Dream 1D Mark V

[MaxExposure]

Here it goes, the one high speed camera to rule them all:

1. Full frame, Dual Digic V, Back-illuminated sensor anyone?

2. 16 megapixels @ 12fps (that would be like half of film speed... :)

3. 16 bit A/D conversion... please ease up on that AA filter and give up 14+ stops of DR :D

4. 100%, 0.8x viewfinder (on full frame, that would be glorious!)

5. 63 pt AF, keep existing points, add more peripheral ones :D

6. ISO Range 50-25600, expanded to 25-102400 (clean up to 12800 shouldn't be too hard with the sensor design and pixel density)

7. Exposure Comp of 5 stops, bracketing up to 9 frames, shutter speed from 60 seconds to 1/16000 of a second?

8. Spot AF, more customization, smarter metering system?

9. PLEASE CAN SOMEONE GET THAT ****ING AUTO WHITE BALANCE TO WORK?!?! or at least make it easier to set your own to a gray card. (think a button dedicated to it, maybe the direct print button! haha)

10. Wireless flash commander built in? Hehe

11. Crop modes like 5:4, 4:3, 16:9, 1:1?

12. Battery tech has improved, I want to see 3000+ shots per charge.

13. That brilliant screen 3:2 on the 550D, except with glass over it :)

14. Built in Geo-tagging/ Wifi .... maybe this one is a bit too farfetched :(

15. Don't really give a crap what they do with video, already pretty damn good. Might as well improve contrast AF during filming, maybe built in stabilization?

That's pretty much it, oh, and also a more sculpted grip, especially on the portrait one. Also, a second quick control knob while in portrait mode.

Day dream done... feel free to contribute, and let the drooling begin! :cool:

[MaxExposure]

Oh, and I almost forgot, the weight should be around the same, pricing should be like $5000 USD.

[MaxExposure]

also either dual CF cards, or one CF and two SD cards :twisted:

[toxic]

1. I'm not sure how useful back-illumination is for SLR sensors
2. 10 fps is the effective max framerate (in Servo). Faster than that and the AF simply won't have enough time to see anything.
3. a) AA filters are good things b) I'm more concerned about patternless shadow noise at this point, though more DR is always nice

5. More cross-type AF points, especially extra-sensitive ones at f/2.8 or f/4, I think would be better than just more points
6. I think 50-25600 isn't very practical...besides, this is the 1D, not Ds. ISO 50 isn't very useful for an action camera. I think 100 or 200 to 25600 is more reasonable, and 50-12800 on the 1Ds.
7. Not sure if 1/16000 is even possible with a focal plane shutter...
8. You mean the 1-series isn't customizable enough already? :shock:

11. Why would you want it to crop in-camera? Do it in post. What you want is frame lines in the VF.

13. Why glass? I wouldn't want it shattering...

The rest would be nice (and practical). To add to it, VF overlays like in the 7D, but with interchangeable focusing screens.

[Lowner]

toxic,

"AA filters are good things"

Thats what I thought from the reading I've done, but the rumour mill is claiming that Canon are removing the low pass filter in the next 1Ds in a bid to get a better dynamic range. Its certainly true that at least one other high quality manufacturer is managing without so maybe there are other methods of solving the problems these days?

[toxic]

toxic,

"AA filters are good things"

Thats what I thought from the reading I've done, but the rumour mill is claiming that Canon are removing the low pass filter in the next 1Ds in a bid to get a better dynamic range. Its certainly true that at least one other high quality manufacturer is managing without so maybe there are other methods of solving the problems these days?

I don't see how an AA filter has to do with DR. DR has to do with photons in photosites and read noise, not aliasing.

Leica and MF backs don't have AA filters largely because they can't afford to make their own sensors (they buy them from Kodak) and filters, not because it's better not to have one. I'm sure part of it is the buyer's illusion that no filters is better, but a big part is the cost while selling very small volumes.

[Lowner]

Well, we will see this winter, when the 1Ds 4 should arrive. I don't understand the science at all, so cannot judge how likely it is.

