Canon Rebel T2i just announced (and preview on photo.net)

<p>There's a new Rebel on the horizon. The Rebel T2i shares characteristics of both the EOS 7D and the T1i.</p>

 

<p>Read the <a href="/equipment/canon/digital-rebel-T2i/preview/">Rebel T2i preview</a>.</p>

<p>Am I missing something, or is this just another way to eek more money out of the public unawares? There used to be two tiers of cameras: amateur and professional. Then three: entry-level, amateur, professional. Then four, when they introduced "prosumer". Now professional is in two categories: "full frame" and "cropped", prosumer has two: "Full frame" and "cropped", there's still an amateur level, and now entry level has four grades? That's a total of, what a minute....carry the three....multiply by pi....9 tiers?!?</p>

<p>1Ds<br>

1D<br>

5D<br>

7D<br>

50D<br>

T2i<br>

T1i<br>

XSi<br>

XS</p>

<p>This is just getting stupid. I get that there are several levels of photographers with varying budgets...but 9 levels? Maybe I could believe 3 or 4, but 9? Let's not be suckers. I don't see anything about this T2i that the T1i couldn't do.</p>

<p>Shelf-stuffing is the name of the game. Sony has an equally absurd number of bodies. </p>

<p>18MP? When will this stop? And why discontinue the XSI? I would think the XS would be the body to be discontinued.</p>

<p>Here's a more substantial preview:<br>

<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/previews/CanonEOS550D/">http://www.dpreview.com/previews/CanonEOS550D/</a><br>

Just wondering: Where's the 60D? Will there be one?</p>

<p>Since most of you will only buy one camera, why is it a problem if you have more choices. By the camera that best fits your needs and move on...</p>

<p>Since most of you will only buy one camera, why is it a problem if you have more choices. By the camera that best fits your needs and move on...</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>(Who did get a laugh out of reading in one thread that there are too many model but that Canon should continue to make the XSi...)</p>

<p>It makes sense that they keep their XS it's the cheapest camera in the line up and fills the shelves of nearly any box store that sells cameras. And it's a great way to get people shooting SLRs for about the same money as a newer P&S. I will assume they will phase out the T1i slowly as they do with most of their cameras.<br>

On a side note I was really hoping for a new lens announcement today or something to wet my whistle but the consumer market charges on. </p>

<p>T1i will be staying in the range for the rest of 2010 (at, I presume , near XSi price point ) , and I fail to see the problem with more choices .</p>

<p>Any word on whether it has manual control over shutter speed and aperture in movie mode? That's the main thing i thought was missing from my T1i.</p>

<p>Yes Adam I believe it does offer manual controls in video ( which I agree is a big plus ) <br>

http://www.canonrumors.com/</p>

<p>I really don't see why many look at this as a bad thing, it looks like a nice camera and if I was looking for an advanced consumer level body, I would take a long look at this. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>This is just getting stupid. I get that there are several levels of photographers with varying budgets...but 9 levels? </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sheesh, choice is good in nearly everything in life. The more the merrier. Besides consumer products are self regulating. If the market doesn't like it, it will quickly disappear.</p>

<p>I kinda agree with Hal. And the way it was announced seemed to indicate another level of consumers as evident from canon usa site <br>

" <em>the new Rebel T2i succeeds in bridging the gap between an entry-level camera and a true pro-sumer camera."</em><br>

If it is an entry level camera with pro-sumer capabilities, why call it entry level in the first place? It is nothing but a marketing strategy to me. <br>

<em><br /></em></p>

<p>I can see Hal B's point, but I think it's a sign of the ipod-24-hour-instant entertainment times. (Many) people are more impressed by words like Digic and huge numbers of megapixels than learning photography. What do I know I'm using a 10d and my original F1n.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If the market doesn't like it, it will quickly disappear.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Should read: If the marketing department finds that it doesn't sell <em>well enough</em>, it will disappear <em>without regard</em> to those consumers who actually like it. In other words: choice is conditioned.</p>

<p>It's a good move by Canon. It puts them at the top of the pile in the class with the 1080 HD video and 18MP 7D sensor.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I'm going to sell my 7D, and I'm going to buy this cam instead.</p>

<p>The increase in choices does not come free. This represents compromises within the company. A company cannot maintain 9 unique products with as much quality control as they could with only 3 unique products. This is a basic truth of manufacturing and has to do with how a company uses its resources. Another consequence is that as the variety increases, so does the per unit cost. 3 unique models could be presented at a lower average cost than 9 unique models, as the quantity output of each model would increase.</p>

<p>Also, notice that the XSi has been a wildly popular camera, seemingly more popular than the XS. Many consumers who are prepared to spend $500 on a camera will sacrifice to spend $600 if they perceive they are getting something alot better for just a little more money. The XSi is a vastly improved camera, and probably hits the mark for the best entry-level option. Instead, Canon wants to push that portion of the market to make an even more expensive purchase with the T1i, just as soon as they can get rid of the XSi. And they want to snag more sales with the XS, stealing away from the long-zoom P&S category by getting those consumers to upgrade to dSLR.</p>

