'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

Moderated by: guardian

Visit the FM Store · Image Upload · Buy & Sell
FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums | Canon-mount SLRs | Join Image Upload

1 2 3 … 14

16 … 121 122 end

Archive 2007 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

tgrey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #1 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

lordcarl wrote:

Both the EOS 5D and EOS-1D MK II N were released at the same time, with the former being cheaper than the latter by US$700 initially.

Those who don't need the higher shooting speed go for the 5D due to its full-frame coverage and lighter overall package. Those who need the speed, weather-sealing, rugged construction and ability to withstand harsher shooting conditions will choose the EOS-1D MK II N.

Should the EOS-1D MK II N has the same 12.8MP full-frame coverage as the EOS 5D at the same US$3,999.95 price point, no one will be looking at the latter anymore as the choice of which to buy is obvious.

I think this leaves out what matters to my gang, the bird photographers. No doubt we are insignificant to Canon's product decisions, because there are too few of us -- though Art Morris may have some minor influence with Canon.

But we piggyback partly on a larger and genuinely influential group -- sports photojournalists. Canon's best advertising is the forest of white lenses at major sports events.

Both groups care a lot about an unmentioned factor, autofocus speed/accuracy. Birders care about pixel density and sports PJs about FPS. So the 5D is not at all an option for either group. And a full-frame replacement for the 1dm2n at 12.8MP wouldn't cut the mustard in terms of pixel density either.

Many bird photogs hike long distances and would like a lightweight APS-C camera with 1-series AF. I don't think we'll get that, but next best would be a 1Dm3 with APS-H at 12MP -- and I bet the sports folks want that too, and that's what will be forthcoming.

To get fast through-put and high pixel density with a full-frame sensor is very costly, and unnecessarily so from the point of view of bird and (more important) sports photographers.

Jan 20, 2007 at 02:41 PM

dcmiller
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.15 #2 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

Lotusm50 wrote:
asnapper wrote:
dcmiller wrote:
You guys stink at rumors. This is a rumor, from dpreview:

The new MF Canon camera sensor is 41.5x56mm and 40MP

New MF SL (Super L) lenses:

35/2.8
40/3.5 TS-E
45/2.8
70/2.8 TS-E
80/2
100/2.8 Macro 1:1
120/2.8 TS-E
200/2 IS
300/4 IS Macro 1:1
300/2.8 IS
600/5.6 IS
800/6.3 IS
1.4x
2x

35-80/2.8 IS
80-200/2.8 IS
200-600/5.6 IS

And more to come
Sorry, I don't know the prices

"Se non è vero, è ben trovato"

Ramón

I'll take this or the True Color. I don't care if the 30D marketed in spain should have been a slightly darker shade of gray.

The originator of the thread on Dpreview says the price will be around 10K, I'm assuming USD. Seems cheap until you look at the price of the Mamiya ZD.

What thread? Is there a link?

It's in the 1DsIII thread.
Se non è vero, è ben trovato

Jan 20, 2007 at 02:50 PM

Joel Slack
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #3 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

I'm curious what bird photographers did in the days when all cameras were "full frame?" Aren't we closing in on the law of diminishing returns, as far as how many pixels can be squeezed onto an APS-C sensor before they become so small that their light-gathering ability is compromised?

What camera can Canon produce that significantly improves on the currently-existing 1.6 crop cameras? And I'm seriously not trying to be difficult, but can't the birders continue to avail themselves of the current APS-C bodies, since they already prefer them to the FF stock?

Jan 20, 2007 at 03:03 PM

asnapper
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #4 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

Lotusm50 wrote:

What thread? Is there a link?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=21719448

Jan 20, 2007 at 03:10 PM

Hrow
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.15 #5 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

Joel Slack wrote:
I'm curious what bird photographers did in the days when all cameras were "full frame?" Aren't we closing in on the law of diminishing returns, as far as how many pixels can be squeezed onto an APS-C sensor before they become so small that their light-gathering ability is compromised?

