Preliminary 3D Specs?

[ChrisGorabPhotography]

http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/12/the-mythical-eos-3d-cr1/

Will this replace the well-loved 5D series?

[rijndael]

If it replaces the 5D II there will be a large price gap between the 7D and 3D.

[RWatkins]

I don't know, ask the unicorn carrying it if it will.

Seriously, if anything, it will be a bridge between the Canon 5D and 1D... hence then name 3D.

[dithiolium]

At that rumored 3D price, the 5D-series will be the equivalent of a 'FF Rebel' - entry level FF.
3D will be the 'FF 7D'.
5D series will still be their icon of 'FF for the masses'.

Introduction of a 3D by end 2010 will make it 2 years after 5D2. Good timing to entice general public to upgrade.

[woos]

I really really doubt this honestly. It just doesn't make sense at that price point. It would just leech sales from the 1dmkIV if they were priced that close together. I could see this happening if the 1d models were combined and there was no more 1Ds though. I duno, this just doesn't make much sense to me. I would think we'd be much more likely to see a really inexpensive DSLR debut, something below the XS, than another model in the high end. But I could be (and hopefully am), wrong. If the 3d does come back hopefully it'll have that cool eye control focus right? :)

[blackshadow]

I really really doubt this honestly. It just doesn't make sense at that price point. It would just leech sales from the 1dmkIV if they were priced that close together. I could see this happening if the 1d models were combined and there was no more 1Ds though. I duno, this just doesn't make much sense to me. I would think we'd be much more likely to see a really inexpensive DSLR debut, something below the XS, than another model in the high end. But I could be (and hopefully am), wrong. If the 3d does come back hopefully it'll have that cool eye control focus right? :)

Not necessarily. The 1Ds will still be the camera of choice for many studio/portrait/advertising photographers - the rumoured specs for the 1Ds are 32MP which should allow a lot more detail/resolution than what has been mooted for the 3D. These are photographers who demand the highest quality images from their cameras - for most of us it's not an issue but for the high end pros that the 1Ds is designed for it is and they have the money to pay for it.

I can see it impacting on 5D Mark II and Nikon D700/D3 sales though.

[dithiolium]

come to think of it, 16MP, better/pro AF. are they repackaging the 1DsII ?
Probably just make the sensor 'gapless' again.

[tkbslc]

I don't think they can price it at $4000 and not have people defect to the D700 or its replacement. It HAS to be $3000 or less, or it might as well not exist. At $4500, why even have the 1D series anymore?

[erickboileau]

I am waiting for a 1Ds without grip, I find the 1Ds too big and the grip unnecessary for my needs

[kansascityshuffle]

come to think of it, 16MP, better/pro AF. are they repackaging the 1DsII ?
Probably just make the sensor 'gapless' again.

Add in current high ISO performance, micro AF adjust, and sensor dust vibration, and it's going to be quite a friggin camera.

[tigerotor77w]

I don't think they can price it at $4000 and not have people defect to the D700 or its replacement. It HAS to be $3000 or less, or it might as well not exist. At $4500, why even have the 1D series anymore?

Good point. I was about to say that the 5D II would still be available, but then the 5D II would outresolve the 3D. :confused:

Maybe those are the specs for a revamped 5D III (with a wrong price tag), but I certainly like the idea of a FF 7D.

[dafriz]

Sounds to me like it'll be between the 5D and 1D... a "budget 1Ds" if you will. I would not be surprised if it's essentially a full-frame 7D.

[erickboileau]

I would not be surprised if it's essentially a full-frame 7D.
then video + diffraction ?

[The Moose]

I still don't see why Canon would create a 3D. Even if the price is raised, I think it makes more sense to just keep the 5D line so then it's a 5D Mark III.

[RWatkins]

I still don't see why Canon would create a 3D. Even if the price is raised, I think it makes more sense to just keep the 5D line so then it's a 5D Mark III.

What if Canon has decided to go for the sub 2K full frame market (or has intel that Nikon is doing this)? If this was the case, they could be positioning the 5D Mark III as a 1999$ camera, and not add many new features and then make a 3D for 2799$.