[ssim]

I would like to have Geo tagging and improved processors. A couple of the others would be nice to have but at some point I want to be able to take credit for the shot and not simply being a person that pushes a button and have technology do everything else for me.

[MaxExposure]

I would like to have Geo tagging and improved processors. A couple of the others would be nice to have but at some point I want to be able to take credit for the shot and not simply being a person that pushes a button and have technology do everything else for me.

Agreed. I have always tried to liken a camera and lens to a set of golf clubs. If you give Tiger Woods your set, he'll probably still rock your world. But if he gave you his, you still wouldn't be able to win the Masters. A camera should only be an extension of the artist that operates it.

[MaxExposure]

1. I'm not sure how useful back-illumination is for SLR sensors
2. 10 fps is the effective max framerate (in Servo). Faster than that and the AF simply won't have enough time to see anything.
3. a) AA filters are good things b) I'm more concerned about patternless shadow noise at this point, though more DR is always nice

5. More cross-type AF points, especially extra-sensitive ones at f/2.8 or f/4, I think would be better than just more points
6. I think 50-25600 isn't very practical...besides, this is the 1D, not Ds. ISO 50 isn't very useful for an action camera. I think 100 or 200 to 25600 is more reasonable, and 50-12800 on the 1Ds.
7. Not sure if 1/16000 is even possible with a focal plane shutter...
8. You mean the 1-series isn't customizable enough already? :shock:

11. Why would you want it to crop in-camera? Do it in post. What you want is frame lines in the VF.

13. Why glass? I wouldn't want it shattering...

The rest would be nice (and practical). To add to it, VF overlays like in the 7D, but with interchangeable focusing screens.

All valid points Toxic, but one can dream can't they? I hope one day down the line some of these will be possible :D Anyway, if there is anything the last 10 years has taught me, it is to not put limitations on the next 10 years!

[MaxExposure]

as a side note, I would like to speculate on the new 60D.

from what I gather, these things are to be expected:

1. 18mp, 1.6 crop sensor
2. all the video modes of the 7D/550D
3. all new body with a articulating lcd screen
4. 6fps, + metering system in the 7D/550D
5. expanded iso of 100-12800, 100-6400 native
6. 9 point af, but with new modes/custom functions

[MARK1992]

as a side note, I would like to speculate on the new 60D.

from what I gather, these things are to be expected:

1. 18mp, 1.6 crop sensor
2. all the video modes of the 7D/550D
3. all new body with a articulating lcd screen
4. 6fps, + metering system in the 7D/550D
5. expanded iso of 100-12800, 100-6400 native
6. 9 point af, but with new modes/custom functions

Why don't you speculate on the 60D thread, since the title you chose states 1D V?

Plus, you may get to meet the most lovely CanonGarcon there! :D

[J_TULLAR]

keep dreaming op lol.

[MMX]

1. The full frame version is called 1Ds and it´s not gonna change, the chances that 1D will be a FF are zero.
11. Who on earth needs in camera crop modes? Don´t you have crop tool in Photoshop?
Other things you require can be divided into two groups:
a) Nice but nobody really needs them (1/16000 s)
b) Nice but can be solved different way (ISO 25 -> ND filter)
What I think is that most of the suggestions would be noticeable only as a numbers in the manual and they wouldn´t bring any improvements to the photographs.

Btw may I ask you what camera do you use now?

[ihv]

1. The full frame version is called 1Ds and it´s not gonna change, the chances that 1D will be a FF are zero.
11. Who on earth needs in camera crop modes? Don´t you have crop tool in Photoshop?
Other things you require can be divided into two groups:
a) Nice but nobody really needs them (1/16000 s)
b) Nice but can be solved different way (ISO 25 -> ND filter)
What I think is that most of the suggestions would be noticeable only as a numbers in the manual and they wouldn´t bring any improvements to the photographs.

Btw may I ask you what camera do you use now?

