Canon 60D possibly on the horizon

dopravopat · Jul 16, 2009

I sure hope that the 60D will remain 1.6 crop. If, then I would upgrade to FF, not to 1.3. Tell me, why should I upgrade to 1.3 when I want reall UWA??? I currently use the Sigma 10-20 at 1.6 crop. Now, to the 16 mm on 1.3 crop, I need 12 mm. But there is no 12 mm UWA for 1.3 crop. There is the Sigma 12-24 for FF. Now, if I had a that expensice FF lens, then why waste its image circle on a crop body? Am am sure a good old 5D MkI would serve me better. APS-H in the xxD line makes absolutely no sense to me. If Canon really makes such a dumb decision to abandon the 1.6 crop in the XXd line, they are either really stupid or they want to boost the sales of FF cameras. And I do not want the xxxD line, as they have worse viewfinder, have no top LCD screen and the overall body size is too small to fit ergonomically into my hands.
--
Erik
http://jalbum.net/users/eziak

rdspear · Jul 17, 2009

Let's see. 10D, 20D, 30D, 40D, 50D...

I'd go out on a limb and agree that "60D" would be a very likely name for the next generation of Canon's pro-sumer line of DSLR bodies.

I'd also agree that it's "possibly on the horizon" somewhere.

1.3 crop? No.

That's been a "rumor" since at least the 30D. I have no idea why people keep making it up and/or wishing it to happen.

Jetfreak · Jul 17, 2009

If anybody is looking or hoping for a 60D with FF, go to 5D oder 5DII.

Why should there come a 60D with FF? In my opinion, it makes no sense.

Regards, Andi

Strannik · Jul 17, 2009

I noticed quite a few stores in Canada are getting low (or out of stock/back order) on 50D, especially on "body only". Any similar observations from other countries? Could that be another sign of August announcement for 60D? With new 40D bodies being hard to find as it is, a low stock on 50D will push a lot of people to the new model (for one reason or another) once it is available. Could be just a sales strategy for the new model (finishing off 40D in advance and reducing 50D stock)... Any opinions?

Just wondering...

4thnebula · Jul 17, 2009

I will be sticking to 1.6 crop bodies along with one FF.

Jim Graziano · Jul 17, 2009

I'd mentioned farther up in the thread that I was told by a retail associate that Canon was increasing the discount to US retail channel employees (Wolf, BB, etc.). They usually do this to draw down stock before a new introduction. The 50D was specifically cited for greater discount.
--
Jim
http://www.pbase.com/jgraziano

guatitamasluz · Jul 17, 2009

whatever they improve at bodies is ok for me. while my 30D gently clicks. I'll sit out at least two upgrades, as my only aim is better high ISO's...hope
they can do something about it even at APS-C level.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/guatitamasluz/

David Hull · Jul 17, 2009

Karel Donk, interesting link. It has been a while since I read something by someone who is that full of himself. I can see why he has been banned from this and several other sites.

Just out of curiosity, do you own a 50D or a 5DII or are you just regurgetating stuff you have read by pompous a$$'s like Donk? I own both and I don't really find them to be that bad and certainly not "gutless". When used correctly by a competant photographer, both are capable of excellent results -- as is just about any camera for that matter.

NetMage · Jul 17, 2009

Many?

--
EOS 50D, 20D, 10D, 630, A-1, SD1000
-- Please remove the Quote option!
-- Why can't you edit more than once???
-- How about switching to real forum software?

FL390 · Jul 20, 2009

Many people say they prefer 1.6 or FF. What's wrong with the 1.3 crop? 1.3 crop gives more resolution and less vignetting. I even prefer it over FF. I admit I don't have any EF-S lenses though...

Peace On Earth · Jul 20, 2009

cos we want the reach

, wildlife shooters, outdoor shooters etc

people who are more into landscape and portrait might prefer 1.3 or full frame

long lenses are heavier more expensive to buy ... crop gives you the reach without cropping .. saving those precious megapixels

FL390 said:
Many people say they prefer 1.6 or FF. What's wrong with the 1.3 crop? 1.3 crop gives more resolution and less vignetting. I even prefer it over FF. I admit I don't have any EF-S lenses though...

jonrobertp · Jul 20, 2009

kitmos · Jul 20, 2009

Jim Graziano said:
That seems crazy to me that they would come out with so many EF-S lenses and then obsolete them. Just doesn't make good business sense.
--

Agreed

Greg Pavlov · Jul 20, 2009

There is the entire Rebel series, which seems to be going strong.