[Fidelity]

I still don't see why Canon would create a 3D. Even if the price is raised, I think it makes more sense to just keep the 5D line so then it's a 5D Mark III.

I don't think the 5D Mark II was designed to be the ultimate wedding photographer's camera. I think it was designed primarily to provide an affordable FF body with outstanding IQ. I think the 5D series will continue in that vein to hold the low-road on pricing. I believe a 3D would be an up-scale, camera designed to have the very best DR and ISO ever produced, and aimed directly at the wedding photographer's market with pro-level AF and 7D-level build quality and weather resistance with a price about half of what the 1Ds Mark IV will be.

[tigerotor77w]

What if Canon has decided to go for the sub 2K full frame market (or has intel that Nikon is doing this)? If this was the case, they could be positioning the 5D Mark III as a 1999$ camera, and not add many new features and then make a 3D for 2799$.

That'd be sweet. It'd still be sweet if the 3D were like $3399, because the next FF option from Canon is wayyyyy up there at nearly $8k.

I don't think the 5D Mark II was designed to be the ultimate wedding photographer's camera. I think it was designed primarily to provide an affordable FF body with outstanding IQ. I think the 5D series will continue in that vein to hold the low-road on pricing. I believe a 3D would be an up-scale, camera designed to have the very best DR and ISO ever produced, and aimed directly at the wedding photographer's market with pro-level AF and 7D-level build quality and weather resistance with a price about half of what the 1Ds Mark IV will be.

Oooooh now you're talking...

[blackshadow]

I don't think the 5D Mark II was designed to be the ultimate wedding photographer's camera. I think it was designed primarily to provide an affordable FF body with outstanding IQ. I think the 5D series will continue in that vein to hold the low-road on pricing. I believe a 3D would be an up-scale, camera designed to have the very best DR and ISO ever produced, and aimed directly at the wedding photographer's market with pro-level AF and 7D-level build quality and weather resistance with a price about half of what the 1Ds Mark IV will be.

Why would Canon make a camera that has "the very best DR and ISO ever produced" and have it priced at half that of their flagship full frame camera? Surely the very best would go into the flagship model.

I don't see the price of the 1Ds being prohibitive for a wedding professional.

Assume a wedding pro shoots 26 weddings/year and the life span of the camera is two years. That works out at around $150/wedding for the camera and then it can be sold after two years for an upgrade. I don't know any wedding photographers worth their salt who don't charge a $1500 minimum to cover a wedding.

[jaykilgore]

Why would Canon make a camera that has "the very best DR and ISO ever produced" and have it priced at half that of their flagship full frame camera? Surely the very best would go into the flagship model.


Like you, I don't buy into this fully, but, just to play devils advocate; they could put this into a camera to test it out, find bugs, hear reports, good and bad before putting it into the 1DS MK IV. Not saying that's the case, but a theory.

[kansascityshuffle]

Like you, I don't buy into this fully, but, just to play devils advocate; they could put this into a camera to test it out, find bugs, hear reports, good and bad before putting it into the 1DS MK IV. Not saying that's the case, but a theory.


Would have prevented the cyber-dorks from crying about the AF on the 1D3.

[jaykilgore]

Would have prevented the cyber-dorks from crying about the AF on the 1D3.

They would have found something else to cry about, friend. You know that as well as I. ;)

[HyperYagami]

I believe a 3D would be an up-scale, camera designed to have the very best DR and ISO ever produced, and aimed directly at the wedding photographer's market with pro-level AF and 7D-level build quality and weather resistance with a price about half of what the 1Ds Mark IV will be.

Yeah and then who's going to buy 1D? Canon isn't stupid.

[shimmishim]

I think plenty of people will still buy the 1Ds or the 1D Mark IV.

The 3D will be a smaller version of the 1Ds without the pro weather sealing, slower FPS, and less custom functions. Give me a 3D for $3K to $3.5K and I'd buy one.

As for the 1D... it's a 1.3x crop with the pro weather sealing, faster FPS...