The choice of crop for the MK4 was not taken easily by many. Times have moved on meanwhile, somebody still wants to vote for even more tight pixels in that APS-H? Carrying a heavy brick with "tiny" sensor whereas even compacts started to get much bigger sensors? What was good in the past, might not be so in the future.

BTW. ever notest the lack of 1.3x lenses?

[gonzogolf]

BTW. ever notest the lack of 1.3x lenses?

What?!

[MMX]

The choice of crop for the MK4 was not taken easily by many. Times have moved on meanwhile, somebody still wants to vote for even more tight pixels in that APS-H? Carrying a heavy brick with "tiny" sensor whereas even compacts started to get much bigger sensors? What was good in the past, might not be so in the future.


What choice for f***s sake?! The 1D had APS-H sensor since the first model, it was as implied as white color of 200mm and longer L telephotos, what did you expect it to have? If you want crop, go for 1D, if you want FF, go for 1Ds, that´s why they have two different models.
Btw 1D has APS-H sensor and 16 megapixels while 7D has APS-C sensor and 18 megapixels so I don´t see it as a problem.

[ihv]

What choice for f***s sake?! The 1D had APS-H sensor since the first model, it was as implied as white color of 200mm and longer L telephotos, what did you expect it to have? If you want crop, go for 1D, if you want FF, go for 1Ds, that´s why they have two different models.
Btw 1D has APS-H sensor and 16 megapixels while 7D has APS-C sensor and 18 megapixels so I don´t see it as a problem.

I wouldn't take such things for granted. Following your logic, the crop itself is kind of unheard - people used to have FF before digital.

Now some quotes from Chuck Westfall:

"Westfall: When we introduced APS-H in 2001 with the original EOS-1D, the idea was to compete against other professional DSLRs with APS-C."


"Is there a unique advantage APS-H has over full-frame sensors besides price? Nikon's D3 is a full-frame competitor to the 1D Mark III at about the same cost. Westfall: At this point, no. Price would be the only thing."


"Generally speaking, the smaller the pixel, the greater the deterioration in image quality as ISO speeds increase."


"For users who wish to make use of the full range of their EF lenses, full-frame sensors are best. For those searching for the fastest frame rates, 1.3x is best."

[jeppoy]

if it's just a dream then I want integrated wireless file transfer

[MMX]

]"Is there a unique advantage APS-H has over full-frame sensors besides price? Nikon's D3 is a full-frame competitor to the 1D Mark III at about the same cost. Westfall: At this point, no. Price would be the only thing."


This is a lie. The main advantage of APS-H is the crop that will "turn" 300 f/2.8 (5.7 pounds, $4300) into 400 f/2.8 (11.8 pounds, $7200). Next advantage is the 10 FPS burst mode.
Don´t forget that these cameras are usually used by pros who don´t really care about prices, for them it´s just a "tool".

[ihv]

This is a lie. The main advantage of APS-H is the crop that will "turn" 300 f/2.8 (5.7 pounds, $4300) into 400 f/2.8 (11.8 pounds, $7200). Next advantage is the 10 FPS burst mode.
Don´t forget that these cameras are usually used by pros who don´t really care about prices, for them it´s just a "tool".

Do you understand all the dependencies?

The 10 fps speed is (and was already long time ago with film) achievable easily on FF mechanically, but the density would have been suffered because of limited data throughput (if 8MP was possible, sports shooters wanted to have more density on a smaller area to help reach). This is why everybody has agreed/could live with crop, until today. Now, when it is possible to have enough density for FF (i.e. reach), there is not much excuse for the cropped sensor, because smaller sensels mean less of high ISO, less of low ISO shadow IQ, more careful techniques have to applied (because tinier sensels work like magnifying/amplifying every tiny error), compromises how lenses work.

The 1D mark 4 is just a semi camera, a compromise, suitable for specific applications.