P.S.: I also doubt that a 1.3 is in the works. If Canon is planning a new line at some point, micro 4/3 would make more sense (IMO, of course...)

Jim Graziano said:
That seems crazy to me that they would come out with so many EF-S lenses and then obsolete them. Just doesn't make good business sense.
--
Jim
http://www.pbase.com/jgraziano

Greg Pavlov · Jul 20, 2009

... of course, there is also the possibility of a 1.3 with a well-done 1.6 mode...... that could be interesting.

Greg Pavlov said:
P.S.: I also doubt that a 1.3 is in the works. If Canon is planning a new line at some point, micro 4/3 would make more sense (IMO, of course...)

Jim Graziano said:

That seems crazy to me that they would come out with so many EF-S lenses and then obsolete them. Just doesn't make good business sense.
--
Jim
http://www.pbase.com/jgraziano

Click to expand...

Mark B. · Jul 21, 2009

Canon won't introduce a 1.3x unless it's a 1DMkIII replacement, or a new range. 1.6x may be useless for you, but not for most people who have been using it.

jonrobertp said:
--

kmckinnon · Jul 21, 2009

I wouldn't mind a FF camera smart enough to recognize when I am using EF-S (or dumb but with a switch to let me tell it what kind of lens I have mounted) and handle the exposure accordingly. I have no problem taking advantage of FF frame capabilities when using EF lenses while still maintaining the ability to use my EF-S lenses. That's a pretty attractive migration path to total FF to me! As I aquire and transition to FF lenses I can sell my EF-S lenses.
--
kmckinnon

fyngyrz · Jul 21, 2009

4thnebula said:
I have a 50D for the specific purpose of
getting a lot of detail and crop from longer
lenses like the 400 f5.6 and 70-200 IS f4.

The only difference in detail you get from a 50D is due to the sensel density (4.7u), not the 1.6 crop factor.

The crop factor gives you tighter framing (FOV) by losing a lot of detail at the edges that a larger sensor would have caught, thus wasting a lot of capability of those longer lenses. As long as the future camera has 4.7u or smaller sensels and is at least APS-C in size, there will be no loss of detail as compared to your 50D.

If a different camera's sensor is larger – APS-H or FF – then it will get more detail around the edges as well.

APS-C designs do not gain magnification by virtue of a smaller sensor; on the contrary, they lose edge detail. The only magnification a camera can pick up is due to sensel size shrinking.

Right now, the 50D has the smallest sensels in the entire Canon line, hence the finest detail of their DSLR lines, and that is the thing to keep an eye on.

4thnebula said:
I also like my EF-S lenses. If Canon stops the
XXD APS-C line I will be moving to Nikon.

The likelihood of Canon abandoning APS-C for APS-H in the xxD line is nearly zero. It's more than a marketing decision; it would hugely damage their business model. EF-S lens sales are important to them. There is no logical basis for the rumor that started this thread.

--
Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fyngyrz/
Blog: http://fyngyrz.wordpress.com/

fyngyrz · Jul 21, 2009

Peace On Earth said:
cos we want the reach , wildlife shooters, outdoor shooters etc

The only improvement in reach you get comes from sensel size. The 50D has very small sensels (4.7u) and this gets you more detail from any particular lens, assuming that the lens is capable of resolving it and you have its settings right.

1.3 crop does not change reach at all. Just the field of view (and in that area, it tosses out a lot of edge detail that non-S lenses are delivering to the focal plane.)

Peace On Earth said:
people who are more into landscape and portrait might prefer 1.3 or full frame

No. Decisions made on fine detail must be made based upon sensel size; decisions made on edge detail must be made based upon sensor size.

Peace On Earth said:
... crop gives you the reach without cropping ..
saving those precious megapixels

Crop tosses out edge detail for any non EF-S lens. Sensel size is the factor that gives a camera more, or less, reach, with any particular lens.

Here's a chart with the relative magnifications for each sensel size:

--
Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fyngyrz/
Blog: http://fyngyrz.wordpress.com/

tigger183234 · Jul 21, 2009

kmckinnon said:
I wouldn't mind a FF camera smart enough to recognize when I am using EF-S (or dumb but with a switch to let me tell it what kind of lens I have mounted) and handle the exposure accordingly.

The problem is a mechanical problem. As far as I know, EF-S lenses on a FF camera would block the mirror from swinging upward, as it is bigger than on a 1.6 crop camera.

Canon 60D possibly on the horizon

Senior Member

Senior Member

Active member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Mark B.

Guest

Well-known member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts