Tentacle wrote:
But the fact is that there is no competition to the current 1Ds Mk II. There is no other dSLR that offers the pixelcount and high-ISO noise performance. On this one, Canon could afford the wait. I don't expect that they will, but they do have the luxury of doing so.
Well, I don't agree. The market for such a high end camera is quite small
and ALL those people know the upgrade is coming.
So who's gonna buy 1Ds MkII now?
Imagine Canon booth at PMA if 1Ds is not there - they will be attacked by
people asking about it... At this time it's better for them to show it
and take a couple of months before the delivery than hold the news forever...
I also don't understand why the new 1D should be released before the new 1DS. By the time the 2008 olympics are due the "sports" flagship is over a year old. A year where the competition can adapt.
However if the new 1D would have a crop/DZ function, the 1DS replacement is likely to get one as well, but that would kill the 1D sales. I would change in a jiffy to the next 1DS if it would shoot at 4 fps FF and 6.5-7 fps @ ~1.25 crop/DZ. (I do love the 8+ fps from my 1Dmk2, but I'd be willing to sacrifice 1, maybe 2 fps for the resolution increase)
I'm thinking that Canon shouldn't just stuff more Bayer Mpx in the 1DsII. If they put in 22Mpx, as some mention, then the photosites would be about the same size or maybe a bit smaller than those on my 20D and, being familiar with the limitions of the 20D, I think doing so could degrade the IQ of the 1DsII slightly.
Such a sensor would probably cost more to produce which could amplify the point of diminishing returns.
There seems to be general rumor consensus that 12mp Small Erwin(1Dv) will crop digitally. I see no reason, once that interface technology is developed, that cropping wouldn't be in Bid Erwin too. A couple of thoughts.
- no reason cropping needs to be limited to varying pixel dimensions in the 2:3 ratio
- cropping is tied to digital lens correction.
From a quality standpoint it would be nice to capture an image somewhat bigger than the final pixel dimension and use those extra pixels when making some in-camera corrections. In photoshop, when making lens corrections, we often crop or smoosh pixels. So an ideal capture device may always want to be bigger than the framed image.Ideal doesn't mean cost effective, of course.
Many of the optical design goals of a more ideal lens/camera system have connections. If there is a new lens line, it will be very interesting to see how Canon puts it all together.
I am certain that a new lens/mount combination will have as it first goal overall image quality, and the second goal of outstanding wide capture. The rumor that they are coming out with a 12-24 EF makes sense. But I believe that they have been too quiet on wide end issue to not come out with something like an EF-X this year or next.
Agree completely. That's why I hope for the 'foveon' layered style MOS sensors. It should decrease noise by several factors per pixel per color if the pixel size are the same. This gain can be used to increase pixel density.
Peterdenh wrote:
Agree completely. That's why I hope for the 'foveon' layered style MOS sensors. It should decrease noise by several factors per pixel per color if the pixel size are the same. This gain can be used to increase pixel density.
Exactly. My thoughts too, and it could lead to better DR but I think the technology needs to mature a bit first.
Peterdenh wrote:
I also don't understand why the new 1D should be released before the new 1DS. By the time the 2008 olympics are due the "sports" flagship is over a year old. A year where the competition can adapt.
However if the new 1D would have a crop/DZ function, the 1DS replacement is likely to get one as well, but that would kill the 1D sales. I would change in a jiffy to the next 1DS if it would shoot at 4 fps FF and 6.5-7 fps @ ~1.25 crop/DZ. (I do love the 8+ fps from my 1Dmk2, but I'd be willing to sacrifice 1, maybe 2 fps for the resolution increase)
Camera crop really isn't digital zoom, as there is a benefit ti speed.
You may get 8fps at the full 12mp. 10-12fps at 8fps. I definitely expect an improvement in high speed, including improved predictive AF. Digic III is 2X digic II. That will definitely improve AF frequency of measurement and allow for more complex algorithms (Although this may only improve servo AF). On the throughput side, 2X 68mps is not an unreasonable expectation. Sure, at this point DIGIC III may not be the performance constraining component for fps. But I'm pretty confident that little Erwin will be a screamer.
RJJR wrote:
Exactly. My thoughts too, and it could lead to better DR but I think the technology needs to mature a bit first.
One way to look at it is that digital camera sensors are maturing - we are at the refinement point. Ultimately the physics of light are the determining factor, and that bigger sensors are needed to go significantly beyond current 35mm digital quality.
Then we have the probability that Canon spends more on sensor R&D each year than the gross sales of all MFDB players combined. We have not seen a Canon state-of-the-art sensor since 2004. What has three years and a huge amount of money created?
dcmiller wrote:
New wides, new mount, designed for digital correction soon from Canon is my prediction. Perhaps a sensor design relying less on microlenses and needing high-angle light. My main source is the president of Hasselblad publicly defending their new wide liked to H3 digital correction. He essentially said that MF had lost enough ground to Canon and Nikon and this linkage between camera and lens was necessary.
It is totally illogical for Canon to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the EOS System by doing away with a proven system and replacing it with a new mount and new lenses that are not compatible with the EOS/EF line-up. Wake up!
Canon doesn't need to compete with the medium format boys. There are enough pro photogs out there who find the 1Ds MK II a reasonable and logical investment than medium format systems. 7 out of 10 pro photogs interviewed and published in the bi-monthly Digital Photo Pro mag of the US use 1Ds MK II, and this ratio more or less reflects the actual situation in the pro system market.
lordcarl wrote:
It is totally illogical for Canon to celebrate the 20th anniversary of the EOS System by doing away with a proven system and replacing it with a new mount and new lenses that are not compatible with the EOS/EF line-up. Wake up!
Canon doesn't need to compete with the medium format boys. There are enough pro photogs out there who find the 1Ds MK II a reasonable and logical investment than medium format systems. 7 out of 10 pro photogs interviewed and published in the bi-monthly Digital Photo Pro mag of the US use 1Ds MK II, and this ratio more or less reflects the actual situation in the pro system market....Show more →
I'd say sensors and lenses are reaching the limits of human understanding more than the limits of physics. An eagle's eye can see a rabbit two miles away. Now that may be reaching the limits of physics as far as lens size and resolution are concerned.
halie wrote:
I'd say sensors and lenses are reaching the limits of human understanding more than the limits of physics. An eagle's eye can see a rabbit two miles away. Now that may be reaching the limits of physics as far as lens size and resolution are concerned.
halie wrote:
I'd say sensors and lenses are reaching the limits of human understanding more than the limits of physics. An eagle's eye can see a rabbit two miles away. Now that may be reaching the limits of physics as far as lens size and resolution are concerned.
Way to go. Knocked that baby right out of the park!
I think when you reach Canon's position you have to step back and look at clean design. Then the EOS product manager freaks out and you look at clean design with backward compatibility.
A new mount is an engineering decision. This would be a significant if the lens designers wanted a larger opening. If it's electrical only, they might be able to get away with not even calling it a new mount.
But I would expect EF lenses to mounts on EFX. EFX lenses do not mount on EF
A new lens line is a product positioning decision. This year or next I expect them to come out with primo lens line. Going high-end creates skilled Japanese jobs. The appetite for highest end glass is greater than it has ever been (I'm guessing).
The most expensive R&D is done anyways, whether of not they compete directly with MFDB. Going into this market segment takes jobs from western europe and the U.S. and moves them to Japan.
Why? High margins, prestige, right kind of jobs (offsets kicking other japanese company's around), and probably, most importantly, not leaving potential future competitors with the high-end reputation among top photographers. Annie Liebovitz shoots with a 1DsII, and then is handed a medium format camera. Ten years ago, Canon would be thrilled to be used by her. Today, they probably most want to knock that other camera out of her hand.
So this is how I reconcile the rumors of the last 18 months. This would be an all Japanese manufacturing effort, and would not involve certain other Asian countries. If it's announced, I expect it will be expensive, they will have announced a really good EF zooms and other lenses first (to show they are not abandoning EF), and announce one of more new EF cameras.
As I said before, a new high end does not necessarily replace the 1DsII. There could be a new 1DsIII and a new high end camera.
I've stopped worrying about when. I was sure of a 1DsII upgrade at photokina.If there's a new mount this year, little Erwin in an EF mount would come first. Little Erwin might look like Crappy Erwin if announce after an ubercamera.
So I expect Little Erwin at PMA, I guess. I would put 1Dv on its birth certificate. If Canon has improved sensor technology to the point of competing with MFDB using a 22mp 35mmish sensor, then some of that good mojo may make 12mp Little Erwin special too.
Wonderful! I love it.