Johnny Blood wrote:
I don't presume to understand the Japanese economy or politics, but I still find it hard to believe that anyone in Japan has the authority or clout to tell Canon (or any other company for that matter) how to run their business. In today's ultra competetive business climate (especially at the level of Canon and Nikon), one trip and you will be an also-ran and looking up at the hind quarters of your competition for a long time to come. And if true, why would Canon agree to this? It impacts its bottom line and hinders stock growth. In a free market, wouldn't Canon's investors be pissed?...Show more →
Try staying in Japan for a few months or a few years and you will understand how Japan and also for that matter, how Asian countries work. What works in USA not necessarily works in them Asian nations. The US Govt (since the late Ronald Reagan was US President) has been negotiating for decades to get Japan to buy US rice but the Japanese Govt simply won't budge from their stance! Doing so would wipe out the Japanese rice farmers!
Tentacle wrote:
Oh, and all this talk about resolution and framerates got me to speculate on the subject some more...
What is known from various documentation is that Canon makes sensors with different numbers of output channels. The sensor itself also houses the AD converters. This is a bit of a strech but it doesn't really matter for the rest of the educated guesswork that is about to follow.
Next comes DIGIC, buffer is "to the side" and the end of the chain is the card storage.
Now, here's the numbers bit... A 10D would do 3 FPS with a sensor that has 2 channel read-out. The current 400D has a sensor with a 2 channel output which cranks out 3 frames per second. 6.3 MPixel vs 10.1 Mpixel means that the sensor read-out speed has increased by 60%.
This is a wild guess on my part, but if a 60% increase in pixel throughput is realistic, then this means that it's realistic to assume that 8 FPS can be achieved for 12.8 mpixel. (Yes, even though a 1DMk II (N) and 1Ds Mk II sensor uses an 8-channel output, not 2 or 4. The same relative increase applies.)...Show more →
If the throughput speed of each channel is increased (which must be true in order to have an overall increase in throughput given the same quantity of channels), then the relative increase must be a function of the quantity of channels used. The percentage of throughput increase cannot be independent of the number of channels through which the data is transfered.
It seems like 150 pages ago or so this same marketing document was used as technical proof that 12MP could not be pushed through 4 channels at a rate faster than 3fps.
Great, then in three or four years the Japan Camera Inspection Council can tell Nikon to pull back on the reigns because they fear Canon might be decimated. Meanwhile we will still be using the same cameras we are today because "they don't take photos any worse than they did yesterday" and Canon didn't give us any reason to upgrade. Many of us might also be using Nikon gear and/or thinking about making a switch.
What if Nikon is playing rope-a-dope? None of it makes any sense.
If the throughput speed of each channel is increased (which must be true in order to have an overall increase in throughput given the same quantity of channels), then the relative increase must be a function of the quantity of channels used. The percentage of throughput increase cannot be independent of the number of channels through which the data is transfered.
It seems like 150 pages ago or so this same marketing document was used as technical proof that 12MP could not be pushed through 4 channels at a rate faster than 3fps.
Sensor read-out speed depends on 2 factors: The number of channels and the frequency. If between 10D and 400D sensor (both dual channel) there is a 60% increase in pixel throughput, then that must be a result of increase in clockspeed, or sample frequency if you will. After all, the number of channels remains the same.
Stick with an 8-channel read-out and up the frequency by 60% and you're at 12.8 Mpixel for 8-ish FPS.
Lack of speculation in the Nikon forums... I suspect that this has something to do with the fact that Nikon announces a camera, but then you have to wait several months for it to make it into the stores. With Canon, they announce it, and a couple weeks later they are all over the place. So with Nikon, the buyers have data they can think about, as they make their choices of what to buy next...
Take for instance me... I have a 300D... I need a new camera soon, because my old one is likely to die any time now... I currently have two Canon cameras I could buy... I a 400D or a 30D... I've chosen to NOT buy anything right now, and wait and see what' new Canon products that may be available this spring... So, for fun and to try and decide exactly what to do... I sit and watch and particiapate in all the speculation about the next Canon cameras...
With Nikon... I'd know for sure that I'd have to wait 3 or 4 months from the time they announce a new camera, before I could buy one... So there would be little reason for me to follow all this specualtion.
OK, we've hit page 300 and what have we got?
Pretty much nothing... wild speculations everywhere but it's not being very consistent. I think Canon will surprise us and do very much hope so. All what I'm waiting for is a new FF body. Be it the 5D successor or a 1-series with smaller body (optional grip). Yes, I'd like that 1Dv... but I will not curse Canon if they don't release what I want, since I'm (unfortunately) not their CEO
I think Monito really got a point on his post on page 298.
I see, that many others have huge expectations... I don't know. As an example that whole 'replacement cycle' stuff. What does it matter? You can't rely on that. I mean there has been one 5D, two 1Ds and two and a half 1D cameras. And people are doing statistics on that??!! Only the xxD series has seen lot more models. Furthermore, The technology is young and sure at the beginning line-ups are being refreshed more frequently. But as the technology matures that might change, and the life-cycles of the individual models might increase.