What camera can Canon produce that significantly improves on the currently-existing 1.6 crop cameras? And I'm seriously not trying to be difficult, but can't the birders continue to avail themselves of the current APS-C bodies, since they already prefer them to the FF stock?

Although not a serious birder or sports shooter I think I can still answer your second question and the answer is no. The problem with current APS-C bodies is not a lack of MPs or the sensor, it is the lack of a fully capable AF system and the lack of weather sealing. In my mind, those are the major failings of the current crop of 1.6x cameras. To eliminate those failings requires that one move to the 1DMkII which involves a sizable increase in weight as well as cost. Also w/ the 1DMkII you get into the issue of pixel density, which at this point, can, should and will be improved.

Without any intent of being hostile, your first question, that being "I'm curious what bird photographers did in the days when all cameras were "full frame?" is irrelevant. To illustrate, an equally valid question is "what did bird photographers use before FF?" 35mm certainly wasn't the starting point of photography and photography wasn't the starting point of bird (or other) imaging. The irrelevance of questions like this is not limited to cameras. Ask a roofer what he used before compressed air hammers and he will tell. Now tell him he has to go back to his old tool and see what happens. You (or your body) will probably make the evening news.

Jan 20, 2007 at 03:46 PM

Joel Slack
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #6 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

I guess I can see your point. Nice logic!

Jan 20, 2007 at 03:49 PM

Lotusm50
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #7 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

The concern about "pixel density" is derivative. The attrction of APS-c DSLR's to "birders" is that they can use a smaller lens to attain the same reach. Period, end of story. There is no image quality advantage or any other advantage. It is about size/weight and/or cost. That's it -- and ultimately some measure of image quality is sacrificed for it. Like most things it is a trade-off, pure and simple.

Perhaps they should move even smaller to a 4/3'rd sensor, or perhaps a sensor the size used in P&S -- they have really high "pixel density".

Jan 20, 2007 at 03:59 PM

john Paul
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #8 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

cwphoto wrote:
john Paul wrote:

A 70-200mm f2.0 IS, L

Smaller and lighter super telephotos..

16.7 FF 8.5 fps, FF non-"S" camera..

We'll see if any of these from my rumor people will get this right this time..

JP

I'm still waiting for the fast 200 IS you promised would be in our 2006 Christmas stockings from Photokina...

I never promised that.. I never said that. Go find the quote!

Some people say things that they claim I said..

In regards to the 5D,... before it was released, I said that it would have an obvious feature.. (the rear much larger LCD)...but then people began twisting around what I said to suggest that I claimed there was a new "super spectacular feature",...and that by "my" words,..the rear 2.5" LCD couldn't have been what I was "referring to".. Until I pointed out what I had origionally written,..which by that time had been completely forgotten about in the minds of the speculators and rumor mongers..

It was like,...."Oh wow".. look at how distorted my message had gotten thanks to the misinformation being spread by those who just like to spread misinformation... much like the fellow named "Gotya" who made obvious false claims in regards to what the 5D was going to be like.. He claimed 1.3 crop, 6FPS..etc..etc.. never a mention of the 2.5" rear LCD.. so, I knew that he was full of poop, yet her even went as far as suggesting that "only time will tell"... well,..what happened to him..? He has no credibility whatsoever..

I said that it would be a "nice" camera.. and never suggested that it would be better than the 1DsMKII... and I said that I probably keep my 20D bodies at the time,...(for me, I shoot things where I need a faster camera with a fast 250ths top sync speed..)... I eventually traded up my 20D bodies for a pair of 1DMK2 bodies.. and that the new camera,..would be not as good as the 1DsMKII.. but those who had the original 1Ds, might just want to sell it while it was still worth something..

I couldn't give away the whole specs,..but I did give enough info so that the average non moron reader to be able to connect the dots.. Some were able to,... some were not..