<p>The problem is that by trying to please a larger portion of the market with more "choices", they are only creating a situation where no one camera does, or is expected to do, everything. The cameras at every level are neglected somewhat by the engineers, as they are working with the premise that each camera has its own specialty. This creates a situation at every price level where you have to make a compromise when you buy your camera. The consumer is led to believe that, even at the pro level, you can't have a camera that can shoot full frame AND hit 10 FPS. At the entry level, the consumer must believe that he can't have video capability (even though his P&S does). Somewhere in the middle, you are led to pay extra for 1080p video, while you could save some money by settling for only 720p video. These are just a couple examples, but this extends into every feature available on cameras today.</p>

<p>Features are only invented to create a price separation between camera models. The only reason dSLR's have video mode now is so that the manufacturers can continue to justify the disparity in cost between low-end and high-end cameras. Once consumers start demanding high quality and full-featured cameras for low prices, the manufacturers have to invent new features so they can restructure their price scheme and keep you paying top-dollar for the new releases.</p>

<p>Have you noticed how this has happened with TV's? Plasma, LCD, and now LED and oLED. 60Hz, 120Hz, 240Hz, and now 600Hz. This is all to justify a whole range of TV's everywhere from $500 to $6000. If a customer is willing to part with $3000, a TV must be provided that costs $3000 or else that customer will only buy a $2000 TV, and $1000 is left on the table. If the competition has a $3000 TV that boasts an extra 60Hz, that's where the customer's money will go.</p>

<p>It doesn't mean that any of these features are necessary, cost any more to manufacture, or even make a difference. It's just another reason for a manufacturer to not include hi-tech features in low-priced models. That's what the consumer really wants, but the current system does everything in its power to avoid it.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Features are only invented to create a price separation between camera models.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yeah, them capitalist pigs deliver a variety of camera models with a variety of features at different price points. What a shame - how dare they!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>reason for a manufacturer to not include hi-tech features in low-priced models.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>In the world of cameras (at least on Earth) features do cost, and that's why there are $500 cameras, $1000 cameras, $3000 cameras and $8000 cameras...</p>

<p>Hal, I really don't understand how additional models undermine quality control. Your logic is strained at best and rests on a whole bunch of unwarranted assumptions. </p>

<p>I do think that the proliferation of bodies is market segmentation at its finest, but as long as we are a bunch of self-centered egotistical pigs, the marketers will continue to take "advantage" by providing the products we "want." Blame the consumers not the producers. </p>

<p>Hal B - you have none of the information necessary to determine if Canon can maintain quality control or not with additional models. For all you know they have the resources to maintain 20 camera bodies at once with no loss of QC. (Look at the number of lenses they support.)</p>

<p>And I honestly can't believe that you are complaining that these cameras are feature limited by engineering after everything Canon put in the Ti2. Canon put the sensor, metering, and video from the pro 7D in the amateur Ti2, gave it a better screen (!), 3.7 fps, and pretty decent AF for the price point. What more do you want?</p>

<p><em>Once consumers start demanding high quality and full-featured cameras for low prices, the manufacturers have to invent new features so they can restructure their price scheme and keep you paying top-dollar for the new releases.</em></p>

<p>If the Rebel Ti2 sensor is anything like the 7D sensor then we now have an $800 body (Adorama) that offers 95% of the image quality of the Canon 5D2 at low to mid ISO. A few years ago you had to be rich to be able to afford a DSLR that could produce the size and quality of prints that the Ti2 will today. The AF and fps is superior to what a professional EOS 1n had out of the box in the 1990's, and the metering is the best Canon currently offers.</p>

<p>Not to mention the improved UI, screen, wireless support via Eye-Fi, video, etc, etc.</p>

<p>What exactly would you consider a "high quality, full featured" camera for $800? 40 MP FF that shoots 15 fps?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>What more do you want?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I want the camera that will finally replace my Elan 7. This is a full frame, AF camera that shoots 3 fps and cost under $400 brand new in 2000. So what I want is a brand new, retail, full frame digital SLR, AF, 3fps, for $400-$500. Why should I expect anything less? All I want is to see a full frame sensor stuffed into a body that was engineered over 10 years ago. I'm tired of being patronized with cropped sensors, when all of my lenses are made for full frame. I have no use for that at all. I'm tired of being treated like full frame is a privilege for the wealthy and the working professionals only. I deserve it, too, and I deserve it for a reasonable price. They can keep their professional version for $4000 if they want, but I have to see one finally produced for under $500 before I go all ga-ga over a new camera that does less than my current cameras.</p>

<p>I had a Digital Rebel XTi (and it was awesome!) for a couple years. It cost me $350 and I sold it for $325. It was cool while it lasted, but the cropped sensor was always a limitation and kept me pining for a full frame. I'll finally make the plunge to an upgraded full frame camera when I see one for $500, the price that it should really cost. Is there any good reason why we shouldn't see the old 5D sensor revived in a Rebel body? That technology is over 5 years old...certainly it's paid for itself by now. Oh yeah...then people would stop buying the 5D Mark II. If it makes it any easier, they can lower the resolution to 8MP, or even 6MP. Just put in a sensor that reads a 36 x 24mm image. That's all I need.</p>

<p>Hal -- to some extent, I feel the same way: why is full frame so expensive?<br>

-- so I just bought an EOS 1v :-)</p>

 

<p>I like it. It'll be quite a capabilities upgrade from the XT I'm still shooting with. </p>

<p>The increase in pixel count is appreciated - more's the better. Add to it the 30fps 1080p video and it's very enticing indeed.</p>