Sub $2k FF camera?

[jcatral14]

What are the chances Canon will come out with a FF DSLR in the next 1-2 years in the sub-$2k range? I know no one knows for sure but I have a feeling something's coming down the pike. I'm itching to go FF :confused:

[Grimm75]

With all the bells and whistles they packed into the 7D I see no reason Canon would produce a FF for under 2k.

[BiPolarBear]

With all the bells and whistles they packed into the 7D I see no reason Canon would produce a FF for under 2k.

I'd agree. Slim to none.
If anything, my guess is they'd go the other way.
Put the bells and and whistles and the AF of the 7D on a FF, and charge about $3k (a 1Ds-lite). They need to one up the D700, and that might do it.
Greg

[Josepi]

With all the bells and whistles they packed into the 7D I see no reason Canon would produce a FF for under 2k.

A FF without the bells and whistles (video/fps/af) would serve a purpose quite well.

[geekyrocketguy]

There's always the 5D classic, which sells for ~$1200 used these days.

[deadpass]

the 5DII used is nearly 2k.

[Josepi]

There's always the 5D classic, which sells for ~$1200 used these days.

Can't exactly rely on a used product market to fill any sales potential though :)

[Elisha]

Sony Alpha a850 is the only current FF DSLR under 2k so far!

[Hermes]

A FF without the bells and whistles (video/fps/af) would serve a purpose quite well.

The 5DII already is a FF camera without the bells and whistles.

The features that it has are developments made in the eos system as a whole (video, micro-adjust, sensor cleaning, live view, e.t.c.) for these shared features not to be in any new model would be pointless as they've already been developed and the cost of implementing them would be shared with all the other models and therefore tiny. It's af and fps are already bottom-of-the-barrell compared to the alternatives. It's just a big sensor put into a "whatever technology we have at the moment" body.

[Stone 13]

I'd agree. Slim to none.
If anything, my guess is they'd go the other way.
Put the bells and and whistles and the AF of the 7D on a FF, and charge about $3k (a 1Ds-lite). They need to one up the D700, and that might do it.
Greg

This!!! Stick a FF sensor in the 7D body, maybe a true 8fps under all conditions and I'd give them 3K tomorrow.....

[iurytx]

I'd agree. Slim to none.
If anything, my guess is they'd go the other way.
Put the bells and and whistles and the AF of the 7D on a FF, and charge about $3k (a 1Ds-lite). They need to one up the D700, and that might do it.
Greg

1Ds Mark IV??? (plus $3-4K)

[Stone 13]

1Ds Mark IV??? (plus $3-4K)

Hate to say it, but Nikon has already proven that a fast FF camera w/good af performance doesn't have to cost 7K, I hope Canon realizes this.

[godzakka]

This!!! Stick a FF sensor in the 7D body, maybe a true 8fps under all conditions and I'd give them 3K tomorrow.....

Here, here!

I love everything about the 7D, and when I'm ready to upgrade my camera, I plan on getting the 7D (or Mark II or 8D or whatever it's called), but if Canon released a FF version of the 7D without giving up any of those bells and whistles...wow!

[tkbslc]

Camera body prices have a lot of downward price pressure. I would imagine over the next few years we will see some amazing tech and specs put into cheaper and cheaper bodies. I would not be surprised to see a $1000 FF before too long. But don't worry, they will make up the difference in the lens prices.

[Tee Why]

If anything it'll have to be a Canon 5D Mark III, but I'm not holding my breath. It's only been about a year or so since the 5DMII was released, so I suspect it'll continue in production for another 2 year or just under for a 3 year product life (I think 5D had a 3 year life).

I'd think a 7D with a full frame would cost more than the 5DMII, like everyone said, about 3k.

I personally am hoping Canon makes their own version of Nikon d700, but I'm not betting on it either.

[Stone 13]

If anything it'll have to be a Canon 5D Mark III, but I'm not holding my breath. It's only been about a year or so since the 5DMII was released, so I suspect it'll continue in production for another 2 year or just under for a 3 year product life (I think 5D had a 3 year life).

I'd think a 7D with a full frame would cost more than the 5DMII, like everyone said, about 3k.

I personally am hoping Canon makes their own version of Nikon d700, but I'm not betting on it either.

I agree the 5DIII will not see the light of day for at least another year it's still wildly popular just the way it is, but the ~3K price point is where Canon has nothing to offer. A FF 7D just makes alot of sense to me, maybe because it's my dream camera but sadly it seems these days Canon is reacting to the market instead of creating it so we probably won't see a FF 7D unless someone else does something like it 1st....

