How many of you are waiting for a 3D????

[kevin_totts]

Is it just me or is there anyone else that was disppointed when the

300D was released, hoping that Canon would have gone the other way??

 

How long will it be until a full frame, EOS1/3 type focusing will be

realeased??

 

Any ideas...or should I but a 10D!!!

 

Kev

[denisbergeron]

I'm wainting for the 3d since the d60 was release!

I was very surprise when the 10d was release because it something like a Elan body minus a lot of feature !

Since the d60 was release on 2002/02 and the 10d on 2003/02, (look at the time line at dpreview.com). I hope the 3d (with all feature) will be realese on 2004/02.

I simply whish that the eye control was there :-)

[denisbergeron]

By the way, I'm not very surprise by the 300d release !

I with gadget for the mass that a company get cash to improuve they R&D !

More People buy it, more the next generation of canon DSLR will be HOT !

 

I'm a dreamer :-)

[eos 10 fan]

At this point in time digi boxes are obsolete the day they are released.

 

If the 10D does not meet your needs, then wait; if the 10D does meet your needs, then what are you waiting for?

 

I think that Canon will release an upgraded 1D body in the next six months - my $0.02

 

--

[ron c sunshine coast,qld,a]

Canon seem to be releasing models at major trade shows.If you can wait 'till the next one (spring next year??),it's pretty likely that a '3D' will be the star of the show.<br>What i'm wondering is-full frame or abit less?

[the_macman]

Dream on people. There is simply NOT a marketing niche for the 3D to begin

with and the EOS 3 is one hell of an old machine. Good one but old. No one

at Canon marketing idiot enough to digitize such such a monster. If you need

a 45-AF digimachine, just get a 1D.

 

>>>>>>> How long will it be until a full frame, EOS1/3 type focusing will be

realeased??

 

In which cavern have you been hiding for the last year or so? :-)

 

Another thought. Those who actually can afford to wait while both the 1D and

1Ds are available, do not need such a camera :) Ppl who need it, buy it.

[the_macman]

>>>>>>> At this point in time digi boxes are obsolete the day they are

released.

 

Any machine that can shoot usable pictures isn't obsolete. Digicams aren't to

be compared with the latest NASA technology, they are to be compared with

one's needs.

[PuppyDigs]

"the EOS 3 is one hell of an old machine. Good one but old. No one at Canon marketing idiot enough to digitize such a monster."

 

The EOS 3 contains the prototype AF and metering systems used in the EOS 1V, 1D and 1Ds, but the body construction and sealing of the EOS 1 and 1N. Thus, it's really pretty up to date. I guess Canon could tweak the AF algorithms and processor to be slightly faster, but it would be a rather tiny improvement. The trouble with a 3D is it would be too similar to the 1D and 1Ds. Well, Canon could add more cross AF sensors, a brain wave AF activation chip and a molded depression on the back for people with large noses...

[eos 10 fan]

Long live the <a href=http://www.daguerre.org/home.html>daguerreotype!</a> <p> <b>;<i>)</i></b> <p>

 

--

[valliesto]

If you look at the Canon DSLR line up right now you can see that there is room for a $2500-3000 camera. This would place this imaginary camera pretty well between the 1D (or its replacement) on the high end and the 10D on the low end.

<p>

As for specs I would think it would look something like this:<br>

- 45 point AF and metering system from the 1D/1V/3 series<br>

- 1.3x CMOS sensor with 6 to 8Mp<br>

- buffer in the neighborhood of 12 frames<br>

- 5FPS max<br>

- Build quality more similar to the 10D than the 1D, with the ability to remove the battery grip like the 10D<p>

 

Full frame would make the camera either too expensive or cause it to steal sales from the 1Ds.

[PuppyDigs]

"If you look at the Canon DSLR line up right now you can see that there is room for a $2500-3000 camera."

 

There is a much more pressing need to lower the price of the entire range of EOS DSLRs. Not everyone is a yuppie puppy or well heeled pro. How about this: EOS 300/$500; 10D/$1000; 1D/$2000; and 1Ds/$4000. Heck, you wouldn't need no frickin' 3D den bro!

[citizensmith1664875108]

If the 3D will do 3D I'll be more excited. :) Other wise I'll stick with DD.

[valliesto]

I am with you on the lower prices, but with the way the cameras are flying off the shelves at current prices, it will be awhile before we get to the levels you suggest. Especially for the fullframe sensor models.

[andrei_lau1]

I'm a bit disappointed that Canon still doesn't release a 3D type of DSLR. I'm looking for a 1.3 crop factor or better (not even a full frame) with good enough focusing ability. Ideally it will be light, 1D or 1Ds are just too big and heavy.

