let's not forget that the Fuji F30 has a pixel pitch equivalent to a 120MP FF sensor. Per pixel, the sharpness and detail and low noise is astounding. There's plenty of room for improvement yet.
the original 1Ds is capable of 8 full stops per my own testing. pondria posted a chart a while back of DR test results and the 1Ds2 came out to 9 2/3. i tried searching for it but it was horribly slow and i gave up. to me the 1Ds2's DR is excellent for most shooting but a few more stops would be even better, coupled of course with 16-bit output for maximum usability.
i'd wait until photokina 2008 for the 1Ds3 if it meant we got 16-bit output with 12 stops of DR, regardless of the sensor size. all it means is that i'd have to pick up a 1Ds2 to use in the meantime. no big deal.
an 8 mpx FF sensor would be great for an entry-level FF body. those who need more pixels are typically doing more with their equipment anyway, where the market wanting an 8 mpx FF body would typically be newer users or ones whose needs aren't very broad. it could leave us with 8, 12, 16, and 20~24 megapixel FF offerings and a sports/PJ body somewhere in between to cover just about everyone's needs. i like the idea.
Why do you think Nikon will deliver? I heard the same rumor when I talked to a Nikon guy last year (he said it would be this year) but I can't get any confirmation.
Do you have something that you think makes it more real?
Because according to Thom Hogan there are quite a few prototypes in development and the rumblings are certain Nikon are introducing FF; if Thom is predicting it it's most likely true, although he's not right all the time - but it appears true there are prototypes. But first will come D3H, with 10MP, 10fps LBCAST sensor, still DX format.
flatdraft wrote:
the human eye can see about 20 stops of light. wiki to the rescue.
the original 1Ds is capable of 8 full stops per my own testing. pondria posted a chart a while back of DR test results and the 1Ds2 came out to 9 2/3. i tried searching for it but it was horribly slow and i gave up. to me the 1Ds2's DR is excellent for most shooting but a few more stops would be even better, coupled of course with 16-bit output for maximum usability.
i'd wait until photokina 2008 for the 1Ds3 if it meant we got 16-bit output with 12 stops of DR, regardless of the sensor size. all it means is that i'd have to pick up a 1Ds2 to use in the meantime. no big deal.
an 8 mpx FF sensor would be great for an entry-level FF body. those who need more pixels are typically doing more with their equipment anyway, where the market wanting an 8 mpx FF body would typically be newer users or ones whose needs aren't very broad. it could leave us with 8, 12, 16, and 20~24 megapixel FF offerings and a sports/PJ body somewhere in between to cover just about everyone's needs. i like the idea.
I'm don't always believe Wiki, and have read elsewhere 13-15 stops for the eye. Anyhoo, Pixsurgeon claims he can pull 11 stops from a 1D II RAW file. However, in real world shooting I'm not so sure it's as good as measured tests say. If the darkest stop has only a few levels and the shadow detail is poor although resolvable I'd dismiss that. Doing landscapes in NZ with snow capped mountains and dark foreground forests put a real strain on the 1D II and we were looking at around 6-8 stops. It was hard to keep detail at both ends of the spectrum.
There seems to be two camps on this issue. Those who claim DSLRS are weak in DR and not much better if at all than slide, and those that claim it's far greater 9-11 stops. I'm not in either camp. It's definitely better than slide but I'd say 7 stops fully useable, maybe pushing on 8 if shadows aren't real important.
I had to double process many of my NZ shots and digitally blend them. I know if I was prepared to spend a lot longer processing I use a linear curve and spent ages getting contrast into the scene in PS, while protecting shadows and highlights, but digitally blending only takes me around 60s now.
flatdraft wrote:
the human eye can see about 20 stops of light. wiki to the rescue.
True, but with a very important condition attached: The human eye can adapt itself by adjusting the iris and by raising or lowering the concentration of light sensitive chemicals in the retina. So at any one time, the human eye can see about 1:100 (or 6,5 stops).
tbartick wrote:
We are on to something with BestBuy! They are back pedaling. Once the word was out what they were telling customers, discountined, new one in April, etc...the store clerks were all told to Keep quiet about the new one. Just sell the 30D. That is not an open box sticker! That is a discountined sticker....The new 40D is on its way! sooner than I though last week!
I will NOT buy a 30D! I will wait for the 40D or the new 5D this summer...can't wait. My rebel will hold me out!
I want a 40D as much as anyone but doubt that BestBuy would trust their employees to keep it secret. They're too many of them to do that but who knows Let's hope so!
Suffice it to say the 40d is coming, but dobut it will have some of the features like the dual Digic III processors, 3 inch screen, or live view like the 1dMkIII..
Seems like the back of the 30d is pretty crowded with the 2.5 inch unit it already contains and Canon seems to have some serious loyalty to the BG-E4 grip so they can't make the camera any wider..