Well,....there you have it... the info I suggested above,... I have no idea if it is true or not... I am out of the loop for much of the new camera info these days,...and that the guy reporting that to me has so far been less than on the mark..dating back to August..

Then again,...who knows... The wait & see will be entertaining for many of us..

There are things that I have been aware of,..like a new AF stystem.... and new flash system.. as well as a new "S" camera.. which has caused the need to create a better technology in order to use it to it's full potential,.../which I was told that, that was the reason why it wasn't released by now.. R&D isn't an easy process,...and the things being tested are not always being delivered.. much like the 1D with it's 6 MP CMOS that I was aware of,... or those other DO lenses.. (expensive junk IMO)..

Sorry about the spelling..I'm in a rush tro get moving..

JP

Jan 20, 2007 at 04:03 PM

bobsofpa
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #9 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

Wrong. When what you have is a 600mm lens, using TCs, and even then on a 1.6X camera, the bird only takes up a small portion of the frame, pixel density is a concern. On a FF camera the bird would be a dot on the image.

Jan 20, 2007 at 04:06 PM

john Paul
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #10 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

dcmiller wrote:
Lotusm50 wrote:
asnapper wrote:
dcmiller wrote:
You guys stink at rumors. This is a rumor, from dpreview:

The new MF Canon camera sensor is 41.5x56mm and 40MP

New MF SL (Super L) lenses:

35/2.8
40/3.5 TS-E
45/2.8
70/2.8 TS-E
80/2
100/2.8 Macro 1:1
120/2.8 TS-E
200/2 IS
300/4 IS Macro 1:1
300/2.8 IS
600/5.6 IS
800/6.3 IS
1.4x
2x

35-80/2.8 IS
80-200/2.8 IS
200-600/5.6 IS

And more to come
Sorry, I don't know the prices

"Se non è vero, è ben trovato"

Ramón

I'll take this or the True Color. I don't care if the 30D marketed in spain should have been a slightly darker shade of gray.

The originator of the thread on Dpreview says the price will be around 10K, I'm assuming USD. Seems cheap until you look at the price of the Mamiya ZD.

What thread? Is there a link?

It's in the 1DsIII thread.
Se non è vero, è ben trovato

Hmm... I heard about a Canon 55MP medium format back being in development .. a multi layer sensor.. that was about three years ago though.. so,...who knows..

JP

Jan 20, 2007 at 04:08 PM

tgrey
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #11 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

bobsofpa wrote:
Wrong. When what you have is a 600mm lens, using TCs, and even then on a 1.6X camera, the bird only takes up a small portion of the frame, pixel density is a concern. On a FF camera the bird would be a dot on the image.

It really is pixel density, not sensor size -- the number of pixels you can get on the bird, assuming similar noise and dynamic range. The reason bird photographers like the 20D/30D sensor so much is that it gets many more pixels on the bird with LOWER noise than the 1dm2, and more pixels with about equal noise as the 1dsm2.

See http://www.sphoto.com/techinfo/dslrsensors/dslrsensors.htm

If the Idsm3 is 24 MP on full frame it will have more reach than the 30D -- more pixels on the bird. You just have to crop. But it will be very expensive, not to mention heavy, and the birder will being paying the big bucks for the parts of the image that are being cropped off.

The dominant factor in bird (and sports) photography is not being able to get close to the subject.

Jan 20, 2007 at 04:33 PM

Lotusm50
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #12 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

bobsofpa wrote:
Wrong. When what you have is a 600mm lens, using TCs, and even then on a 1.6X camera, the bird only takes up a small portion of the frame, pixel density is a concern. On a FF camera the bird would be a dot on the image.

Again, it's about being able to have a shorter/smaller lens give you the reach you need. It all boils down to that.

Jan 20, 2007 at 04:56 PM

mfurman
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #13 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

Lotusm50 said: Again, it's about being able to have a shorter/smaller lens give you the reach you need. It all boils down to that

You do not seem to understand that there is no Canon lens longer than 600mm. For someone who already has EF 600 f/4.0L lens, a crop camera gives a better pixel density (resolution) than 5D.