[bomzai]

What are the chances Canon will come out with a FF DSLR in the next 1-2 years in the sub-$2k range?
It's called 5D classic ;)

And in 2-3 years it'll be 5D2.

[JayStar86]

to answer the OP's question...... zero.

[Sharingan]

Zero chance. I would love it if it was possible but not anytime soon.

[tkbslc]

Zero chance. I would love it if it was possible but not anytime soon.

Why not?

Sony has one at $1999 and that is only about 20% off of the 5Dmk2's full price.

[CanonGarcon]

Why not?

Sony has one at $1999 and that is only about 20% off of the 5Dmk2's full price.


The Sony A850 is a striped down camera lacking many features that most Canon users would want.

[tkbslc]

The Sony A850 is a striped down camera lacking many features that most Canon users would want.

Such As?

All I can think of that it lacks compared to the 5Dmk2 is video and that is a low-cost add on.

[CanonGarcon]

Such As?

All I can think of that it lacks compared to the 5Dmk2 is video and that is a low-cost add on.

No video, no live view.

[tkbslc]

No video, no live view.

I think the T1i shows us that those add almost nothing to the price of a camera these days.

[CanonGarcon]

I think the T1i shows us that those add almost nothing to the price of a camera these days.

Please don't compare the movie mode in the T1i to the one in the 5D Mark II.

[tkbslc]

Please don't compare the movie mode in the T1i to the one in the 5D Mark II.

Okay, lets compare it to the one in the t2i, then, which actually has MORE video features than the 5Dmk2.... :)

Seriously though, why would you think movie mode and Liveview adds anything to the price of a camera? ALl I am saying is that over a year ago, Sony came out with a $1999 FF body. That means Canon could do it, too. The T2i is the same price that the XTi was 3 years ago, so costs are not increasing for these technologies.

[MR do little]

The Sony A850 retails for 1700USD in Sweden, which put both Nikon and Canon to shame when it comes to offering a semi-pro FF camera. Of course Sony lacks ALOT in other areas, still dosent detract from the fact they do indeed offer a FF camera for 1700USD...

Sure its no speed demon when it comes to AF or high iso, then again AF and build of the 5DII isnt exactly something to brag about...

CanonGarcon
I assume you done a big survey to know that movie mode and liveview is something alot of Canon users want ?

[CanonGarcon]

Okay, lets compare it to the one in the t2i, then, which actually has MORE video features than the 5Dmk2.... :)

Seriously though, why would you think movie mode and Liveview adds anything to the price of a camera? ALl I am saying is that over a year ago, Sony came out with a $1999 FF body. That means Canon could do it, too. The T2i is the same price that the XTi was 3 years ago, so costs are not increasing for these technologies.


Let's see Sony put out a Full frame camera that is not stripped down for under $2,000

[MR do little]

Let's see Sony put out a Full frame camera that is not stripped down for under $2,000

Define stripped down.

[tkbslc]

Let's see Sony put out a Full frame camera that is not stripped down for under $2,000

I think we have been through this, haven't we (read up about 4 posts)? :rolleyes:

[CanonGarcon]

Define stripped down.


I think we have been through this, haven't we (read up about 4 posts)?

[MR do little]

I think we have been through this, haven't we (read up about 4 posts)?

stripped down ? Because they dont have liveview and video ?

Well some people would call the 5DII stripped down due to its consumer grade AF and build.

So that's highly subjective, since it all depends on what you want/need in a camera.

BTW have any data for that survey yours ?

[CanonGarcon]

stripped down ? Because they dont have liveview and video ?

Well some people would call the 5DII stripped down due to its consumer grade AF and build.

So that's highly subjective, since it all depends on what you want/need in a camera.

BTW have any data for that survey yours ?


Almost every DSLR camera introduced since 2007 has live view and almost every camera introduced since late 2008 has video. Since this is 2010 and the Sony A850 has neither, it's a stripped down camera.

[MR do little]

Almost every DSLR camera introduced since 2007 has live view and almost every camera introduced since late 2008 has video. Since this is 2010 and the Sony A850 has neither, it's a stripped down camera.

In your opinion of course.

With your logic any camera lacking a feature that we can point out is stripped down.

So did you or did you not make a survey ? Simple question.

[alessandro2009]

What are the chances Canon will come out with a FF DSLR in the next 1-2 years in the sub-$2k range? I know no one knows for sure but I have a feeling something's coming down the pike. I'm itching to go FF :confused:

2 years?
I think zero probabilities.

