The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

The 5D replacement rumor mill...

helenhill

Senior Member
Can CANON ever catch up to NIKON now ?
hasn't the canon mystique been blown to smithereens w/ the D3, & D700

Cheers - H:)
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Sure Canon can catch up to Nikon!

1) If they manage to build a similar good AF system as in D3, D300, D700.

2) If they really manage to build and manufacture their next gen CMOS sensors paired with DIGIC4 and DIGIC5 processing - should bring immense pixel density paired with lowest noise at high ISO, something we only can dream about today...

3) If they bring finally some good wide angle zooms, like the 14-24 from Nikon

4) If they manage to make their cameras as robust and weatherproof as Nikon, especially in the mid range

In general I think Canon has much better cards for the future of digital, because they already develop their own sensors since many years. So their potential for groundbreaking improvements is there and I hope they will leverage that. One example would be here the possibility to skip AA filters totally, because they can do processing in their DIGIC5 engines. Plus DR, plus partial ISO, etc. Who else will be there in the next years? No other vendor I see.
 

johnastovall

Deceased, but remembered fondly here...
More than a ultra wide zoom, I want to see Canon come up with a fast prime wide at about 20 to fill the gap they now have there. New 14/2.8 is outstanding as it the over looked 24/1.4 but I would like a Canon replacement for my Zeiss 21/2.8 Distagon that used all the AF mount features.
 
A

asabet

Guest
Not sure if this will help on the wide end, but it looks like Zeiss may be supporting the EOS mount soon:

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2008/09/new-zeiss-zx-mo.html

http://proimaging.blogspot.com/2008/08/propix-news-carl-zeiss-for-canon-eos.html

Personally, I think Canon and Nikon will continue to avoid directly competing products except for at the 1D/D3 level where the D3 will compete with the 1D and D3x with the 1Ds. A $3,000 21MP 5D II with great image quality will compete well in this market even without a better AF system and weather sealing.
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
Sorry, but I must be missing your point, Ben. If you are not a Canon owner, and do not like what they offer, why bother with them? If you are a Canon user, there is a lot of possibly good news on the way, so what is the issue. The 50D is not such a bad camera or deal if you really look at what you are getting. Lots of folks seem to think this the case. The 5D has been a very venerable offering for quite a long time, and any upgrade will most likely be substantial, and probably offer quite a bit of interesting things.

No point in bashing Canon in favor of Nikon on this forum, as folks are not of that nature here. We all have our preferences. Some of us are gear agnostic. Some of us have a lot invested in some systems and lines of gear, so there may be some cheering in one camp a bit more/less than another. If folks want to constantly be switching out gear for what they think is the latest and greatest, that is their choice. Personally, I like seeing the competition among manufacturers, as it does bring about better offerings for all of us, most of the time. In the end, if the gear does not meet your needs, do not bother buying it. Nice to have choices.

LJ

LJ, I've always shot canon, own a couple of 5D's. If the replacement is what most think it will be then I will seriously think about changing. My comment was based on the above mention of canon execs laughing at our discussions, if they are still as arrogant as we can assume they are then I will have no problem changing over for a better camera as I think will many people. I have absolutely no brand loyalty whatsoever, whoever provides the tool better suited to my purposes gets my money, period. Given that the founders here, especially Guy, are among the pioneers of this philosophy in todays digital world, I rather think that this is exactly the nature of the folks here. Personally I and many others here think that 'The 5D has been a very venerable offering for quite a long time, and any upgrade will most likely be substantial, and probably offer quite a bit of interesting things.
'
is rather optimistic and I will put my money where my mouth is. I can't see that any one could fault me for that.

On an aside, and someone mentioned the 24-70L, I'm about to sell my third copy, all three have had significant focus shift (NOT focus innaccuracy) which is horribly apparent in fluorescent light. I've lost count of the times I've sent these lenses back to CPS. I've taken to shooting most everything that needs critical sharpness with primes and during a wedding that is a serious pain. I'm going to wait till after photokina then either swap to the Nikon camp completely, see if there is an interesting replacement for the lens or swop for a 24-105L.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Well Canon has had lens problems for a long time and years of bitching has really not totally solved it. No question they have some good lenses but they also have some very bad ones even in the L cabinet. I guess the scary part is one day I looked in my bag and had 8 leica R lenses to compensate for what canon did not have going on. That was the day I bought a DMR. But since those days until present they have improved but in my mind not enough. They want to sell 22 mpx camera's than they need the glass to support it. They have gotten better but the whole alternative lens thing started with a few folks and has grown quite large. Certainly a signal to canon there lenses are not preforming to folks tasks. My issue with them is they still have yet to fully fix the issue. Sure the have had replacements and such new 85mm , 16-35 and so on but today as they keep trying to market MPX to people as the marketing tool . They still are left short with lenses that won't handle the MPX race well . Sure there are a few and there long stuff is great but still no wide angle primes that really sing as well as the 35 1.4 or better. I think the interesting thing we are seeing is Nikon is really trying to up the ante and it does have some if not a lot very interested back in Nikon. Now the new 5d will come out and of course will be better but there still not addressing the lenses and the world of alternative glass will prosper again. I guess we wait once again for announcements on new product but the rumors for glass is still pretty null. Now there is talk of Zeiss joining the Canon line and such , so things hopefully are improving for the end user. But getting Leica R lenses and old Zeiss lenses to bolt on the new Canons will eventually dry up. So hopefully there is new life coming and Canon actually listened to there customer base.
 

