# Uh-Oh!  Canon to throw down the gauntlet! What does this mean to you, as a N-shooter?



## Markw (Aug 27, 2012)

Well, sorry for the extensively long title, but I didn't want this thread to be forwarded to the Canon forum, as it's intended for Nikon shooters.  Anywho, should the rumblings from the rumor mill be true, Canon is about to throw down the gauntlet (my commentary in green):

*3DX*:
46 MP
3.7 frame per second
Dual DIGIC 5+
ISO: (25) 50-6400 (12800) (Great.  Especially on the low-end)
AF: Same as 1DX
USB 3
CF+SD - (perhaps a tad confusing why they wouldn't put 2x CF cards in..)

*7DII*:
24MP - an all new sensor with phase AF on chip and noticeably lower noise than the current 18MP. (Sounds fantastic.)
1Dx/5D3 based AF system. (Great, of course.)
10 FPS. (..at 24MP.  Great.)
ISO 100-25600. (Great).
High speed video, with still capture. (VERY anticipated.  If it's at least at 720p, and at least 1080p60, it's still a win.)
Improved durability and sealing. (Always welcomed)
Available this year. (O.O)
Read more on PhotoRumors.com: Rumored high megapixels Canon EOS-3D X and EOS-7D Mark II cameras | Photo Rumors

Anywho, That 7DII seriously sounds like a killer camera.  The 3Dx sounds great too, but the 7DII sounds impeccable.  Being an avid Nikon shooter, this can only mean one thing.  Great things are to come from Nikon.  With a 7DII, it's almost impossible for Nikon to NOT come out with a king-of-the-hill DX replacement.  And, if my thoughts are correct, it should be incredible, as the 7DII sounds to be.  Either way, great things are to come from both companies.  What do you think?  What are you most excited about?  What do you think this means for Nikon's upcoming lineup?  Either way, the D4x and D7100/D400 are looking incredible by association and nothing else.

Mark


----------



## Parker219 (Aug 27, 2012)

Wow sounds amazing. Like you said, Nikon will see this and try and come up with something as good/better!


----------



## KmH (Aug 27, 2012)

It may not be a safe assumption that Nikon does anything in response to what Canon does.


----------



## Markw (Aug 27, 2012)

KmH said:


> It may not be a safe assumption that Nikon does anything in response to to what Canon does.



That point aside, it's no secret that Nikon will likely produce a pro-grade, pro-bodied higher-MP camera, and a new flagship DX camera (whether it be a D400 or D7100 is beside the point also).  So, whether it is in direct competition with Canon (which, in order to remain competitive, it will need to be) or not, it's a safe bet to say that Nikon will be releasing a camera in both of these categories.

Mark


----------



## Derrel (Aug 27, 2012)

It really means nothing to me as a Nikon shooter, except that Nikon will probably produce a similar, or better-spec'd model, at a lower price and with higher reliability. Witness, the 5D-III versus the D800...or the cheapest Canon Rebel and the 24-megapixel, $699 Nikon D3200, or the Nikon D3x at 24.5MP versus the Canon 1D-IV at 21 MP. The two companies will probably continue to go back and forth. Canon's BIGGEST hurdle though is going to be in designing and producing some decent wide-angle primes and wide-angle zooms...Canon has been lagging badly in wide primes and zooms for a decade and a half...if they DO make a 46MP camera, they don't have a decent wide-angle zoom to work with it...even their 16-35-L Mark II lags behind compared to the discontinued 17-35 Nikkor, and the 14-24 Nikkor is one of the world's best zooms...and BETTER than most all of Canon's entire wide-angle "standard" prime lineup. 

I mean, WHEN will Canon finally get around to updating its 24/1.4 and 35/1.4-L series lenses? Nikon has two standard prime lenses in those slots that are currently the class leaders--and a ZOOM, the 14-24, that blows away almost any other prime lens between 14 and 24mm...Canon has...old chit that's pretty pathetic when shot on their 1D-IV or other 22-MP class sensors...and the people who CRAVE high,high,high MP cameras are highly concentrated in the LANDSCAPE/NATURE segments, where actual, PRINTED, high-resolution images are common...high MP bodies are great, ut one needs GREAT lenses to leverage them...

