JohnRobb wrote:
A three inch screen combining the two back displays is my favorite thought for a new 1 series feature.....
Not if it's anything like the 350D -> 400D. I miss the "classic" BW LCD. Right now, with the 1Ds2, I can look at the camera at any time and know exactly what state of mind it is. If the system is turned into something like the 400D, it won't be so easy because you somehow have to activate the display.
stanj wrote:
True. But try a wedding photographer. .....
Having mucked about storage media for 30+ years (14" disk drives in the
old days :-), I've been wondering whether I'm better off with a high-capacity
card or several small ones: I'd be paranoid about the large one failing and
taking everything I did with it, as opposed to spreading the risk a bit and
saving at least some of what I'd done if one of 2-3 smaller cards fail. Or
is that only a remote possibility ?
Greg Pavlov wrote:
Having mucked about storage media for 30+ years (14" disk drives in the
old days :-), I've been wondering whether I'm better off with a high-capacity
card or several small ones: I'd be paranoid about the large one failing and
taking everything I did with it, as opposed to spreading the risk a bit and
saving at least some of what I'd done if one of 2-3 smaller cards fail. Or
is that only a remote possibility ?
For long storage of my photos -->> DOUBLE BACK UP in DVD
For shooting -->> I prefer go up to 2 Gb cards (mainly 1 & 2 Gb).
I have had a experience with 4 Gb SD card just stop working, so I had to take the decision to stop working with it and recover the images afterwards at home, just to avoid loose images. When I did realize that in my counts I said: "Hey with the near 1200 photos of this 4 Gb card I have enough", but the reality was it stoped at 340 or so --->> I had to buy more cards to follow the trip.
MORAL: Minimize the risk !!
But now I have a 350D (8 Mp); whats about the new 22 Mp !!!! And even taking into account that normally I donīt shoot raw.
Well all is relative, so now if my preference cards are 1 or 2 Gb; it will go up to 4 GB or even more in the future. The thing is it the number of total photos remaining has to be almost the same than before (not a big amount to minimize risks)!. Pure mathematics !!
I wonder if introduction of a new top-end sensor (the 22mp+ for the new 1DSIII) would allow Canon to migrate it's current group of excellent sensors down one level, and thereby reassert complete dominance across the board.
After all, designing and fabricating a number of new sensors in house would be a very large task - and we have heard (last May) that there were issues with the new 22+mp sensor that helped influence the delay til 2007.
Combine the current crop of great sensors (from the 5D/1DsII) with the improved processing speed offered by DigicIII, and the hype around Canon's 70th anniversary (and EOS's 20th), and I suggest the following would make some sense ...
Move the current 16mp sensor from the 1DsII into the 'new' 5D model.
Move the 5D's sensor to the 40D.
Not sure what would happen with the 1DIII, but DigicIII may make it possible to move to the 12mp sensor from the 5D. Sports shooters would certainly benefit from the low-light ability of that sensor, and if it could be run at 8 fps, I'm nearly positive most pros would give up the 1.3 crop factor in exchange for roughly 2 stops of light via very usable ISO1600.
The 400 XTi stays the same, while the 350 XT soldiers on at a new lower-end price.
Of course the only real problem in this scenerio is the cost of fabrication of the FF sensors has to come down. Given that the R&D has been done, and presumably mostly recovered from the sales in the initial bodies they were intended for, then it's only fabrication that must be covered, and if Canon is moving to a 2 sensor production (from 3) then that might help bring down costs as well.
Anyway - this would really push Canon ahead of the pack again, and be a bold move worthy of anniversary hype. The D200 would suddenly be facing down the sensor previously found in the 1DsII, and the D80 would be taking on the 5D's sensor.
I think that would be another big challenge to Nikon, and a very strong response to Sony.
Numfar: "I wonder if introduction of a new top-end sensor (the 22mp+ for the new 1DSIII) would allow Canon to migrate it's current group of excellent sensors down one level, and thereby reassert complete dominance across the board."
