The latest Canon rumors

The upcoming high MP DSLR camera from Canon will probably be called EOS-1S and is expected to be priced around $9,000.

The Canon 7D Mk2 is rumored to be announced in January at the CP+ show in Japan (beginning of February, 2013) or during the PMA/CES show (early January 2013).

The Canon EOS 650D got tested by DxOMark: it scored few points lower than the 600D and significantly lower that the Nikon D3200:

When we first heard the announcement about the EOS 650D and its new sensor, we hoped to see a gain in image quality sensor performance, but the Canon EOS 650D’s sensor scores have left our hopes high and dry. Clearly this 18 Mpix sensor’s only new feature is its hybridized autofocus (which includes the specialization of certain photosites).

Canon is outclassed by both Sony in terms of sensor technology, particularly where color depth and dynamic range are concerned. So the Canon EOS 650D’s strong points must be found elsewhere. Content with the image quality of the EOS 550D/600D line — sufficient for the majority of amateur photographers — Canon chose to focus its efforts on designing a camera with such ergonomic improvements as a capacitated touchscreen display and an innovative, quick, quiet, and powerful hybridized autofocus. In video mode, the autofocus operates continuously and takes full advantage of the emerging new line of lenses equipped with Stepping Motor (STM) technology.

This entry was posted in Canon and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Calibrator

    “…and is expected to be priced around $9,000.”

    Canon’s very own D3x…

    • they will sell them, because unlike Pentax they have system to back it up and unlike D3x there will be bigger IQ difference to mainstream then D3x was. Beside the fact that A850 with same sensor was under 2000 while 1ds will not have direct competitor

      • Pablo Ricasso

        Except for a camera costing all of 3000 bucks.

        • that camera have much less pixels if canon will have 50+

          • Pablo Ricasso

            I read a rumor of 46 and of 39, but nothing about 50+. Without a dramatic improvement in dynamic range and color depth, either smaller increase of resolution will mean very little.
            It is inevitable that there will be 50+ megapixel sensors, but you are the first one I have seen suggesting an imminent possibility of one. Can you share where you read this?

          • it was on cr some time ago and on some youtube video. cannot remmember where, but i also do not believe that canon would bother releasing 39Mpix body now unless it comes with “something” to appeal studio shooters (like high sync, built in ND filter, 1/32000 shutter, really really low ISO) etc

          • Sahaja

            Sony are also rumored to be making a 50mp + sensor . If so, that might appear in a D4x and/or a high mp Sony camera.

            Sony already have the tech. They just have to scale up the 24mp APS-C sensor used in the NEX7, A77 and A65 to full frame, in the same way they scaled up their 16mp APS-C sensor, used in the D7000, K5 and several Sony cameras, to produce the 36mp sensor used in the D800; and that would give them something like a 54mp sensor.

            I expect Nikon are the first customer this would be offered to – so any announcement of a EOS-1S would likely be followed by a 54mp D4x from Nikon. Going by recent releases, the Nikon camera would probably be available first and have better specs than a 1S.

            – S

  • Z

    Oh joy …

    No doubt FF sensor is the scaled up version of the SAME Canon sensor found in all their DSLRs …

    • What you just did now was tell everyone that (1) your’e not a Canon user and/therefore (2) you don’t know how these thing work 😀

      • Z

        Does admitting having used a Rebel count?

        • Pablo Ricasso

          I believe Z is on to something. The number I kept hearing from this forum and Canon rumors is 46 and also a bit of 39 earlier, but now mostly 46.
          Their small sensors are EXACTLY 1.6 times smaller than a full frame.
          So 18 megapixels x 1.6 x 1.6 = 46.1

          If I multiply the 15.1 effective pixels of the T1i, the answer is 38.656, so possibly when making a full frame at the same pitch they can use more of the remaining pixels and get something closer to the 39 that had been rumored.

          In either case, I hope that the sensor or the processor has enough improvements to make it a worthy camera and that they can eventually transfer those improvements to other cameras. Otherwise…

  • Pablo Ricasso

    I have to admit, while I dislike Canon, that they did do something completely unprecedented…

    They replaced an existing model with one costing more but inferior in every measure. I wonder if anybody else would have been brave enough to do that.

    • That logic is pretty consistent with your alias… both are likely products of dyslexia.

      • Pablo Ricasso

        Oh Geno, having another bad day at the net? Sometimes my fingers act a bit dyslexic when typing on a cold day, but I viewed the rebel T4 vs the T3 and most likely the T2 also, as was outlined from DXO in the article above. Try reading the article for yourself, so you can know what I was discussing.
        I tend to agree with the findings of DXO as well as those from Photozone and also the basic data from Photodo back in the day. I even use a Canon sometimes. I’ll use anything that works, and especially when it’s the only thing available. For mini DV it was between them and Sony, and their DSLRs still reflect the knowledge they gained in the area of video. But I hate most of the things the company has been doing for a long time. Please don’t get hurt if I don’t like everything about every one of your camera makers. I doubt you have a rebel T4. I know I won’t.

