Why a 50D of all cameras?

[BigBlueDodge]

I don't want to get into a discussion of what the 50D will have, spec wise. What I want to discuss is why is Canon even coming out with a 50D. If I look at the two top complaints most frequent on this site, they are

1. Where is the replacement for the 5D
2. When is canon going to fix/replace the 1DMKIII


The 40D has barely been out a year, and while it does receive some chatter, the 5D MKII and 1DMKIIIN seem to be getting significantly more chatter. So why does Canon feel the need to target the 50D for an upgrade so soon over the 5D and 1DMKIII? Is the 40D market where Nikon is taking most of Canon's business?

[NickSimcheck]

A million reasons, my guess is that it was easy/cheap to come out with a new crop sensor with high MP to lure in consumers to get them into the "EOS" line.

All boils down to money.

[swalter]

One word: volume

The market potential is much much larger for a $1200 camera than for a $3000 camera. Canon must be losing some sales to other midrange cameras so it probably is the best return on investment to keep this segment competitive in the marketplace.

[gdl357]

Your basing your opinion on rumours. Who says Canon is not upgrading the whole line? They started with the XSI and may pull out another 3 cameras. Then what you said in the paragraph above (OP) would be just talk.

Let them upgrade...as maybe now they have finally woken up. They should even upgrade their lens. Maybe a 1740 with IS...you know!

[bsmotril]

Nikon D300 and D700 is why.

[BigBlueDodge]

A million reasons, my guess is that it was easy/cheap to come out with a new crop sensor with high MP to lure in consumers to get them into the "EOS" line.

All boils down to money.

Agreed. If the alleged specs for the 50D are true, it appears that it is just a 40D with some eye candy. Even still, replacing this camera appears to be an admission by Canon that they missed the ball when releasing the 40D and are trying to catchup with the competition. Personally, I would rather have 12MP and more autofocus point (say 25-27) than I would have 15MP and 9 AF points. And I would rather have built in wireless control of Speedlight flashes like the D300 than I would have built in face detection.

So if indeed the 5D and and 40D are both upgraded, I got to think that all 1D MKIII owners would be seriously upset. The 1D has had the most problems, and having the 5D and 40D upgraded is almost like a slap in the face to 1D MKIII owners. Personally, I really thought if any camera was going to break the normal upgrade cycle, it would have been the 1DMKIII upgrade, and the 40D would have been at the bottom of the list.

[BigBlueDodge]

Nikon D300 and D700 is why.


Well, I understand that the D300 is putting pressure on 40D sales, but the D700 shouldn't be a reason for Canon to upgrade the 40D. The D700 is in a complete other class of camera's and isn't directly competing with the 40D.

[form]

The d700 is a reason to upgrade the 5D. I still think that the d300 and 40d appeal to and are designed for very similar markets, and even if their prices are different their uses keep them in competition. Semi-pro, crop sensor, mid-level, good burst mode and extra features, good for weddings, events, etc.

Just like the 5d is now in competition with the d700. The 5d is comparatively lacking in features, as is the 40d lacking in features compared to the d300.

[MLphoto]

Nothing you can do now, 50D and 5D where released, wooohhooo!

[Pen6uiN]

I WANT 5D MK II for pete sake !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[TomTomTuning]

A million reasons, my guess is that it was easy/cheap to come out with a new crop sensor with high MP to lure in consumers to get them into the "EOS" line.

All boils down to money.
I thought the Mega Pixel wars were fading away, but i seriously hate it haha.

[gjl711]

Maybe Canon knows something we don't. Nikon's D300 is a nice body and in most ways superior to the 40D, but it's also at a different price point. However, the D80 is getting quite old and closer in price to the 40D. Maybe Nikon is planning a few announcements of their own like a new D90 which would have made the 40D look quite primitive. The new 50D could be Canon's answer to the yet to be announced 90D.

[form]

I think the price point concept is misleading. The 40D and D300 have long been in competition with each other, even if the price is a few hundred dollars different. The 40D was always seen as the inferior one. That's a bad light to view a product in, surely not great for business.

[Pete]

Mainly because they don't want to alienate all those people who still have their kit (EF-S) lenses from buying their 450Ds...

It was pretty easy for get people to buy the kits, it's a bit more difficult to convince Joe Public that they need to buy a body and a lens separately...

[studiom]

I understand some people have had horrible experiences with there Mk III's but they're not all bad. Most actually perform as they are supposed too.

[DStanic]

For most people (like myself, many wedding photogs etc) a 40D or other xxD series does the job just fine and no need to jump to full frame. I'm just about at the limit of my XTi but I'm sure that the 40D (or possibly 50D if I can get the moneys :)) will do the job for a long time- until the next improvement comes along. I don't shoot in a studio or shoot sports so I don't need a 1D or 1Ds.