That's pretty much what I've been thinking for a half year now - not that I have any inside information.
It would be quite something to see that happen across the whole line at one time, but I think it is more likely that this would occur over a series of upgrade announcement during the course of a year or so.
Edited by danmitchell on Feb 02, 2007 at 06:33 AM GMT
Numfar wrote:
I wonder if introduction of a new top-end sensor (the 22mp+ for the new 1DSIII) would allow Canon to migrate it's current group of excellent sensors down one level, and thereby reassert complete dominance across the board.
After all, designing and fabricating a number of new sensors in house would be a very large task - and we have heard (last May) that there were issues with the new 22+mp sensor that helped influence the delay til 2007.[...]
It's not likely to happen this way. Canon is making continous advances in both sensors and production technology. They will not put a 3 year old 1Ds II sensor into a 5D because they will loose out on years worth of advances. The same goes for the other sensors.
Greg Pavlov wrote:
Having mucked about storage media for 30+ years (14" disk drives in the
old days :-), I've been wondering whether I'm better off with a high-capacity
card or several small ones: I'd be paranoid about the large one failing and
taking everything I did with it, as opposed to spreading the risk a bit and
saving at least some of what I'd done if one of 2-3 smaller cards fail. Or
is that only a remote possibility ?
Statistically speaking, yes, you significantly minimize risk by spreading your work on to multiple smaller cards. This is the reason that when a cadre of business execs needs to travel to the same event, they are never placed on the same airplane
What would be really cool is if the CF card makers could figure out a way to make CF RAID 1 (Mirroring) cards, so that there are two identical memory arrays inside the card and your image is written to the card twice on two separate arrays.
What would be really cool is if the CF card makers could figure out a way to make CF RAID 1 (Mirroring) cards, so that there are two identical memory arrays inside the card and your image is written to the card twice on two separate arrays.
There are image tanks that allow daisy chaining so that the second unit synchronises with the first, effectively mirroring the content.
Numfar wrote:
I wonder if introduction of a new top-end sensor (the 22mp+ for the new 1DSIII) would allow Canon to migrate it's current group of excellent sensors down one level, and thereby reassert complete dominance across the board.{snip}
Move the current 16mp sensor from the 1DsII into the 'new' 5D model.
I don't think that would be an "upgrade". More pixels, perhaps, but the IQ of the 5D is considered to be better than the 1Dsll by many.
Antony wrote (speculates):
A new 1D series camera will be announced for PMA. It will have a size similar to the 1V, and will be 8.5 fps with a full frame 12.8MP sensor. ISO will now be 100-3200 (extendable to 50 and 6400). There will be a refinement of the 45 focus point system, with more cross sensors.
There will be multiple grips available for the camera, including a WiFi grip, and a basic grip that simply adds battery capacity.
There will be a customizable button that can be set to MLU.
The camera will be very water-resistant and will have a shutter rated for 200,000 cycles.
Price will be approx US$4500, dropping to under $4,000 within 12 months.
Approximately 3 months later the new 1Ds will be announced. It will be effectively the same camera, but with a 22MP sensor, and a maximum frame rate of 5fps. Price will be $7500, dropping to $7,000 within 12 months
....Show more →
I really find one thing funny. Lots of people are talking about updating the 30D, so what would happen ? A 10Mp sensor with all new things for around 1300... I mean how would then buy a 5D for much more...
Next thing upgrade a 5D to pherhaps 14Mp .... Ups same thing, the won't sell any other 1Ds Camera...
So I really think it is time for Canon to push their Pro camera to the next level.
It would be nice if we got a 17 megapixel FF 3D with weather sealing in a 1V size body. We've all been asking for it and it's the right time to produce it.
The threshold for me is an 11x17 two page magazine spread at 300 ppi and CDN$3500.
Tentacle wrote:
There are image tanks that allow daisy chaining so that the second unit synchronises with the first, effectively mirroring the content.
