10mp 10fps 1.3 crop

Started Feb 17, 2007 | Discussions
swardo Contributing Member • Posts: 909
Re: Great chance for us

Julia Borg wrote:

however Nikon does have fluorite, and for many years. they use it

where they think it belongs. NASA seems also to object agains
fluorite elements in lenses. but you know that...

So your rebuttal is that Nikon lenses are more reliable in outerspace? I'll take that into consideration next time I have a shoot on the moon.

Dave Chrismer Contributing Member • Posts: 684
Re: I love the 45 pt. 27 pt wuld be a step down.

I suspect that very few people who have used a 1D would disagree.

I just kind of feel like the Canon engineers probably know more about camera design than I do and the 45 pt AF system has been the choice of professionals for quite a few years now.

Peter Carmichael Contributing Member • Posts: 727
Re: And you know this how?

Press Correspondent wrote:

No "gospel", just logical projections.

Logic doesn't necessarily point in a single direction.

I'm not convinced with your "5D doesn't sell" observation. We know, for instance that D200 is at a price point way lower than the 5D. The problem is not that the 5D performance doesn't kill all prospects of D200 purchase outright, but that the value proposition for the 5D doesn't stack up for many users. If you introduce any sort of a 5DN, it can't appear at the current 5D price point or below, so it still won't be a D200 competitor. In the meantime, you have a production run of 5Ds that are still finding buyers, albeit at a slow rate. There is absolutely no need to introduce a 5DN unless 5D supply (the entire production run) has run out; all you'd do is end up with a warehouse full of 5Ds.

We also currently see the 1DmkIIN at a price point close to 5D. When the debate surfaces on here on choosing between the two, there are a lot of noisy individuals who over-simplify the debate down to the 1D being a "better" camera. This isn't the case. The two cameras have different strengths and for some people the 5D is the better choice. Think of the 5D as a competitor to the Leica M8 and it all makes a lot more sense - compact (ish), quiet (ish), resolution, image quality. The sort of person who buys a Leica M8 is probably not also considering a Canon 1DmkIIN to perform the same function, but the 5D is compelling and certainly has an attractive price point compared to M8. Equally, an M8 buyer is unlikely to have been considering a Nikon D200.

So summing up the position of the 5D, I can see that if there was a direct Canon competitor for the D200, the 5D would be sitting pretty with its superior characteristics of low noise at high ISO - desirable for certain photographers (pro/am landscape, weddng, photojournalist, available light), but attracting photographers who seek extra capability in those areas over and above what the "40D" can offer. What Canon did with the 5D was put a top-end sensor in a mid-range body. The D200 is a D80 sensor in an up-spec body, with a much lower cost to build than 5D. If the 5D was forced to go head to head with the D200 at the D200's price point, Canon would feel some pain on the lost margin. The remnants of the 5D production run can remain viable on the market for some time as it has unique differentiation. Slashing price on a significantly differentiated model is a dreadful marketing/sales strategy.

All the 5D needs is an effective Canon D200 competitor and for the 1DmkIII to appear at a higher price point than the runout 1DmkIIN to give it clear water. The 5D defines a market sector. It might not be a high volume market sector, but 100% of buyers in the 5D sector are buying 5Ds because there is no alternative. In due course the 5D can receive minor tweaks in handling and perhaps focus system, but the fundamental formula is going to exceed all competitor offerings until the competition starts offering full frame cameras.

The sales of 350D,
30D, and 5D are killed by Nikon D40, D80, and D200 respectively.

The 30D is particularly vulnerable as it is straddled in the market place by two compelling Nikon offerings (D80/D200). The 30D needs to be replaced.

The new specs are easy to guess. 4000D is a repackaged 350D

I agree this is likely. Not impossible for a 6MP model to appear with superior noise.

40D is 30D with the technologies first released in 400D and G7:
5.7-micron pixel (10.4 mp) and anti-dust plus Digic III, but same 5
fps;

This is the critical one. I personally don't think the 400D sensor generation has shown that it is good enough for 10MP and I'd prefer to see a radical move to 10MP at 1.3x crop, 5fps. Then again, ruling out EF-S lens usage rather suggests this isn't an option.

5DN is a facelift of 5D with the same (only quicker) sensor, 12.7
mp, anti-dust, Digic III, and 4 or 5 fps - either speed is easily
possible, so it is a purely marketing decision by Canon.

