Poprosze o uzasadnienie, bo powyzsze niczego mi nie wyjasnia.Zamieszczone przez Viracocha
Ponizej wkleilem urywki opinii Mike Johnstona z:
http://theonlinephotographer.blogspot.com/
tekst dotyczy nieco innej kwestii, tym niemniej daje do myslenia i dla mnie.
Zeby bylo jasne: sam stoje przed pytaniem: zmieniac?, na co? czekac?
Canon 40D: Needed At All?
[...]
That's right. Drop it altogether. Why does Canon need a camera in between the XTi (400D) and the 5D, anyway? Answer: it doesn't. [...]
So my question for Canon shooters is, what the heck do you think you want in a "40D"? A better camera than the 30D? You've already got it, folks: it's called the XTi. A luscious, higher-MP, full-frame sensor and a great, big, beautiful finder in a tough, solid box? You've got that too: it's called the 5D. True, a lineup without a 30D creates a "price gap." Who cares? Either save your money, or spend less and stop kvetching about all the dough you didn't spend. If the XTi is too cheap to soil your soft pale fingers with, buy two.
[...] And from Canon's perspective—well, all Canon needs to do is to work toward the middle. Give future iterations of the XTi a better viewfinder and more robust build, and/or work on bringing the price of the 5D down, or on putting the 5D sensor into a somewhat more modest camera.
So, Canon might need a 4D. Or a 3D (now that would be a cool camera name). But maybe it doesn't need a "40D" at all. It was a great series in its time; but maybe it's time now for the x0D series to go the way of the station wagon.
Odpowiedz z cytatem