Latest Canon "rumor" lineup

Not sure if this is a repost but,

http://www.slrlounge.c​om …hip-eos-1-d-xs-2014-rumor

Eh not much rumour other than "might be some new cameras from Canon this year that aren't rebels"

Considering that the 70D and 5DMIII and Rebel line all got released the 7DMII and 1D lines are the only ones currently left for Canon to release anything into anyway.

Bigger news though will be if they use a new crop sensor for any 7D upgrade camera (if indeed we get an upgrade on that line). A new 1D would be interesting to see if only to see what canon is throwing up for its best.

A 1dx mk2 with around 45-50mp is what I would think would be coming. They really have nothing that competes with the d800 in the aspect.

the flying moose wrote in post #16470775
A 1dx mk2 with around 45-50mp is what I would think would be coming. They really have nothing that competes with the d800 in the aspect.

Do you think a 7.000 dollar heavy elephant camera will compete with the D800? I wouldn't buy it even if I had the money.

If Canon wants to compete with the D800 (and the upcoming D900, and the Sony A7R), they will need to release their high MP sensor in a smaller package. 5D size or xxxD size.

Personally, I'd prefer a high resolution FF mirrorless (small and light like the A7R), but I believe Canon is still too scarred of being serious with mirrorless.. Just look at the puny EOS M.

Osiriz wrote in post #16470840
Do you think a 7.000 dollar heavy elephant camera will compete with the D800? I wouldn't buy it even if I had the money.

If Canon wants to compete with the D800 (and the upcoming D900, and the Sony A7R), they will need to release their high MP sensor in a smaller package. 5D size or xxxD size.

Personally, I'd prefer a high resolution FF mirrorless (small and light like the A7R), but I believe Canon is still too scarred of being serious with mirrorless.. Just look at the puny EOS M.

All I meant was with the megapixels. Nothing else. The rumors I have read have had a new 1dx with 45 or 49mp, depending on what site you read it on.

Yup I saw that rumor.

If it turns out to be true, then I'll have one more reason to feel happy and content with my A7R.

Osiriz wrote in post #16470897
Yup I saw that rumor.

If it turns out to be true, then I'll have one more reason to feel happy and content with my A7R.

Depends on what you shoot and what's important to you. I have no use for a camera that only shoots 4 frames per second, for example. I can see how the A7R would be exciting for some but it's not a blip on my radar as a wildlife photographer. Mirrorless tech needs to advance to capture 10-12 shots per second and would also need a focusing system much more capable of tracking moving objects if that product is going to mean anything to those who would be looking at a 1DX.

The only thing an A7R would have over a 1DX with 40+ megapixels would be convenience of it's size.

yes but the price difference really should exclude these two cameras from being seriously compared. maybe if you compare a 7000dollar nikon or sony camera you might find something that your looking for.

According to a Sony rep, 36MP is the most you'll see on a full frame chip from them. I expect others to follow suit.

elitejp wrote in post #16473885
yes but the price difference really should exclude these two cameras from being seriously compared. maybe if you compare a 7000dollar nikon or sony camera you might find something that your looking for.

There isn't a comparison, I'm not sure why someone would look at the specs of their A7R and try to justify it compared to a 1Dx, current or unreleased model.

Not sure why the sony was mentioned.

dfbovey wrote in post #16473996
Not sure why the sony was mentioned.

I think engineers are finding that 36MP is the most that can be sensibly crammed onto a 35mm sensor.

chris_holtmeier wrote in post #16474034
I think engineers are finding that 36MP is the most that can be sensibly crammed onto a 35mm sensor.

I was talking about why a Sony A7S owner validating their purchase

Are MP above 20 really even needed? I understand keeping up with the Jonses but unless you are printing posters of your work isn't extreme resolution just a waste of HD space?

Eh go back far enough and people were saying that 8mp was more than enough and that you'd never get any more put onto anything that wasn't medium format. Technology and software change and advance -what's good this year is old next year and ancient the year after that.

Overread wrote in post #16474377
Eh go back far enough and people were saying that 8mp was more than enough and that you'd never get any more put onto anything that wasn't medium format. Technology and software change and advance -what's good this year is old next year and ancient the year after that.

8 MP is still 4 times the resolution of 1080p. Why do people who are just taking pictures to post on the internet need 4 times the resolution of the average monitor?