Wasn't everyone jumping all over the 5D specs when they were first leaked, saying it didn't make sense for Canon to release that particular body? People need to relax...
I happen to know the OP, and he's not given to spouting nonsense, FWIW. Feel free to jump on that too
namyoon wrote:
I don't know where anyone got the impression of a 3-stop light loss ... it doesn't make any sense at all (it's actually a 1/3 stop light loss)
Ok, help me with math someone here. The 1N RS (I am talking about the 1990s film camera here) had a pellicle mirror that let 2/3 of the light go to film and 1/3 light to the viewfinder. To me, that means a 2/3 f-stop loss (given that a 50:50 pellicle would be a 1 stop light loss). Definitely more than 1/3 stop, and less than 1 full stop.
A pellicle mirror would be a fantastic idea in DSLRs. I personally have been wanting this to be introduced into modern cameras for a while now. We're getting to the point where noise is becoming less and less of an issue. If it's introduced with Digic 3, which would be a nice step up from Digic 2 I'm sure, the 1/3 stop loss would be negligible. Besides the 10fps, the lack of mirror blackout would be very welcomed.
Argh guys, I apologise for the miscommunication between me and my friend. There's NO 10 FPS and the subsequent 3 stops of light loss. My bad, you can spit on me as many times as you want.
It's just 5fps, and a possible 8fps with crop.
Makes you wonder what's gg to happen to the 1dmk2...
Edited by data1ore on Feb 14, 2006 at 09:39 PM GMT (Reason: english phrasing mistake :-))
I don't know the exact split of light of the pellicle mirror, but I have read that it is a 1/3 stop loss--but I'm not sure. But yes, even a 50:50 would only be a 1-stop loss, so a 3-stop loss is nonsense.
Either way, if you think about it, with the 20D ISO800 images being as clean as a 10D's ISO400 images, and you continue that trend with the alleged Digic-3, I could imagine that the 1/3 or 2/3 or whatever stop light loss would be insiginificant to image quality, at least compared to current cameras.
What I mean is, if you were to set the 1Ds RS to ISO400, it would actually set itself to the equivalent to ISO640-800, but the image produced would be as clean as ISO400 out of the current 1Ds Mark-II models because of the better SNR and filters of the Digic-3.
I have a question on the 30D, Since everyone is expecting this camera to replace the 20D, if your info is correct, we can see the first Digic 3 processed camera this Feb. right?
One of your posts mentions that the Digic 3 will be released in the Fall.
I have a question on the 30D, Since everyone is expecting this camera to replace the 20D, if your info is correct, we can see the first Digic 3 processed camera this Feb. right?
One of your posts mentions that the Digic 3 will be released in the Fall.
Please clarify.
Well I only said what I found out. I didn't predict on when they'd be released. You can bet at least one of them's gg to be released at the next show I guess....and even better if Canon releases all 3. Nikon will look REALLY bad.
The issue with fps and digital is getting the sensor to dump the info fast enough (thats why they doubled the number of readout channels on the 20D as opposed through the 10D).
data1ore wrote:
Nam, it's STILL the pellicle, just that it's not 10fps, and no uber-high speed mode.
But if it's a pellicle, then there MUST be light loss. And you say on the previous page that since it's not 10fps then there's no light loss. The frame rate is independent on light loss - light loss has only something to do with pellicle or no pellicle. Even a 1fps pellicle will be losing light.
So now you are saying that it's going to have pellicle mirror but without light loss?
With all due respect - do you understand the concept of pellicle mirror? By design it will provide less light to the viewfinder and since it is not moving and cannot be completely transparent, there HAS to be light loss to the sensor
stanj wrote:
But if it's a pellicle, then there MUST be light loss. And you say on the previous page that since it's not 10fps then there's no light loss. The frame rate is independent on light loss - light loss has only something to do with pellicle or no pellicle. Even a 1fps pellicle will be losing light.
You may want to start the rumor from scratch
Sigh...I mean there's no "uber-high mode where u lose 3 stops of light". You'll still lose some light due to the nature of the pellicle system. It's just not gg to be a factor in the high speed shooting mode. That point was a mistake on my part.
Man! You guys are ruthless. :-)
Sorry stanj and mt :-)
Edited by data1ore on Feb 14, 2006 at 09:41 PM GMT
