APS-H on it's way out?

I just started messing with a 1D2 and like the format, but I am doubtful about the future.

If Canon pumps up the 5D3 some more (better AF) then the 1Ds will have to to get some other improvement and I don't see how that could not erode the 1D APS-H segment. Namely, to keep the 1Ds in play against an improved 5D they would have to increase FPS, thereby moving into 1D areas.

Or in other words, if the 5D improves it squeezes the market above it and there might not be room for both 1D and 1Ds.

Also, it seems wasteful to first require non-EF-S lenses but then still only use a part of them. Might be better to have a FF sensor and waste some surface (use only the center part) to increase reach and FPS.

Opinions?

I think you ignore the fact that the APS-H is the go to format for sports and photojournalists. If anything you might see the 1Ds disappear and some form of advanced 5 series replace it.

gonzogolf wrote in post #12261007
I think you ignore the fact that the APS-H is the go to format for sports and photojournalists. If anything you might see the 1Ds disappear and some form of advanced 5 series replace it.

Yeah but mainly because the smaller sensor gives more reach and the lower resolution allows more FPS. But that still means that you need to go through two kinds of pain (1) make FFx 1.0, 1.3 and 1.6 size factor sensors and (2) not use a good chunk of the glass mounted.

I would think it's more likely to see a future 5D with the same sensor as a future 1Ds, and the 1Ds can use the sensor partially for high fps. That would save Canon the trouble to develop three sensor systems and give the 1Ds a selling point over the 5D.

gonzogolf wrote in post #12261007
I think you ignore the fact that the APS-H is the go to format for sports and photojournalists. If anything you might see the 1Ds disappear and some form of advanced 5 series replace it.

It is hard to call something the "go to format" when that is all there was for so long. It was great when Nikon only had 1.5x crop pro bodies. But Nikon has gained a lot of market share in the high end sports/wildlife market the past 2 years and I can't help but think it has something to do with a FF sensor at 9fps.

All Canon would have to do is give us a 1.3x crop mode like NIkon has, and there would be zero need for the 1.3x format. Those that want the extra reach and frames can enable a lower res crop mode, those that want FF can have it without packing two cameras. Of course I am sure Canon doesn't mind if you have to buy two.

My uninformed prediction is that Canon is waiting so long on the 1Ds4 because it is going to have a 1.3x crop mode at high fps and they don't want to kill the 1Dmk4 sales just yet.

uOpt wrote in post #12261884
Yeah but mainly because the smaller sensor gives more reach and the lower resolution allows more FPS. But that still means that you need to go through two kinds of pain (1) make FFx 1.0, 1.3 and 1.6 size factor sensors and (2) not use a good chunk of the glass mounted.

I would think it's more likely to see a future 5D with the same sensor as a future 1Ds, and the 1Ds can use the sensor partially for high fps. That would save Canon the trouble to develop three sensor systems and give the 1Ds a selling point over the 5D.

Once again ignoring the vigorous market for the 1.3x for photojournalists and sports. You are focused on what might make sense to you, not what market is driving the bus. They sell a lot of these high end cameras to institutional users who have budgets to pay the freight. These folks dont want to revamp their lens libraries to deal with a new format.

gonzogolf wrote in post #12261007
I think you ignore the fact that the APS-H is the go to format for sports and photojournalists. If anything you might see the 1Ds disappear and some form of advanced 5 series replace it.

And before that it was 35mm film. APS-H was a compromise. I think if Canon could make a FF sensor equipped camera that could perform like the current 1D it would be a done deal.

gonzogolf wrote in post #12261905
Once again ignoring the vigorous market for the 1.3x for photojournalists and sports. You are focused on what might make sense to you, not what market is driving the bus. They sell a lot of these high end cameras to institutional users who have budgets to pay the freight. These folks dont want to revamp their lens libraries to deal with a new format.

1.3x crop mode on a FF sensor = no problem for anyone. If they made a 27MP FF sensor, it would still leave the 1D4's 16MP after cropping.

