careful to let certain features show, it seems to me. Other teaser campaigns have looked like the camera that's eventually revealed, albeit sometimes with skewed angles designed to deceive. We haven't said this is conclusive, just that the 100D's size and features seem to fit under the cloth.
marleni: Dear dpreview,Please stop blowing up RUMORSand get down to FACTS.some recent "news" stories like the above are miles away from what I expect from a credible and trustworthy site about photography.Thank you.
It's not a rumor. It's a teaser put out by the camera company. Last I checked, cameras are what we cover here at DPReview. Fact is, what shows through the white cloth looks like a 100D, only white. That's all we've reported, because we thought camera fans would like to know. If that's not you, feel free to proceed to our many other credible and trustworthy reviews. Just remember, there's nothing incredible or untrustworthy about this camera and photography site reporting on a camera company's teaser campaign. Some would say it's our job.
nstam: making cameras: youd think they(camera companies) understand photoshop... of course theyre playing games with everyone. why make it easy to discern what it is; todays market works off selling pushing ideas; isnt that marketing?DPReview knows whats hiding, and we're giving it hits. It would be more fun if they didn't follow the 'rumours' and let us play the 'whats next' game. This is one of the leading websites around the world, and they still play games... what happened to old DPR(edited, grammar)
We don't know what it is. We have not been briefed. We thought it seemed pretty obvious what was under the sheet, and just a few moments in Photoshop confirmed our suspicions. It still might be a mini 1D Mark 5 for all we know.
It's not a rumor. It's a teaser put out by Canon. And yes, it's very likely a white model for the Korean market.
JoEick: Once again. DPR staff posting rumors, when we all know they have been playing with one for weeks now. They did the same thing with the Nikon Df.
By posting this rumor, they are indirectly confirming that it is true, but they can't say it yet due to NDA restraints.
Also, to the OP, this is not a rumor, it is a teaser, which makes it fair game for speculation.
We copied no one, prepping this late last night, waiting to post it this morning. Congrats on seeing the same similarities.
Not true. All we have is this image. And if it is what it seems, there's not much reason for us to be pre-briefed. It could also be a less expensive model, or more feature-rich. But since it's being teased in Korea, it might also be Korea-only.
jws1956: I am not a photographer but am looking for some help comparing this to the 5d mkII. Is this a step up, down, or just lateral?
The 5D Mark II is a full-frame DSLR, this is an APS-C DSLR. Sensor size, and the resulting difference in focal length is a key differentiator. The 70D, for its part, has Dual Pixel AF, which, when shooting videos, is better than the contrast-detect AF available on the 5D II. The latter cannot autofocus smoothly while shooting video, whereas the 70D can.
dr jim: You guys (and gals) at dpreview must have really thick skins to be willing to post these. You know the drill. Shortly you will have a dozen hot shots tell you what crappy shots they are, and their goldfish could have done better. ;-).Well, I for one really appreciate these real world samples. As much as I'd love to see raw's I understand you can't do that yet. Keep up the good work.
My skin's getting thicker, but I wish the instinct weren't so often for blood. We're just people.
Anzere08: Am I the only one seeing a lot of issues in the way these samples were shot? Lots of very low shutter speed in moving scenes (1/160 with a running horse) ? 1/100s with a moving singer? 1/50s using a 55mm non-stabilized lens etc? A lot of shots look blurry for that reason. Was it shot in auto mode?
I have never shot a pop singer under HMI lights in a church with a wide, dense arc of 40 other journalists competing for angle. I tried lots of different settings in a situation where I wasn't much happy with my choice of lens, nor the difficulty of the subject. At the time, though, I wanted to use the new Sony lenses primarily, not mess with Alpha lenses. Nailing focus was of primary concern, obviously, and controlling focus on the A7 takes a little learning. And yes, there is no one way to shoot a scene. It all changes if she moves, or I move, or the lens changes. I took a lot more shots than you see of this moving subject, but I generally chose them for sharpness and content. As it turns out, only a few of my shots with the A7 were as sharp as I wanted, a lower percentage than I got with the A7R. More later.
UneVache: Excellent samples, thank you :D At the contrary to some others, I really think that snaphots and simple and well done unmodified every day shots are the best way to have a first honest idea/impression of what a camera can offer to most of us, so thanks for the time you took to share this. Keep up. I'm impatient to read about your future review of these two cameras.
And you're right, they are snapshots. That's all they're supposed to be when creating a gallery in a hurry. Companies do their best to give us interesting things to make snapshots with at these events, and they try to make them artistic opportunities. But when there are 40-some other journalists standing around in the best spots, and the subject is not yours to command, you do what you can.