Canon keeps doing okay on the bodies, off and on...but their LENS strategies seem pretty lame. Why do they continually produce such crappy wides and such so-so wide zooms?


----------



## Overread (Aug 27, 2012)

I think Canon's lens focus in the last year or two was on their big white super telephoto lenses - even though many of them took months longer than they should have to reach the market. Heck you mention wide angle - Canon needs a new 50mm f1.4 as theirs currently lags against the Sigma offering. 

That said I suspect Canon will push more on their long lenses for a while yet - I've still to wonder if we'll see MII versions of the 400mm f5.6, 300mm f4 and the ever rumoured 100-400mm. That said they might be holding off on new versions of them - its no illusion that new lenses end up with a near double price jump over the old ones and the £1K market in those three lenses does net canon a lot of new customers interested in those focal lengths at that budget point (whereas nikon only has the one 300mm f4). 

As for the new rumoured bodies - eh - I wish they'd stop boosting the MP! Not so much because of noise but because each time they bump the MP users have to:
1) Upgrade their storage (both computer and camera memory cards)

2) Get used to a whole new world of 100% crop views and "softness at 100%". 

Honestly I think if they held the MP values stable for a release or two they could really work some outstanding magic with them.


----------



## Markw (Aug 27, 2012)

Overread said:


> Honestly I think if they held the MP values stable for a release or two they could really work some outstanding magic with them.



I agree 100% (Yes, even owning a D800).

Mark


----------



## TheFantasticG (Aug 27, 2012)

Doesn't mean much to me and I shoot with Canon and Nikon. On the other hand, competition is great for us so I hope Nikon, as a company, thinks they need to answer Canons cameras.


----------



## jrizal (Aug 27, 2012)

KmH said:


> It may not be a safe assumption that Nikon does anything in response to to what Canon does.



Correct me if I'm wrong but there may be truth in this. With regard to recent outings by both Nikon and Canon, it seems Canon releases more models compared to Nikon. Another thing I've noticed too is that Canon seems to "surround" Nikon with slightly better and slightly lower models. ie. T3-D3100-T2i; T2i-D5100-T3i (tight match though); 60D-D7000-7D and so forth. Maybe it's just me but let's not create a flame war ala Windows vs Mac, Android vs iOS. After all both companies make good cameras but AFAIK Canon is the bigger company today and is not limited to photography products. After all, one can have the 5D Mk III and still take mediocre photos. It's not only about the gear but the user as well.


----------



## Solarflare (Aug 28, 2012)

These cameras only exist as rumors, so far. Not much to comment on a virtual gauntlet really.


----------



## greybeard (Aug 28, 2012)

I'm personally ready for the FF d600.  I don't really care what Canon comes out with unless I can use my Nikkor lenses with it.........lol


----------



## Derrel (Aug 28, 2012)

Markw said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> > Honestly I think if they held the MP values stable for a release or two they could really work some outstanding magic with them.
> ...


----------



## MLeeK (Aug 28, 2012)

As a canon shooter... The specs on those things listed LOOK great, but they seem to be the sales gimmicks too. WHY do I need a 3D? For megapixels alone? I can live without 50 ISO. It's not worth it to me over the 7D or possible 7D2 which will have better high ISO ability. I can buy something to limit my low end. Can't buy anything to expand my high end. 
It's about damn time they got their crap together on the focus systems. 
I want to know more about dynamic range here?
This seems like the megapixel war only expanded-so far. 
I'd like to see reality and testing.


----------



## sleist (Aug 28, 2012)

Solarflare said:


> These cameras only exist as rumors, so far. Not much to comment on a virtual gauntlet really.



Hasn't stopped you from referencing the D600 for the past few months ....


----------



## sleist (Aug 28, 2012)

I'd like 24mp in a D300s body with AF at least as good as the multicam 3500.
Until then, my D700 and D90 will suffice.