From here on in, our logic differs.

Press Correspondent
Press Correspondent Veteran Member • Posts: 3,362
5D Projections

Peter Carmichael wrote:

Logic doesn't necessarily point in a single direction.

True, but whatever the arguments, the altimate question is if 5D is being replaced at PMA. I would say yes, because Canon wants to recover R&D on anti-dust and quicker electronics while correcting some marketing mistakes (this is why I am afraid of the plastic body possibility). The largest and longest ever rebate on 5D also suggests a replacement.

I didn't try to write a book in my quick reply covering all relevant considerations. Of course 5D and D200 do not compare 1 to 1, although many potential buyers in this price range choose between these models.

you have a production run of 5Ds that are still finding buyers,
albeit at a slow rate. There is absolutely no need to introduce a
5DN unless 5D supply (the entire production run) has run out; all
you'd do is end up with a warehouse full of 5Ds.

Yes, this was exactly the reason for such a huge and long rebate - to clear the stock. Accordingly, 5D already must've been replaced in production with its successor.

What Canon did with the 5D was put a top-end sensor in a mid-range body.

I think, it was one of Canon's marketing mistakes based on its ambition to dominate all markets and if they could to do it all over again, 5D would be 1.3x. But even if I'm wrong and the reason was different, it sure brought to the market one of the best cameras ever for its lucky owners.

The D200 is a D80 sensor in an up-spec body, with a much lower cost to
build than 5D. If the 5D was forced to go head to head with the D200
at the D200's price point, Canon would feel some pain on the lost margin.

This is close to what is happening. Many potential buyers of 5D go with D200 because of the lower cost and this hurts Canon's sales.

Slashing price on a significantly
differentiated model is a dreadful marketing/sales strategy.

Yet they compete. This, again, is why I am afraid of the plastic body and other possible ways for Canon to reduce the cost of the 5D successor.

All the 5D needs is an effective Canon D200 competitor

Canon and Nikon don't compete 1 to 1. It is a bad strategy, because it would hurt too much the loosing side. Instead all models of one are positioned between the models of the other, so there always is some market for each. So D200 is close to 40D, but sealed like much more expensive 1D. In turn 5D offers better IQ that to many is more attractive than sealed body. The only problem is that 5D is too expensive. It would fly off the shelves for under $2k. This is why I think Canon wants to dumb down 5DN to lower the cost. It will start with the list of between $2k and $3k, but will drop to $2k street before the year end. Although I keep my fingers crossed that Canon reduces the cost without degrading the camera.

The 5D defines a market sector. It might not be a high volume market
sector, but 100% of buyers in the 5D sector are buying 5Ds because
there is no alternative.

This is my main point. 5D was not invisioned for a niche market. With 5D Canon wanted to bring FF to the mass market, but overestimated the buying power of a consumer. Everyone was buying 10D for $1,500. So Canon thought that everyone would buy FF for $3k, but people didn't. $2k happened to be the mass market limit nicely matched by D200. Sure, all wedding photographers got 5D, but they are a few and a drop in a bucket compared to the mass market of xxD and xxxD models. 5D sold as a pro camera, it did not sell as a consumer camera, as Canon wanted. And this is why I think they will be "upgrading" it into cheaper 5DN.

In due course the 5D can receive minor tweaks in handling and perhaps
focus system

God bless you, if you are correct, but I think it may be a goal for more expensive 3D.

but the fundamental formula is going to exceed all competitor offerings
until the competition starts offering full frame cameras.

That may be in a week and more than one.

This is the critical one. I personally don't think the 400D sensor
generation has shown that it is good enough for 10MP and I'd prefer
to see a radical move to 10MP at 1.3x crop, 5fps. Then again,
ruling out EF-S lens usage rather suggests this isn't an option.

Exactly! Just make the next logical step here - a new advanced 1.3x camera IN ADDITION to 40D! To wipe the competition! This is why I introduced this new product category in my table. I named it wrong as 3D, but will shortly change to 7D:

http://presscorr.com/dslr/dslr.gif

I agree, it is not likely, but not impossible. Especially if released with a new EF 12-28 or something like it.

From here on in, our logic differs.

So what's your projections on 5D?

