Can Canon afford _not_ to release a 30d sucessor *soon*?
2 new cameras from Olympus at 10MP, both much cheaper than the 400D
1 new camera from Nikon at 10MP, cheaper than the 400D
The 400D is cheaper than the 30D.
While I'm sure there are lots of "feel good" reasons for someone wanting a 30D instead of one of the others, for normal shooting, the 30D would now appear to be dead in the water and the 400D being attacked from all sides.
Could these two events push Canon into announcing a 40D sometime very soon?
For us do not yet have a dSLR, and are going to phurchase one soon, we do care. I am not going to buy the 30D now. If the 40D comes now or within a year that is OK for me, but I think the discussion is good.
Also Canon should care. Think if no one cared about it. That would be a really bad sign for Canon.
yeah...sorry...i was in a bad mood...and this 40d post was the straw that broke the camels back and...in another state of mind...left the a* hole comment...I apologize to the original poster.
What I mean is that to a casual observer, there isn't much difference between the models. Look at the D40, D80, and D200. If you compare them in a list-type comparison, for 95% of the population, there's no reason to buy the D200. Same megapixels, same speed in the D80/D40 (fps). It looks like Nikon has decided that many people will buy based on megapixels and a few other specs - no interest in having the D200 to be better at "everything."
If that's the case, and if they're right, then it would be a mistake of Canon not to follow with a D30 replacement soon. I tend to think Nikon has made a smart move here - I think the high specs on more basic cameras is the way to go to get the first-time DSLR buyers (like me).
And whether we love Canon, Nikon, Oly, Pentax, or whoever, we all benefit from the competition - if they're not playing the same game, one of them will lose (for a while at least). And that would be bad - without the competition we'd not have come nearly as far as we have.
Unless - and it's a big unless, Canon thinks the D200 segment will be short-lived and that people truly wanting more than megapixels will go FF - then they would best benefit by putting their effort into the 5D replacmement. If they kept the FF and gave the 5D the "missing" features in the D200 (5D lovers please don't kill me), they'd have a killer camera. All depends on what format they think will end up winning the prosumer market.......
But now I think it is inevitable.
I was in a camera store recently looking when the salesman told me the 400D was more professional than my 30D (with L-series glass attached) because of the MP difference
When Nikon first released their D40 I thoght very clever marketing move, now less than 6 months later a replacement at 10MP indicates (at least to me) that the 400D must be hurting their sales at the low end market.
On a recent trip abroad I saw many 300/350/400D's being carried by the tourists, Many Nikon D200 (much more than 20D/30D kit) and a smattering of D70/D80 but no entry level Nikon. (total Nikon was about 40% of all DSLR camera models I saw, other than the P&S variety)
I found this very different to SA where I see about 70% are Canon DSLR's
Within some months, Canon will release a xxD that will include:
Live viewfinder (selectable)
In Body IS (adding stabilisation to IS lenses when mounted)
Good integrated sensor cleaning
More Mega Pixels
Better Noise management at higher Iso
Before, or after, some other providers will release also these features for their DSLR.
The best is:
to trust one of the big providers (Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, ...)
to buy some good lenses and enjoy shooting with your gear at that time
to change your body when your find it relevant for these new features.
All these camera providers deliver good DSLR and do their best to offer competitive products with the lastest stable technology.
It is often a matter of 6 months to be ahead or behind.
After the pictures that you are taking is mainly your art.
The 30D seems like the odd ball from a marketing perspective considering it's price. I don't see why Canon would even bother upgrading it considering these lower end dslr's have more than enough features for most people. Is the D40x a sign that market is begining to see model changes just as a fast as the P&S models? So who is the 30D's market these days? If I slap on a L lens to an xti, will I be disappointed?
So unless Canon wants to compete with the D200 they really need to put in some 5D and Mark II features and build something that obviously standsout. I could see this camera becoming a 1.3x, 10mb while still protecting their interests in the FF area.
Although it would be interesting having a choice of a 1.3x or FF camera with the same functions at the same price so I could choose the right camera for what I needed.
They don't even have to do much, they just have to release a XTI II version with better plastic (Nikon like) and a larger grip, no changes to stats.
There's not too much the 30D can borrow from the 5D, it even has picture style and the print button, the only thing I could see that stands out is FF, more MP, and it has 4 invisible a/f points, the 30D can do 5fps where the 5D is only 3fps. Take the 30D add 2more MP, a bigger viewfinder (it's an insult that D80 has bigger one), and possibly 2 or more a/f points, cram 3D matrix metering and a wireless flash system and you have a winner, there is not much to improve on a good design.
The only reason for me to upgrade from 20D to anything else will be higher ISO capability. There is nothing else I can't live without. To me, one stop of ISO improvement means almost one stop upgrade to all my lens.
But I doubt canon will put the new sensor on 40D.
I was in a camera store recently looking when the salesman told me
the 400D was more professional than my 30D (with L-series glass
attached) because of the MP difference
Fortunately, you didn't believe him.
On most forums (particularly the Canon forum), it is pretty well conceded that the IQ from the 400D and the 30D are very close. Some saying one is better, others ther reverse.
Then there is the D200 from Nikon:
This test has to be read right through - for Nikonians, it is recommended that they not read about the noise comparisons. Other than size, the sensors on the 5D and 30D are quite similar.
The ability of the mind is limited only by attitude; which is controlled by the mind.
Nikon just released an update to the recently released D40. Even if not a replacement it is a 'big brother' cam.
D200x would be v nice imho. Same cam with increased speed and sensor improvements (better high ISO...).
If Nikon did that, I'd be very interested and I'm sure CAnon would have to jump and get the 30D successor out there right away.
At present (and since release) the D200 is equal to or better than the 20/30D in all areas except high ISO with a small price difference. Improving the high ISO and speed would surely kill off the 30D as a viable current camera in the retail market (although, yes, it will keep taking pictures - before anyone goes there).
Bring on the D200x and/or D300. We'll surely have a great option there and hopefully an equally attractive new alterntive from Canon.
Keep photography wild.