I can be equally incompetent with any camera Nikon makes.


----------



## jake337 (Aug 28, 2012)

I always have wondered why people think more megapixels means some sort of sales gimmick.  Especially in manufacturers flagship models.

Doesn't anyone else think that the technology behind it is just getting better and better and better?  


D800 comes to mind.


----------



## JDFlood (Aug 28, 2012)

Frequently a single specification becomes a proxy for an entire product. Like amplifier and watts of power. Marketing takes it and promotes a camera ( in this instance) based on only mostly megapixels. So this is what happened for a long time. The casual consumer could make a semi-good dicision based on the number of megapixels.... The more educated customer base then put up the rebuttal that megapixel aren't every thing.... Well they arn't. But when you triple the number and accompany that with substantial improvements, without loosing ( for instance ISO performance), then it really says something. The D800 is quite an achievement, I love mine... It has significantly improved my photos. I ca also tell that I am not getting the most out of it. It is now better than many of my lenses and... Well, honestly me. But that is Ok, hopefully I can grow into it. Yeh, the technology is getting better and better! I thought digital finally bested film about five or six years ago... Now it is so far beyond that  I find film a really anoying memory. I wish I had this when I was a kid... Hours in the dark room... What a waste. Can't wait for the D900... In the mean time I'll try and get as good as my D800 is. jD


----------



## gsgary (Aug 28, 2012)

As a new Leica shooter neither lenses compare to Leica lenses


----------



## Derrel (Aug 28, 2012)

jake337 said:


> I always have wondered why people think more megapixels means some sort of sales gimmick.  Especially in manufacturers flagship models.
> 
> Doesn't anyone else think that the technology behind it is just getting better and better and better?
> 
> ...



Here are a few screen caps I made today and pasted into a PSD document....Yeah....the D800 comes to mind...i
n the minds of Canon executives looking for their next employment opportunity...in Canon's photocopier division...


----------



## Derrel (Aug 28, 2012)

MLeeK said:


> As a canon shooter... The specs on those things listed LOOK great, but they seem to be the sales gimmicks too. WHY do I need a 3D? For megapixels alone? I can live without 50 ISO. It's not worth it to me over the 7D or possible 7D2 which will have better high ISO ability. I can buy something to limit my low end. Can't buy anything to expand my high end.
> It's about damn time they got their crap together on the focus systems.
> I want to know more about dynamic range here?
> This seems like the megapixel war only expanded-so far.
> I'd like to see reality and testing.



I'm going to make a comment here about Dynamic Range. I bought a Nikon D3x last month. The DR on this camera's sensor is ABSOLUTELY ASTOUNDING. ANd by that I mean *freaking* ASTOUNDING. As in, "the ability to pull back a FOUR-stop over-exposure and make it look good." As in "*damned near WHITE RAW images"* shot in summer sunlight or with studio flash, that come BACK with just simple, direct Exposure MINUS slider in LR or ACR. And which look GOOD after as much as MINUS 3.75 stops of Negative Exposure!!! 

As in, "the ability to use MASSIVE FILL LIGHT slider, and STILL make a great image", with a simply contrast tweak or black point adjustment or curves nudge. The D3x was the "king" of DR...some of the testing sites had it listed at 13.5 stops of DR...it is simply the SINGLE, biggest, best photographic advantage I have EVER,ever been given. The difference in the malleability of the D3x files and those of any other camera I have ever dealt with is simply S_T_A_G_G_E_R_I_N_G. it is hard to over-emphasize my sheer amazement of how far Nikon has come. I am familiar with Canon 60D and 7D and 40D and 20D and 5D Classic files, as well as Nikon and Fuji D-slr files...the D3x's sensor technology and the camera's electronics performance are simply hard to believe. The post-processing malleability of a D3x 12-bit NEF file is almost beyond my wildest dreams. And I have not yet even TRIED using the true, 14-bit NEF capabilities.

You might think Canon is doing well. Well...they are lagging.


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 28, 2012)

And I'll bet the actual specs are going to be disappointing compared to these...like they always are.