Finally, I do not claim to be a great photographer. I am by trade a camera reviewer. The photos were framed and shot to show characteristics of the sensor, lens, and various modes the camera offers. I search for texture, depth, subject pose, and try to focus on interesting parts of the scene. When a horse and rider just stand there, that's what you have to work with. Rocks, well, they're even more exciting.
When the horses were galloping, which didn't happen much, I was distracted with the fact that the lens didn't zoom with the shutter half-pressed (on the RX10). More later.
Thanks, I'll reply to the sane comments, not the people who would rather puff themselves up for being able to criticize someone seen as an 'authority.' The truth is I shot three cameras at once. I didn't know in advance what I'd be shooting, and these were the first moments with the cameras (the horse shots at least). I had intended to shoot just one camera, but realized I'd better start doing all of them, which left those first ones a bit off. I hadn't learned that the rear dial was resetting the ISO for me by default, and the EV dial was changing each time I took it in and out of the bag.
I do often shoot in Program mode when making galleries, partially to see what the camera does in this very common mode. Many cameras will choose too low a shutter speed and still not raise the ISO, as I've seen in the past, and that's important to note, because not everyone shoots in the semi-auto modes. Lately I shoot more in Manual mode, but seldom for gallery images.
jonmcphoto: It looks to me under close look that hardly any of these images are that sharp. As a matter of fact I rarely see an image on this site's galleries that make me go WOW! If I had relied on what I have seen here I don't think I would have purchased and camera. I love this site but images always lack edge sharpness to me. Am I alone on this?
Actually, the problem is I didn't know the rear dial was set to change the ISO by default until I had more time with the camera. We'd just received them the night before and that was our first time to shoot with them.
Spectro: another photographer took sample shots of the A7r in Tennessee also. Looks like the same people on horse. Sony must be in TN for some reason. He got some better shots indeed, but with a better lens.
Steve let me try his Nocti-whats-its (Voitlander, whose name I can't remember) with which I captured a picture of a glass on the table (so exciting) because I didn't want to bogart his lens. Yes, it's very impressive. I don't know one way or another what Steve did to his images, but mine are posted unmodified, as we almost always do, which raises the bar quite a bit for point-of-capture. Getting it right in camera is always a good idea.
After the disparaging comments from other galleries, I looked around at the 47 other journalists crowding around our few subjects and didn't feel at all bad that my images are less than art. We were all doing what we could to capture staged, yet fleeting moments while not stepping on each other. As usual, I'd see a shot, and someone else would see it too, often getting there before I did. Normally I'm the only photographer in the room; this was something other.
Tord S Eriksson: Well, I was impressed by the ease the camera handled colours in low light, and the very subdued noise, no matter what setting! The rest (choice of subjects, and so on) wasn't so impressive.
Oh, I wish you had had Steve Huff to take the photos, someone with a little imagination, outside the box. 50 pictures taken in neon light doesn't say more than a handful, but some portraits, close-ups, in short something interesting, had been appreciated!
The photos of the Jack Daniels guy going through the motions made my day, while those of our four-legged hoofed friends were the worst I've seen in a long time!
You know, when we're on a press trip like this, we spend a lot of time on the bus. When we get off, we're hustled through whatever thing it is they've given us to photograph and then herded back on the bus. I stood patiently taking representative photographs quite often with three cameras: the RX10, the A7R and the A7. Many of them will repeat as we post galleries from the other two cameras. I had PR people hustling me and others along, while we tried to capture more meaningful images.
When I say 'representative,' I mean shots that show what the camera can do in various situations. A moving animal, for example. A standing animal with a rider. A brick wall with a neon sign illuminating it. It's not art, it's an image that you can zoom in on and look at for detail, color, processing, sharpening, whatever.
It happens that Steve Huff is on this trip. Go visit his site, I'm sure he'll appreciate it. Bottom line, I don't shoot these for art. I shoot them to show what the camera can do.
maxdance: DPR continue to impress with their creativity in finding new ways to up their click rate and, from Shawn Barnett’s comments, seem to think that “pointing out stuff like this” is important. Really??In my view this is more like just another (admittedly clever) cheap trick designed to increase the hit rate, and not at all worthy of this site.
It's just a conversation we invited our readers to have about a fake rumor that hit today. As of the time of its posting, we were the first to point out it seemed pretty fake while others were treating it as real. I think that's important, yes. In the meantime, the team has been producing tons of information about interesting cameras you can check out in other posts.
Optimal Prime: Oh dear.... Is DPREVIEW into rumours now?
I'm not sure how this is presented as "objectivity." We said, "Look at this photo, is it real or fake? Sure looks fake to us and here's one reason. What do you think?" I'd frankly appreciate more objectivity and less opinion in news stories, leaving the opinion out. That's what journalism is supposed to do: report, not judge; that seldom happens in modern journalism. Instead, stories are crafted to send a message. Here's where you learn, though, that this is probably not real.