I think they have room to add a 3D into their line up with the price of the 5D Mark II dropping.

However... I'd like a 1D Mark IV. I've come to enjoy the extra 60mm "reach" I get with my 70-200 when I had the Mark III. I didn't realize how much I missed it until I started shooting at 200mm on FF.

Yeah and then who's going to buy 1D? Canon isn't stupid.

[AllenF]

WOW some here are awful free with their cash. " I would pay 1/2 of the 1DsmkIV for a 3D". Seems a bit premature to want to spend $4K on a camera without knowing one real spec or feature.

If Canon Rumors is right with the 16 MP chip of the 1DsmkII, then this one will be a hard sell IMO. When we look at the 5DmkII's 21 MP and the best IQ of all Canons to date, (the 1DmkIV is not here in any numbers and no real IQ tests yet), it seems a step backwards IMO. Rumoring it to be a wedding tog's body is also odd as the resolution is a bit low IMO.

The 3D, if the numbering systems holds true to the past, should be a better and more expensive body than the 5DmkII. So going with 16 MP is not in keeping with Canon of the past. I see the 3D as having the Eye Control Focus, 100% VF, and at least 21 MP or more like 25 MP (a FF version of the 40D chip). I see the 7D 19 point AF system too. I hope for better ISO noise than the 5DmkII at the higher ISO's. I see 5 FPS.

This allows the 5DmkIII to be a dumbed down 7D but FF for those wedding togs. It will be the same resolution but with added higher ISO's and a bit cleaner. It will have 9 point AF all cross type or perhaps 19 points like the 7D but no ECF like the 3D, it's price will be the same as the 5DmkII or possibly a bit less to sweeten the pot. It will be less if the AF is 9 all cross type instead of 19 points. It's FPS will be the same as the 5DmkII now. It will keep the same 95% VF too.

The 3D having higher resolution and ECF, 100% VF, and slightly better ISO noise, and more FPS than the 5DmkIII should justify it's higher cost.

What will the cost be?

$3499 retail

Lastly the 7D, 5DmkIII and the 3D should all share the same button placement and layout so that owners of these bodies will find them all to act the same in feel and not need to relearn how to shoot with any of them. I also think Canon should layout the 60D like them as well, since folks will be coming from these to the higher levels and will feel right at home. Unifying the product line allows folks to move up much more easily, IMO.

[tigerotor77w]

Rumoring it to be a wedding tog's body is also odd as the resolution is a bit low IMO.

Everything is a rumor at this point, so it's all moot.

But I disagree with this statement. All the Nikonians wedding togs use the D3x or have since switched to Canon? None of them are satisfied with the 12 MP in ALL Nikon bodies from the 3000D on up with the exception of the D3x?

[blackshadow]

If it's ever produced I'd expect a 3D model to use the sensor from the 5DM2 or 1DsM3 so it remains a step below the 1Ds Mark IV.

I'd also expect expect AF and weather sealing along the lines of the 7D. Excellent video performance and priced somewhere between the 5D series and the 1D (not 1Ds). Also high ISO performance at least on par with the 5Dm2 - maybe slightly higher FPS.

Very similar to what AllenF outlined above.

[AllenF]

Everything is a rumor at this point, so it's all moot.

But I disagree with this statement. All the Nikonians wedding togs use the D3x or have since switched to Canon? None of them are satisfied with the 12 MP in ALL Nikon bodies from the 3000D on up with the exception of the D3x?

Nikon has a different idea of resolution and noise. Since they are not as adept at chip making as Canon they have chosen to limit resolution. They have focused on feature set. It has worked for them well.

If you read my earlier guess and Canon's past numbering system having the 3D have less resolution than the 5DmkII, IMO, makes no sense. The 3D should be equal to or higher in resolution WRT the 5DmkII, UNLESS Canon can make those 16 MP's sing with some extremely clean ISO performance. While many here scream for less resolution but cleaner images, I wonder if they got that, if they would now not be screaming for more resolution? Sort of a vicious circle.

