Printable View
So, it looks like most of us here would be satisfied with 20-30 MP sensor. David's post has triggered a second question: What improvements are we looking for in the next camera body we will buy?
This poll allows more than one selection, but please limit yourself to three.
I know it's wishful thinking because it seems to have plateaued, but I'd love to see better ISO performance from crop bodies. As much as I'd love to go FF, my primary photography is birds and nature which would mean a whole new tier of price on lenses.
I'm going to suggest an off the wall desire... a faster generational turnaround on the high-end cameras. I need the servo capabilities of the higher-end bodies, and I'd love the new ISO capabilities of the higher-end bodies, but I cannot afford these bodies, so I have a 1Ds2. If Canon released a new 1D and 5D body each year like they did with the Rebels, it wouldn't be long before the fancy new high-end features would trickle down to an affordable price in the used market.
As that will never happen, I'll vote for vastly improved ISO and noise handling in a 7D2, as that's definitely due for an upgrade. ie: crop body, high-ISO with low noise (Maintaining 1/2000s shutter, and minimal noise, at indoor and/or dusk light levels), with Servo that can keep up with a champion Border Collie or Aussie.
Sorry...forgot to include a selection for improved AF.Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidEccleston
I would like a few more MP than the current 18, as long as I can keep my 12 fps. Given that the 1D X shoots 14 fps in JPG with the mirror up, I expect that means CFast cards would be needed for higher data transfer rates while maintaining a fast clearing of the buffer.
Most desired?
I would desire them all with the exception of two options.
More FPS, the 12 FPS of the 1D X is enough. If you want more shoot video.
Second is None- I own my last DSLR. Hopefully I will own a few more.
I didn't vote. I want almost all of it.
Better AF would be on my list. Especially at f8. Any new body coming out should have f8 AF and I'd like to see Canon come up with a firmware fix for f8 AF for the 6D if possible. My 6D will AF fine at f8 using the Kenko TC, but not with the Canon TC.
I just voted. I actually struggled to answer this myself. I know that while the 5DIII could be my last DSLR, it won't be just because I don't expect it to physically last 40 years. Also, unfortunately, photography is one of the few areas where I let myself get gear I don't necessarily "need." :rolleyes:
That said, Canon would have to introduce something pretty spectacular with across the board improvements in order to get me to consider buying it today. DR, Low/High ISO noise, Megapixels, frame rate, etc. But, moving out 2-3 years, I think I would be most interested in a modest increase in megapixels, another 1-2 stops of high ISO noise performance and an increase in dynamic range. Thus those were my votes. But I debated between increased MP, increased DR, low ISO noise and increased fps. Those would all be about equal in value to me.
Realistic hopes: Smaller Size, more of everything else (dynamic range, ISO, FPS). If FPS gets high enough then an electronic global shutter would be cool.
Hallucinogenic hopes: Interchangeable senors - I.R., Uber low light, uber high mp. (a lens that can resolve it would be nice) With dual pixel/live view focus perpendicular to the axis is more important that precise distance to the flange (remember I am hallucinating).
1. Carbon Fiber composition
2. Solar cells in front of hot shoe, above Canon logo for battery trickle charging
3. I chose more megapixels, existing pixel refinement also.
4. New "joystick", slightly larger, with rubberized grip surface, similar to new xbox controler, incorporating push down to click and twist left and right.
5. Realistic ergonomics, better placement of buttons rather than only thinking of PCB placement and circuit design.
6. More ergonomic mappable fingertip controls to do settings on the fly. Located on the inside front of the grip, where the fingertips are when gripping.
7. Various back lit buttons
8. Proper video autofocus, leaving primary purpose for photography but allowing usage of the video without requiring $10k of focus gearing and brackets.
9. Touch Screen
10. Built in RF flash control to eliminate needless transmitters and receivers when using Canon speedlights.
There are a lot more improvements. This is only the basic physical list.
This 5D is designed the same as cameras 50 years ago. It's made in Japan, where there is a massive 80's era Michael Jackson facility in Tokyo Disney (that almost made me vomit). There is a real disconnect between Japan and reality outside of Japan.
If Samsung, Lamborghini and Versace were running Canon, we might see some real improvements in our lifetimes. meanwhile, the Japanese salary-man works long hours designing something made with an absolute lack of forward thinking, creativity, or concern for the end user.
I have never seen trolling on this site before, due mostly to the character of those who inhabit this forum, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Would you like to expand on your post?Quote:
Originally Posted by UmiKaibutsu
I like the carbon fiber idea - not that I know anyting about carbon fiber - but if lightens the load...
Better DR at low ISO is the elephant in the room. Other manufacturers are making big strides with their sensor technology while Canon appears to be making more incremental improvements. I may go elsewhere in the future if I feel other manufacturers are making a better product for my needs.
Dave
@busted knuckles: The front forks of the road bike I bought in Japan are carbon fiber. It is strong, improves vibration absorption and is extremely light. There is absolutely no reason why the camera chassis and other components could not be made from carbon fiber. There are carbon fiber tripods and many fake carbon fiber tripods. The real ones are light as a feather and very expensive.
@raid: I honestly don't know what trolling is. Trolling for a response? I just write (sometimes a lot) and whatever I write is what it is. I don't know these terms nor inhabit forums. I just visit occasionally, most recently because I have questions about some camera things and picture things.
Would be interesting to see how much weight reduction could be achieved by using lighter materials for the body frame, which accounts only for a portion of the overall weight of the body. The weight of electronics and mechanical assemblies would be still the same, and I suppose, is even higher than the weight of the frame itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busted Knuckles
+1. Certainly there is weight associated with the metal bodies, but there is a lot more. I also wanted to mention, many people prefer the heavier bodies to help balance the heavier lenses often used with the camera bodies. So, while I am not opposed to the idea of decreasing the overall weight of my camera system, there are many factors. But, as question, why whould carbon fiber be much better than the plastics currently used in rebels/XXD bodies and several lenses? Everything I own made of carbon fiber lacks fine detail and is connected with adhesives. I am not a materials engineer, so I don't know if that is a function common of carbon fiber, but that wouldn't be too compatible with high end camera system.Quote:
Originally Posted by ahab1372
:) Thanks.
I really think the joystick could be improved. I saw a new xbox controller and it has some good features, but has a concave center that is not desirable for 1 finger usage, not that I play xbox, pshhh.
Something like this https://www.google.com/search?q=japa...w=1156&bih=866
I voted for high ISO performance and resolution. You always crop birds, and there's never enough light with a small telephoto lens. Otherwise I'm taking pictures indoors on a tripod under controlled lighting, where resolution (detail) is of utmost importance (at least to me it is).
I read an interesting comment that the quantum efficiency of the current generation of sensors is already ~50%. If noise and quantum efficiency are linear, then doubling quantum efficieny would give you 100%, and we'd get 1 stop better noise reduction. The author of the post I read (jrista) was making the point that even 1/3 improvement in high ISO noise at this point would be very impressive. Low ISO noise is a different beast, mostly cause by read noise and Canon's Analog Digital converters. That could be improved.
Hopefuly I am representing the post correctly.