Jan 20, 2007 at 06:08 PM

Beni
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.15 #14 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

Canon would be crazy to release a medium format system with that large a lens lineup ready from the word go. If it doesn't take of that is one huge investment in lens design/tooling that goes flush down the drain.

Jan 20, 2007 at 06:31 PM

Lotusm50
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #15 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

mfurman wrote:
Lotusm50 said: Again, it's about being able to have a shorter/smaller lens give you the reach you need. It all boils down to that

You do not seem to understand that there is no Canon lens longer than 600mm. For someone who already has EF 600 f/4.0L lens, a crop camera gives a better pixel density (resolution) than 5D.

Of course I understand that. That just means it's cost is infinite. Of course, you can go always out an get a third-party 1000mm lens and you can add teleconverters to that as well. It's still a cost and/or lens size/weight issue. And it's still about trade-offs no matter how you choose to look at it.

Jan 20, 2007 at 06:33 PM

kleinssz69
Online
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #16 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

Lotusm50 wrote:
And it's still about trade-offs no matter how you choose to look at it.

No trade offs - pixel density is what you want for birding, and not point and shoot type pixel quality either.

Jan 20, 2007 at 06:45 PM

RJJR
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #17 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

kleinssz69 wrote:

No trade offs - pixel density is what you want for birding, and not point and shoot type pixel quality either.

The 1DsMwhatever would have to have over 22M to match the pixel density (on a Bayer sensor) of my 20D.

From what I've seen from 1.5/1.6 Bayer sensors at 10+ Mpx I don't think I'd want any smaller photosites than the 8Mpx, and there's diffraction limiting waiting in the wings.

Now of it were a Foveon or the "True Color" type of sensor, that might be a different story if the the resolution was there and noise control at higher ISO was at least as good as the current Canon sensors.

Jan 20, 2007 at 07:06 PM

Simon Naisbitt
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #18 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

My predictions for Canon cameras in 2007

DIGIC III and integrated cleaning system across the board

Jan 20, 2007 at 07:18 PM

dcmiller
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.15 #19 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

kleinssz69 wrote:
Lotusm50 wrote:
And it's still about trade-offs no matter how you choose to look at it.

No trade offs - pixel density is what you want for birding, and not point and shoot type pixel quality either.

CCD may ultimately be the be the winner in pixel density.
You guys didn't mention digiscoping.

Jan 20, 2007 at 07:38 PM

dcmiller
Offline
Image Upload: On

p.15 #20 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

john Paul wrote:
dcmiller wrote:
Lotusm50 wrote:
asnapper wrote:
dcmiller wrote:
You guys stink at rumors. This is a rumor, from dpreview:

The new MF Canon camera sensor is 41.5x56mm and 40MP

New MF SL (Super L) lenses:

35/2.8
40/3.5 TS-E
45/2.8
70/2.8 TS-E
80/2
100/2.8 Macro 1:1
120/2.8 TS-E
200/2 IS
300/4 IS Macro 1:1
300/2.8 IS
600/5.6 IS
800/6.3 IS
1.4x
2x

35-80/2.8 IS
80-200/2.8 IS
200-600/5.6 IS

And more to come
Sorry, I don't know the prices

"Se non è vero, è ben trovato"

Ramón

I'll take this or the True Color. I don't care if the 30D marketed in spain should have been a slightly darker shade of gray.

The originator of the thread on Dpreview says the price will be around 10K, I'm assuming USD. Seems cheap until you look at the price of the Mamiya ZD.

What thread? Is there a link?

It's in the 1DsIII thread.
Se non è vero, è ben trovato

Hmm... I heard about a Canon 55MP medium format back being in development .. a multi layer sensor.. that was about three years ago though.. so,...who knows..