        • What’s a Rebel? xxxD? Never heard of such things 🙂

          • Z

            Gee whiz … you are a Canon fanboi … no?

  • Kuishinbou

    Aside from lenses and their high-end cameras (5D mkiii and above), Canon is falling behind. I believe that their “give the bare minimum” approach with respect to specs, along with the lower image quality of their sensors (especially 7D and below) is going to catch up to them.

    Although I am a Canon user and I am heavily invested in lenses, I am seriously considering selling all of my gear and switching. For me, the last straw was the introduction of the 6D, which I believe highlights their “give the bare minimum approach”, as it is inferior to the Nikon D600, but priced the same. And, if you look at the 5D mkii, they had the same approach back then, as the AF system was and still is inferior to the competition. But because of video, at that time, they could cut back on other specs like the AF.

    The Canon 5d mkiii appears to be a great camera, and I believe it is. However, it is what the 5D mkii should have been and it is far overpriced. It is more expensive than the D800, which is a serious joke! And, though I can afford it, I am not willing to be ripped off with an after-tax bill of around $4000 for the body alone.

    It is a shame, however, because I do love their lenses…

    Unfortunately, the camera that I want is not out yet. I would love to have a FF mirrorless camera with an efficient and accurate AF system and a bright EVF or OVF. Until one is introduced, I am not sure what I will be settling with: perhaps a D600, a D800E, or a Fuji X-E1. Although the Fuji has a crop sensor, the image quality without the low pass filter appears to be pretty impressive, and the compact size and style is very attractive. I only wish it was full frame and was free of its RAW file conversion issues.

    • I’m also facing a similar dilemma… Sony’s 36MP sensor in the D800 is actually better than the 5D3 sensor… this wasn’t the case before with the D3, D700, D3s, etc. But Canon’s lenses are better than Nikon’s and now (although it’s not a huge deal for my style of shooting) Canon’s AF is miles ahead of Nikon’s.

      Maybe one day if Nikon comes up with a 85 1.2, a 24 1.4G that’s sharper than the Canon 24 1.4 and a 200/2 VR that can match the Canon 200/2 IS, PC-E lenses that can match the quality+functionality of Canon’s TS-E lenses… maybe.

      • Ansel Adams

        Canon glass better than Nikon, huh? Well, I’ll agree it’s probably not for people like you who don’t understand what image quality is…

        • I’m speaking after using the lenses below:

          14 f/2.8L II, TS-E 17 f/4L, 24 f/1.4L, 24 f/1.4L II, TS-E 24 f/3.5L, TS-E 24 f/3.5L II, 35 f/1.4L, 50 f/1.2L, MP-E 65mm f/2.8 1-5x, 85 f/1.2L II, TS-E 90mm f/2.8, 100 f/2.8L IS Macro, 135 f/2L, 180 f/3.5L Macro, 200 f/2L IS, 300 f/4L IS, 300 f/2.8L IS, 400 f/5.6L, 400 f/2.8L IS, 800 f/5.6L IS, 8-15 f/4L, 16-35 f/2.8L II, 17-40 f/4L, 24-70 f/2.8L, 24-105 f/4L IS, 70-200 f/4L IS, 70-200 f/2.8L IS, 70-200 f/2.8L II IS, 70-300L IS, 100-400L IS, 28-300L IS, 70-300 DO IS, 17-55 f/2.8 IS.

          24 f/1.4G, 35 f/1.8G, 35 f/2D, 35 f/1.4G, 85 f/1.4G, 85 f/1.4D, 105 f/2 DC, 105 f/2.8G VR Micro, 200 f/4D Micro, 200 f/2G VR, 300 f/2.8G VR, 400 f/2.8G VR, 600 f/5.6, 14-24 f/2.8G, 24-70 f/2.8G, 70-200 f/2.8G VR, 70-200 f/2.8G VR II, 200-400 f/4G VR, etc.

          And what have you used? What do you know? 😀

          • Adam Ansel

            I own every single lens in both Canon and Nikon’s lineup.

            I have so many lenses I had to buy a second house in the Caymans to hold them all.


      • Sahaja

        Surely some Canon lenses are batter than the equivalent Nikon lenses – but then some Nikon lenses are also better than the equivalent Canon lenses. Each also has a few lenses with no real equivalent from the other.

        I really don’t believe Canon’s AF is “miles ahead” of Nikon’s – they may have caught up, and possibly even nudged ahead by a little – but saying they are “miles ahead” is I think a gross exaggeration.

        There are other things to consider including , flash system, sensor, customer service, and the rather subjective matter of ergonomics.
        To some people video is important too.