I'm also waiting on a 40D and will buy it when it happens. I'll also sell my 20D. I guess this will happen no matter what the 40D is unless it's FF then I'll have to think about it as I like the 1.6X as that enhances long lenses which I like.
Johnny Blood wrote:
Great, then in three or four years the Japan Camera Inspection Council can tell Nikon to pull back on the reigns because they fear Canon might be decimated. Meanwhile we will still be using the same cameras we are today because "they don't take photos any worse than they did yesterday" and Canon didn't give us any reason to upgrade. Many of us might also be using Nikon gear and/or thinking about making a switch.
What if Nikon is playing rope-a-dope? None of it makes any sense.
DynoMoHum wrote:
With Nikon... I'd know for sure that I'd have to wait 3 or 4 months from the time they announce a new camera, before I could buy one... So there would be little reason for me to follow all this specualtion.
The Nikon D80 and D40 were available abbout 3-4 weeks of being announced, which means the company has cut down the waiting period from announcement to market.
The fall-out from last year's Photokina disappointment wasn't that bad... And this year we have more reason to expect something significant than last year.
Even if Canon doesn't announce anything, I will not loose any sleep over it. Haven't got the cash to get a 1D Mk III, a 5D Mk II or 40D anyway, I'll have to settle for something second hand.
I confess I haven't read all 300 pages here, but it strikes me that none of us,,,certainly not I....are getting more than about 50% out of the photo equipment we already own. I am not as good a photographer as my D200 is a camera, and the same holds true with the 5D.....
Being a congenital equipment junkie is expensive and destructive to getting out and just making pictures. ..I'm speaking of myself here again.
I should care about the new technologies, but not obsess that this or that new geegaw or camera feature will make me a better photographer, or make my pictures better...The only thing that really does that is getting out and taking pictures. Getting equipment should be a process of getting tools that you need to accomplish photographic goals, or projects.
The best analogy I can come up with is GOLF....Many many golfers think they can go out and "buy a game" with this or that club or a new putter etc etc....The only way to get a good golf game is to practice and play. ...I hope I live long enough to do justice to the equipment already in my bag...Gotta go and check eBay for that new.....
I'd be better off if the 40D came out later cause my purchase is not in the immediate future as I am in college. But maybe the sooner the better cause then maybe a 50D will be not too far in the future
mudmutt wrote:
What would "Dual Digic III" mean? Would that somehow infer speed to transfer the image to disc? Or possibly (hopefully) higher ISO with low noise?
No, I guess one processor is dedicated to the AF system (and may be to some other tasks) and the other processor dedicated to sensor data, exposition tasks o what ever. Attend 45 AF points is time consuming ... My 350D in AI servo is not able to track a moving target correctly because has too many tasks to do; and only have 7 AF points !!! (Well roughly)
lordcarl wrote:
Canon had expected the D200 even before Nikon announced it. It was overdue anyway. The 30D could have been made a 10MP camera but Canon didn't do it as this would put the brakes on the D200's sales.
Remember the D2H? 4.15MP, 8 fps, announced in Fall of 2003, available early Jan 2004. Was a worthy challenger to Canon's original 1D but the company upped the ante and announced the EOS-1D MK II on January 29, 2004. Whatever gains made by the D2H went south the moment the 1D MK II was unveiled.
A 10MP 30D would do the same to the D200's existence in the marketplace. If the Japan Camera Inspection Council didn't request Canon to slow down for 2006, it would have make it practically impossible for the rivals to compete on equal footing and recoup their investments in DSLR technology - no point making newer cameras if a newly-launched version is set to gather dust on the shelves the moment it is shipped. ...Show more →
Here on the D200 I have to admit to seeing it differently. The D200 is a pro grade body with a decent pro-sumer 10.2 mega pixel sensor. It is more than competitive with the 30D with a 8 or 10 mega pixel sensor. I do agree with your D2H example.
Rusty1 wrote:
Here on the D200 I have to admit to seeing it differently. The D200 is a pro grade body with a decent pro-sumer 10.2 mega pixel sensor. It is more than competitive with the 30D with a 8 or 10 mega pixel sensor. I do agree with your D2H example.
Doesn't matter whether anyone thinks the D200 is better than the 30D in every way. Canon made record profits for Year 2006, most of it came from DSLRs, consumer digicams and inkjet printers. Been requested to slow down didn't make a dent to its profit margin, and Canon sees it as that its product line-ups are still very much sought after despite the negative predictions on the 30D in here and elsewhere.
And as Monito had pointed out, Canon couldn't care much about all the howls in any forum regarding its product offerings to the global market. They understand what photography is all about better than most camera equipment collectors.
Any chance of this topic reaching 400 pages just before the official announcement? We already have 25 new pages added today, with four days to go, at 25-30 pages per day, we might just do that. After that, all discussions on the new EOS would have its own dedicated topic by then.