PS. you are contradicting yourself: a) pros who don´t really care about prices b) The main advantage of APS-H is the crop that will "turn" 300 f/2.8 (5.7 pounds, $4300) into 400 f/2.8 (11.8 pounds, $7200)

[MMX]

If you have same pixel density, then you also have same image quality.

[ihv]

If you have same pixel density, then you also have same image quality.

True.

[MMX]

True.

So where´s the advantage of FF? If it should have better image quality, then they would have to decrease the pixel density which sports photographers would see as a disadvantage. And if it should have the same pixel density, then there wouldn´t be any difference in image quality (moreover the files would be larger and thus the frame rate in burst mode would decrease).

[ihv]

So where´s the advantage of FF? If it should have better image quality, then they would have to decrease the pixel density which sports photographers would see as a disadvantage. And if it should have the same pixel density, then there wouldn´t be any difference in image quality (moreover the files would be larger and thus the frame rate in burst mode would decrease).

It is about product balancing, taking into account that:

"Generally speaking, the smaller the pixel, the greater the deterioration in image quality as ISO speeds increase."

Now, talking about the 1D mark future, I don't see how users would take the idea to add even more pixels without increasing the sensor size to FF. For a sports camera, a certain sensel size has to be retained in order to perform well at high ISO.

Apparently, the D3s has better high ISO performance than the 1D MK4. Which is completely logical.

[MMX]

Now, talking about the 1D mark future, I don't see how users would take the idea to add even more pixels without increasing the sensor size to FF. For a sports camera, a certain sensel size has to be retained in order to perform well at high ISO.

The question is if someone needs more than 16 megapixels.


Apparently, the D3s has better high ISO performance than the 1D MK4. Which is completely logical.

Yes D3s is the best camera on the market when it comes to high ISO performance. However how many times does a sports photographer need ISO 100k and how many times does he need 400 mm instead of 300 mm?

[Lowner]

Can we please stick to pixel "density" and stop talking about pixel "size"? A pixel has no size until we start post processing, so has no meaning in-camera.

[frankchn]

I would like to see the 1DsIV (or 1DsV) do 8fps+ in reduced resolution mode. Then everyone who wants a "do it all camera" (everything from studio to sports) can fork out the cash for a 1Ds and we won't be having this argument.

[CanonGarcon]

I would like to see the 1DsIV (or 1DsV) do 8fps+ in reduced resolution mode. Then everyone who wants a "do it all camera" (everything from studio to sports) can fork out the cash for a 1Ds and we won't be having this argument.

If you want a sports camera, then get the regular 1D. The 1Ds is a pure studio cameras for people who need large resolution.

[Lowner]

While the 1Ds is not primarily intended as a sports/photojourno camera, more as you say a studio, location, landscape camera, I see lots around the motorsports tracks so its still a pretty versatile machine.

I agree, that eventually, when technology has developed enough, I see the 1D and 1Ds returning to a single body, but don't hold you breathe because that might be many years down the road.

[MMX]

I would like to see the 1DsIV (or 1DsV) do 8fps+ in reduced resolution mode. Then everyone who wants a "do it all camera" (everything from studio to sports) can fork out the cash for a 1Ds and we won't be having this argument.

People who want a "do it all camera" are usually noobs who couldn´t afford it anyway. And I don´t know about any pro who shoots everything from studio to sports.

[ihv]

Bigger sensor means more light, more megapixels at the same density compared to smaller sensor. As soon as data throughput improves and such a camera is possible, I don't see much point for a small sensor big camera. Nikon D4 is expected around july, august 2011 with 18MP at FF. What you think happens with Canon, what is the reaction, seriously? Staying at 16MP crop?

The question is if someone needs more than 16 megapixels.
Yes D3s is the best camera on the market when it comes to high ISO performance. However how many times does a sports photographer need ISO 100k and how many times does he need 400 mm instead of 300 mm?

[MaxExposure]

a jack of all trades master of none doesn't sound like a great idea, at least not on their specialized flagship models

[ihv]

a jack of all trades master of none doesn't sound like a great idea, at least not on their specialized flagship models

I would add that this is so at least for now.