----------



## Vautrin (Aug 28, 2012)

A camera is sooooo much more than MP....  Just shoot a Nikon D3100 and a D700 side by side.  The 3100 has more MP, yes.  But the pictures on the 700 are nicer.  Why?  Features.  Skin tones more life like.  That kind of thing that makes an "ok" photo great...  

So, as a Nikon shooter, I'm happy because I want the big boys duking it out to make better progress.  I'm also secretly hoping that such high megapixel cameras will either let hasselblad bring down their price, or have them throw down another gauntlet with a 200MP + camera...

But will I switch for 46 MP?  No.


----------



## Markw (Aug 28, 2012)

I was scared this was going to become a MP flame war.  And we're almost there.  That's not what I intended the post for.  As Derrel said, the D3x's DR was astounding.  The DR of the D800 is impeccable as well.  Resolution from both cameras is incredible, especially from the D800.  Landscapes with the 46MP, if Canon comes out with some good WAs, could be something great.  But, either way, the D4's high-MP successor will rival it and will produce incredible images akin to the D3x over the D3200.  

As for the 7DII, the MP were the least of the worries here.  Higher video frame rates will CERTAINLY trickle over to Nikon.  That's great for me.  ISO range sounds fantastic, and at 10FPS (which I have NEVER used, and probably will never need.  I don't care much about this one.  But, it does mean that the write speed of the camera is great.)  Pro-grade AF and weather sealing (not necessarily pro-grade).  All good things.  So, MPs notwithstanding, it still sounds like a great camera. Something that would go as a great backup to my D800 (Nikon's counterpart, of course).  

Oh, and the specs are from Canonrumors.  So, they should be taken with MANY grains of salt.  NR does a much better, and more reliable job than CR.

Mark


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Aug 28, 2012)

Nikon still a LOT better


----------



## Tee (Aug 28, 2012)

Mark, I know you're a gadget geek but as a Nikon shooter, I'm curious as to why I should even care? :???:  I mean, awesome to the Canon shooter but this has no bearing to my current set-up or wants and needs.  The only thing this means is Canon is rolling out good camera's for their users and more Nikon VS Canon hater threads.


----------



## MK3Brent (Aug 28, 2012)

Sup with all the megapixels...?


----------



## Markw (Aug 28, 2012)

Tee said:


> Mark, I know you're a gadget geek but as a Nikon shooter, I'm curious as to why I should even care? :???:  I mean, awesome to the Canon shooter but this has no bearing to my current set-up or wants and needs.  The only thing this means is Canon is rolling out good camera's for their users and more Nikon VS Canon hater threads.



Well, gadget geekiness aside, I need a supplement for my D800.  And I want my money to go where it's best used.

Wel, your current setup is just that; your current setup. It will be replaced.  And, when it's time to replace it, you'll want to know what's on the market at that time, and what will be coming up soon.  That's where I'm at now, looking for a supplement.  Between now and when you want to replace your setup, the industry may have changed.  Your wants and interest in the art (notice the difference) may have changed.  And, when that time comes, you'll be thankful you did take into account every option, and evaluate what effect that will have on the near future (of that time).

And, this will likely spark lots of comment akin to: A nice camera takes a great photograph just as a hard hammer builds a beautiful house.  Well, a nicer camera does produce a file that you can pull back 4 stops of highlights and shadows then print 6' wide prints (that are still viewable from a respectable distance) like a D800.  So, a great camera doesn't take great photos.  But it does allow you to take more of them in more diverse, and adverse conditions.  Oh, and 120fps video can only be created by a camera that can shoot, well, 120fps.  

