he didn't ask about the d700. He's got a small collection of Canon lenses already. If anything, he'd be looking at the 5D MarkII if he was willing to shell out that much cash.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
5d worth the extra?
- Thread starter rweakins
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
he didn't ask about the d700. He's got a small collection of Canon lenses already. If anything, he'd be looking at the 5D MarkII if he was willing to shell out that much cash.
It has been interesting watching the rumors on this one. I've been watching them since Nov 2007, when my Underwater camera (35mm film) flooded, which is prompting me to finally move to digital (BTW, that Tokina 11-16mm looks very tempting; too bad its not for full frame).
Insofar as "Concrete Rumors" on the 5D's replacement, this URL at canonrumors.com has some claimed specifications, and also claims that the 5D isn't necessarily be 'upgraded' (aka "5D Mk2), but instead, potentially replaced with 2 cameras....although it should be noted that names are still TBD, so one of them very well could use the "5D Mk2" name.
In brief summary, it says $2K for a 14MP body ("3D") and $3K for 20MP body ("6D"), both Full Frame.
.....however...!
His latest rumor news (2 July ... yesterday) says:
"...about the new CMOS in the EOS-3 D. My source is claiming that Canon's new CMOS will once again bring Canon to the forefront in high ISO performance. I was told again sensor will be in the 18mp - 21mp range (I still think 16mp)."
Picking through the tidbits a bit further, these two statements also suggest interesting happenings:
(30 June):
When I put up the initial rumour about the 3D and 6D, some people commented that there's no way the megapixel count would reach what the 1DS is currently at.
This week we'll be seeing the Nikon D3 sold as a Nikon D700. So if Nikon can release just about the same camera for less money, why couldn't Canon?
This week we'll be seeing the Nikon D3 sold as a Nikon D700. So if Nikon can release just about the same camera for less money, why couldn't Canon?
And
(2 July):
The last words in the email were "the new Canon's will make every Canon user very happy."
Overall, I think that there's a lot of credence to what Abstract and ChrisA were alluding to above: Canon may very well be in the process of upping the "5D replacement" in order to compete better against Nikon, and it appears to me that part of their strategy has been to "hold off" on this upgrade cycle to see what Nikon puts out.
And since Nikon has really upped the ante, the prospects appear good for a very healthy kick upwards for Canon gear now too...I won't claim that it has been like our looooong wait back in 2001-02-2003 for the G5 CPU, but I won't say that it is unlike it, either.
-hh
Canon's schedule has been very consistent. The 5D is on cycle to be released at Photokina this fall. I don't think they were holding out and waiting for Nikon. That is a difficult game when you have to change whole manufacturing plants.
Photokina. September. Announcement a few days before. Demo models for people to paw at. That's how Canon rolls, on the half year cycle.
1D – 25 September 2001
1DMkII – 29 January 2004 (~2.5yrs since previous model)
1DMkIIn - 22 August 2005 (~18months)
1DMkIII - 22 February 2007 (~18months)
1Ds – 24 September 2002
1DsMkII – 21 September 2004 (~2yrs since previous model)
1DsMkIII - 20 August 2007 (~3yrs)
5D - 22 August 2005
5DMk II - August/September 2008 (~3yrs since previous model)
Photokina. September. Announcement a few days before. Demo models for people to paw at. That's how Canon rolls, on the half year cycle.
1D – 25 September 2001
1DMkII – 29 January 2004 (~2.5yrs since previous model)
1DMkIIn - 22 August 2005 (~18months)
1DMkIII - 22 February 2007 (~18months)
1Ds – 24 September 2002
1DsMkII – 21 September 2004 (~2yrs since previous model)
1DsMkIII - 20 August 2007 (~3yrs)
5D - 22 August 2005
5DMk II - August/September 2008 (~3yrs since previous model)
3D and 6D rumors
My BS meeting is going off the charts on this rumor. First, under Canon's naming convention, the 3D would be the higher end camera. This is now fixed at that link, but you'd think his source, so worthy of "complete confidence", would have gotten this right in the first place.
Second, Canon would sell the 14MP FF camera closer to $3,000, as it competes with the Nikon D700. They'd still sell a ton of it, and they wouldn't be stuck leaving $1,000 on the table.
Second, as the author himself admits, a 20MP $3,000 camera would steal sales from the 1Ds Mk III. Leaving $1,000 on the table is one thing. Leaving $5,000 is quite another.
Aside from medium format backs, there's currently no competition for the 1Ds, so Canon can set their price. Rumor has it Sony will add some competition, and as they now supply sensors for Nikon, I suspect Nikon will, too (the rumored D3X). But for now, Canon's got the high resolution, 35mm market to themselves, so I don't expect to see a Canon with these specs at a $3,000 price anytime soon.