But i have the bad impressions that this situation will not change for years (4-5).

Canon haven't any intention (for marketing reason).
Nikon has a good camera, they have their quote of the market so why worry about further reduce prices, the other producer are on the window for see if rain or not.

Mah. :confused:

I think would need some outsiders to give a good kick on the market about FF.

[CanonGarcon]

In your opinion of course.

With your logic any camera lacking a feature that we can point out is stripped down.

So did you or did you not make a survey ? Simple question.

What survey?

[CanonGarcon]

In your opinion of course.

With your logic any camera lacking a feature that we can point out is stripped down.

So did you or did you not make a survey ? Simple question.

The Sony A850 doesn't have features that almost every DSLR introduced since 2009 over $700 has. That is called stripped down, my friend.

Sony made compromises to get their full frame DSLR under $2,000 (barely).

[MR do little]

What survey?

The suvery you made to make statements like this.

The Sony A850 is a striped down camera lacking many features that most Canon users would want.

[MR do little]

The Sony A850 doesn't have features that almost every DSLR introduced since 2009 over $700 has. That is called stripped down, my friend.

Again its stripped down in your opinion. I think your record is broken btw..



Sony made compromises to get their full frame DSLR under $2,000 (barely).

Tell one camera that isnt a compromise..

Dosent matter what you think, still dosent changet the fact that Sony offers a FF camera for 1700usd Nikon and Canon dont.

[CanonGarcon]

Again its stripped down in your opinion. I think your record is broken btw..




Tell one camera that isnt a compromise..

Dosent matter what you think, still dosent changet the fact that Sony offers a FF camera for 1700usd Nikon and Canon dont.

Find me a new Sony A850 for $1,700 at a legitimate retailer. I am waiting.

Looks like there are many people besides me on the internet calls the Sony A850 a striped down full frame DSLR (which it is).

There is a reason why Canon and Nikon don't have a DSLR at this price. Their models have what many of what their customers want.

[CanonGarcon]

The suvery you made to make statements like this.

My survey is the sales of Nikon and Canon full fram DSLRs vs Sonys. Besides many people who complain about the price are the ones who can't afford a full frame DSLR in the first place.

[MR do little]

Find me a new Sony A850 for $1,700 at a legitimate retailer. I am waiting.

In Sweden just recently you could get tha A850 for 13000 SEK wich equals 1700USD.



Looks like there are many people besides me on the internet calls the Sony A850 a striped down full frame DSLR (which it is).

You have to define many.


There is a reason why Canon and Nikon don't have a DSLR at this price. Their models have what many of what their customers want.

And you would know, because you read on the internet right ?

[MR do little]

My survey is the sales of Nikon and Canon full fram DSLRs vs Sonys. Besides many people who complain about the price are the ones who can't afford a full frame DSLR in the first place.

You might want to check where Nikon and Canon are making their sales.. its not in the FF segment...:rolleyes:

I didnt complain about the price, i just pointed out the fact that Sony offers a FF below 2K.

Which begs the question what do a Canonfodder like you self shoot with ?

Have any real experience with the Sony cameras you think are so "stripped" down ?

[tkbslc]

Probably a lost cause arguing this anymore...

[MR do little]

Most causes are,but as long im amused by the fierce front lines of the Canon crowd...

[monk3y]

Most causes are,but as long im amused by the fierce front lines of the Canon crowd...

haha...

[CanonGarcon]

You might want to check where Nikon and Canon are making their sales.. its not in the FF segment...:rolleyes:

I didnt complain about the price, i just pointed out the fact that Sony offers a FF below 2K.

Which begs the question what do a Canonfodder like you self shoot with ?

Have any real experience with the Sony cameras you think are so "stripped" down ?

Most cameras sold are not full frame. Anyone can figure that out,

If you think so much of Sony, then why don't you go out and buy one.

I had Minolta film cameras before I went digital. I could have easily bought a Sony since that would have accepted lenses. I didn't like the way Sonys felt in my hand. They were small, picture quality was not as great, so I went to Canon.

[JayStar86]

Most cameras sold are not full frame. Anyone can figure that out,

If you think so much of Sony, then why don't you go out and buy one.
.

+ 1.... if your so in love with Sony why dont you just go buy one?

[MR do little]

Most cameras sold are not full frame. Anyone can figure that out,

If you think so much of Sony, then why don't you go out and buy one.

I had Minolta film cameras before I went digital. I could have easily bought a Sony since that would have accepted lenses. I didn't like the way Sonys felt in my hand. They were small, picture quality was not as great, so I went to Canon.