 

I'm also very disappointed that Canon does not come forward with a wide angle solution for the amateur photographer. Practically there is no means for an amateur user to shoot wider than 26mm (35mm equivalent) with the current DSLR of 1.6 (1Ds is just too expensive for average photographer).

[aappelphotography]

Yeah, I´m also waiting for something with a 1.3 crop factor and >6 mp. But I have the time to wait, i have the Elan 7E aka Eos 30 and a slide scanner. So i live with both worlds, can control what i capture via the film I use and when I want more modifications I scan the slide.

And as time advances, they need to present "new" things so that the satisfied owners of D10 and other digital cams start to think whether they need the new one. The market movement and enhancements will never stop.<br>

Greetz,<br>

André.

[caroline_cooper]

I think Canon will be working on producing a whole range of DSLRs, including the equivalent of a 3D. I've bought the 300D for now, but I'm definitely in the market for something like a 3D when the price is right.

 

The decision to market the 300D before a 3D is definitely the right one, in my opinion. Getting as many people as possible locked into the Canon system (if they aren't already) makes sense to me.

 

Caroline

[aaron_lam]

When I a started photography (as a hobby), I was crushed to spend $400 on a Rebel 2K set. 2 years later, I spent $400 on an Elan IIe. 1 year after that, I spent $500 on a 1n. Yesterday, I spent $1100 on a Canon 10D. And now it looks like hobbyist like myself aren't even batting an eye to spend $2000+ on a digicam. Is it just me but has this expensive hobby just gotten 3-4 times more expensive. Oh, and when I started... I thought spending $1000+ on a Leica was extreme. I guess you just can't compare digicams with film bodies.

[erb_duchenne]

If you can believe that there once was a 640x480 digicam selling for $20,000, then you surely can believe that technology has improved and prices have come down.

 

What enables prices to come down are mass market models, such as the 300D. So, no, I wasn't dissappointed when the 300D came out. In fact I was expecting it, and in anticipation.

 

For people who ever wonder why a certain model with certain specifications wasn't announced instead... start a thread, or forum and ask how many people want such a product. Just because you want it, doesn't meant others do (or in significant enough numbers). Canon has the figures and the market research. They're not going to produce a handful of totally unique cameras desired only by a handful of people.

[tom_burke3]

Canon, Nikon, Minolta et al must be very pleased with the sums of money people are

spending on digital photogrpaphy equipment - the general photo market had got

very mature by the mid-90s; this was one of the reasons for APS. Now people who

had to be persuaded hard to spend more than £150 on a 35mm compacty are happily

paying double that or more for a compact (3 or 4 Megapixel, say) digital, and

enthusiasts are happy to pay around £1000 for higher-spec equipment. So it's a real

money-spinner for the companies. Given that, why should they move quickly towards

the ultimate product? Better for them to take a few extra generations over the move,

and persuade the consumer to pay for multiple 'upgrades'.

 

As regards the current lineup, my feeling is that there isn't enough difference in spec

between the 10D and 300D to truly differentiate them. Over the last few years it's

digital resolution that the market has latched onto as the measure of a camera, and

these two have exactly the same resolution. So I expect that Canon will replace the

10D with something newer. My guess would be that it will have higher resolution -

maybe 8 Mp? - but retain the 1.6 FOV size. And Canon will make it a camera able to

take the 17-55 lens that's included with the 300D kit. I expect that Canon will

continue with the three digital formats - full-frame, 1.3, and 1.6 - for a couple of

generations yet. 1.6 for the mass-market, 1.3 for general 'EOS 1 standard' cameras,

and full frame for very high res studio cameras. I have a feeling that they will keep

running the 300D for two years, and agressively drop the price over that time. In

2005 the resolution will be low in comparison with what else is available, but it will be

a low-cost way into Digital EOS.

[staticlag]

In Response to - The Macman

<p>

"Another thought. Those who actually can afford to wait while both the 1D and 1Ds are available, do not need such a camera :) Ppl who need it, buy it.

 

-- The Macman"

<p>

 

The reason why I wouldnt buy a 10d, 300d, 1d, or 1ds or any other digital camera right now, is because they seem a lot like toys to me. It seems that people that buy them are more buying them to rave over the latest gaget or take advantage of the cheap operating cost.

<p>

It seems a lot like when apple computers first came out. People bought them and raved over them, but they were kinda pointless, all you could really do was text input.