I do, though, expect to see a 5D replacement soon, but expect a more modest resolution, no DIGIC 4, and a $3,000 price tag. Though I've expected that for a year, and been wrong, so this is mere speculation. But that's better than wishful thinking, which is all this 3D/6D rumors is.
My BS meeting is going off the charts on this rumor. First, under Canon's naming convention, the 3D would be the higher end camera. This is now fixed at that link, but you'd think his source, so worthy of "complete confidence", would have gotten this right in the first place.
Second, Canon would sell the 14MP FF camera closer to $3,000, as it competes with the Nikon D700. They'd still sell a ton of it, and they wouldn't be stuck leaving $1,000 on the table.
Second, as the author himself admits, a 20MP $3,000 camera would steal sales from the 1Ds Mk III. Leaving $1,000 on the table is one thing. Leaving $5,000 is quite another.
Aside from medium format backs, there's currently no competition for the 1Ds, so Canon can set their price. Rumor has it Sony will add some competition, and as they now supply sensors for Nikon, I suspect Nikon will, too (the rumored D3X). But for now, Canon's got the high resolution, 35mm market to themselves, so I don't expect to see a Canon with these specs at a $3,000 price anytime soon.
I do, though, expect to see a 5D replacement soon, but expect a more modest resolution, no DIGIC 4, and a $3,000 price tag. Though I've expected that for a year, and been wrong, so this is mere speculation. But that's better than wishful thinking, which is all this 3D/6D rumors is.
The average for the first model is 1.83 years (22 months)
The average for the second model is 2.5 years
The 5D is now matching the longest update that Canon has ever had before (with the 1DsMkIII). YMMV, but I'd hardly consider that to be normal or even typical, especially when we consider the other Non-Pro cameras:
For the D30/D60/10D/20D/30D/40D, their releases were (per Wiki): 2Q00, 4Q01, 1Q03, 3Q04, 2Q06, 4Q07 - which are intervals of 6, 5, 6, 7, 6, (5 and counting) fiscal quarters, which averages out to 6 quarters = 18 months per revision, and that's not even accounting for the 20Da variant.
For the Rebel line, 3Q03, 1Q05, 4Q06, 2Q08 - - which comes out very roughly to the same ~18 month update cycle (without the 1000D, released 3Q08)
With the 5D on schedule to match the longest time ever (of 3 years) between updates that Canon has done this decade, it might suggest that the 5D is in some way 'special', not unlike how the 1DsMkIII was 'special' ... which was a very bad & embarrassing product release for Canon.
-hh
The other thing that I'm sniffing at is the naming suggestion of 6D, because single digit even numbers (2, 4, 6, 8) are considered bad luck (or at least, not good luck like odd numbers are). As such, I'd suspect a 5DMk2 name or a 7D before a "6D".
Not that the name matters much...other than a method to try to track down where your information leaks are
-hh
If he gets the 5D 24-105mm f4L IS kit, for $2599, it's like getting the 5D body for $1500 (the 24-105 being a bit over a thousand). For landscape and portraits - it's a great choice. Put an 85mm f1.8 on there and shoot some open aperture portraits that will knock your socks off. A lens like the 24-70 f2.8L is breathtakingly wide if you've been living with a cropped sensor for awhile.
Here's a link to a 5D admiration society thread that's been going for awhile on the Canon forum site - POTN: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=462416&page=119
Think he did, the 1DS MKIII was fairly trouble free, though it had a few bodies that had wonky horizons due to a manufacturing fault.
As for a 5D now, difficult one. It's a superb camera, any replacement is likely to be 50% more than the current price the 5D sells for. The 5D will still be able to produce great images for a number of years to come. So if you can live without 14bit colour, sensor cleaning and weather sealing* then the 5D would be a worthwhile investment.
*many people quote weather sealing as a deal clincher, well both of my 5D's have been used in fairly wet weather and both are still working fine. I've not shot in a desert storm so maybe that's where the weather sealing is worth while. But you really have to ask/wonder how many people with weather sealed cameras use them in an environment that requires such protection (excluding pro's of course, who normally have to stand in a vast shower of ***** to get a decent image.).
As for a 5D now, difficult one. It's a superb camera, any replacement is likely to be 50% more than the current price the 5D sells for. The 5D will still be able to produce great images for a number of years to come. So if you can live without 14bit colour, sensor cleaning and weather sealing* then the 5D would be a worthwhile investment.
*many people quote weather sealing as a deal clincher, well both of my 5D's have been used in fairly wet weather and both are still working fine. I've not shot in a desert storm so maybe that's where the weather sealing is worth while. But you really have to ask/wonder how many people with weather sealed cameras use them in an environment that requires such protection (excluding pro's of course, who normally have to stand in a vast shower of ***** to get a decent image.).