LJL

New member
Saw this little teaser this morning

http://www.canon.co.uk/
Well, hard to tell too much from the teaser, but unless they have removed the top dial from the 5D, the camera in the teaser profiles more like a 1-series body. That could be the "evolution"....bringing the 5D more toward the 1-series, and everybody is speculating on what that means.

LJ
 

Ben Rubinstein

Active member
I've been making a list of reasons not to stay with my present 5D's. What is comes down to is two things, Pro AF and weather sealing. These are the two only reasons that I would upgrade as a necessity. Shot two weddings in the rain this week and during one the lens wasn't communicating properly, I think a tiny bit of moisture got in. I shoot a lot in the rain and eventhough it's not for long periods I'm fed up of risking that kind of investment. The other point is that I want my cameras to focus f4 lenses as fast as it presently does f2.8, i.e. AF as fast as the 1 series. If neither of these things happen then I'll either stick with what I have and use primes more or see if a few niggling but important things about nikon are enough to stop me switching.
 

LJL

New member
My comment was based on the above mention of canon execs laughing at our discussions, if they are still as arrogant as we can assume they are then I will have no problem changing over for a better camera as I think will many people.
Ben,
Your point was a bit lost in your post, hence my question about your response.

With respect to changing over to another camera....that may be easy for some folks, especially if they do not mind losing a fair amount on selling their old gear and replacing with new. If you only have a few lenses and such, might not be an issue. But, as you mention, if you have shot Canon for some time, you may have a lot more tied up in glass, and that always costs to replace.

In that regard, a lot also depends on what you shoot. I use a lot of longer glass for sports stuff, and from what I have seen, Canon still excels in the long glass. I also have an use the 24-70 f2.8 a lot. It is not a perfect lens, but it has not failed me yet shooting on a 1DsMkII at 16+MP. Could always be better, and there are alternatives, if you do not mind giving up AF and sometimes metering functions. Not something I can afford to give up with a lot of my subjects.

I shot Nikon for 25 years, and have never lost my fondness for their stuff, but until very recently, they just could not deliver what I needed for my work. I am still looking hard at things like their D3 and D700, plus any D3x they may offer, but Canon still does a pretty decent job of delivering images. I do wish for improvements in the lens line-up as mentioned, but that always seems to be the case for both Nikon and Canon. If somebody like Zeiss does enter the picture making Canon compatible glass that is able to function with AF, for example, a lot of folks might be heading that way. Hard to believe Canon would not react to that also.

In the end, both Canon and Nikon are turning out decent gear. It may not excel in every aspect, but they do tend to cover a lot more ground as systems. The 5D replacement will probably NOT be a dud. I really do have no way of knowing that until it is out and in the hands of folks, but the original 5D held its own for nearly three years before Nikon put something similar into the market. I have to look at the entire line-up of offerings before I start jumping from one system to another, not just one camera. Presently Nikon is impressing a lot of folks, but not everywhere in their lens line-up either, both for IQ and price. Nether of these guys have it all worked out yet, so what is the harm in waiting a few more weeks to see what else comes to market?

LJ
 

LJL

New member
I've been making a list of reasons not to stay with my present 5D's. What is comes down to is two things, Pro AF and weather sealing. These are the two only reasons that I would upgrade as a necessity. Shot two weddings in the rain this week and during one the lens wasn't communicating properly, I think a tiny bit of moisture got in. I shoot a lot in the rain and eventhough it's not for long periods I'm fed up of risking that kind of investment. The other point is that I want my cameras to focus f4 lenses as fast as it presently does f2.8, i.e. AF as fast as the 1 series. If neither of these things happen then I'll either stick with what I have and use primes more or see if a few niggling but important things about nikon are enough to stop me switching.
Totally understand about the needs for weather sealing. I wind up in very harsh conditions a lot, and that is why I did not even think about anything other than my 1-series bodies and "L" lenses for my shooting needs. The new 50D from Canon is starting to get some more seals, but the 5D just missed that mark, and in speed for me to ever consider it. Hoping whatever comes along next has some of these rather important things in place and that it is more of "pro level" camera that can take the harder use some of us may give the gear, such as shooting in the rain and dust a lot.

LJ
 

Jack

Sr. Administrator
Staff member
I've been making a list of reasons not to stay with my present 5D's. What is comes down to is two things, Pro AF and weather sealing.
I agree for sure on those two, but for me woudl add frame-rate and higher ISO noise. If I got all of that in a new 5D and it was still 11MP, I would be happy to stay with Canon...
 