Would that anyone be you ? Since you used Nikon and Canons dominant sales as argument....


If i think so much of Sony...lol

I mean is this the best you can come up with ?!! Im sure the Canon crowd are just over the moon to have you at the frontlines... :lol:

So what Canon did a Canonfodder like your self get then ?

[MR do little]

+ 1.... if your so in love with Sony why dont you just go buy one?

Are you asking me ?

To answer your question, i dont see the need as i already have two A900's.

[mehran.mo]

A FF without the bells and whistles (video/fps/af) would serve a purpose quite well.

that's basically a more modern 5D Classic.

[CanonGarcon]

Are you asking me ?

To answer your question, i dont see the need as i already have two A900's.

Most Canon and Nikon users don't want their cameras to be stripped down models. Funny how Sony is said to have the best live view system of any DSLR in their lower end models, but leave out the live view feature in their full frame cameras.

The 5D Mark II and D700 are selling well. Canon and Nikon don't need to sell a cheaper stripped down full frame camera to boost sales. You don't see new Mercedes Benz with crank down windows and no A/C just as don't see new premium Canon and Nikon DSLRs lacking live view and movie mode.

[MR do little]

Most Canon and Nikon users don't want their cameras to be stripped down models.

Again i assume you made a suvery ? How many people did you ask ?

Oh i forgot you read world wide web...

The D3 works quite well without video function regardless of when it was released...Its not like people ditching it to get the D3s, cause now the D3 is stripped down...




Funny how Sony is said to have the best live view system of any DSLR in their lower end models, but leave out the live view feature in their full frame cameras.

I can honestly say i never heard that, then again im also fully aware of the difference between the Sony LV and Nikon/Canon.


The 5D Mark II and D700 are selling well. Canon and Nikon need to sell a cheaper stripped down full frame camera to boost sales. You don't see new Mercedes Benz with crank down windows and no A/C just as don't see new premium Canon and Nikon DSLRs lacking live view and movie mode.

Now your just starting to contradict your self :lol:

Still havent answered my question what non stripped down Canon did you get ?

[alessandro2009]

What are the chances Canon will come out with a FF DSLR in the next 1-2 years in the sub-$2k range?
I think zero because their market has decided differently.
There isn't a will to produce a more cheap full-frame camera.

[JuliusUpNorth]

Adding a bit of fuel to the fire, I would like to see the 7D with FF, but without video capability. I am probably in the minority, but if I want to shoot video, I'll buy a dedicated video camera, which will do a better job than the add-ons we find on today's DSLRs. Yes, I know they do an amazing job, but a video camera does it easier and better. Video capability cost extra, and while some say you don't have to use it, the cost for something I will never utilize bugs me.

So, let the beating up begin, but be gentle--I am just throwing out an opinion and won't force you to agree!:D

Julius

[CanonGarcon]

Adding a bit of fuel to the fire, I would like to see the 7D with FF, but without video capability. I am probably in the minority, but if I want to shoot video, I'll buy a dedicated video camera, which will do a better job than the add-ons we find on today's DSLRs. Yes, I know they do an amazing job, but a video camera does it easier and better. Video capability cost extra, and while some say you don't have to use it, the cost for something I will never utilize bugs me.

So, let the beating up begin, but be gentle--I am just throwing out an opinion and won't force you to agree!:D

Julius

Not going to happen. The 7D is too popular of a seller and video is here to stay. Canon is not going to make the next 7D full frame because that would just to confusion to the line up.

[Purple Puppy]

You don't see new Mercedes Benz with crank down windows and no A/C just as don't see new premium Canon and Nikon DSLRs lacking live view and movie mode.

However, you DO see Porsche Boxster Spyders (http://www.wheels.ca/article/783312) with no interior door handles, no air conditioner, and no radio. But everyone loves it!

Anyway regarding the Sony A850, I think that where it is lacking in certain features (video recording, live view, etc), it makes up in other features (good viewfinder, in-camera image stabilization, weather-sealing).

Personally I would LOVE Canon to produce a sub-$2k full-frame camera to compete with the Sony A850. However, given that Canon already has a 7D sitting at that price point and that it costs about twenty times to manufacture the bigger image sensor, this is probably very unlikely :(. Moreover, the very few people who know and care about full frame sensors are also likely to spend the extra to go for a 5D mk II.

