Things I want in my next upgrade

[iND]

I dont want to pay for video if Im not going to use it.


I want to have 5 (or 7) not 3 exposure brackets for HDR


I want to know my depth of field


I want a built in radio trigger that will work with pocket wizzards


I dont want to pay for a pop up flash


I dont want live view


I only need 15 megapixels


I want 8-9 fps even if i need to pay for two sensors/processors


I want to card slots (at least one CF since I got a lot of those)


I dont want to pay for a gazillion autofocus points (I use center focus 90%)


I want to move my menu items to my preference.


So I have the ones I use the most up front.


You think canon will listen?


Any other wishes?

[andnowimbroke]

They are actually heading towards one shot containing enough info to equal what we would consider HDR without the extra shots, but they want to milk us first. Nothing wrong with this as that is a common practice. It

[Rocco]

Can

[HDNitehawk]

I dont want to pay for video if Im not going to use it. <span style="color: #000080;"]No dont want it, but we seem to be stuck with it.


I want to have 5 (or 7) not 3 exposure brackets for HDR. <span style="color: #000080;"]How about just figuring out a way toexpand the dynamic range. I thought when reading the 1D IV book it was capable of bracketing like this. I didn't pay much attention to that part because it is not my landscape camera. (EDIT: I went back and checked and, no the 1D IV will not do it. Maybe it was just a fantasy I had that it would. Or maybe just a dream)


I want to know my depth of field. <span style="color: #000080;"]Built in DOF calculator, that would be nice


I want a built in radio trigger that will work with pocket wizzards <span style="color: #000080;"]Yes that would be a plus


I dont want to pay for a pop up flash <span style="color: #000080;"]Don't want it either and the models I have don't have it. But they charge more for the models that don't have the pop up. Go figure.


I dont want live view <span style="color: #000080;"]NO ...got to have this


I only need 15 megapixels <span style="color: #000080;"]Nope...not on a full frame body, 21 megapixels on the 5D II is a good thing.


I want 8-9 fps even if i need to pay for two sensors/processors <span style="color: #000080;"]It is called a 1D IV, and you will pay extra for it.


I want to card slots (at least one CF since I got a lot of those)<span style="color: #000080;"] It is called a 1D IV


I dont want to pay for a gazillion autofocus points (I use center focus 90%) <span style="color: #000080;"]As long as it is accurate, a few extra point'swill not hurt.


I want to move my menu items to my preference. <span style="color: #000080;"]Not a big issue for me


So I have the ones I use the most up front. <span style="color: #000080;"]Not a big issue


You think canon will listen? <span style="color: #000080;"]Not to one person, no. Maybe if a thousand people say the same thing, just maybe they will


Any other wishes? <span style="color: #000080;"]That you can get all this on a camera body that cost less than $1,500 US Dollars.


<span style="color: #000080;"]So it goes with cameras, we pay for the options other people use and we don't need. I suppose Canon would build a custom camera with just the functions you need, but it may cost a dollar more than one that has all the options.


<span style="color: #000080;"]

[Daniel Browning]

I dont want to pay for video if Im not going to use it.





I dont want to pay for a pop up flash





I dont want live view





I dont want to pay for a gazillion autofocus points (I use center focus 90%)

Removing features from a camera (or not adding them in the first place)does not reduce the sale price unless the number of users that like that feature is so small that it cannot offset the fixed and variable costs of the feature. In the case of video, live view, and many AF points, the number of users who like and use the feature is so tremendous that it pays for the feature several times over. That is, new cameras without the feature will need a *higher* price to offset the greatly reduced number of consumers that will buy it.


Personally, I would love to have video, pop-up flash, live view, and a gazillion AF points. But there are other features that I find useless and would rather them do away with. However, I recognize that the useless (to me) features help reduce the cost of the camera by increasing marketability, so I am content to put up with them.

I want to have 5 (or 7) not 3 exposure brackets for HDR





I want to know my depth of field


<span>


I want to move my menu items to my preference.

Ditto for these. Although I would be fine if Canon just stopped trying so hard to limit third-party firmwares. Let us develop these features by ourselves, at no cost to Canon. For example, Magic Lantern already has all three of these features you want. Imagine how much better it would be if Canon gave up their amateur attempts at encrypting the firmware (easily cracked) and instead actually helped the people who are trying to do their job for them.


Not holding my breath.

<div>


I want a built in radio trigger that will work with pocket wizzards
<div>

</div>
<div></div>
<div>I would be happy with *any* radio communication in the body. The range and reliability of the current manufacturer systems is annoying. I don't know why they haven't done it already. Maybe it's the cost of transmitter hardware that has to support a huge number of frequencies (due to each country/locale having different and varying availability)? Or the extra regulatory compliance for redio emission in a huge number of different countries? I dunno.</div>
</div>
<div></div>
<div>
<div>

</div>
<div>You think canon will listen?</div>
<div>

</div>
</div>
<div></div>
<div>No. But I would love to be proven wrong (again).</div>

[Daniel Browning]

They are actually heading towards one shot containing enough info to equal what we would consider HDR without the extra shots

Until someone invents the "one-shot unlimited full-well capacity", one-shot will never be equal to multi-shot, because of photon shot noise (AKA "midtone noise"). Single-shot will be finefor most purposes, as long as the noise level is low enough that most people wont notice it. But multi-shot(or any other ulimited-FWC tech)will always be required for photographers that want their SNR to be higher than is even theoretically possible in one shot.For example, with single shot HDR, it will never be possible for a 15 MP digicam to match the noise level of a 15 MP Medium Format Digital Back. But with multi-shot HDR, it *is* possible.

, but they want to milk us first. Nothing wrong with this as that is a common practice. It's just frustrating.

I would put that sort of behavior in the category of Malice.I've often thought that myself, but right now I lean more towards Stupidity.