I highly believe that after the Nikon D4, when at some point comes out the Canon 1D MK5, many photographers do have a camera which covers 100% of their needs. My assumptions being that the 1D MK5 is something like 21MP FF.

That being said, many professionals use only D700 for example, or 5D MK1 I know of, i.e. not at all big cameras. The upgrade is based on business needs, when price is justified. Also, for many the 1D size is too heavy (remember, this is not about the photographers look but about the tool and results and conveniency and price etc.). Latest and the greatest is only for rich amateurs and the minority of top pros (there are plenty of professionals still using the 1D MK3 or even older models).

[MMX]

Bigger sensor means more light, more megapixels at the same density compared to smaller sensor. As soon as data throughput improves and such a camera is possible, I don't see much point for a small sensor big camera. Nikon D4 is expected around july, august 2011 with 18MP at FF. What you think happens with Canon, what is the reaction, seriously? Staying at 16MP crop?

Canon offers two cameras, so yes, they can stay at 16MP crop in 1D while putting 32MP FF into 1Ds. In fact, Nikon did the same with D3 - one 24MP D3X and one 12MP D3S.
And crop is good because it makes your view angle narrower. Yes, it can be done in Photoshop, however journalists will be glad if they can avoid the extra work, especially if the photos need to be published asap.

[ihv]

Canon offers two cameras, so yes, they can stay at 16MP crop in 1D while putting 32MP FF into 1Ds. In fact, Nikon did the same with D3 - one 24MP D3X and one 12MP D3S.
And crop is good because it makes your view angle narrower. Yes, it can be done in Photoshop, however journalists will be glad if they can avoid the extra work, especially if the photos need to be published asap.

You cannot escape the fact that FF is at least 1 stop better due to sensor size. Which means better IQ in the end.

Try to think hard - will Nikon try to make a 1.3x crop camera if it has such unique properties? Now go to back my post where I quoted CW, the Canon's top level technical adviser about the preferences of the crop.

[MMX]

Try to think hard - will Nikon try to make a 1.3x crop camera if it has such unique properties?

Try to think hard why most of the lenses you see on major sports events are white ;)

[MaxExposure]

canon rumors mentioned something about a hybrid/low mp FF camera with video, maybe this dream 1D5 could be made into a 1Dv mark 1? any takers?

[Canonswhitelensesrule]

I'd stick with the 1.3 crop factor. It adds a bit of focal length to telephoto lenses, while still allowing wide angles to still be fairly wide. (i.e. 16mm becomes roughly 21mm, still usable)

I like the idea of dual CF slots. 12 FPS sounds nice. Of course the built in grip has to stay. As far as the other features go, they seem pretty cool.

[Indecent Exposure]

canon rumors mentioned something about a hybrid/low mp FF camera with video, maybe this dream 1D5 could be made into a 1Dv mark 1? any takers?
Yes.

[bkdc]

built-in radiofrequency remote flash triggering with multiple zone control and new radiofrequency triggered speedlite system.

[mannygscd]

If I may add, it should support SDXC cards (up to 2TB storage) just like in T2i /550D.

[Lowner]

I've seen 1Ds mk3's being used by pro 'togs at motor racing events, so these expensive beasts are pretty flexible.

[J_TULLAR]

Try to think hard why most of the lenses you see on major sports events are white ;)

For one the white lenses are a bit cheaper than nikkors :p But I would have to disagree however on the crop factor now. D3s has built in 1.2 crop mode @ 8mp (which lots of sports users still use the 1d2). So if the D4 does come out with a 16mp sensor not only do you have the full frame option but a 12mp 1.2 crop as well. Also the reliable focus from the nikon and ability to focus in low light at high iso is making people think. Im starting to slowly see those white lenses disappearing at sports events... just sayin.

[Lowner]

Are Canon still playing catch-up with AF with their latest cameras?

It does seem that Canon are making things more complicated for the user by offering a multitude of different settings. I'm not sure whether thats actually an improvement and not a backward step.