[erickboileau]

Yeah and then who's going to buy 1D? Canon isn't stupid.

I sold my 1Ds Mark III for a 5D Mark II because of the size, I am not the only one

[Lowner]

"Assume a wedding pro shoots 26 weddings/year and the life span of the camera is two years. That works out at around $150/wedding for the camera and then it can be sold after two years for an upgrade. I don't know any wedding photographers worth their salt who don't charge a $1500 minimum to cover a wedding".

Thats a pretty big chunk out of the bottom line. I'm not a pro 'tog, but have spent half my working life fretting about budgets/targets and the bottom line and its too big for my blood. Cut that to $15 and it might be bearable. Remember that everything else is depreciating as well, so we have transport, premises, lenses, lighting etc, etc. To take 10% of the gross on one item makes it a non starter.

And two years assumed life is very pessimistic. Its a pro camera and I'd be looking at nearer ten years. I briefly worked with a sailing mag staff 'tog and was amazed at his old, beaten up Nikon kit, but everything worked as it should, and he understood it so well.

[tigerotor77w]

Nikon has a different idea of resolution and noise. Since they are not as adept at chip making as Canon they have chosen to limit resolution. They have focused on feature set. It has worked for them well.

If you read my earlier guess and Canon's past numbering system having the 3D have less resolution than the 5DmkII, IMO, makes no sense. The 3D should be equal to or higher in resolution WRT the 5DmkII, UNLESS Canon can make those 16 MP's sing with some extremely clean ISO performance. While many here scream for less resolution but cleaner images, I wonder if they got that, if they would now not be screaming for more resolution? Sort of a vicious circle.

Nothing to say the 5D III would become a 12 or 15 MP body and the 3D just slightly above that. The 1Ds would become the high-resolution FF.

Either that... or the alleged 3D would pick up the 1Ds IV's sensor at the rumored 30+ MP. Either way, it's all speculation.

[KayakPhotos]

I think that it is all a matter of personal preference and needs. I would prefer a 3D with around 16MP, the best ISO performance to date, and AT LEAST the 7D autofocus system. Make it shoot 8fps and you're golden. That would be my first full-frame camera, especially if it would sell for around $3000.

Canon could go ahead and make the 1Ds Mark IV have excellent high ISO performance and insane MP as well as the usual pro AF and build. It would still sell, to those that really need the super high resolution and usual 1D characteristics. They could then continue producing the 5D series, providing a high MP sensor similar to the 1Ds in a smaller form factor with inferior weather sealing and autofocus (but hopefully better than the current system...), as well as a slower frame rate than the 3D. This offers three different full-frame lines, and everyone can pick their poison.

[Lowner]

My perfect 3D:

Have at least 21MP, maybe even 25.
Have a dial-less body like the original, excellent 1 series speed AF with eye-control on all 50 odd points, all of which would be the new high performance sensors.
Noise control as good as if not better than current 1 series).
Low fps, but boostable with a strap-on motor booster (again, as was the original).
A customisable button so I could have mirror lock-up with a single press of a button, or any other function I want instead.
A menu that does not require the manual every time I want anything slightly unusual.
An LCD light that stays on until I tell it to switch off.

I would not require stratospheric ISO numbers, 6400 would do me. But unlike the original, can I have it made of metal, not plastic please?

[blackshadow]

"Assume a wedding pro shoots 26 weddings/year and the life span of the camera is two years. That works out at around $150/wedding for the camera and then it can be sold after two years for an upgrade. I don't know any wedding photographers worth their salt who don't charge a $1500 minimum to cover a wedding".

Thats a pretty big chunk out of the bottom line. I'm not a pro 'tog, but have spent half my working life fretting about budgets/targets and the bottom line and its too big for my blood. Cut that to $15 and it might be bearable. Remember that everything else is depreciating as well, so we have transport, premises, lenses, lighting etc, etc. To take 10% of the gross on one item makes it a non starter.

And two years assumed life is very pessimistic. Its a pro camera and I'd be looking at nearer ten years. I briefly worked with a sailing mag staff 'tog and was amazed at his old, beaten up Nikon kit, but everything worked as it should, and he understood it so well.

