Anyone disappointed by today's releases?

CountryBoy wrote in post #10799894
I agree , I really thought the 400mm 5.6 would be next .

This lens won't show up now for at least next few years.
If Canon might loose one sale of the new 500 f4, they won't risk it.
Look at 60D - why didn't they include the focus micro-adjustment?
Would it make this camera more expensive? No, it's only one software option,
would add $0 to the camera price.
But they couldn't risk any 7D sale lost. They wanted to have the extra option between
Rebel and 7D, but they didn't want to loose any sale of the more expensive camera...
All they do is trying to make as much money as they can still make.
If they release a new small mirrorless system, it would kill a lot of D-SLR profit.
So they will wait as long as they possibly can. Any D-SLR profit now is free,
no R&D spendings anymore, nothing.
The answer to all that is pretty simple - stop buying all those new toys just because
they are new. If they see the money lost, they will do something.

Yeah, but I don't think a hinge is going to all of the sudden, break if you don't use it. So, if you like your screen fixed on the back, then don't open the hinge. Problem solved.

Canon GL2's which are arguably the most reliable workhorse, professional video camera around, have pop-out screens. You don't see any sudden catastrophe from those. They are exceptionally high quality, and mine worked the same as day one, for years.

I'm not talking about cheezy, plastic bodies here...

snowboarder wrote in post #10801041
This lens won't show up now for at least next few years.
If Canon might loose one sale of the new 500 f4, they won't risk it.
Look at 60D - why didn't they include the focus micro-adjustment?
Would it make this camera more expensive? No, it's only one software option,
would add $0 to the camera price.
But they couldn't risk any 7D sale lost. They wanted to have the extra option between
Rebel and 7D, but they didn't want to loose any sale of the more expensive camera...
All they do is trying to make as much money as they can still make.
If they release a new small mirrorless system, it would kill a lot of D-SLR profit.
So they will wait as long as they possibly can. Any D-SLR profit now is free,
no R&D spendings anymore, nothing.
The answer to all that is pretty simple - stop buying all those new toys just because
they are new. If they see the money lost, they will do something.

I don't agree with that . There is too much price difference to worry about that.

I was going to point this out but you beat me to it Todd...

Even their newest all-digital (records to CF) camera has a swing-out, adjustable LCD screen in addition to the EV.

Todd Lambert wrote in post #10801045
Yeah, but I don't think a hinge is going to all of the sudden, break if you don't use it. So, if you like your screen fixed on the back, then don't open the hinge. Problem solved.

Canon GL2's which are arguably the most reliable workhorse, professional video camera around, have pop-out screens. You don't see any sudden catastrophe from those. They are exceptionally high quality, and mine worked the same as day one, for years.

I'm not talking about cheezy, plastic bodies here...

as i mentioned in an earlier post, i've had other small devices where the hinge will catch on things and open, or just get loose over time. i think the analogy to the mode dial is pretty fair. can't you also say, "if you don't want the camera to switch from manual mode to bulb, don't move it. problem solved." however, we all know that we use these cameras in pretty rough conditions. it's not like live view or video. those two have to be deliberately activated in order to interfere with normal use of the camera (or the unluckiest combination of accidental button presses possible).

i've seen the comparison to the GL2 before, and i don't think that's a valid defense. have you seen the screen on the GL2? that part alone is half the size of our cameras. in order to make it so tough, it had to be big and bulky. to do that on a camera body.. that just introduces a whole new set of inconveniences.

Really there is nothing I'm interested in or need in this update. Well, I would take the 500 F/4 IS as a gift but I would never buy one.....

Todd Lambert wrote in post #10801045
Canon GL2's which are arguably the most reliable workhorse, professional video camera around, have pop-out screens. You don't see any sudden catastrophe from those. They are exceptionally high quality, and mine worked the same as day one, for years.

I'm not talking about cheezy, plastic bodies here...

The GL2 is also not weather-sealed and is intended for an entirely different application.

