What has Canon gone to?

[Ruben123]

To be fair I havent followed Canon and other camera manufacturers for some time, but since the 60D a new strategy seems to be used at Canon's.

The x0D series was always the semi-prof camera with the nice built bodies, top lcd screen and the somewhat better AF and viewfinder (and the rear wheel!!!!!). Now the 7D (II) has taken over that place, though at a higher price point, with the x0D being the.....? No clue what it stands for now.
And to my greatest shock I saw that the xxxD series now is separated in a 750 and 760D. One having the top LCD and sort of el cheapo control wheel on the back.

The clear lines of 1000D - 350D - 40D - 5D and 1D lines have totally vanished it seems. Can someone explain -shortly- how the line up is built now? Not that I am interested in buying a new camera though......

[Bob Andersson]

Hi Ruben,

Maybe a way to look at the 750D vs 760D is that it's the same basic mechanics but with different factory options?

Bob.

[RexGig]

I became truly serious with photography while using a 40D, upgrading from a 400D/XTi. (This upgrade was for handling qualities and ergonomics, as the sensor was the same.) The 40D was replaced by the 50D, in the Canon line-up, though I skipped the 50D, wl3cted to leap two generations, rather than one. Then, when I noticed that the 60D was seemingly a down-grade in some ways, bought a 7D, which I believed was the logical continuation of the "semi-professional" category. (The 60D had controls more like the consumer-level Canons, among other differences, and skimpier gripping areas, that annoyed me.) The 7D Mark II seems to be a further divergence from the 60D-70D-80D series, a true professional's APS-C DSLR, also suited to the keen enthusiast.

I added a pre-owned 5D, while I was using my pair of 7D cameras. A friend, who had a 30D, handled my 5D, and said it was built like his 30D. I did some internet research, and reached the conclusion that the 5D, due to lack of weather-sealing, should be considered consumer-level in build quality, by today's standards. The 5D Mark II represented an elevation to a true semi-professional camera body at the full-35mm-frame level. (Of course, plenty of professionals have used the original 5D, with satisfaction.)

The 1D-series, with its intermediate-sized APS-H sensor, seems to be no more, with the advent of the 1D X series, which has a full-35mm-frame sensor. The 1D X signified a merging of the older 1D-series and 1Ds-series, into one full-35mm-frame camera. Shooters who have held onto their 1Ds Mark III cameras, for its higher resolution, should probably look to the 5Ds-series in their quest for more MP.

It remains to be seen whether the 5D-series splits into the 5Ds-series, for high-resolution, plus another 5D-something for general-purpose shooting. (5D X, and 5D Mark IV, are rumored to be the names for the new camera. Time will tell.)

The 6D is, physically, something like a 60D with a full-35mm-frame sensor, and no articulating LCD. Its central AF point is very capable, with the outer AF points, and overall AF system, less-capable than pro/semi-pro cameras. There is no way to know where the 6D-series will go; it could be a "one-off," or perhaps it will become the basis for Canon's next semi-pro camera.

I cannot really discuss the consumer-level Canon DSLRs, having paid little attention since upgrading from the 400D/XTi. This should not be interpreted as snobbishness on my part. I did buy an EOS M3, for the relatively few occasions I want a smaller camera body.

This is not intended to be an unbiased narrative; much of this is, indeed, my opinion.

I use 7D Mark II and 5Ds R cameras.

[popo]

Canon aren't just competing against themselves, or Nikon, but also all the mirrorless players and smartphones. DSLRs still have their place, but what that place is, is still evolving. They know the low end will be more challenging, so without eliminating it, they have to raise the game. Mirrorless in particular is allowing more features into lower cost bodies, and DSLRs can't be seen to lag that.

So, the latest xxxD models is encroaching into old xxD territory. The 80D is in some ways even better than 7D2 and to be honest, if I hadn't already got the 7D2 I would probably have got the 80D in preference, but getting one now in addition is excessive for my use. The 7D2 is more focused a camera, but my changing needs would be better off with a more flexible yet still high performer like an 80D.

Full frame still isn't a significant selling point for me, so I'm less able to comment on where that is going, especially if you consider it in relation to APS-C line. My basic thoughts on that are they did need the high MP bodies, but they are not worth a significant cash premium. Just "differently good" compared to lower MP. Let the user decide between their needs. 1D will always be its own niche, whatever that is...

Mirrorless continues it relentless improvements and the reasons to swap are getting smaller, so holding back on DSLR features is not an option any more.

[Bob Andersson]

.
Gordon has just previewed the new 5D Mark IV...

[popo]

Mis-typed into my browser and ended up here... M5 announced now. Somewhat interesting, although sticker shock...

[Bob Andersson]

.
My first reaction was "At last", as in "Canon are beginning to take mirrorless seriously". One feature I don't understand is how they claim 5-axis stabilisation with a fixed sensor even if the lens used doesn't have IS. Maybe I've misread something or maybe I'm a couple of axes short of a picnic.

Bob.

[popo]

I haven't paid attention to the detail but think I read somewhere it combines the optical IS in lens and does digital shift on the sensor. Is this a video thing as I can't see that happening for stills...

The pricing in context does seem less unreasonable, but still not what I might consider. I think I read somewhere (probably Thom Hogan's site) that Canon were already 3rd in mirrorless before that. I don't know if that is worldwide or a specific region.