I was being very conservative with the two year life span. Was the sailing tog shooting film or digital? (I'm guessing film). Due to rapid advances in technology professionals tend to replace DSLRs at shorter intervals than 35mm cameras. I also chose the two year figure as a reasonable time frame to sell off a second hand camera and still get a reasonable price for it (and putting the sales proceeds towards a new body).

[Lowner]

Blackshadow,

He was using a Nikon digital. Probably because it keeps things simple and quick. The magazine editor was my boss at the sailing school I instruct for these days, all the instructors were asked to perform for the camera frequently, to demonstrate technique articles in the main.

Looking at the state of his camera, no one would want to buy it! Originally painted black, I think there was more bare metal than paint. Honorable retirement would be the best that body could expect. And it was the same story with the rest of his kit, the tripod looked a hundred years old and was held together with that thin brown plastic packaging tape! But he did/does good work, sometimes under a lot of pressure to produce the goods in shall we say "less than ideal conditions" on the water.

[HappySnapper90]

http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/12/the-mythical-eos-3d-cr1/

Will this replace the well-loved 5D series?

Certainly not. 1 - 3 - 5 - 7

See the pattern? 3 has been missing. Canon has just been developing digital versions of the film SLR lineup. Canon won't close down a camera line.

[Lowner]

I am very surprised that they ever let the 3 slip from the line-up. In fact remove the film transport mechanics, use the cassette and film take up sprocket spaces for the processing electronics, super glue the sensor onto the film guides of the Eos-3 body tomorrow and bingo, you still have a very capable digital camera.

[RWatkins]

How about this...

1. 1D Mark IV sensor
2. 7D like Body and focus system
3. 6-7 FPS
4. Cost: 2999.95

[Stan Jones Photography]

stanjonesphotorumors.com

-1.175x crop sensor
-7 fps
-17 mp
-underwater/lava housing included


-3750 USD


From a bird, that is.

[cccc]

Why not make a slow 1ds (4fps), remove the grip and badge it as the 3d? Perhaps use 7d sealing as well.

It would be priced right below the 1dmk4.

That sounds logical to me.

[Stealthy Ninja]

Why not make a slow 1ds (4fps), remove the grip and badge it as the 3d? Perhaps use 7d sealing as well.

It would be priced right below the 1dmk4.

That sounds logical to me.

So long as the AF is as good as the 1DIV, I'd get one instead of the 1DIV. Don't particularly need 10fps, but I could do with better AF.

Most likely it would be a 5DII with 7D AF stuck in.

[Lowner]

Spec wise the 3D would need to sit very firmly above the likes of the 5 and 7D. When the Eos-3 was released the frame rate was cutting edge with the motor drive grip so why not go down the same route again? lowish fps, with the option of more with a grip.

For the same reason I'd fully expect it to have a higher MP than the recent 1D4, which after all has been designed for a rather different task. Possibly the same sensor as the upcoming 1Ds4, but with a less bullet proof build quality.

I think Canon have at last caught Nikon up with the AF in the 1D4 (I'm sure we will hear if it is not up to scratch) and cannot see Canon getting away with the previous substandard system in any of their bodies in the future.

[HappySnapper90]

How about this...

1. 1D Mark IV sensor
2. 7D like Body and focus system
3. 6-7 FPS
4. Cost: 2999.95
Who would pay $1200 more just for a 7D with a slightly bigger sensor and 1 to 2 fps less?! A whole FF sensor is about $800 to $1000 to produce!

Most likely it would be a 5DII with 7D AF stuck in.
That would be unacceptable by most because Canon has stated in their materials that the 7D AF point array covers the exact same area as the 5D and 50D AF point array. So you'd still end up with all your AF points near the center of the frame and in the same small diamond shaped area.

[Stealthy Ninja]

That would be unacceptable by most because Canon has stated in their materials that the 7D AF point array covers the exact same area as the 5D and 50D AF point array. So you'd still end up with all your AF points near the center of the frame and in the same small diamond shaped area.

