[springle]

Is there one?

After I purchased a 5D II, I lost interest in HD camcorders. Yet Canon is still plugging away with new models.

Now I'm looking at the Rumours and wondering about the replacement for the 5D II, presumably a 5D III. This model is expected late this year and it is expected to boast a full frame 28 MP sensor, improved focusing system and other whiz bang features. Not certain about the processor. If it will employ a Digic IV processor, then I would expect two of them, as handling 28 MP images takes more processing power. Perhaps a Digic V will be available by that time.

But what about the 1Ds model? The current version is very expensive and offers a 21 MP sensor and a Digic III processor. Rumours suggest that a new model won't come out until after the 5D III.

Why would anyone buy a 1Ds if a new 5D III offers so much more for a lesser cost? This doesn't seem to be a coherent strategy.

Rumours also suggest that the 1D model will be moving to full frame as well. If so, then it almost certainly will require a Digic V processor (or two or four) to process 10 fps (or more).

If so, then whither the 1Ds model? If, as suggested, the new model will be radically different, where will it be positioned, given the other new models as described above? I can only think that it will be a studio camera, with unique features suited for studio work.

Can anyone piece together a coherent marketing strategy from the above rumours?

 

[753951]

That's just it. They are all rumours. And basing (or piecing together) a coherent marketing strategy off of rumours is mother of all screw ups.

Bottom line, we have no clue if any of these rumours have any shred of truth in them. There may not be 5D Mk III, there may not be another 1Ds, who knows!?!

 

[01 Boxer]

In my opinion, there are two types of amateur DSLR owners. The first ones are concerned about taking pictures and improving their skills while the second ones are obsessed by specs and believe that a new model immediately renders their cameras incapable of taking good pictures.

 

[springle]

Simplistic

Kind of a pointless comment by "01 Boxer".

No photograph is perfect. If one takes a large number of photos and studies the results with personal honesty, then it is apparent that some are more pleasing than others. The reasons for such differences can bo both qualitative and technical. The qualitative reasons are personal, linked to the viewers' inclinations.

The technical reasons can be addressed by the photographer in an effort to improve his images (technically). Sometimes the technical reasons can be addressed by the features that the camera offers, or doesn't offer, but features that are present in other cameras. Sometimes these reasons can be addressed by the photographer using his current camera, or other equipment by using his equipment more effectively.

No one reading this forum can address my qualitative opinions. But they can address technical issues. I have a "want list" of features that I know would result in technically improved images for me and hence I watch the announcements of new equipment (not just DSLRs) to determine if some new equipment features will address my "want list".

Classifying photographers as one ot two types is incredibly naive.

 

[01 Boxer]

The serious answer: the only people who know the truth about Canon's upcoming products are under NDA. It is entirely pointless to have purchasing decisions based on rumours and speculations.

 

[talljak]

Wondering what will come or waiting to get something new in the camera world is no big deal. It will likely not lead to a better finished product but its fun to do.
Its no different then waiting for the next car model (make you a better driver?)

For me I knew the 7D would have the electronic level It doesn't make me a better photographer then before but I knew it would be a nice feature to have.
Even though I have no plans to buy anything new in the Canon market for a while I still read the rumor sites because I like to know whats coming. Or whats not.

 

[01 Boxer]

Unfortunately, a lot of the "improvements" are driven by marketing reasons that are aimed at topping the competitions specs. This led amongst other things to the ridiculous megapixels wars. Uninformed consumers would pick camera X over camera Y on the false assumption that more pixels=better camera. The 60D was actually a step backwards compared to the 50D.

I shouldn't complain: the constant release of new models drives down the resale value of used cameras. I could buy a camera that used to sell for 1700$ two years ago for 600$ today. That's an amazing bargain.

 

[talljak]

Yea the mega pixel war is very frustrating but the general consumer understands nothing else.
But every industry has their war & numbers games.
Its up to the consumer to educate them selves now because most companies just will not.

 

[Petee_C]

I shouldn't complain: the constant release of new models drives down the resale value of used cameras. I could buy a camera that used to sell for 1700$ two years ago for 600$ today. That's an amazing bargain.

I agree.

Also it's not the camera, the person behind the viewfinder is way more important when taking a good picture. Even the lens is more important than the body.

I would rate it as:

70% - photographer
12% - Camera Body
18% - lens attached to camera

(hope that adds up to 100%) - in determining the final product of most images....

My 1st camera that I bought was a EOS 650 in the 80's. Lasted me until my Dig Rebel circa 2003. Got a 2 30D's in 2005-07. I got my 2nd 30D for 40% of the cost of the 1st (18 months used)

I've upgraded my SLR body's 3x in the past 20+yrs; I haven't updated the photographer recently.... (must go to library and read that freeman book... photographer's eye)

 

[01 Boxer]

Also it's not the camera, the person behind the viewfinder is way more important when taking a good picture. Even the lens is more important than the body.

I would rate it as:

70% - photographer

I remember reading a book where the National Geographic photographers explained their "secrets". I was quite shocked to learn that they used 35mm film cameras and often restricted themselves to carrying two lenses. That didn't prevent them from taking stunning pictures, far from it.

 

[philmar]

70% - photographer
12% - Camera Body
18% - lens attached to camera

You forgot luck. I find with a little luck I can take a good photo.

 

[Francois Caron]

I remember reading a book where the National Geographic photographers explained their "secrets". I was quite shocked to learn that they used 35mm film cameras and often restricted themselves to carrying two lenses. That didn't prevent them from taking stunning pictures, far from it.

Not all that surprising. Some of the best pictures I've ever taken was with a completely manual Pentax K1000 and a standard 50mm SMC lens, almost all of it in B&W which I processed myself. And if you were good at determining the correct exposure without a meter, you didn't even need the battery for the exposure meter.

Pretty soon, they'll have no other choice but to shelve most of their old gear. The biggest advantage digital gear has over analog gear is response time. From taking a picture to published on the Internet in under a minute! Pretty essential during breaking news items.

 

[Zrock]

I think his comment is quite valid. The quality of the picture is not all the camera its the person behind it and his talent and the use of his equipment. Alot of the top photographers out their are using older equipment and take truly amazing pictures. Sure they may be able to get a slightly better picture using the latest and greatest but to the untrained eye they would never see the differences. Heck i have seen truly amazing pictures taken by a point and shoot and you would never know by looking at them