Pixel Perfect wrote:
If the darkest stop has only a few levels and the shadow detail is poor although resolvable I'd dismiss that. Doing landscapes in NZ with snow capped mountains and dark foreground forests put a real strain on the 1D II and we were looking at around 6-8 stops. It was hard to keep detail at both ends of the spectrum.
This is where the two extra bits of the 1DIII comes to rescue, I believe. You have access to 100 times as many levels.
But as far as I understand it, significantly increased dynamic range must come at the highlight end. You have to design photosites that can register more photons without blowing through the roof. But I have not heard what is limiting todays sensors at that end. Anybody know anything about that?
jamesf99 wrote:
… From Canon's 1D3 white paper, we know that the 1D3 and 1Ds2 both have identical pixel sizes (7.2 x 7.2), but they don't share the same density or diode size. The pixel sizes of the 1D2N and 5d are both 8.2 x 8.2, the 30D is 6.4 x 6.4, and the XTi is 5.7 x 5.7. …. here's the text from page 10 of the white paper.
Although the pixel size of the 1D Mark III is 1 micron smaller than the pixel size of the EOS-1D Mark II and Mark II N, the photodiode size of both sensors is the same, thanks to the optimized photodiode construction and more sophisticated processing of the 1D Mark III.
By optimizing the gap between the on-chip microlenses and improving the fill factor
(photodiode area divided by total pixel size) of each pixel, light-gathering efficiency has been improved. Also, by optimizing the photodiode's structure, light-reception efficiency has been improved. Additionally, the second-generation, on-chip noise removal circuit and the noise reduction technology explained below combine to remove noise effectively.
This has enabled the EOS-1D Mark III to be the first EOS DSLR camera to have ISO 3200 as part of its standard ISO speed range. Dynamic range at low ISO speeds is about the same with the 1D Mark III as it is with the EOS-1D Mark II and Mark II N despite the 1D Mark III’s increased resolution.
So I'm wondering what many others may be as well, and that's where does this lead us? Does that mean that assuming Canon maintains a Bayer sensor, is the optimal photodiode size 7.2, or the 5ds 8.2, or even the 20d/30d's 6.4 or the XTi's 5.7? Realistically, the XTi seems like a dead end, and Canon simply crammed more pixels in to be competitive and I'm fine ignoring it as not relevant to this discussion.
Everyone loves the low noise shots from the 5d at 8.2 (better than the 1Ds2's performance at 7.2), and now Canon says " Dynamic range at low ISO speeds is about the same with the 1D Mark III as it is with the EOS-1D Mark II and Mark II N despite the 1D Mark III’s increased resolution". Them are weasel words.
So what's going on? Where is FF headed? Are we headed for a 1Ds with 20% more resolution (16.7x.1.20= 20MP) or is the change going to be smaller? Where will the 5d go? Will it too see a 20% increase, or since it shared the same density as the 1D2n, will it see a larger increase with smaller pixels/diodes ala the 30d (I don't think so)? ...Show more →
Great questions Here’s my take…
Canon were testing a FF sensor last year with the same 6.4 x 6.4 pixel pitch as the 30D but with larger photodiodes and better pixel lenses. Compared to the current 1Ds II’s 7.2 x 7.2 sensors this gave a pixel density increase of 1.266 giving a sensor size of 21.8mp with an effective size of 21mp. This sensor also had a built in 1.25 crop mode, giving a 16.7mp 1D IIn equivalent picture. The sensor (with dual DIGIC III etc) could do 5 FPS at FF and 8 FPS in crop mode…. The photodiodes were approximately the same size as those in the 1Ds II’s 7.2 x 7.2 pixels and with the next generation noise reduction etc this sensor delivered 3200 ISO native and 6400 with High mode enabled…
And (surprise ) they were also testing a FF 16.6mp sensor with the 7.2 x 7.2 pixel size, new micro lenses and close to 5D sized photodiodes (presumably for the new high end 5D replacement). What is interesting is if you reverse the maths, for the 1.255 crop this gives you exactly the 1d III sensor when cut down from FF…. Which makes a lot of sense
Now what remains to be seen is what they release… But if I were a betting man it will be dam close to the above (ie IDs III with 21mp and the 3D or 5D Mark II with 16.7mp)
Oh and BTW the testers LOVED the image quality on both cameras…
Edited by Geoff Costello on Feb 27, 2007 at 07:51 PM GMT
And now we are into speculation... But currently there is a greater than 5D sized price difference between the 1Ds II and 1D IIN (IE You could buy the ID IIN and the 5D in many countries for less than the 1Ds - which really only has the FF sensor to boast about... So if you consider the crop mode etc in the sensor above... Imagine if Canon positioned the 1Ds III as being "the one camera to rule them all" and kept the high speed crop mode etc... That way if you wanted sports or studio you could get the 1Ds III... Food for thought
I have spent the last week checking / begging to sources who had leaked (or claimed to) on the 30D replacement (AKA 40D). However I can’t seem to get consistent information. The two most credible sources are saying:
• Source 1 - Canon underestimated the drop in the demand for the 30D and has significant stocks, so that they made a late decision to defer the 40D, drop the price of the 30D and market it strongly (lens packages, D80 like pricing in some markets etc). They now intend to have 4 DSLR announcements in the year of the EOS 20th anniversary – beginning March 2007 and ending February 2008. The 1D III (done), the 40D (mid year), the 1Ds III (August / September 2007) and the 5D replacement
• Source 2 - Canon had the 40D ready to go and ran the specifications (10.4mp 1.6 crop, Digic III, Antidust etc) past some very influential buyer reps and got the feedback that this would be a “me too” camera, seen as a catch-up to the competition with nothing much to differentiate it. This was not acceptable to Canon in the 20th anniversary year, where Canon’s DSLRs needed to be seen as defining the market. So they have sent the camera back for some specification updates and plan a release later this year. Updates being considered included 3 inch LCD, limited weather sealing, Wi Fi attachment option (as per the 1D III) and the next generation 12mp sensor. They may even surprise people by skipping the 40D name (e.g. 50D or 60D to make a point)
It is possible that these two messages are consistent - but then again…
I also checked with the same photographer friend now in NY who had previously provided some info re the 1D III series, dynamic crop modes etc (which I have quoted in the Pre PMA thread). Anyway (slighly translated with some of my calicaitons etc inserted)...
Canon were testing a FF sensor last year with the same 6.4 x 6.4 pixel pitch as the 30D but with larger photodiodes and better pixel lenses. Compared to the current 1Ds II’s 7.2 x 7.2 sensors this gave a pixel density increase of 1.266 (my calculation) giving a sensor size of 21.8mp with an effective size of 21mp. This sensor also had a built in 1.255 crop mode, giving a 16.7mp 1D IIn equivalent picture. The sensor (with dual DIGIC III etc) could do 5 FPS at FF and 8 FPS in crop mode…. The photodiodes were approximately the same size as those in the 1Ds II’s 7.2 x 7.2 pixels and with the next generation noise reduction etc this sensor delivered 3200 ISO native and 6400 with High mode enabled…
And (surprise ) they were also testing a FF 16.6mp sensor with the 7.2 x 7.2 pixel size, new micro lenses and close to 5D sized photodiodes (presumably for the new high end 5D replacement). What is interesting is if you reverse the maths, for the 1.255 crop this gives you exactly the 1d III sensor when cut down from FF…. Which makes a lot of sense
Now what remains to be seen is what Canon actually release… But if I were a betting man it will be damm close to the above (ie IDs III with 21mp and the 3D or 5D Mark II with 16.7mp)
Oh and BTW the testers LOVED the image quality on both cameras…
Now since then (ie in the last 2 months) serious pre-production cameras are apperently testing in New York at selected Advertising / Fashion photography houses... However the NDA's are watertight and no one will talk...
Thanks for sharing Geoff. If this is true the future looks bright indeed, albeit the wait will be torture.
I have spent the last few days considering the 1D Mark III and have decided not to proceed on the basis that I need the higher resolution more than the 10fps. I will be sticking with my existing cameras until the new 1DS III is released, and then getting that to supplement my gear.
The 1D II will become a back-up for wet weather when I require two waterproof bodies, 8.5 fps, or for when I have an assistant without a camera.
And now we are into speculation... But currently there is a greater than 5D sized price difference between the 1Ds II and 1D IIN (IE You could buy the ID IIN and the 5D in many countries for less than the 1Ds - which really only has the FF sensor to boast about... So if you consider the crop mode etc in the sensor above... Imagine if Canon positioned the 1Ds III as being "the one camera to rule them all" and kept the high speed crop mode etc... That way if you wanted sports or studio you could get the 1Ds III... Food for thought ...Show more →
OK, I'm in.
"One camera to rule them all". Yes master, here's my ATM card and PIN number. Take all you want.
Thank you Geoff for your insightful and informative messages regarding the upcoming SLR's and your thoughts regarding the 40D or whatever it will be called.
First of all, a replacement for the 30D will happen, it's just a matter of when and which features. I hope it's not another "plain vanilla" upgrade like the 30D was in the sense they really didn't change anything that counted. Bigger screen, spot metering and a few other minor changes were about it.
I'm still holding out for a PMA release but that's my heart talking and not my brain. Logic says it will be later this year but my heart wants it NOW!
I kind of like 2007D for the replacement. Kind of rings a bell for the anniversary year!
This is where the two extra bits of the 1DIII comes to rescue, I believe. You have access to 100 times as many levels.
Wouldn't two bits provide 4 extra levels? Or is that 4 per channel? In any case, I don't understand how you would get "100 times" as many levels from two extra bits.