I have two digital wallets. Cf goes in one, then the other. That's my raid 0. I purchased the digital wallets empty, and put different brand drives in each. The best way would be have different brand digital wallets and different brand hard drives. But I didn't bother, as I normally use a laptop and one digital wallet.
I believe the biggest safety factor is to always have enough CF for a days work. Reusing cards in the field is probably the biggest cause of a 'whoops'. I may back up a card during the day, but it doesn't get formatted or reused until I can sit down quietly and make sure everything is in order. I also never format a card without first pressing play to look at the first image on the card. The choice is either careful and redundant or casual with occasional lost images.
Smaller cards... mean more frequent card changes... each change means there's a chance of bending a pin, loosing the card, or both... I think it's basically a wash in terms of risk when you compare one card vs two, etc... Having said that, I think everyone should own at least two cards and a Portable Storage Device (at least one), that way if one goes bad, you at least can keep on shooting.
Mirroring of data in the camera on two different cards, would be interesting... and possibly of some value... However I doubt that this is in the works on anything that will be announced at PMA 2007... but then I could be wrong.
Regarding card risks and the "many small cards" approach vs. the "one big card" approach:
While using one big card might cause you to lose more images in one shot, wouldn't the likelihood of a card failure increase overall if you were using 4 small cards rather than one large one? And not only for the purely statistical reasons - if you are swapping cards rather than leaving one card in the camera, the cards will likely be subjected to more handling, abuse, and environmental effects.
If Canon introduces a new lens system for this purported now smaller 1Ds, I'd be terribly annoyed. I would hope that they would not plan to abandon the EF series, since I am sticking with it!
danmitchell says: Regarding card risks and the "many small cards" approach vs. the "one big card" approach:
While using one big card might cause you to lose more images in one shot, wouldn't the likelihood of a card failure increase overall if you were using 4 small cards rather than one large one? And not only for the purely statistical reasons - if you are swapping cards rather than leaving one card in the camera, the cards will likely be subjected to more handling, abuse, and environmental effects.
I realize this topic is a bit off topic but I will jump in anyway - I prefer a handful of 1 or 2 gig cards to one big card YMMV
Back to the PMA rumors... things are a bit quiet on this front - won't we all be VERY let down if Canon does not introduce any new DSLRs at (or for) PMA!
Got my sucessor to the Canon xxD series....it's called a Pentax K10D!
Seriously though, I think Canon are kind of scratching their heads on competing with this one - in the value for money stakes it is incredible - actually I have specialist reasons for going over, as health issues mean that I really need stablisation and light weight gear.
There are weaknesses in the Pentax system, for instance there are not a complete range of lenses especially at the long end, and the ones they have are difficult to obtain, and the high ISO performance does not match the Canons, it has no 5fps mode and the RAW files are huge, which is a pity as the WB is very dodgy - flash is supposed to be not so sophisticated as the Canon or Nikon system too.
If that sounds like a litany of complaint though, look at what you do get, and think how Canon can compete against it without blowing their price structure away.
For the price of a 400D you get a great VF, AF points which move ovver a decent field so that you can get away from re-composing shots, super new modes like TAv, wireless flash control with the firmware upgrade, and of course image stabilisation in lenses which Canon do not dream of, including very fine primes.
I can't believe how good the 50-200 is at the price either.
For a lightweight rig IMHO it blows away the equivalent Canons for many uses.
So, do they take it on, or do they maintian their range and price structure?
It's what the Sony would be if they priced the lenses sensibly.
The great news for Canon shooters is that I doubt thedy will be able to tough out not putting in in-body IS for ever, althought they certainnly will not introduce it in this product cycle.
Regards,
DaveMart
Unless canon shrinks their sensors, or increases the diameter of the lens mount, I can't see how an in-body IS can work. There isn't enough clearance within the lens view-field to move the sensor around, which is what is required for an in-camera IS system.
Maybe if they build an FF sensor body that takes MF lenses they can pull it off, but the weight of the sensor would suck up the power something awful.
