digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Canon's 5D Mark II rumor gets another jolt

engadget.com — Here's a sure fire way to set rumors in motion: list an unannounced, though hotly rumored camera in a pull-down list on your website.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • NSiderBot, on 11/20/2007, -8/+1Dugg for coolness!
  • darkchild82, on 11/20/2007, -1/+2can't wait for the specs
    • insertAliasHere, on 11/20/2007, -1/+3Can't wait to know if it actually exists.
      • senixon, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2It's a FAKE, read the comments on that page! buried for FAKEness!
  • hungarian33, on 11/20/2007, -2/+5dugg. canon is my favorite. my middle name is canon.
  • JazD, on 11/20/2007, -14/+1You have been dugg. Canon is a great product. I have no doubt this will be too. Please digg my latest post. Thank you!
  • Simonft, on 11/20/2007, -1/+2Probably, or wanting people to dig it, and get free advertising.
  • shockingbird, on 11/20/2007, -0/+12I stopped buying new equipment until I felt like I could really master what I already owned.
    • itsme7g, on 11/20/2007, -0/+14Stop thinking! You are hurting the economy.
      • shockingbird, on 11/20/2007, -2/+9Hhaha... why do I hate America!!
  • acomj, on 11/20/2007, -0/+10I have a 5D. Best camera I've ever owned, no regets.

    It has a couple of minor flaws (dust attaches to the sensor more than other cameras), and is fairly pricey. Everyone is waiting for the 5D MKII who doesn't have a 5D already, because the camera is kinda old (well, 2 years old but cameras are now computers...). Canon users are all excited about it, no need to tease them.
    • gordonf238, on 11/20/2007, -6/+25D is too pricey for the negligible benefits of a full-frame sensor.
      • BossKey, on 11/20/2007, -1/+5Were you under the impression that was the only interesting feature it had?
        • gordonf238, on 11/20/2007, -4/+0I was, and so was the world. Wait, there's more to 5D than its full-frame sensor?
      • bieber, on 11/20/2007, -0/+4A) The benefits of the larger sensor are far from negligible
        B) There's an awful lot more to the 5D than the sensor. It's almost comparable to the 1 series in terms of things like autofocus
  • dafragsta, on 11/20/2007, -8/+3I'm not a big fan of the full frame SLRs. I prefer the 1.6x zoom multiplier I get out of my Rebel XT. I think the benefits of full 35mm vs 24mm frames is not worth the tradeoff I get for losing a substantial amount of focal length. Full frame would be nice in those instances where you wanted to get the most out of an ultra-expensive ultra-wide angle lens, but day-to-day shooting benefits more from the added focal length.
    • bendylan, on 11/20/2007, -0/+8You don't get an increase in focal length on a crop camera. You get a crop. Get a full frame camera, crop off some of the image, then you have your "extra" focal length.
      • jonr, on 11/20/2007, -3/+2Fine, if you want to waste money on that huge sensor...
        • DagMX, on 11/20/2007, -0/+5It's not a waste.
          1)You have a lower sensor density which reduces noise or letting you get larger resolutions
          2)The viewfinder is usually larger so you get more light

          Plus if your spending money on a wide angle lens, you want it to behave like a wide angle lens
        • dafragsta, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2The sensor density benefit is negligible. The difference between the pinky-nail sized sensors on most point and shoots going up to a 24mm is big. Going from 24mm to 35mm... not so much. The price difference going up to a 1D or a 5D from a Rebel or 40D is enough to cover the cost of a decent lens at the very least.
    • Firehed, on 11/20/2007, -0/+5That works against you horribly when you're doing wide-angle shots.

