Pixel Perfect wrote:
UCSB has it right, translation was wrong. Canon won't offer in-body for a long time if ever unless it's a demanded feature and Nikon does so too.
Nah! Nikon want to push their uber expensive lenses, and take their time releasing them. Nope, I'm just hoping Sony can really get their act together and really release some good lenses and are more realistically priced. Doubt it though.
philber wrote:
IMHO the 920.000 pixel LCD has got to be a major improvement. It cancels one of the worst features of my 40D, its weak display. Microadjustement also looks promising, as does Digic IV, which should take care of offering at least as good noise characteristics as Digic III despite the higher pixel count, which then becomes another bonus.
With 4 significant improvements, this looks like enough to warrant a new camera, and the spec sheet compares well with D300. Except, as is normal with middle-of-the-line products, the key question to decide if it is "interesting" or not is price. And there my guess is that 50D should still be cheaper than D300, which sports a more sophisticated viewfinder and AF. But at the price point where 40D was before they dropped the price, 50D should be a very good seller. Unless (or until) of course, D90...:-)...Show more →
If this new LCD is true, lets hope there is more magnification and much improved method of zooming in and out, ala Nikon,
When Sony do release the A900 it might well be interesting, might buy one with a Zeiss 50mm (I assume a 50mm is to come) just to use for a specific project. If the pricing will be as aggressive as rumour says it will. I won't need it to be a pro spec camera but that is a lot of resolution. Cheap medium format, my Mamiya 645 Pro never had multiple AF points, weather sealing and 8fps either!
I just hope it will not have 15 mpix. I checked out some samples of 14,6 mpix Pentax K20D at dpreview and it was soft thanks to NR@ISO1600. It was also soft at f10 thanks to the diffraction when doing some "landscape" stuff. Let's hope Canon will be wiser.
I think in all fairness, the Pentax chip was a CCD and a couple of generations back, Canon have always been the premier experts at noise control and uses CMOS sensors which even Nikon have had to switch to so as to get such good noise control. With Digic 4 the noise should be comparible to the 40D and that's no bad thing I suppose. It's a D90 competitor not up against the D300, a fact that will be conveniently forgotten the moment its released and the tirades begin.
This is my first participation in all this rumor/speculation threads. I saw the original web page before it was taken down and there is only mentioning of "in-lens IS", not "in-body IS" (I read Chinese).
I am pretty convinced that this is as real as many of the previous Canon leaks. Canon likes to play this kind of tricks. If the specs are true, this will be my next camera. A 5D + 50D combo is the dream combo for me: 5D for wide angle and 50D for telephoto for its pixel density.
A couple of comments that have been made here are interesting to me. The pixel pitch/density is real. I think this could turn into a real deficit with the camera. We have been fairly lucky so far to not have diffraction be a real concern for most shooters, but I think we might see it really coming into play with this new camera. Also, this will be pushing lenses. Does everyone remember how when the 1Ds came out that everyone said that it demanded the best lenses. After the 1Ds Mark II came out it everyone said that it REALLY demanded the best lenses. We are now virtually cramming the entire resolution of the Mark II into just the center of the lens. Luckily this is typically the best area of the lens, but it will still be extremely demanding of the lens. I wonder how things will fair. We might see a real barrier/downside to this megapixel race aside from the continued discussions around preferring less MPs in favor of better ISO or dynamic range.
Diffraction is not an issue to be ignored though to some extent the ability to use wider lenses for a given FOV may mitigate it somewhat. 12 megapixels on FF seems to be the diffraction sweet spot, plenty good till f16 for real world use and f22 is OK-ish.
BrianP wrote:
A couple of comments that have been made here are interesting to me. The pixel pitch/density is real. I think this could turn into a real deficit with the camera. We have been fairly lucky so far to not have diffraction be a real concern for most shooters, but I think we might see it really coming into play with this new camera. Also, this will be pushing lenses. Does everyone remember how when the 1Ds came out that everyone said that it demanded the best lenses. After the 1Ds Mark II came out it everyone said that it REALLY demanded the best lenses. We are now virtually cramming the entire resolution of the Mark II into just the center of the lens. Luckily this is typically the best area of the lens, but it will still be extremely demanding of the lens. I wonder how things will fair. We might see a real barrier/downside to this megapixel race aside from the continued discussions around preferring less MPs in favor of better ISO or dynamic range....Show more →
I think that this is where the SRAW[12] modes will start really becoming useful for folks worrying about things like that. You can choose to have it behave like an 8mp camera just by changing the image type -- and you'll likely win better low noise operation (compared to normal) due to the pixel binning. I'm also wondering if you'll see improved sharpness when compared to a std 8mp camera since sraw is effectively RGB pixels (already interpolated). Be fun to find out and to compare the high mp sraws against foveons
[edit] Adding that it is things like this which could well make me consider upgrading from a 40D - 8mp sized images are about all I need. If I could shoot in sraw1 and/or medjpg and get lower noise + higher iso + improved sharpness, I'd seriously consider an upgrade.
Beni wrote:
I think in all fairness, the Pentax chip was a CCD and a couple of generations back, Canon have always been the premier experts at noise control and uses CMOS sensors which even Nikon have had to switch to so as to get such good noise control. With Digic 4 the noise should be comparible to the 40D and that's no bad thing I suppose. It's a D90 competitor not up against the D300, a fact that will be conveniently forgotten the moment its released and the tirades begin.
You mean the "old" CMOS sensor co-developed by Samsung? Because I meant that one.
gml1 wrote:
The image quality is surely going to be great. Canon are very good at this. But is 15mp better than 12mp? And how much better is 15mp compared to 10mp?
Of course it depends. I'm a landscape photographer who likes to make 36" prints, so I'm of course excited about the 15mp possibility. "Better" is subjective. Better for me, yes. Better for you, you must know that for yourself.
milanissimo wrote:
I just hope it will not have 15 mpix. I checked out some samples of 14,6 mpix Pentax K20D at dpreview and it was soft thanks to NR@ISO1600. It was also soft at f10 thanks to the diffraction when doing some "landscape" stuff. Let's hope Canon will be wiser.
Greater resolution is of course an advantage when making large prints. And really large prints aren't typically shot at 1600. I did a bunch of landscape work with a K20D last season and it produces remarkable 36" prints.
The pixel pitch it will be too small(4,1-4,3 qm2).I DON'T THINK THIS WILL BE GOOD!!!!!!