Mark


----------



## toontca (Aug 28, 2012)

greybeard said:
			
		

> I'm personally ready for the FF d600.  I don't really care what Canon comes out with unless I can use my Nikkor lenses with it.........lol



Well said sir.
Well said.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 28, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> Nikon still a LOT better



THAT type of comment is often regarded by Canon loyalists as "flame bait"...hence my actual effort above, to go and screen-cap some truly relevant photographic results to prove my point, which is that Canon is having a TOUGH GO OF IT, sensor-wise...they are getting their butts kicked by the Nikon sensors which can do on-chip noise reduction BEFORE the digital signal is run through the digital to analog converter phase...Nikon has a BETTER SYSTEM, and one that Canon does not have access to...so yeah...a 36 megapixel Nikon blows the doors off of a 22 MP Canon, at BASE ISO, with only MINOR post-provessing tweaks added to lift the shadows!!! 

Canon is STILL limping along with, basically, the 5D-Mark TWO's sensor, over four years later....STILL suffering from chroma noise, and pattern noise, in HEAPS. WHo thinks Canon has a GREAT new sensor technology ready to go??? Raise your hands? Nobody? FOur years to make a MArk III that finally has a decent AF system--but has basically the same,old, warmed-over sensor as the 5D-2 had???

That "megapixel race" thing Canon was doin' has come back and bitten them on the arse...


----------



## Overread (Aug 28, 2012)

Derrel said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon still a LOT better
> ...



You WERE there weren't you! At F-Stop Ridge! 
Battle At F-Stop Ridge - YouTube
Battle At F-Stop Ridge 2 - YouTube

Darn Nikon Confederates!


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 28, 2012)

Derrel said:
			
		

> THAT type of comment is often regarded by Canon loyalists as "flame bait"...hence my actual effort above, to go and screen-cap some truly relevant photographic results to prove my point, which is that Canon is having a TOUGH GO OF IT, sensor-wise...they are getting their butts kicked by the Nikon sensors which can do on-chip noise reduction BEFORE the digital signal is run through the digital to analog converter phase...Nikon has a BETTER SYSTEM, and one that Canon does not have access to...so yeah...a 36 megapixel Nikon blows the doors off of a 22 MP Canon, at BASE ISO, with only MINOR post-provessing tweaks added to lift the shadows!!!
> 
> Canon is STILL limping along with, basically, the 5D-Mark TWO's sensor, over four years later....STILL suffering from chroma noise, and pattern noise, in HEAPS. WHo thinks Canon has a GREAT new sensor technology ready to go??? Raise your hands? Nobody? FOur years to make a MArk III that finally has a decent AF system--but has basically the same,old, warmed-over sensor as the 5D-2 had???
> 
> That "megapixel race" thing Canon was doin' has come back and bitten them on the arse...



Why is it that every time you pick a side you make the opposition seem like its absolutely, disgustingly bad and/or unusable? XD

I still shoot with a 1D Mark II. It's almost a decade old. I've never heard anyone critique me on "omg look at all of that chroma noise."

I agree that Nikon partnered with Sony does make better sensors, but you emblazon the chit out of your posts with so many capitalizations that it makes me wonder why I'm using such a painfully inferior camera. Now that I think about it....The poor quality of the 5Ds makes me vomit in my mouth a little.


----------



## sleist (Aug 28, 2012)

Tee said:


> Mark, I know you're a gadget geek but as a Nikon shooter, I'm curious as to why I should even care? :???:  I mean, awesome to the Canon shooter but this has no bearing to my current set-up or wants and needs.  The only thing this means is Canon is rolling out good camera's for their users and more Nikon VS Canon hater threads.



I see it like this.  If Canon doesn't abandon the pro DX shooter, neither will Nikon.  That's a good thing as far as I'm concerned.
The D7000 body doesn't cut it for me and I bought a D700 instead for that reason.  I care very little about the D600 as it's rumored to be configured.
If I'm stuck with less, so be it.  But I want Nikon to maintain the top of the line DX body.  If Canon does this, then Nikon will be more likely to do so as well, rather than give up market share by default.
At least that's what many DX shooters hope.


----------



## Parker219 (Aug 28, 2012)

Rexbobcat, I am new here, so just wondering why are all the "L"s red in your signature?


----------



## rexbobcat (Aug 28, 2012)

Parker219 said:
			
		

> Rexbobcat, I am new here, so just wondering why are all the "L"s red in your signature?