LJL

New member
I agree for sure on those two, but for me woudl add frame-rate and higher ISO noise. If I got all of that in a new 5D and it was still 11MP, I would be happy to stay with Canon...
Jack,
So you want more noise at higher ISOs ???:eek: :D (just kidding....we know what you meant, and I agree with your adds to Ben's wishes....weather seals, faster frame rates, higher NOISE FREE ISO, and much faster and accurate AF.)

LJ
 
A

asabet

Guest
I agree for sure on those two, but for me woudl add frame-rate and higher ISO noise. If I got all of that in a new 5D and it was still 11MP, I would be happy to stay with Canon...
The latest rumors seem pretty reliable and state 21MP, 4 FPS, new (presumably weaker) AA filter, and body otherwise similar to 50D (no heavy duty weather sealing and "non-pro" AF). Also said to offer 1 stop better high ISO performance than the 50D and no video.
 
R

rexyinc

Guest
oh your kidding me right? you want VR and will actually use it? on this range? common please..

Assuming that the 5D replacement is 21MP and great at high ISO, there's one more thing Canon can do to make it a smash hit. Release a great 24-70/2.8 IS version for the same price or less than the non-stabilized Nikon version. I would buy the Nikon today, but I can't see paying $1700 for a non-stabilized, huge standard zoom.
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
oh your kidding me right? you want VR and will actually use it? on this range? common please..
Owning the 24-70 from Nikon and using it on a D3 I must say I of course would love VR on this lens!

Are you kidding here????
 

jonoslack

Active member
Owning the 24-70 from Nikon and using it on a D3 I must say I of course would love VR on this lens!

Are you kidding here????
No - I agree.
Anders Uschold in BJP makes it pretty clear that putting IS into lenses DOES sacrifice quality. With the fantastic high ISO on the D3/D700, I don't think it would be worth sacrificing any of the quality for the sake of IS, which would be of questionable value - if you need more shutter speed, just stick up the ISO.

I like IS . .. but it won't be REALLY useful until it manages to stop subject movement as well as camera movement :)
 
A

asabet

Guest
No - I agree.
Anders Uschold in BJP makes it pretty clear that putting IS into lenses DOES sacrifice quality.
I'm not all that famililar with Nikon lenses yet. However, on the Canon side, the IS versions of lenses have shown improved image quality over the non IS versions in most cases, most likely because the IS designs are newer designs. The only Canon lens I've heard of where the IS version is thought to be a little bit less sharp is the 300/4. Not the 70-200/2.8, 70-200/4 (IS much sharper), 18-55 (IS much sharper), 75-300 (old lens), 300/2.8, 400/2.8, 500/4, or 600/4. In each of those cases, the IS version is widely considered on par with or better than the non-IS version. Even flare performance, which might be expected to suffer with the greater number of elements, has not been demonstrably worse in any of those examples that I have seen.

As pixels bet smaller, it takes less handshake to sacrifice a bit of quality at the pixel level. To make the most of 21 megapixels on a 24x36mm sensor, handshake has to be neutralized, even on the wide side. So yes, I'd like stabilization even with a wide lens. On a lens that ventures into short tele as the 24-70 does, its a clear benefit for the way I shoot.

With a non-IS lens, I can handhold a sharp photo of a static subject at 70mm and 1/100s perhaps 90% of the time. The shot I need may be in the other 10%, and I can get it with an IS lens.
 
Last edited:

LJL

New member
I have IS on several Canon lenses, and frankly, it does not get used all that much. Might just be the subjects I am shooting that does not have me using it much. For me it tends to slow down the entire AF process, but then I am mainly pointing at things that are moving around and sometimes rather fast. I have even gone to the point of taping over the controls with IS off on my 70-200 f2.8L IS lens, mainly so I do not accidently engage it.

In agreement with Amin, I have not found any degradation of images from IS versus non-IS lenses that I have used. There may be a few cases where folks are seeing things, but I think them few and far between.

While IS is a very nice feature to have, it is not needed or useful in a lot of shooting situations, especially anything where the subject is moving. In those cases, a higher shutter speed is the preferred choice. I can see that it may have some utility on a lens like the 24-70 for more static subjects (group shots, and things like that), and I would probably use it for many of the failing light, post-match sports awards I shoot, but right now, I am augmenting those with fill flash, so it may no matter as much. It does seem to do a very good job at lower shutter speeds, handheld, and where the subject is not moving, but I tend to kick the ISO up a stop, if needed, and that gets me there most of the times. (There are times when the ISO is already high, and then the IS really does help gain a bit more steadiness.)

On balance, the Canon IS does seem to work quite well on their lenses. It does add a significant cost to the lens, and some weight, but if needed, it does the job well. I do not see it degrading the resolving capabilities or introducing any other problems on glass that I have shot. I just do not think it needs to be on all lenses, or used all the time, but it does the job when needed.

LJ
 
Top