[alt4852]

Adding a bit of fuel to the fire, I would like to see the 7D with FF, but without video capability. I am probably in the minority, but if I want to shoot video, I'll buy a dedicated video camera, which will do a better job than the add-ons we find on today's DSLRs. Yes, I know they do an amazing job, but a video camera does it easier and better. Video capability cost extra, and while some say you don't have to use it, the cost for something I will never utilize bugs me.

So, let the beating up begin, but be gentle--I am just throwing out an opinion and won't force you to agree!:D

Julius

i think it's pretty well established how illogical this argument is. you're actually not the only one who i've heard make this claim over and over and i just don't see it. the new digic chips have much of the video capabilities integrated. the r&d has been spent, and the per unit cost to include it seems to be nonexistent in relation to the components that are expensive to manufacture (ie: the full frame sensor itself).

considering the 5dmk2 retails for much cheaper than the original 5d was released for, the fact that every single canon dSLR since the 5dmk2 has included video, and the only difference in construction is a video encoding chip, a mic, and an extra button or two.. why are you so convinced that you're paying vast amounts of money for this feature in particular?

since none of us have manufacturing statistics and cost figures for these cameras, my question is: why do you find the inclusion of video to be more offensive than the direct print button? if you don't use either one, they are equally useless and you're paying for both of them regardless. why the uproar against the video function in particular?

edit: not trying to sound confrontational, i just keep seeing this argument being made and i honestly don't understand how some people are so firmly set in their belief that they're getting a bad deal on any new model because they're "paying for a function they won't use." the vast majority of us don't use picture styles either, but you don't really hear about how we shouldn't have to pay for the r&d on a function set that we don't use.

[JuliusUpNorth]

And fuel to the fire it was! Actually, you can keep the direct print button, as well. Call me old-fashioned, but I do not like to have things on my camera (or, at least, have as few of them as possible) that I will never use.

By the same token, I realize quite clearly that video function (and most likely the direct print button) are here to stay on new camera models. I am also pretty sure that Canon is not going to come out with a FF 7D--I was simply expressing my opinion (and hope??). And, by the way, I didn't think those of you arguing against me were confrontational--no offense taken, and none meant. I just think that good debates are healthy, and who knows, maybe one of the gods at Canon actually reads our comments...

Julius

[alt4852]

And fuel to the fire it was! Actually, you can keep the direct print button, as well. Call me old-fashioned, but I do not like to have things on my camera (or, at least, have as few of them as possible) that I will never use.

By the same token, I realize quite clearly that video function (and most likely the direct print button) are here to stay on new camera models. I am also pretty sure that Canon is not going to come out with a FF 7D--I was simply expressing my opinion (and hope??). And, by the way, I didn't think those of you arguing against me were confrontational--no offense taken, and none meant. I just think that good debates are healthy, and who knows, maybe one of the gods at Canon actually reads our comments...

Julius

i get what you're saying, but the misconception that i think is being perpetuated is the idea that omitting these features will have an appreciable effect on the price of the camera. since the newer models are released at lower prices than their predecessors, it's practically a matter of perception. if people are bothered by the video feature, why not conclude that it's a feature that canon included for free, all while selling their cameras for lower prices?

the r&d money would have been spent anyways on other bodies, and i don't see much of a reason for offering a crippled model which doesn't include a feature that doesn't cost canon a whole lot but offers another dimension to their products for their customers. there are so many things on my camera that i NEVER use, but having the option there doesn't bother me. i guess it's a matter of whether you want to be happy with your equipment or not, because i really doubt canon will ever change their business model which is working so well for them right now.

[Yohan Pamudji]

Canon is not going to make the next 7D full frame because that would just to confusion to the line up.

I don't think anybody is saying the 7DII will be FF. I think the point is that the 5DIII should at least have 7D's feature set (slower framerate though). Price that at $3K or less and we're in business.

[DStanic]

I do think the 5DmkIII will be more similar to the 7D for features and hopefully build quality. I have a hard time seeing a huge jump in IQ like from 5d->5DmkII, but they proved us wrong before!

Perhaps when the 5DmkIII comes out they can continue selling the 5DmkII at a lower cost. $2000 would be ideal. :)

[CanonGarcon]

I do think the 5DmkIII will be more similar to the 7D for features and hopefully build quality. I have a hard time seeing a huge jump in IQ like from 5d->5DmkII, but they proved us wrong before!

Perhaps when the 5DmkIII comes out they can continue selling the 5DmkII at a lower cost. $2000 would be ideal. :)

They are not going to continue to sell the 5D Mark II after the Mark III comes out. You can get a original 5D used for less than $2,000 now.