Exactly. People wouldn't lose anything. Their lens collection is fine, they already waste 25% of the incoming rays. They can do exactly the same thing with a 1.3 mode on FF.

It's already been around a generation too long.

All Canon has to do is to keep the lines differentiated by not sharing the AF systems all across the board. Keeping the designed for sports AF systems on the 7D and 1D series and never lending them to the 5D and 1Ds series will keep them in line. The pro 1D(s) bodies will always carry the latest and best technologies at the time of their releases.

Simple marketing formula, in my opinion... and it's not all about the fps.

I think the 1Ds being a high MP version of the 1D would be sufficient, everything else the same. (Of course, FPS would naturally drop as large higher rez files will take longer to transfer and clear, but the throughput should remain comparable.) Throw the best of everything at the 1D(s) otherwise. Do that and those markets will protect themselves.

A 5D with a state of the art AF should no more eat into 1Ds sales than 5Ds already do. The jump to 1D(s) should always be about more than AF. If crippling the 5D's AF is the only thing protecting the 1D(s) market then Canon did something wrong designing the 1D(s).

Indecent Exposure wrote in post #12263725
A 5D with a state of the art AF should no more eat into 1Ds sales than 5Ds already do. The jump to 1D(s) should always be about more than AF. If crippling the 5D's AF is the only thing protecting the 1D(s) market then Canon did something wrong designing the 1D(s).

I think you may have missed my point. You really need to compare market sharing between 5D/1Ds and the 7D/1D. I think it's throwing an apple into a basket of oranges by looking at the 5D/1D/1Ds bodies together.

Why? Because you have to look at the full frame bodies and the crop/sports cameras separately. A 1.3x sensor is much closer to a 1.6x crop sensor than it is to a full sensor. Truly speaking the 5D should only eat into the market share of the 1Ds series. The 7D eats into the market share of the 1D series.

That said, for the 1Ds to retain it's hold on professional full frame users, Canon will focus on producing incredible resolving power with clean images are incredibly high ISOs. The ergonomic unibody design with complete weathersealing is the lynch pin for a lot of professionals.

For the 1D series, Canon will probably keep improving fps and AF in these bodies. Sensor technology will trickle down and they will continue to improve in that area, but image quality never "catch up" to the 1Ds series.

Arguably, however, there will be a point where people will ask how much is enough and these cameras will be so amazing that no one needs the uberhigh ISO. At that point, it will be about other bells and whistles in body design and perhaps even in areas such as video capabilities, built in wireless file transfers or flash triggering capabilities.

There are a lot of factors at play, but the marketing department and engineers will be able to keep differentiating. If APS-H is on its way out, it should still be around for quite a while I think.

But how can you keep justifying 1.3x when Nikon is giving a similarly performing FF camera that has a APS-H mode built in? Where is the value? If I don't have a huge investment in Canon superteles to protect, why would I pick the 1Dmk4 over the D3S?

Right. You can't just leave the 5D series with lame AF because the D700 and presumably the D800 will eat into the sales. Right now you have more pixels in the 5D2 than then D700 but that's probably gonna change and be much closer with the 5D3 and D800.

That is what will squeeze the room that 1D and 1Ds will both have to live in.

gonzogolf wrote in post #12261905
Once again ignoring the vigorous market for the 1.3x for photojournalists and sports.

Imagine a FF 1DV with 30mp, 10fps, 1.3x in-camera crop, and MSRP of $5K.

How is this imaginary 1DV any worse than the 1DIV for photojournalists and sports .
Speed is the same, 'reach' is the same, MSRP is the same - and on top of that you have a FF sensor, which is actually quite convenient for indoor photojournalism.

I guess a lot of people don't believe that the price of such camera will be $5K and that's why we keep hearing the argument that the 1.3x format is needed for photojournalists and sports.

If Canon makes such a camera, though, I predict that the '1.3x is good' argument will be quickly put to rest - for good.
And the fact is, this camera is indeed one generation late already.