JP

I just don't see Canon coming out with a straight medium format system, like the ZD. If they do come out with a larger than 35mm sensor, I think it will be part of a system that can perhaps accept L glass in a crop mode. I do expect something different this year. Don't know what, but something other than the evolutionary model progression of the last few years.
The trouble with coming out with a new MF system is that it gives people who are not interested in MF a reason to look at Nikon.
Pure conjecture and 'gut feeling' on my part. It will be interesting in the future to look back and figure out if some of these rumors had any basis in fact.
I also wonder about a little 'counter-espionage' of false rumor on Canon's part, as they are much more deliberately managing information flow. I don't see this as corporate policy, but perhaps the actions of a few 'entrepreneurial' middle managers.

Jan 20, 2007 at 07:50 PM

Koivulehto
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #21 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

tgrey wrote:
To get fast through-put and high pixel density with a full-frame sensor is very costly, and unnecessarily so from the point of view of bird and (more important) sports photographers.

To match Nikon D2Xs' pixel density with FF, one would need 1.5 by 1.5 by 12.4 MP = 28 MP. To match Nikon D2Xs' pixel density with APS-H, one would need 1.25 by 1.25 by 12.4 MP = 19.4 MP.

To match Nikon D2Xs fps wise in high speed crop mode, one would need 8 fps for 7 MP images, which is slightly less than what 1D MKII(N) has now.

To match Nikon D2Xs in pixel density in high speed crop mode, an APS-H sensor with a similar high speed crop mode would need to be 1.25 by 1.25 by 7 MP = 10.9 MP, and a FF sensor would need to be 1.5 by 1.5 by 7 MP = 15.8 MP.

Of course, manufacturers usually don't design their future products to match competitor's current products, but to exceed them at least in some respects. From this point of view, a 12-13 MP 1D3 could be sufficient, either with APS-H or with FF. If it were FF with 5D's pixels and a 1.25x high speed crop mode, the high speed crop would have exactly same sized pixels, crop factor and file size than what 1DII(N) now has.

Jan 20, 2007 at 08:40 PM

Geoff Costello
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #22 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

Simon Naisbitt wrote:
My predictions for Canon cameras in 2007

That’s a serious commitment to predictions, a substantial Web page with detailed graphs, charts, pictures etc all on using past EOS Canons to predict the future... Right down to trend line graphs of rates of change in pixel pitch by model range to predict new sensor densities.

It looks sensible and consistent with the 'best of' the rumours for the 2007 models. How long have you been running it and have you been right at all in the past?

Also (just for fun) if you were (as some rumour sources have suggested) to se Canon splitting the 5D into two (claim 16mp for the 3D like an still 12Mp or so for the 7D like) how would this fit into your predictions etc.

Geoff

Edited by Geoff Costello on Jan 21, 2007 at 07:32 AM GMT

Jan 20, 2007 at 11:05 PM

Andrew Dale
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #23 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

is it just me? or does it seem like if Canon were to put out a 30D replacement that was 10.1 MP, then Canon would no longer be excelling, but just following the lead of other companies?

i know that MP isn't what its all about, but for a lot of new guys it is. and to simply make a replacement that seemed to merely match Nikon, Sony, etc, just seems out of character for Canon.

Jan 20, 2007 at 11:20 PM

mfurman
Offline
Image Upload: Off

p.15 #24 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

Andrew Dale said: is it just me? or does it seem like if Canon were to put out a 30D replacement that was 10.1 MP

I am not sure what you are suggesting. Is it a 12 MP 1.6 crop camara, you have in mind? Are you hoping for the same noise level as for 30D (at the same ISO)?

Jan 20, 2007 at 11:53 PM

thehawkins
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

p.15 #25 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread

Canon will release some cameras with some new cool stuff. And some of us here will be disappointed.

Jan 21, 2007 at 03:15 AM


FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Image Upload 1 2 3 … 14 15 16 … 121 122 end