<p>

Don't get me wrong, I would instantly buy a 3D if it came out and was over 6MP because I work for the paper now, and don't think my images(of resturants and people) really mean anything if they are only premired in one paper. aka. I hate saving negs of mugshots of strangers. Digital would make these images easy to create and even easier erase.

<p>

Until digital 35mm(cause I like the portability) becomes about 40 or 50 megapixel and no noise at 1600 iso, i dont think I will even consider it for my artsy type sunset, rainy day, emtional images that I really want to make an impression on people with. Thats all MF for me, baby. If photograhy is a job, then sure, shoot digital, you can save a lot. If photography is a lifestyle, stick with film, it carries more mood than digital ever could. Part of the fun that got me into photography is its ultra complexity. Differences between films, and printing, just makes it more happily complex.

<p>

Half of photography is having a good eye, and the other half is getting it on film, or whatever else you use.

<p>

-Dan

[whayne_padden]

Don't listen to Macman. The 3D is coming, there is a definite niche for it and Canon will fill it. The only way a 3D would not be needed is if the 1D became 8MP and dropped in price to $2500. Now most PJ's will tell you they don't want 8MP so I don't see that happening. Strongly rumoured specs of 3D are 8-9MP, 4-5 fps, ISO 80-6400, 1.3x crop. Announcement may be made next month.

[jon_austin]

"Until digital 35mm(cause I like the portability) becomes about 40 or 50 megapixel and no noise at 1600 iso, i dont think I will even consider ..."

 

-- That day is coming, possibly sooner than you expect.

 

"If photograhy is a job, then sure, shoot digital, you can save a lot. If photography is a lifestyle, stick with film... Part of the fun that got me into photography is its ultra complexity. Differences between films, and printing, just makes it more happily complex."

 

-- Certainly, to each his own. For me, photography is a hobby ("lifestyle"), not a job, but I wouldn't be doing it at all if it weren't for digital. If you were to do a statistically valid survey, I think you'd find that the vast majority of photographers (of all stripes) got into it for the fun of making pictures and memories, and they muddle through the "ultra complexity" to the extent necessary to satisify their needs, rather than revel in it.

 

" ... [film] carries more mood than digital ever could."

 

-- Maybe today, but I predict that the day will come when the quality of digital surpasses all film. Your position reminds me of the folks who used to complain (about 20 years ago) that digital audio (most commonly when referring to compact discs) lacked the warmth and presence of analog. Yeah, and it also lacked the clicks, pops, poor frequency reponse and separation and rate of deterioration. Today, we have Super Audio CDs and DVD Audio. The equivalent day for digital photography is inevitable.

[staticlag]

Response to Jon Austin:

<p>

Yes, I know that day is coming, hopefully soon (cause film costs a lot). And basically in a long winded arrogant way I was saying I would rather stick with with good 'ol film than waste $8K on a 1DS, Or $1.5K on a 10D when I know the market is advancing so fast any model will be obsolete in the next six months.

<p>

I would rather buy a digital model that was leaps and bounds above film than one that was just on-par with it at best. My 40-50 Megapixel request was not an unachieavable mocking statement to digital, because I really know they will probably do it in like 5 years.

<p>

Not buying a 10D means I have an extra $1.5K to spend on those hyper-advanced models of the near future.

<p>

In 1998 I bought an Alienware Pentium III 866mhz - 128 MB RDRAM - 18 GB SCSI HD - GeForce2 GTS - CD Burners, DVD, the works. This was brand spanking new top of the line(not bulk discount late technology gateway, dell stuff), $5K gone! The next week the 1GHz came out for the same price. Now I can buy two of the current top of the line PCs for the price I paid for my old one.

<p>

Oh, Im not falling for the buy the best and have it incredibly surpassed in the near future trick again, I can't afford it. Or else I would have bought the 1DS this last summer.

<p>

If digital lets you shoot whatever you want, then great! I am seriously happy you can take advantage of the market right now.

<p>

Lol, but right now I prefer to sit on the sidelines and wait for something truly worthwhile to come out before investing so much money.<p>

Plus, they haven't even gotten advanced enough in imaging to even consider organic materials. Just think of the resolution and colour depth and overall versatility of the human eye? That day is far off, but I still see it in the future.

<p>

No hard feelings

<p>

-Dan

[digitmstr]

I think that Canon will come out with a 3D ONLY after they made plenty of $$$$ on the 1D (and 1Ds). I doubt they would release a Prosumer camera that could kill their more expensive PRO models.

 

Same thing happened when DAT machine first came out, as consumer digital audio tape recorders. I wasn't long before ALL pro engineers were using them for mix-down and/or field recording. That killed sales of multi-thousand dollars machines worldwide. Something no other company would want to repeat.