Good point. I didn't study the 7D materials.

They won't make it FF with a 1DIV AF system... that's a 1DsIV.

Perhaps I should have said:
5DII with 7D STYLE AF system

Spread it out a bit more. :)

[RWatkins]

Who would pay $1200 more just for a 7D with a slightly bigger sensor and 1 to 2 fps less?! A whole FF sensor is about $800 to $1000 to produce!

That would be unacceptable by most because Canon has stated in their materials that the 7D AF point array covers the exact same area as the 5D and 50D AF point array. So you'd still end up with all your AF points near the center of the frame and in the same small diamond shaped area.

I would. The pixel density is the thing (4.3µm for the 7D vs 5.7µm for the 1D mark IV), not just a slightly bigger sensor.

From what I understand, the Nikon D700 is a combination of a D300 inspired body and the sensor from the D3. The parallel to this with Canon in the body of the 7D and the sensor of the 1D mark IV.

If Canon used an existing sensor from the 1D mark IV, my assumption is they could save the R&D cost associated with making a new design. Since its not my field, I don't know how much it cost, but I suspect its not cheap.

Personally, I'd hate to see Canon upmarket the next 5D. I'd rather see them follow the 7D strategy used to answer the D300s - make a new class of camera.

[Shadowblade]

I see this as a lightweight, 'travel' version of the 1D series, in the same vein as the D700 is a 'travel' version of the D3. In other words, fully-weather-sealed, pro AF, same sensors, but smaller body, with a tradeoff in shooting speed.

3D:
16MP 1.3x crop (same as 1D4)
8FPS
45-point AF
Full weather sealing
Optional grip

3Ds:
High-resolution full-frame (same as 1Ds4)
4FPS
45-point AF
Full weather sealing
Optional grip

[Twotan]

I see this as a lightweight, 'travel' version of the 1D series, in the same vein as the D700 is a 'travel' version of the D3. In other words, fully-weather-sealed, pro AF, same sensors, but smaller body, with a tradeoff in shooting speed.

3D:
16MP 1.3x crop (same as 1D4)
8FPS
45-point AF
Full weather sealing
Optional grip

3Ds:
High-resolution full-frame (same as 1Ds4)
4FPS
45-point AF
Full weather sealing
Optional grip

That would be nice. I would buy both of these bodies.

[HappySnapper90]

I see this as a lightweight, 'travel' version of the 1D series, in the same vein as the D700 is a 'travel' version of the D3. In other words, fully-weather-sealed, pro AF, same sensors, but smaller body, with a tradeoff in shooting speed.

3D:
16MP 1.3x crop (same as 1D4)
8FPS
45-point AF
Full weather sealing
Optional grip
$4500. 2fps less and no build in vertical grip isn't much to cut the price off the 1D4

3Ds:
High-resolution full-frame (same as 1Ds4)
4FPS
45-point AF
Full weather sealing
Optional grip
$7700 (if 1Ds4 is $8500 like predicted. Do you really think a 1Ds4 with 1fps less and no built in vertical grip is going to be sold at a significant discount?

[Shadowblade]

$4500. 2fps less and no build in vertical grip isn't much to cut the price off the 1D4

$7700 (if 1Ds4 is $8500 like predicted. Do you really think a 1Ds4 with 1fps less and no built in vertical grip is going to be sold at a significant discount?

These aren't budget-model 1D/1Ds bodies. They're intended as fully-featured, compact bodies for the travelling photographer, with minimal difference in pricing.

The 5D and 7D are the budget models.

[RWatkins]

Since Canon is effectively putting the 7D sensor in the T2i/550D, could this mean they might be planning to do the same thing with the 1d mark IV sensor into a lesser body, like the 3D?

21 MP FF Sensor: 1Ds Mark III (Premium) --- 5D Mark II (Budget)
16 MP APS-H Sensor: 1D Mark IV (Premium) --- 3D (Budget)
18 MP APS-C Sensor: 7D (Premium) --- 550D (Budget)