Lol it's just because they're normally red on the barrel of the lenses that have it.

It also means that for every lens I get that has a red L on it my photography skill goes up 50%


----------



## desertrattm2r12 (Sep 6, 2012)

Canon, as I recall, came out with the first digital SLR body under $1000. They usually come out with a cheaper version first and then everybody else follows them shortly. It means nothing to me. A few years ago I decided I needed autofocus bodies and lenses because my eyeballs were not getting any younger. I looked around very carefully and saw that --at that precise time -- Minolta had a camera with more features than anyone else. It can change monthly. So I went out and bought a Nikon "entry level professional" system because I had so much Nikon stuff I could use with the new camera bodies.
Heck, I just dragged out my Nikon F body (made in 1965) and I am going to get it fixed. I dropped it in 1974 and it hasn't worked since.
Canon? It's the other side of the moon, although the cameras are okay, I'm not a brand snob.


----------



## manaheim (Sep 6, 2012)

I thought canon made cheaper FF bodies available a while back... Well before Nikon since the first rumored one is the d600?

Anyway I still say DX has like 3-5 years left and is going to get dropped.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 6, 2012)

Parker219 said:


> Rexbobcat, I am new here, so just wondering why are all the "L"s red in your signature?



Yeah, Fanboy much there rexbobcat???

I have a $10,000 Canon d-slr system...I bought it and payed for it...and have had it since, oh, what was it?? 2006 or so... yeah...weird...I own Nikon and shoot that, and I ALSO OWN been shooting a Canon 20D, 580 EL-II flash, Canon 5D, 24-105-L, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 135/2-L, 135 2.8 S.F., and 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM, and a few other lenses, like the Canon 100 EF Macro, 50/1.8 Canon, sigma 18-125, Sigma 80-400 OS, etc,etc. And even though I OWN some L-series lenses, *I do not list ANY of my equipment *in my sig file...


----------



## Markw (Sep 6, 2012)

Derrel said:


> Parker219 said:
> 
> 
> > Rexbobcat, I am new here, so just wondering why are all the "L"s red in your signature?
> ...



I suppose I never really asked.  Out of curiosity, why do you shoot so many systems?

Mark


----------



## chuasam (Sep 10, 2012)

It means absolutely nothing. It just means that gear heads will have to spend more money but for photographers...it's business as usual.


----------



## rexbobcat (Sep 10, 2012)

Derrel said:
			
		

> Yeah, Fanboy much there rexbobcat???
> 
> I have a $10,000 Canon d-slr system...I bought it and payed for it...and have had it since, oh, what was it?? 2006 or so... yeah...weird...I own Nikon and shoot that, and I ALSO OWN been shooting a Canon 20D, 580 EL-II flash, Canon 5D, 24-105-L, 50/1.4, 85/1.8, 135/2-L, 135 2.8 S.F., and 70-200 f/2.8 L IS USM, and a few other lenses, like the Canon 100 EF Macro, 50/1.8 Canon, sigma 18-125, Sigma 80-400 OS, etc,etc. And even though I OWN some L-series lenses, I do not list ANY of my equipment in my sig file...



My fanboyism doesn't change the objective fact that every other word of every one of your posts is capitalized for unnecessary emphasis.

You really overestimate how much I care about the gear you have as opposed to the words you post on this forum. 

I don't understand how the whole signature thing changes how your words are perceived on the forum. I can own a Porsche and a Mercedes and have radical over-emphasized views about both of them.  But obviously if I own both they must not be as omg horrible as I make them out to be. Either that or I don't have the capability to find a better alternative.

I don't like the 60D all that much for photos because the colors and tones aren't as accurate and rich as those of the 1D, but I don't go around being like "the tones are SOOOO inaccurate, AND the HIGH ISO noise is APPALLING and is THREE generations BEHIND other sensors."

I was just implying that you make the 5DII sounds horribly inferior to other current systems, and that's not really true...


----------



## manaheim (Sep 11, 2012)

Um... What?

That was like a drunken rhino on an icy road.


----------