 Press Correspondent's gear list:Press Correspondent's gear list
SeaLife DC2000 Panasonic LX100 II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L USM +12 more
David Mazeau Veteran Member • Posts: 4,631
1D Mark II ... three years, same sensor

Press Correspondent wrote:

No "gospel", just logical projections. Canon cannot upset its
distribution chain by replacing more than 2 models at a time, but
it can introduce new additional models on top of that.

I think your other projections are where the errors are. The other
DSLR bodies you think are coming out, that's where you're wrong.

There was an "N" update to the 1D Mark II, but it was stuff like a
bigger LCD.

The sensor, however, hasn't changed since 2004. Really, this PMA,
it's the time for the new 1D body.

And the guy that started this thread here, he was right on the money
last August about the XTi and 2 new lenses for Photokina.

David Mazeau Veteran Member • Posts: 4,631
Re: 1D body = at Superbowl ? No

Press Correspondent wrote:

If Canon wanted
to replace 1D in spring, the model would be announced at the
superbowl like it was in the past. But now it wasn't. So watch for
a big rebate on 1DN2 inf all as well.

And this is wrong too. I know very well when the 1D Mark II was
announced, and it wasn't at the Superbowl. It was just before PMA,
three years ago. And I'm really quite, quite sure.

Kyle Jones
Kyle Jones Senior Member • Posts: 2,320
Yeah, but...

And the guy that started this thread here, he was right on the money
last August about the XTi and 2 new lenses for Photokina.

... sometimes even a blind hog will find an acorn. Speculation is speculation.
--
Street: http://www.wonderworks.com/streetphotographydigest.html
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kyle_jones/

David Mazeau Veteran Member • Posts: 4,631
Re: Yeah, but...

Kyle Jones wrote:

... sometimes even a blind hog will find an acorn. Speculation is
speculation.

But look:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=19678723

This is more than just an acorn.

That's detailed info, before it was out officially. If there's any question
as to what was officially known at that date, in August ... look at
the comments that followed his "speculation".

Press Correspondent
Press Correspondent Veteran Member • Posts: 3,362
Re: 1D Mark II ... three years, same sensor

David Mazeau wrote:

I think your other projections are where the errors are. The other
DSLR bodies you think are coming out, that's where you're wrong.

My projections are trend based, but there still is a lot of unknown. So they are just my best educated guesses. They sure can be wrong. In fact, it is very unlikely that they are all right just by probability.

The sensor, however, hasn't changed since 2004. Really, this PMA,
it's the time for the new 1D body.

Perhaps. I also considered this possibility as well as a few others (like 1D going FF etc.). A flagship upgrade seems a bit more likely to me and I doubt Canon would release both 1D and 1Ds at the same time. So let's see in a week or two whose intuition was closer to Canon's line of thinking

As far as the timeframe for the sensor upgrade, I believe that we are in the pattern where only every other model is upgraded. With 18 months between models (especially consumer) it is 3 years between sensor upgrades. Examples (mostly hypothetical) would be 1D2 -> 1DN2 -> 1D3, 20D -> 30D -> 40D, 5D -> 5DN -> 5D2, 350D -> 4000D -> 4500D, 40D (10.4 mp) -> 50D (10.4 mp) -> 60D (12.8 mp), etc. This pattern does not seem to apply to the flagship model, but for the rest this is what I would expect to see in the next 3 years. Along this line notice the 3-year plateau on my megapixel trend:

http://presscorr.com/dslr/trend.gif

So from this standpoint you are right, 1DN2 is 3 years old and is due for replacement. I just think that Canon may prioritize 1Ds for the big anniversary. Otherwise, it's a fair guess.

 Press Correspondent's gear list:Press Correspondent's gear list
SeaLife DC2000 Panasonic LX100 II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L USM +12 more
Press Correspondent
Press Correspondent Veteran Member • Posts: 3,362
Re: 1D body = at Superbowl ? No

David Mazeau wrote:

And this is wrong too. I know very well when the 1D Mark II was
announced, and it wasn't at the Superbowl. It was just before PMA,
three years ago. And I'm really quite, quite sure.

http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/1114

 Press Correspondent's gear list:Press Correspondent's gear list
SeaLife DC2000 Panasonic LX100 II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 70-200mm F4L USM +12 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads