fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              68              70              151       152       end
  

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

  
 
Nill Toulme
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #1 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


Erik Barzeski wrote:
What do you do to tolerate the Allison Krause?


Mix in a little Lucinda Williams. ;-)

Nill
~~
www.toulme.net



Feb 08, 2007 at 11:01 AM
Tentacle
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #2 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


Getting rid of the mirror is fraught with problems. The sensor needs to be able to give a live high-res high-fps feed to a likewise high-res high-fps micro monitor. Oh, and the discrete AF sensor has to leave the building.

I hate to see the power draw of such a system... or the poor noise performance because of the heat output of the sensor.

Oh, and kicking the mirror out doesn't really allow for a shorter backfocus because sensors don't take high angles of incidence as well as film. It works for EF-S, which allows for some shorter backfocus, but that only works because of the smaller image projection circle.



Feb 08, 2007 at 11:08 AM
Monito
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #3 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


DaveMart wrote:
An EVF would explain the ability to change aspect ratios... http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=21978075


That is just junk. As I explained earlier, you are not going to get rid of the mirror and hold the shutter open for an electronic viewfinder. If you do so, you will get Point&Shoot type lag: 250 ms to 500 ms. Unacceptable. Canon DSLR lag is 55 to 120 ms.

However, there can be electronic masking in an SLR viewfinder, to account for variable aspect ratios or variable image circle coverage, especially if there is a new line of lenses with a bigger image circle, possibly in the same EF mount.



Feb 08, 2007 at 11:31 AM
DaveMart
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #4 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


Monito wrote:
That is just junk. As I explained earlier, you are not going to get rid of the mirror and hold the shutter open for an electronic viewfinder. If you do so, you will get Point&Shoot type lag: 250 ms to 500 ms. Unacceptable. Canon DSLR lag is 55 to 120 ms.

However, there can be electronic masking in an SLR viewfinder, to account for variable aspect ratios or variable image circle coverage, especially if there is a new line of lenses with a bigger image circle, possibly in the same EF mount.

If only you had told Canon R & D, they could stop wasting their time trying to make it work!
http://www.dslrphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/07/Future_DSLRs.pdf
Perhaps you could make your point better if you were a little less didactic and absolute, and prefaced your comments with something like 'IMO' - there are plenty of very bright guys who think it can work - prople like Joe Wisniewski, who actually design cameras, although when it willl be practicabe is another matter.
Exactly what are your own qualifications for making the statement you have done?
Also perhaps you will forgive us if not everyone has read every single word you have ever writtten on the subject, so it is not very enlightening to say 'as I already explained' - perhaps you would share your reasoning, and forgive us again if not all of us instantly accept your conclusions.
Regards,
DaveMart



Feb 08, 2007 at 12:23 PM
mfurtman
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #5 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


Contrary to what some have stated in this discussion, there are plenty of pros out there -- myself included -- who use 1.6x crop factor bodies. Canon recognized this when they improved the shutter life of the 30D over the 20D, (from 10,000 actuations to 100,000) and they recognized in their 30D white paper that the 20D and 30D are often the choice of working pros because of price and size.

In their 30D white paper Canon stated: "The EOS 20D was among the first mid-priced DSLRs to gain broad support, not just from advanced amateurs and serious photo hobbyists, but from a wide range of working professionals: wedding and portrait photographers, journalists, sports shooters, press organizations and newspapers. After reviewing the feature improvements of the EOS 30D, it becomes apparent that Canon hasmanaged to make this new camera far more suitable for professional applications, while at the same time maintaining its strong appeal to advanced amateurs. Whereas the EOS 20D could reasonably have been described as the “big brother” of the Digital Rebel XT, the EOS 30D is truly the “little brother” of its higher-priced sibling, the EOS 5D. This makes the 30D a compelling proposition for a wide range of customers, including:

• 5D or EOS-1 class owners looking for a professional quality backup camera
• Wedding and portrait photographers looking for exceptional image quality and
professional features in a compact, lightweight package
• Photojournalists, other professionals and anyone else looking for outstanding
performance at an affordable price."