I've owned an XL-2 and I can assure you there's nothing special about the plastic. In fact, the included "L" lens is made from some of the chintziest plastic ever to grace a camera. But, then again, it, like the GL2, aren't designed to be used in the same manner as the damn-near indestructable 1D(s) is.

CountryBoy wrote in post #10801064
I don't agree with that . There is too much price difference to worry about that.

Do you know how many possible 500 f4 buyers would consider 400 f5.6 instead,
if this lens was up to today's standards? A lot. I know quite many people who
didn't want to get 500 f4 tele, they waited as long as possible, but at the end,
they decided they wouldn't wait any longer and paid for it.
This lens is not a professional lens the way 400 f2.8 and 300 f2.8 are, many buyers
are wealthy hobbyists who like to shoot animals and birds.
That's why Canon will postpone the release of the 400 f5.6L IS as long as they can.

Remember, with the increased resolution of today's sensors, 7D + 400mm
will give you much more details than 20D + 500mm

snowboarder wrote in post #10801107
Do you know how many possible 500 f4 buyers would consider 400 f5.6 instead,

Do you know how many people who really need the 500 f/4 wouldn't give the 400 f/5.6 a passing thought regardless of version?

Sorry but you're comparing Apples to Kiwi Fruit...

snowboarder wrote in post #10801107
Do you know how many possible 500 f4 buyers would consider 400 f5.6 instead,
if this lens was up to today's standards? A lot. I know quite many people who
didn't want to get 500 f4 tele, they waited as long as possible, but at the end,
they decided they wouldn't wait any longer and paid for it.
This lens is not a professional lens the way 400 f2.8 and 300 f2.8 are, many buyers
are wealthy hobbyists who like to shoot animals and birds.
That's why Canon will postpone the release of the 400 f5.6L IS as long as they can.

This does not rhyme.

snowboarder wrote in post #10801107
Do you know how many possible 500 f4 buyers would consider 400 f5.6 instead,
if this lens was up to today's standards? A lot. I know quite many people who
didn't want to get 500 f4 tele, they waited as long as possible, but at the end,
they decided they wouldn't wait any longer and paid for it.
This lens is not a professional lens the way 400 f2.8 and 300 f2.8 are, many buyers
are wealthy hobbyists who like to shoot animals and birds.
That's why Canon will postpone the release of the 400 f5.6L IS as long as they can.

Remember, with the increased resolution of today's sensors, 7D + 400mm
will give you much more details than 20D + 500mm

Most people who can afford the 400mm 5.6 and want IS , will buy the 100-400mm L or one of the new Sigmas . Not a lens that is way out of their price range . In the case of the Sigmas , Canon is actually losing money.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #10801123
Do you know how many people who really need the 500 f/4 wouldn't give the 400 f/5.6 a passing thought regardless of version?

Sorry but you're comparing Apples to Kiwi Fruit...

Right , there's a "little" price difference .

LOL!

You guys make some good points, and I generally agree with the potential downside of an adjustable screen. I just think that with the right engineering and with what's available today, we could have pretty bullet proof screens that are weather sealed, thin, firm, and address all of these issues.

I don't think Canon is dumb enough to put this on their flagship without addressing these things. However, with the nature of the camera business today (feature-itis) Canon is going to want to put these things on the camera. They've been a proven success in other segments and it's a BIG item that they can add to their cameras that is much easier to do than creating noiseless ISO 12800.

I'm going on record as saying that these will be a certainty on all camera bodies within 3 years - probably much less. (I'm a big boy, I'll own up to this, and just to make things fun, if I'm wrong, I'll eat my CF card)

Blame the economy for the high prices

Todd Lambert wrote in post #10801223
I'm going on record as saying that these will be a certainty on all camera bodies within 3 years - probably much less. (I'm a big boy, I'll own up to this, and just to make things fun, if I'm wrong, I'll eat my CF card)

careful, nick simcheck already promised me a cookie if canon doesn't phase out mirrors in our cameras within five years. i could use the entertainment of watching you eat a CF card while i enjoy my snack.