It strikes me that if the AF just worked, then there would be no need for these user adjustables. How does Nikon deal with this in their top end stuff?

[J_TULLAR]

Are Canon still playing catch-up with AF with their latest cameras?

It does seem that Canon are making things more complicated for the user by offering a multitude of different settings. I'm not sure whether thats actually an improvement and not a backward step.

It strikes me that if the AF just worked, then there would be no need for these user adjustables. How does Nikon deal with this in their top end stuff?

I have the same thoughts... everyone raved about the 1d2 AF then it went down hill from there. Why fix something if the supposed improvement is worse???

[Indecent Exposure]

I have the same thoughts... everyone raved about the 1d2 AF then it went down hill from there. Why fix something if the supposed improvement is worse???
The AFs in the Mark III and Mark IV are superior in every way to the AF found in the Mark II.

[Mastamarek]

For one the white lenses are a bit cheaper than nikkors :p But I would have to disagree however on the crop factor now. D3s has built in 1.2 crop mode @ 8mp (which lots of sports users still use the 1d2). So if the D4 does come out with a 16mp sensor not only do you have the full frame option but a 12mp 1.2 crop as well. Also the reliable focus from the nikon and ability to focus in low light at high iso is making people think. Im starting to slowly see those white lenses disappearing at sports events... just sayin.
100% agree on this one. 1D4 is the last 1D series with 1.3 crop. If not then simply canon is out of game for sports and photojournalism. With D3s you can have all the benefits of a FF sensor and then, if by some miracle you do need that crop factor, you have that option as well. If 1D5 is not FF, I'm gonna have to say goodbye to canon :(

[dolina]

maintain MP and surpass the D3S dynamic range beyond ISO 3200

[Lowner]

Dekka,

"The AFs in the Mark III and Mark IV are superior in every way to the AF found in the Mark II".

Thats not quite what I was asking. It's been felt by many that Nikon has had an advantage in AF performance at the top end for a while. As I'm going to be interested in spending more money than is really wise on a top end Canon body this winter, I'm wondering how things stand right now between the two systems.

[Mastamarek]

Dekka,

"The AFs in the Mark III and Mark IV are superior in every way to the AF found in the Mark II".

Thats not quite what I was asking. It's been felt by many that Nikon has had an advantage in AF performance at the top end for a while. As I'm going to be interested in spending more money than is really wise on a top end Canon body this winter, I'm wondering how things stand right now between the two systems.
canon AF in 1D4 is just fine.

[Indecent Exposure]

Dekka,

"The AFs in the Mark III and Mark IV are superior in every way to the AF found in the Mark II".

Thats not quite what I was asking. It's been felt by many that Nikon has had an advantage in AF performance at the top end for a while. As I'm going to be interested in spending more money than is really wise on a top end Canon body this winter, I'm wondering how things stand right now between the two systems.
This is how it stands - If you are missing shots with either system the problem is not with the camera.

[J_TULLAR]

The AFs in the Mark III and Mark IV are superior in every way to the AF found in the Mark II.

Define superior? 1D4 low light focusing has been said to be slow to focus, 1D3 needed a firmware change and shutter replacement... What happened to the 1D2??? Now I would love to have either camera and Im not really complaining im just stating the competition is out pacing canon. The nikon just plain works.

[Mastamarek]

Define superior? 1D4 low light focusing has been said to be slow to focus, 1D3 needed a firmware change and shutter replacement... What happened to the 1D2??? Now I would love to have either camera and Im not really complaining im just stating the competition is out pacing canon. The nikon just plain works.
1D4 AF is just fine. I ve seen as many opinions about how great it performs in low light as how poor it does. I'll bet ya $100 its just user error this time. Especially at 10fps ^_^

here is what adoramaTV thinks aobut 1D4 AF:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLAKooU9SCE

again, if I was to bash 1D4, it would definitely not be for its AF performance.