In other words, at least Canon recognizes that plenty of pros use the 30D and its predecessors, and that the market for these cameras isn't limited to "hard up amateurs."

In addition, the crop factor makes long lenses "longer" which is a very popular feature among pro wildlife photographers, and I doubt seriously that it has hurt the sale of their "L" series lenses. In my travels as a working pro, I see plenty of full time, well published professional photographers shooting 20D and 30D bodies. Finally, I think the worries about "sealed" bodies is highly over-blown. My cameras are worked hard, are never cased, are out in all kinds of weather, including sub zero temperatures and snow, hauled around on boats, in kayaks and canoes, etc., and have never failed as long I take some very minimal precautions. Besides, I look at these bodies as expendable -- I can buy three 30Ds (if they were to die, which none have) for the price of one pro-series body.

Frankly, I'm pleased with Canon's current camera line-up, and don't yearn for any more pixels than my 30D delivers -- I sell plenty of cover shots and double-truck (2-page spreads) to magazines originating from 8 mp files. If the 30D replacement does retain the 1.6x crop factor, but jumps up to 10-12 mp, I hope that it retains the excellent image quality the 8 mp sensor produces, especially at higher ISOs.

What I'd like to see are smaller, lighter "L" series lenses. With the improved noise reduction of Canon's sensors, shooting at higher ISOs makes f/5.6 lenses (like the 100-400) much more suitable for wildlife photography than they were in the days of 100-200 ISO transparency film. I no longer need, or want, to haul around the giant 500mm f/4. A hand holdable, 500mm f/5.6 image stabilized "L" series lens -- either a prime or in some zoom configuration -- would sell like hotcakes, in my opinion, to pros and serious amateurs alike.

PMA is just around the corner. I don't know if there will be a 30D replacement or not, but I'm keeping my fingers crossed that some new, smaller and yes, slower, "L" series lenses might be announced.




Feb 08, 2007 at 12:34 PM
Chuck Fry
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #6 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


dcmiller wrote:
They had to with the EF mount. They were not foresighted enough with the FD mount. It's not a big risk if users know it's necessary, so your point is not valid.


Keep in mind too that FD cameras were backward compatible with FL lenses, and I think even R mount before them. That mount had a long history. It ticked me off when they obsoleted FD, because I had lots of FD mount stuff, but I think it's proved to be a wise choice for Canon.

Back to the topic at hand... if even Canon can barely make full-frame CMOS sensors "affordable", why would they go out on a limb for even larger sensors? They don't have any experience in that market either.



Feb 08, 2007 at 12:51 PM
Patrick Cox
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #7 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


Well, I can't resist "stirring the pot" a bit. I am on an email list of a wildlife photo workshop operator that uses Canon gear and in his most recent email update that I just received today, he had the following comment...

"...The other news is from the camera manufactures......... Officially it will out in the next few week and I think you will be pleased ..."

Since he is a wildlife shooter, I am assuming that we will see some announcements that will please wildlife shooters. I hope a new long lens is part of the announcement!




Feb 08, 2007 at 01:42 PM
Monito
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #8 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


This is the internet. It is generally accepted common knowledge that people on the internet have opinions. Even camera designers have opinions, it's just that they tend to have more weight according to how successful they are, but even the most successful designers' opinions are not law or fact.

If you have an electronic viewfinder, the conventional solution leads to unacceptable lag because you have the shutter open and light flooding the sensor. You have to close the shutter, and clear the sensor and let all the electronics in the sensor settle down, or else you get horrendous noise and/or a raised floor causing a lower dynamic range. Then you have to rewind and retension the shutter and release it which opens the shutter and closes it, then you have to read out the sensor, then open the shutter again, so you have completed almost two full shutter cycles from the moment you fire the button. You can fire a shutter and rewind it and retension it at 8 frames per second in an expensive camera like the 1DIIn, which would suggest an electromechanical lag of nealry 250 ms for that component of the electronic viewfinder idea. If you don't want that kind of expense, remember the 5D is only 3 frames per second, corresponding to about 660 ms of electro-mechanical lag. Clearly this would be optimized, but you aren't going to get 55 ms lag with any conventional electronic viewfinder as so many people think would be so easy to just plug into a DSLR.

The situation is worse than that faced by a P&S because the lens has to be wide open to get autofocus performance. This means that the sensor is being flooded with bright light for long periods of time and gets habituated. P&S cameras have such tiny sensors and therefore such huge depth of field that they can get by with much sloppier autofocus systems than would be acceptable in a DSLR, especially a full-frame DSLR. Thus the DSLR sensors would need more settle time, not less.

Another issue is that the sensor will be exposed to the air and the dust in the chamber. The P&S cameras are sealed. SLRs with interchangeable lenses are not sealed 100 percent of the time. By keeping the shutter open for dozens of seconds to minutes, the dust has much greater access to the sensor than it ever did before.

Like I said, I did explain some of this earlier not too many pages back, though this thread is so huge it is understandable that many or most would not have read that.

I am not a camera designer, but I do try to apply an engineer's mindset to the issues, which includes a respect for business economics. However, I do admit I was overly forceful in my reaction to hare-brained theories that constantly show up on dpreview, which is not noted for a high level of discussion or knowledge. I was hoping dpreview would stay at dpreview. I skimmed a few posts in that dpreview thread, including the one cited, and they didn't have anything new and precious little wisdom to offer. There is an awful lot of wishful thinking floating around sucking up oxygen from reasoned analysis and knowlegeable discussion. So I apologize for being "didactic". I try hard not to be absolute like the professor in 1901 who said that heavier than air flight was impossible.

Now it is your turn. Please explain how the electronic viewfinder systems you have in mind or have read about would overcome the problems I've outlined.



Feb 08, 2007 at 01:57 PM
Monito
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #9 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


mfurtman wrote:
Canon recognized this when they improved the shutter life of the 30D over the 20D, (from 10,000 actuations to 100,000)


The 20D was never rated at only 10,000 actuations, a ridiculously low figure. Even its contemporary 300D was rated at about 50,000. The 20D's rating was never explicitly stated but was always hinted to be over 50,000 and under 150,000.



Feb 08, 2007 at 02:11 PM
bharner
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #10 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


I'm hoping to see a 5D with the sensor cleaner like the XTi has. Not a fan of the XTi, but they've had them out long enough to test that sensor thoroughly and put it in the hands of beginners... If it can survive unscathed in those hands, hopefully it will do well for those of us who use a 5D on a daily basis. Mine is at almost 300,000 images, and I need to pick a new one up. Gonna wait till after PMA and see what kind of upgrade they (hopefully) come out with.


Feb 08, 2007 at 02:18 PM
Scott T
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #11 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


mfurtman: Whereas the EOS 20D could reasonably have been described as the “big brother” of the Digital Rebel XT, the EOS 30D is truly the “little brother” of its higher-priced sibling, the EOS 5D.

Great post Michael, but this bit of Canon marketing screams BS to me, from everything I've read (and seen, I've owned all 4 cameras), the 30D is the same internally as the 20D, (and the XT for that matter), how does it suddenly become a mini-5D? picture styles and a direct print button? The LCD's on the 30D and 5D are gorgeous, but the images on my PC look the same.






Feb 08, 2007 at 02:24 PM
DaveMart
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #12 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


Monito wrote:
This is the internet. It is generally accepted common knowledge that people on the internet have opinions. Even camera designers have opinions, it's just that they tend to have more weight according to how successful they are, but even the most successful designers' opinions are not law or fact.

If you have an electronic viewfinder, the conventional solution leads to unacceptable lag because you have the shutter open and light flooding the sensor. You have to close the shutter, and clear the sensor and let all the electronics in the sensor settle down, or else you get horrendous noise and/or a
...Show more
Personally, I prefer to respect every forum I participate in or read, and would no more denigrate dpreview here than I would these forums on dpreview.
Perhaps it is best to deal with the arguments, rather than which forum they have been presented on.
As to the comment about very little wisdom, perhaps you would note that one of the posters in the thread there is Petteri Sulonen, who is widely respected and technically competant - he also happens to be someone who thinks that an EVF will come, although not yet and certainly not initially in a top level camera.
To those who dismiss the EVF on grounds of poor resolution, he points in the same thread to the VF used in Panavision Genesis - a bit pricey at the moment though!
As for myself, I certainly am in no way expert in any of these matters, and am just interested in gathering others opinions, and hopefully having a little fun - which fun is pretty substantially reduced by encountering de haut en bas comments, or in this present case the dismissal of whole forums and the people in them with a slighting attitude.
Thank you however for explaing the issues you have on shutter lag, which I am in no position to rebut as I recognise myself to be not qualified.
Perhaps some of the more technically qualified advocates of EVF, including those from dpreview will happen to read the thread, but then again perhaps they don't visit often as they may find some of the attitudes one occassionally encounters difficult to accept.
Regards,
DaveMart



Feb 08, 2007 at 02:28 PM
DynoMoHum
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #13 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


300D having 50,000 shutter click life? I've always heard it's like 10,000... even to the point were many 300D owners have had mirror failures at just over 10,000... Well, technically I guess a mirror failure is NOT exactly a shutter failure... but anyway, I don't believe the average 300D will go anywhere near 50,000 clicks without failure... I've got 15,000 or so on mine and am hoping it will keep going until I can get a 40D...

However I do think the 20D's shutter life should indeed be well over 50,000.



Feb 08, 2007 at 02:28 PM
dcmiller
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #14 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


Patrick Cox wrote:
Well, I can't resist "stirring the pot" a bit. I am on an email list of a wildlife photo workshop operator that uses Canon gear and in his most recent email update that I just received today, he had the following comment...

"...The other news is from the camera manufactures......... Officially it will out in the next few week and I think you will be pleased ..."

Since he is a wildlife shooter, I am assuming that we will see some announcements that will please wildlife shooters. I hope a new long lens is part of the announcement!



Certainly a longer lens would sell, especially if they can cut the weight down from the 600/4. It will be interesting to see if Canon can progress further with DO lenses.
With Westfall talking about native ISO "that could move up to 6400 and higher very quickly", I wonder what Kind of fixed aperture lens they could build, like a 1200/f11.
A camera a that can shoot low noise at ISO 51200 would certainly be great for wildlife shooter.



Feb 08, 2007 at 02:53 PM
Tentacle
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #15 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


A friend of mine has a 10D that's on its fourth (yes, 4th!) shutter. The first shutter lasted 54k, the second 75k, and the third did 104k actuations. His 10D is still a backup body for a 1DII.

I might not recall the numbers entirely correct and be off by a few thousand, but each shutter lasted (well) beyond the rated 50 thousand. And if a 10D has a designed shutter life of 50k, which it does and it certainly appears to live up to, then the 20D definately has the same life expectancy, not lower.

Of course, you may end up with a shutter failure that's not the result of wear before you get past 50k. Or 100k for the 30D.

Regarding EVF: The Where Are DSLRs Going interview with Chuck Westfall clearly states the following:

Westfall: If you substituted an optical viewfinder with an EVF, the size, weight and cost of the camera would come down quite a bit. You’d be eliminating the need for a prism and a mirror, which currently limits how small of an SLR you can make.

So, this would be about cost-cutting and getting the size down. Does that strike you as paramount for a high-end range?

Now, if anything, that suggests that, at some point, we might see the introduction of a mirror-less 4000D. Just think of the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 with APS-C sized sensor, but then with EF/EF-S mount. Live preview, small, cheap, compact, and with interchangable lenses.



Feb 08, 2007 at 03:19 PM
dcmiller
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #16 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


Or a small hi-res EVF. I think we're still a long way from the primary one series going EVF. But give me the 5D sensor in as small of a body as possible with EVF, and I'll buy it.

There are Fuji S5 production samples out now. It's nice it's a high dynamic range camera. But I find the shots from the camera indistinguishable from a $200 P&S.

There was one rumor earlier in the thread about a lower end camera. Will Canon undercut the D40? Canon should have a meaningfully lower per camera cost than Nikon. The 4/3 camera business seems doomed.



Feb 08, 2007 at 03:37 PM
DaveMart
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #17 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


Tentacle wrote:
Regarding EVF: The Where Are DSLRs Going interview with Chuck Westfall clearly states the following:

So, this would be about cost-cutting and getting the size down. Does that strike you as paramount for a high-end range?

Now, if anything, that suggests that, at some point, we might see the introduction of a mirror-less 4000D. Just think of the Sony Cyber-shot DSC-R1 with APS-C sized sensor, but then with EF/EF-S mount. Live preview, small, cheap, compact, and with interchangable lenses.

That would be my guess too - and not yet, although in 2004 the EVF on the KM A2 was not too bad - so presumably we could do rather better now inexpensivly.
I don't know what the answer to Monito's points about shutter lag and dust are though - but presumably there is more than one way to skin a cat.
Regards,
DaveMart



Feb 08, 2007 at 03:37 PM
silverhalide
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #18 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


DaveMart wrote:
That would be my guess too - and not yet, although in 2004 the EVF on the KM A2 was not too bad - so presumably we could do rather better now inexpensivly.
I don't know what the answer to Monito's points about shutter lag and dust are though - but presumably there is more than one way to skin a cat.
Regards,
DaveMart



Everyone seems to be talking about switching to an EVF would eliminate the mirror, and use the image sensor full time.

Consider leaving the mirror and placing a EVF specific sensor where the pentaprism currently is. You would still get most of the benefits of a SLR over a P&S. Depending on the design you might be able to use the EVF sensor for focusing; if so, you would be able to use a full-silvered mirror, rather than the half-silvered one, brightening up the image going to that sensor. Because it is a separate sensor, you'd be able to design it differently for constant operation, including a different gain mechanism to compensate for light levels.

As for the discussions about a new sports lens with additional contacts... What if this is the beginning of a super-L series of lenses? The new 1-series bodies will have additional contacts too, but no other bodies. This leads to a premium series of lenses with superior performance when used with the premium bodies; if either non-premium bodies or lenses are used, performance is standard. Maybe these lenses have the standard 3:2 image baffles normally, but (only) when used in a premium body, you can select a 4:3 image.

Are the additional contacts for data or power? If we assume that the current serial communications are sufficient for data, consider what might require more power (or a different voltage)? Electronic zoom (yuck)?

Or to step into science fiction, maybe they've got liquid lenses working; these would probably have different power requirements than a standard autofocus lens.

Just speculating,

E.



Feb 08, 2007 at 04:18 PM
Tentacle
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #19 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


silverhalide wrote:
[...]

Or to step into science fiction, maybe they've got liquid lenses working; these would probably have different power requirements than a standard autofocus lens.


Forget liquid lenses for SLRs. And that's final. There is a simple reason for this. Liquid lenses work because of the surface tension that exist between two different fluids. The distance over which the suface tension is able to curve the transition between the two liquids is limited. Think droplet size. This means that there is a physical limitation that prevents you from getting beyond roughly a quarter inch diameter.

Now, such a small lens will work fine in, say, small-sensored mobile phone camera's, and maybe bigger sensors. It's simply not possible to upscale to large sizes. You can't make stable droplets of one inch big, gravity will pull them appart.



Feb 08, 2007 at 04:49 PM
DaveMart
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.69 #20 · 'Un-Official' pre-PMA Rumor Thread


silverhalide wrote:
Everyone seems to be talking about switching to an EVF would eliminate the mirror, and use the image sensor full time.

Consider leaving the mirror and placing a EVF specific sensor where the pentaprism currently is. You would still get most of the benefits of a SLR over a P&S. Depending on the design you might be able to use the EVF sensor for focusing; if so, you would be able to use a full-silvered mirror, rather than the half-silvered one, brightening up the image going to that sensor. Because it is a separate sensor, you'd be able to design it
...Show more
I reckon it is more likely to be data than power - does my idea of lens info like barrel distortion being passed to the camera for instant in-camra correction make any sense?
Could be awsome if Chuck gets his 'native 6400 ISO' going - stick any 5.6 coke botle on the camera and shoot the Olympics! ;-)
I somehow suspect that the new contacts would only go on pricey glass, so Canon would find a way of making us pay!
Regards,
DaveMart



Feb 08, 2007 at 05:05 PM
1       2       3              68              70              151       152       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              68              70              151       152       end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account