Canon Issues Firmware Updates For 5D and 30D

Comments

1. Joe says

   March 19, 2008 at 4:11 am

   On the topic of firmware: Why are manufactures in the this field so reluctant to update? I just want to say this, I’ll pay $50-$100 for a firmware update that adds new features a lot sooner than I’ll buy a new body. What kills me is that most of the changes that I would want would take very little work.

   Now I only have a D50 which isn’t produced any more and isn’t a pro-body so a firmware update wouldn’t need to be too extensive to get my money. Example: I can manually choose between ISOs of 200, 400, 800 and 1600 however the auto-ISO will pick in increments of 50 and go as low as 50. How hard would it be to make that change? How about a 5 exposure bracket mode? How about a delay mode wherein the sensor waits 1 or 2 seconds to record after the mirror flips (to allow vibration dampening for relaly long exposures)?

   Pipe dreams I guess.
   

2. Richard says

   March 19, 2008 at 4:51 am

   I agree. I would also like to see them add the facility for very low ISOs. I understand that superhigh ISOs are hard to achieve, but surely very low ISOs would be a relativly simple change and would reduce the need for ND filters whilst virtually illuminating noise.
   

3. mrkgoo says

   March 19, 2008 at 5:25 am

   There are at least two arguments as to why they don’t ‘upgrade’ older cameras, at least the way I see it:

   1) Regardless of how easy it is to implement, it still needs work-hours to do, to implement, and to test. Work hours that may be better spent on something else, depending on the popularity of teh older camera.

   2) By updating older models, it means fewer people will buy newer cameras – and let’s face it, updating hardware is a large cash cow for many camera manufacturers.
   

4. Richard says

   March 19, 2008 at 9:05 am

   Agreed that it might reduce the sales of new cameras, but only fractionally as there is only so much that you can do with firmware updates. I think it would buy a certain amount of good-will which it could be argued is worth more than the few cameras that go unsold. I think if you look at Nikon’s loss of good will through their RAW debacle, it could be easily argued that when you give with one hand you can often take more with the other.
   

5. Joe says

   March 19, 2008 at 11:28 am

   Surely Nikon knows I’m more than 7 times likely to spend $100 than $700 especially since I’m likely to buy a more pro and less consumer body my next time around. They know I have Nikon glass which effectively glues me to them. When I outgrow my D50 I’ll give them thousands. Selling me a firmware upgrade doesn’t delay my camera upgrade, it makes them $100 richer and a happier customer.

   Also, I think you’re overstating the cost in man-hours to enable features. Its more of unlocking the hardware that is there than trying to invent magic. Letting me manually shoot at 100 ISO should be easy since the auto mode can. I’m not asking to have the camera bracket 5 shots then combine then into a 32-bit RAW (which probably could be done on board if Nikon wanted to).