      /XTi owner
      • shockingbird, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2Amen.. I have a 30d and have to use the 10-22mm lens to get the same width as a 16mm.
    • sprutnik, on 11/20/2007, -1/+4Bendylan is absolutely correct! - there is NO advantage to a cropped image aside from price. I can't believe people still think their lenses become longer from the crop factor. I assume you think digital zoom is awsome as well!
      • dafragsta, on 11/20/2007, -0/+3Take your self rightiousness and stick it up your ass. smaller crop factor != digital zoom. The only leg you have to stand on is the pixel density which someone else mentioned, and as I mentioned in my reply, that's not nearly as big of a deal when the sensor is already 24mm.

        I assume you are a supposed know-it-all camera person who is beyond reproach, much like the rest of Digg who feels that the status of the insane bottom line is more important than value. I'll take a 40D and a nice L lens over the 1Ds. Not sure what the price point of the new 5D will be, but I'm sure it's about half the current 1D and I bet that is still significantly higher than the 40D.
        • sprutnik, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1I appologize for the "self righteous" comment. I did not mean to offend. As for being a "know it all" camera guy, I do not claim to know everything about cameras BUT I am a professional photographer and I have held classes in digital photography with students being seasoned/professional photographers wishing to switch from traditional film to digital.
        • sowdog, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2hurr, interesting. i was having a conversation with a friend over why we'd want a full frame body. bottom line is there isnt much of a reason from sensor to sensor(aside from the FOV), however canon markets is products in a way that the higher end bodies that come with more features are full frame bodies. So until canon decides to release a high end APS-C with all the tricks, the top of the ladder will still be full frame.
          • dafragsta, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2Isn't that what the 40D is? What features is that missing?
          • sowdog, on 11/21/2007, -0/+1@dafragsta

            The iso sensitivity vs grain on the 1ds(i'm comparing the highest aps-c vs full frame) will probably be superior to the 40d. bigger pixel count, more AF points, bigger buffer, bigger viewfinder. i'm sure there are more though. Don't get me wrong, i doubt i'll move out of the APS-C or that the 40d is bad, i'm just saying there's definitely a reason canon markets it's 1d series for 7 grand and there are still people who buy it.
        • JoeVet, on 11/21/2007, -0/+1Sprutnik is absolutely correct. Same can be said about film cameras......a cheap large/medium format camera will always do better than any top of the line 35mm. Its the nature of photography.
    • rebotfc, on 11/20/2007, -1/+2There is an advantage, however it is a resolution advantage not a focal length advantage.

      For instance to approximate the FOV of a 80mm lens on a 1.6 Crop with a full frame 5D you crop to a 5 megapixel image. This is compared to the 8 megapixel in a 20D or Rebel XTi. This is one reason why Canon's pro sports camera is a Crop not Full Frame.
      • bieber, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1You may get _more_ pixels, but you're going to be getting better _quality_ pixels out of the 5D. Canon's 1D line (which is far from just a sports camera, need I remind you) are crop cameras because it's easier to achieve insanely fast frame rates and data transfer when you're dealing with fewer pixels, not because the 1.3X crop factor actually matters.
    • roblesphoto, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1Crop != Magnification.

      Bendylan is correct, here is a link explaining it: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/unders ...
      • dafragsta, on 11/20/2007, -1/+2Full frame != $1000 in value over the 40D.
    • dafragsta, on 11/20/2007, -2/+3Here come the Digg-downs. I'm just gonna reply to my own comment a third time to spell this out for you idiots who insist that spending twice as much to not have the crop factor is worth it, because apparently I'm full of ***** or something. These are Amazon prices.

      Canon 40D = $1295
      Current Canon 5D = $2,199

      These cameras probably match each other in build quality. They are both extremely rugged and geared more toward the professional shooter who isn't buying the 1D. If you think spending nearly A THOUSAND GODDAMN DOLLARS more for nearly the same camera to avoid a negligible crop factor which will extend the reach of your lenses in terms of perception and your ability to frame a shot on the spot, in exchange for minor cropping and pixel density differences not even worth talking about, then I seriously hope your cameras are making you some cash.