Yes, although if you read Rob Galbraith, both the D and Ds models are affected to a degree.
I'm not in the market for a ($$$) Pro body, so I've not really paid that much attention to the pains that the Pros went through with the autofocus problems and the like ... and it also isn't particularly clear if the problems have been definitively and 100% resolved. My recollections were of a recall, product being pulled from shelves, and firmware updates ... and an odd amount of silence from the Pros in making any clear statements that they are now satisfied. The latest that I've found is from March 2008, which alludes to some vague promises made in Feb 2008 to definitively fix things - - but there's also been some scattered reports of some Pro's dumping their Canon gear and changing brands (to Nikon).
The reason I'm interested in a 5D is purely for wide angle (for use underwater). The dilemma is that I've also seen some reports that report that the 40D with the 10-22 EF-S results in sharper images than the 5D with the 17- 40L. Not really sure if the problem is the 17-40 being not that great of a combination with a full frame digital, or if the 10-22 is simply a great lens.
My application for underwater requires pretty severe 'weather sealing'
The companies that make aftermarket UW housings will of course update their products for the 5D-next, but that will take them a few months. That's what's pushed out my personal schedule into 2009, as even if the 5DMk2 were released and shipped today, there's only ~60 days of turn-around time before my next planned dive trip, which is barely time for a first prototype.-hh
The 10-22mm and the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS are both of L quality. Canon won't label them as such because of a perception difference between EF-S lenses/bodies and "Pro" lenses/bodies. We all know that pros use a wide variety of lenses/bodies but it is the marketing engine that drives this unmentioned distinction.
I owned the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and it was on par with every top lens that I have used.
Nice to hear positive words about EF-s from someone with knowledge of kit. I was tempted to get the 10-22 with a 20/30D a while back, but then I tried the 5D!
Well, there are other lens of this class, according to photozone, Tokina's new 11-16 zoom is even better. So what's the wide-angle advantage of full frame? Don't we have plenty of (good) wide-angle crop lenses to choose from?
About 3 isn't it? Canon, Sigma and Tokina (Maybe Tamron as well, but I haven't looked).
Whereas on FF you've got the 14mm, 15mm FE, 16-35, 17-40 and many others by 3rd party (inc the sigma 12-24mm)
Pretty evenly balanced I suppose.
There are 3 Tokinas (11-16, 12-24 and a unique 10-17 fisheye zoom), 2 Sigmas (10-20, 12-24), a Tamron (11-18 mm) in addition to Canon's 10-22 mm zoom. There are no crop-specific wide-angle fixed-focal length lenses besides fisheyes. All of the Tokinas and Canon's zoom have a very good reputation.
In any case, I don't see a shortage of wide-angle lenses for crop sensors unless you really, really want a fixed focal length lens.
Does that 17-55 have Full Time Manual Focus? (FTM)
You know so that even in Autofocus mode you could manually tweak the focus.
Also was the front element Non-rotating ?
I think there are some other common characteristics of the " L " series lenses that the EF-S lenses do not have. It's a little more than just the use of Low Distortion elements.
I am going to check out the newest EF-S lenses - I have heard from others that the image quality is on par with the " L " series even if the operation characteristics are not.
One big advantage for me with "L" lens are that they are sealed. I shoot a lot around beaches and other not so clean outdoor venues. I've had some non-L lenses get a rough feel to them over time, whereas the old "L" seem to keep smooth.
Yes to all of these, for both the 10-22 and the 17-55. They're definitely nice lenses, and offer great IQ, but the build quality isn't quite up to L standards.
The materials aren't quite the same as L's, they have smaller focus rings, they're not weather sealed, etc.
It is worth waiting till Photokina in September where rumor has it that the Canon 5D will be upgraded. It was originally released in 2001 so the 5D is likely for a replacement. I would expect the 40D to be upgraded in early 2009.
As for which to get, it depends on what you photographing and what lenses you own.
As for which to get, it depends on what you photographing and what lenses you own.
Slightly wrong date. The 5D was released in October 2005.
To add rumours for the 5D MkII (or whatever) have been around for nearly 2 years. That said this September is most likely to be to time it's updated (unless they do it sooner!)
To add rumours for the 5D MkII (or whatever) have been around for nearly 2 years. That said this September is most likely to be to time it's updated (unless they do it sooner!)
Actually it was August 2005.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082209canoneos5d.asp
Still a helluva good camera though.
Actually it was August 2005.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0508/05082209canoneos5d.asp
Still a helluva good camera though.
Probably announced in August and available in October!