Alistair101 wrote:
Interesting article though I can't imagine this sensor cleaning technology, ie another plane in front of the image sensor really being that important to a pro, ie anything that is not absolutely required in the light path between sensor and glass is a bad thing, especially considering the pride we take in our equipment and the fact that 90% of the time we are post processing our images afterwards so the odd dust blemish is easier to remove. This sensor cleaning technology, at least on the 400D seems purely oriented to consumers who won't, don't know how to, keep their sensors clean!
You do know that the cleaning system vibrates the AA filter which already exists in a 1Ds...right? It's not "another plane" at all.
Personally, while the DPR post is plausible, I think it's highly unlikely. Dealers would have complained about the cannibalization of the higher volume 30D sales from the introduction of the XTi before complaining about a 1Ds3 that didn't have anti-dust. I still suspect Canon has other plans.
It would be interesting if they released the anti dust feature on the consumer body so the marketing department could kick the proverbial tires as to its viability as a selling point for more expensive model. It would also provide lots of consumer feedback for R&D purposes.
It might make sense for Canon to do this. I don't understand them demo'ing the camera without the production line up and running. If the camera sample was from the initial trial production run of 20-30 bodies and Canon was holding off production any additional bodies until feedback / testing was compleated, I could see this happening.
The 1ds has always had the lowest unit volume. It maybe that they can swap out the sensors and still sell any bodies produced. It might make sense to re-work 100-200 1ds III bodies and avoid a "dead" product.
I doubt that an unproven sensor cleaning scheme would stand in the way of a pro camera. Pros want reliable, proven technology. Adding unnecessary bells and whistles aren't goint to matter that much.
Hmmmm.... I'm sat here waiting to buy a replacement for my 30D, and not wanting to get a MkII N in case it gets replaced with something (more) fantastic. Just hurry up with the announcement Canon!
10DFT wrote:
I doubt that an unproven sensor cleaning scheme would stand in the way of a pro camera. Pros want reliable, proven technology. Adding unnecessary bells and whistles aren't goint to matter that much.
That makes good sense, but maybe it isn't the pros those Canon distributors were worrying about. Anyone have an educated guess on of the breakdown of sales of the 1-series, and especially the !Ds series, between pros and high-end hobbyists? Canon advertises these as cameras priced for those who can deduct the cost -- but this would be the best selling strategy anyway for the hobbyist who "wants the best" and can afford to pay for it.
It's a nice story, but I don't see it being the real case either. The vibrating AA filter is not a particularly exotic technology, it's the kind of "nice to have" thing added when there is not anything great to add - like picture styles.
Damon Spencer wrote:
Hmmmm.... I'm sat here waiting to buy a replacement for my 30D, and not wanting to get a MkII N in case it gets replaced with something (more) fantastic. Just hurry up with the announcement Canon!
I'm in the same boat as you, just I've decided to not limit my options to just canon. I'm waiting for PMA 07 to see what Fuji and Nikon will hatch. I'm looking for something that will really change my shooting style or improve the quality of my images. Right now, my 10D and a borrowed Nikon F5 are doing it for me. If Fuji builds an S4 off the F6 body and speeds it up just a pinch, I'm totally sold to switch.
Nikon's lens selection is disappointing, though, for those of us that like a variety of primes.
Canon seems to be marking time with the last three cameras introduced. Wonder if a new type sensor or technology is in the wings not quite ready for prime time. Looks like 2007 might be more interesting than this year was.
Fuji is the only one I'd expect to even try it, and it would never see production because they want to keep body costs down. Then again, if they're basing S4 off the F6 body, the geometry is there...
Sony, just like Canon, they make their own sensors. They were the first with a 10mp CMOS sensor. The logical next step for them would be to create a larger sensor - either FF or 1.2x, for example.
Nikon currently use Sony sensors.
Right. Since Nikon sources their sensors from Sony (except LBCAST, IIRC), they won't get FF before Sony does, but I don't think Nikon is too motivated to do it. They've discontinued a good amount of their FF/35mm glass, like 28 1.4.
Given that Nikon management has said publicly and emphatically that they won't pursue FF digital, I'd guess that might be a hint that one shouldn't hold their breath in anticipation.
doesn't make sense to me for Canon to combine 1d and 1ds. Would pro sports shooters be prepared to pay extra for FF if they only need (or prefer) a crop sensor?
i was thinking the price would be a problem. why buy a $10k super FF camera when you only need a fast crop sensor that costs less. Not to mention the workflow. FF files may not be much fun to work with in large volumes.
With the new "Conroe" processor and the "Kentfield" quad processor coming on line towards the end of the year FF files hold no workflow problems. Hard drives are now so cheap the storage is no longe a problem either.
A high speed crop camera should be an option though. serious amateurs might demand a high speed option, at a lower price than a high speed FF.
Seems like I'm going backwards. I had a $NZ500 eos 3, now I would need to mortgage my house to afford anything like it in digital. The 20d is great, but its no eos 3.
