A new rebel is coming. How will it be better than the last?

R2D2 wrote:

Move on up to the "i" class and you get all this back, and you really find yourself with a very capable camera. Heck, I shot with the T4i exclusively for a year and hardly missed a beat (coming from the 50D).

There are certainly a large number of folks here clamoring for an even more capable offering in this Rebel form factor, and would likely jump on a new Rebel if Canon were to simply add MFA and a deeper RAW buffer (the two things I missed most from the xxD series).

Question is would they also see fit to pay Canon's premium for these features, since Canon heretofore has always reserved them for the yet more capable xxD line, and any narrowing of the performance gap would naturally also mean a commensurate narrowing of the price gap.

agree this is a potential issue, and it probably varies strongly by region (country) just like with acceptance of ILC cameras. But currently better IQ and more performance is strongly tied to bigger, heavier bodies and it doesn't need to be like that. In fact, mirrorless shows that at least some users will pay premium price for a smaller, lighter and also more capable camera.

Now for those looking for all of the goodies from the xxD line to be accomodated into a form factor nice and small like the current Rebel, well it can't physically be done of course. A larger viewfinder means a physically larger body. More buttons/thumbwheel for increased control would mean a physically larger body. A larger grip/better balance would mean a physically larger body. All of these hallmarks that distinguish an xxD body simply require a physically larger body.

The viewfinder in a compact DSLR can be pentamirror instead of a pentaprism which most of all means less brightness - not a problem IMHO is the AF is accurate. Most xxD bodies haven't very accurate OVF focusing either, the standard screen isn't optimal for that and much worse than the screens on the better analog SLRs. But I doubt is HAS to be like that, my old OM2 had a big ('FF') and excellent quality viewfinder in a body that was smaller and lighter than current xxD cameras...

More controls on a small camera is a problem indeed and something has to give. I would gladly give up some buttons for smaller size. Also, if a tilt/touch screen is used many control buttons are no longer required. And even if you look at grips, it sure isn't the case that the biggest cameras have the best grips and best ergonomics, it strongly varies and no grip is optimal for everyone. If the camera gets really small an add-on grip could be an option (e.g. for when you need to use big lenses).

And IMHO Canon will never come out with two different cameras with identical feature sets, differentiated only by size. It's just not their way. Mind you, I'd love to see it personally. But I'm not holding my breath, and I'm certainly not going to forgo all of the benefits of the current technology by waiting for it.

I think there is plenty of room in the current lineup for a very compact, light and highly capable body for those who work hand-held, need to travel light etc. Not just a scaled-down 5D3 or 1DX of course, that would not make sense. These small/light bodies are for a different type of photographer, with other priorities than those who buy the tough 'action' cameras like 5D3/1DX. There is plenty of room for differentiation.