[J_TULLAR]

1D4 AF is just fine. I ve seen as many opinions about how great it performs in low light as how poor it does. I'll bet ya $100 its just user error this time. Especially at 10fps ^_^

here is what adoramaTV thinks aobut 1D4 AF:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLAKooU9SCE

again, if I was to bash 1D4, it would definitely not be for its AF performance.


Good to hear... I hear its slower but a tad slower... its all peanuts now lol.

[Lowner]

Interesting but still not any answer to my question. Maybe we just don't have any users of top-end stuff from both camps on this thread?

To say that the newest body is better than prior versions is no more than any of us would expect. Its like Ferrari saying they have brought improvements to a particular track, the trouble is so has everyone else, and they might be doing a better job.

[Mastamarek]

Interesting but still not any answer to my question. Maybe we just don't have any users of top-end stuff from both camps on this thread?

To say that the newest body is better than prior versions is no more than any of us would expect. Its like Ferrari saying they have brought improvements to a particular track, the trouble is so has everyone else, and they might be doing a better job.
:facepalm: click on the link I posted and you'll actually see that a pro phtog that owns D3s and 1D4, says that D3s sucks!! lol. canon is not playing catch up with AF anymore. And as I said a billion times before, if you are to criticize 1D4 for something, it is not the AF performance.

[HappySnapper90]

I think there will be no more 1D cameras after the mark IV. I think Canon will bring out a FF EOS-3D at 20MP or so that does 10+ fps with optional battery/vertical grip. But it would sell for $4,000+ which is half the new price of a 1Ds which is the same as the EOS-3 to the EOS-1v. The 3 was half the price of the 1v though they were only $900 apart in price. EOS-3's body was engineering plastic and fiberglass. Rugged yet lightweight. Metal bodies are not needed these days, plastic can be made very durable.

[CyberDyneSystems]

God I wish I could earn money every time someone predicts the EOS 3D as if it was a new idea...

[Indecent Exposure]

I think there will be no more 1D cameras after the mark IV. I think Canon will bring out a FF EOS-3D at 20MP or so that does 10+ fps with optional battery/vertical grip. But it would sell for $4,000+ which is half the new price of a 1Ds which is the same as the EOS-3 to the EOS-1v. The 3 was half the price of the 1v though they were only $900 apart in price.
Canon likes branding and they like the equity they've built with that branding. Why shelve the 1D when there is so much value and market respect for the 1D name? That seems an unnecessary move just to have parity with the bygone film days.

EOS-3's body was engineering plastic and fiberglass. Rugged yet lightweight. Metal bodies are not needed these days, plastic can be made very durable.
When you're talking about asking people to fork over $4k+ for a camera body, metal starts to become "needed."

[HappySnapper90]

Canon likes branding and they like the equity they've built with that branding. Why shelve the 1D when there is so much value and market respect for the 1D name? That seems an unnecessary move just to have parity with the bygone film days.


When you're talking about asking people to fork over $4k+ for a camera body, metal starts to become "needed."

I work with survey grade GPS receivers that cost $15,000 a piece and guess what? They are made out of tough plastic! They need to be made durable and lightweight. Hmm, sounds like what cameras need to be too! ;)

I had a Saturn coupe that had a body mainly made out of plastic. Great car, never had to paint it, did not rust.

And "branding". It's a model number. Heck, Nikon keeps adding a number to their pro line: D1X, D2X, D3, D3X, and soon the 4's will come. As much thought as their for keeping a familiar name, there is as much to say and a spark is there for a new product.

"1D mark VII" - like Rocky VII - yawn. EOS-3D is new and exciting and people will line up for something new! ;)

[Indecent Exposure]

Plastic body in the 1D line is not going to happen (thankfully), I don't care what TomTom is doing. You're just going to have to let it go.

[HappySnapper90]

Plastic body in the 1D line is not going to happen (thankfully), I don't care what TomTom is doing. You're just going to have to let it go.
LOL, Tomtom, yeah that's funny. No, I'm talking about Trimble. Survey grade GPS receivers, not car navigation devices.