      • Pablo Ricasso

        If the only thing you care about is how narrow your depth of field then you might think the 1.2 lens best. But the new 1.4G and any of the 1.8s are MUCH sharper and that is in the center of the image. On the sides and in the corners there is no comparison. And that goes for any aperture below f5.6 and probably above.
        Out of all of them my most preferred is the 1.8D or the manual focus, provided you find a good copy. Either can be had for less than 300, cheap enough to use everyday. For full aperture, I would want the f1.4G. But I might rather use the PC lens or try one of the slightly longer DC lenses if the full aperture effect I was aiming for. They should exceed everything we have been discussing when used well.
        Back when all Nikon had was the AIS and the 1.4D I did want that Canon lens.
        I can’t say about the 200 f2 vs the 200 f2. or the 24. I know that my AI 24 f2 is way better than everything I read about it and that I seldom find a need for it. I know that I like using my AI 200 f2, but it isn’t quite as crisp as my AIS300 f2.8. I also know that much of the difference is because of a narrow depth of field that no amount of optical improvement will help. Given that, I can’t imagine there being much anything to distinguish the latest models in actual use. I also can’t imagine f1.4 doing much for a 24 lens that would be worth a couple thousand more dollars. I really like the tack sharpness of the AI 28 f2, even wide open, and find myself wanting to use that lens more often. I seldom hear people talk about it, but they sell well, are fairly inexpensive, and share a 52 filter with the 24 f2 and most all the great early Nikon primes, so you can carry a bunch of them.
        You did at least pick some really excellent examples of Canon lenses to throw out there…

          • Pablo Ricasso

            I suppose the difference between your observations and those of photozone may be caused by the fact that they used a NIKON camera to obtain the results for the f1.4G lens while you used it on a completely inferior 5Dmk2 that was likely the same camera they used to test the Canon lens.

            I suppose the 85 f1.2 is a good lens after all, so now I’m back to envying it. Do you know if there is much difference between it and the first one?

          • @Pablo Ricasso

            I’m not going to argue about yesteryear’s cameras but one thing’s for certain… you don’t know the subject.

          • Pablo Ricasso

            I do know that the Nikon 85 1.8 performs so good that there isn’t much need for the 1.4 and that in real world shooting the difference between the newer 1.4 and the 1.2 isn’t worth noting. I don’t understand why I would buy into a system I don’t like just to get that one lens when I could come along with a Mamiya or a Hasselblad and put either lens to shame. The damn lenses are so big you may as well be shooting medium format anyway…

            The only thing that should be apparent to you is that I haven’t shot the 1.2 lens against the 1.4 on FILM or on the same sensor as you have. I found that most times when I evaluate a lens my findings agree with photozone. I did, however, fail to consider just how INFERIOR the 5d2 sensor was compared to the D3x and the new D600. I didn’t think that the sensor could make THAT much difference. Have fun playing with your second rate sensors and know that it’s likely that Canon can catch up someday if they want to. Nikon was way behind back in the day also. I know this because that’s how I was able to afford to get all of their lenses that I wanted. I don’t consider myself a “pro” like you do, and likely wouldn’t. There really isn’t anything about your pursuit that requires enough intellect to designate yourself as a “pro.” If they started handing out titles for that, they might as well hand out titles for mouse fondling.
            In my money trade I’m told that I have good eyes, and it seems that anybody should. For me it’s fairly easy to see how much is often lacking in the images that are produced by the system you advocate so much. So go ahead and tell me that I don’t know squat, but remember that even somebody who doesn’t know squat can easily see that the thing you have to mount your precious lenses on is a pile of garbage.

      • Pablo Ricasso

        Oh, and I just read the 1DX got a really high DXO score. Best ISO, really good color depth, and acceptable dynamic range. So the company CAN do what I want. They just want me to buy their most expensive product.

        That gives me reason to think that the new 9000 dollar camera might be worth the money to some people. Maybe the 5D mk4 will get some of that someday…

        • It saddens me to say this but the D800’s images, when downscaled appropriately to match the 1D X’s resolution, the level of noise is not worse.

          • Pablo Ricasso

            Plausible. DXO had the ISO number for the D800 at 2800+ and the rumor site says the same for the 1DX is 3200+ or not far enough apart to make much difference. One set of eyes may prefer one over the other. A difference in shooting conditions might throw it one way or another.
            I also note that, while the rumor site claimed this score a few days ago, I still don’t see it posted. I suppose that IS why it is called “rumors.”
            The main thing I take from this is that Canon can make a camera that scores like a Nikon, if the rumor is correct, but only does that for the top one. Nikon makes one score like that so cheaply that the camera snobs hate it. It makes a plastic camera that the snobs won’t even think about score as good as the last 5D. That SHOULD catch up with them at some point, but given some of the attitudes I see here, maybe not…

          • Pablo Ricasso

            And it now appears apparent that someone was lying about the said DXO scores……..

  • Paul

    So this camera is going to be the 1DS…….. S for sucks. lol *snort* amiright?

    Ok fanboys it’s already been said.
    I know of a lot more studio/commercial photographers who shoot Canon than Nikon and this probably would be their upgrade of choice from the 1Ds III.

  • Nikon -> Canon

    I’m actually switching from Nikon to Canon (from a D800E to a 5Diii).

    I know the D800e is technically a bit better with stills, but I shoot video more than stills these days so Canon is making more and more sense. (I’ll be getting a C100 too).

    Also 5Diii seems to be a bit more of an all round camera.

    Just informing the world that not everyone is switching from Canon to Nikon. 😉

  • Back to top