Good Bye Eos System

[christianrafael]

<p><a href="http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/06/canon-wonder-camera-concept-promises-single-lens-perfection-vid/">http://www.engadget.com/2010/07/06/canon-wonder-camera-concept-promises-single-lens-perfection-vid/</a><br>

say good bye to the eos system when this comes out!</p>

<p>not sure about the video only though, makes me think if canon really is focused in making pictures or are they thinking of different things </p>

<p>oh well!</p>

<p>Christian</p>

[wolf_weber]

<p>We're talking <strong>2030</strong> here, Chr. R. That's <strong>20 years</strong>... By then the way we know our world will be upside down anyhow. 20 years ago I had to have a huge & heavy (& expensive) 600mm f/4 lens on a tripod in order to achieve what I can do today with a 300mm f/4 IS, hand held. I'm sure 100's of <em>Forum Readers</em> can quote similar examples from all kind of fields.<br>

There'll always be another tune called "<em>future music</em>".</p>

[William Kahn]

<p>Let's see...in 2030, I'll be 90. Will I care?</p>

[mars c]

<p>I'm about to buy myself the 100mm macro L lens, But then I saw that link, I changed my mind, 20 years ain't that long, LOL</p>

[john_r._fulton_jr.]

<p>Hmmm. Why will it take 20 years? Also, as long as they're "dreaming" why should it be bigger than a G11 rather than looking like a hair dryer? 'Just askin.</p>

[ds_meador]

<p>This leaves me a little confused. It's white but doesn't have the red ring. So, is it an "L" or isn't it?<br>

DS Meador</p>

[RobertChura]

<p>Where are my flying cars? I was promised flying cars years ago</p>

[jim_j2]

<p>Go figure!<br>

By the time I get around to affording something, it's already obsolete with something "newer & beter" to replace it!<br>

Guess I had better start saving now, and maybe by 2030 I'll have saved enough to purchase this! Took me near 20 years already to obtain my first "L" from Canon!</p>

[paul_russell1]

<p>But will it have eye controlled focus?</p>

[flatulent1]

<p>I don't mind the Bridge Camera concept, but I really detest power zooms. They'll have to do better than that. But then, in 30 years I'll be dead, so I guess I don't care.</p>

[jim_j2]

<blockquote>

<p>"newer & beter"</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Maybe by then (2030) I'll learn to proof read better too!</p>

<p>Fred, it's only 20 more years!</p>

<p>Paul, No ECF digital bodies . . . keep dreaming!</p>

[William Kahn]

<p>Maybe the guy in <a href="../casual-conversations-forum/00Wn6X">this thread</a> will put one in his eye socket...</p>

[starvy]

<p>The concept is lovely but one wonders how good the quality would be. It would perhaps replace the point and shoot cameras rather than contemporary dslr cameras of 2030.</p>

[robert_turner]

<p>Boy, that is KILLER news! They're finally ditching the Direct Print button!</p>

[jean_pierre_la_forest]

<p>Whoa, awesome camera, will be perfect for my retirement from my day job :)</p>

<p>Hey Robert, actually your flying car already exists: <a href="http://www.terrafugia.com/">http://www.terrafugia.com/</a><br>

I've seen a video a few weeks ago of a test run they did with it, pretty impressive.</p>

[jaydesi]

<p>I think I'll stick with DSLRs...when everyone jumps on this bandwagon, L glass will be dirt cheap!</p>

[bobatkins]

<p>It's just a concept. If we assume the front element is maybe 50mm in diameter, that "macro to 5000mm" zoom can't be any faster than f100. At f100 diffraction will simply kill any sharpness, so matter how many pixels it has unless it's an 8"x10" sensor (not very likely). Even with 4" optics it would still be f50.</p>

<p>I have no doubt we will see ultrazoom video cameras with high resolution sensors capable of yielding excellent still images. However they will still have to conform to the laws of physics and optics.</p>

[tdigi]

<p>Will this be out before the 24-70 2.8 IS?</p>

[ryan_k]

<p>but <em>will it blend.</em></p>

[anand_n._vishwamitran]

<p>Do I still have to travel to take pictures, or can I zoom in from my living room couch?</p>

[BelaMolnar]

<p>You still need an artistic talent behind the camera, regardless of an ultra sophisticated super camera, to produce a valuable nice image. Even to day you can see, people having a hell of a expensive equipment, and producing noting. Contrary, some talented artistic mind using a Nikon D40 or equivalent low end camera, and creating beautiful art work, photograph. Super focus...? You still has to have a control of the camera, including focus, to acquire a desired effect, and so on and so on. If todays digital cameras has only M manual mode, (including manual focus) many of the skilled photographer would produce the same quality images then somebody with "A" or "S" mode, or "AF" mode, never mind the "Program Mode". Then... The photograph as a value are going down, and those pour artist/painters going to like it. A painting is always more valuable then a photograph. Or an old hand made, darkroom produced image from a film has also higher value, even today. . . . . . 2030. . . . ? We my going to paint in the cave walls, if we continue what we doing today.</p>

[hal_drallmeyer]

<p>I'm worried too. How will be able to accessorize with a camera that does it all? Doesn't sound like a good business plan to me. </p>

[ben_s2]

<p>It looks like a HAIR DRYER.</p>

[juan_p._martinez]

<p>maybe im just not open to new ideas but that thing looks haggard. This is like the SEGWAY trying to replace the Bicycle.....FAIL!.</p>

[flatulent1]

<p>Hal, you have a point. I (stupidly) bought an Olympus IS-1 when they first came out, but I couldn't accessorize it so I dumped it. Did I mention I hate power zooms? There's a reason!</p>

<p>Yeah, 20 years. I can't count. Let's see, I'll be 72... old man, new technology... Nope, don't see it happening to me.</p>