      I think the average Digg is obsessed with spending the most money with the least common sense, while telling everyone they are lesser beings if they compromise on a lesser product. I'm not jealous of your iPhone either.
      • jbryer, on 11/20/2007, -0/+3You clearly do not understand the differences. The build quality between the 40d and the 5d are not the same. Just compare the quality of high ISO images between the two and you will quickly see the difference. Do a little reading and you will find many more advantages.
      • shockingbird, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2Here's a pretty good comparison:
        http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_EOS_40D/ou ...
        • mattbatt77, on 11/21/2007, -0/+1problem: comparison of jpg only and not RAW
    • itsme7g, on 11/20/2007, -0/+3You act like the 40d didn't just come out. I shot with a friends 5D over a year ago and only now do I own a 40D. For well over a year she has made money off the 5D. Only now can you make that comparison. For the love of Pete please stop assuming your needs are the needs of others. Do you shoot full 360 panoramas? HDRs? Sports? Underwater? Newspaper? Weddings? Landscapes? Time Lapse? Multiple exposures? If you did try one or more of these things you might understand that some needs are different than others. My mother-in-law likes to tell others what they should be doing. And the advice is good if you are a 59 year old Catholic fom Pittsburg who has been married for 30 years and work in civil service your whole life. For the rest the advice is just too narrow.
      • itsme7g, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2This was a reply to the comment below. Sorry. Too many comment branches!
  • scabbers, on 11/20/2007, -3/+6Spend the money on photography lessons instead.
    • DagMX, on 11/20/2007, -0/+5Perhaps it interests those who are already talented photographers?
      I hardly think a beginner would get a 5D...
    • bieber, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2I'm pretty sure high image quality is going to make my clients happier than me re-learning things I've known for years in some random entry-level photography class...
  • jonr, on 11/20/2007, -0/+45D is a great camera, and I am not even a fan of Canon. $3000 for 5D 16MP with sealed body, and even I might be tempted... (Olympus E-3 still rocks, though)
  • digid, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2Canon historically announces new camera bodies in both January and August with release a few months later
    • digid, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2correction: february and august. usually around the week of the 20th.
    • RRJackson, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2Sometimes they ship pretty fast, though. The 40D was introduced last August on the 20th and people were receiving cameras within a couple of weeks. Of course, they also introduced the 1Ds Mark III in August and those still aren't shipping, but the 1DsIII probably shares the same autofocus system with the 1DIII and they've had that problem to deal with concerning the manufacturing tolerances of the mirror assembly. Hard to say what availability is going to be like on the 5D. Hopefully it will ship right after PMA.
  • footfwd, on 11/20/2007, -0/+2awesome now a can afford the 5d Mk I. I'm a prof photog and these bodies are soo expensive.
    I agree with jonr that new Olympus is unreal, i owned the e1 it was a nice camera, really nice
    color files, the body was incredibly solid.
  • gordonf238, on 11/20/2007, -7/+2Never ask a photographer what camera he uses. If it's a Nikon, he'll tell you himself. If it's not, why embarrass him?
  • Snappysnap, on 11/20/2007, -2/+1why, why why can't Canon give their cameras distinctive names than this mindless Mark 111, IV etc nonsense. It typifies their attitude to updates to their cameras such as the 30D which was a VERY minor revision to the 20D. Produce something big and revolutionary. I love Canon but I'm thinking of Nikon with the D300/D3 type of major upgrade.
    • chicagospur, on 11/20/2007, -0/+4In Japan, the Rebel XT/350D was called the Kiss'n'Digital.

      Rumored there was a pink Hello Kitty version as well...
      • shockingbird, on 11/20/2007, -0/+4Dude.. I was like, "No way they called it that." Apparently they did.
  • thurows, on 11/20/2007, -0/+1Nikon screwed up with their new releases. The D300 should have the chip from the D3 and the D3 needs to have much higher resolution.
  • ophello, on 11/21/2007, -0/+1http://sigma-dp1.com/

    Sigma has a compact camera with a giant 3X sensor from Foveon. Its pretty nifty.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.