rscheffler wrote:
From one 1DIII review I read, they estimated just over 11 stops. I would expect the 1DsIII would be very similar.
Downsides of HTP: can result in more noise, especially in shadow areas at high ISOs. If using it in RAW, it may not translate to 3rd party RAW converters. HTP enabled RAW files that I browse through the Finder or Preview on my Mac appear about a stop underexposed (I believe because that is exactly what happens - the files are underexposed to retain more highlight info, then treated in software to bring back midtone/shadow detail).
"A Highlight Tone Priority image is processed differently in the camera, regardless of whether the camera is set to CR2 or JPEG. Specifically, the amount of gain applied during the analog-to-digital conversion step is less. For instance, if the camera is set to ISO 200, the amount of gain applied is similar to or the same as ISO 100, which means more of the highlight detail captured by the sensor is preserved during this early in-camera processing step. This is the main reason the camera can't be set lower than ISO 200 when Highlight Tone Priority is enabled; it requires the extra highlight headroom it gets by applying a level of analog signal boost to the sensor data that is commensurate with a lower ISO setting."
So I just looked up what my 1ds2 has with regards to dynamic range. The best info I can find states its about 8+ stops when using raw/tif formats. So if we say for now that its 8.5 stops the new 1ds3 is 11 or 11.5 thats a 3 stop jump. That is really good news as most of the time Im in the 2-3 range deficit from sky to ground shadows. So this would put the new camera very close to the P45 back at its estimated 12 stop range.
Does this sound about right?
PS
There are 4-5 1ds2's for sale on the board. Bad time to sell a high end camera.
Paul Gardner wrote:
I would have prefered the 16 bit over the sensor upgrade by far. I am really disapointed that the GPS did not make it to the ds3 from the ds2 for those of us who shoot landscapes. Looks like Canon is going to milk the technology for another two years. Oh well maybe Pentax will come through, if not there is always the ZD. If the 5D2 does not have 16 bit Canon has lost me.
You really think the difference between 14 and 16 bit A/D conversion will be noticeable? Can you provide an example where it is important? Moving from 4096 steps (12 bit) to 16,384 steps (14 bit) in tone in each color channel would seem to be beyond the point of producing much improvement.
yellowducky wrote:
Any bets on the odds of availability BEFORE December? My next vacation is late November so would be awesome to have this new camera with me for it.
Especially since I already passed my 20d to my father and so currently have nothing!
we'll be lucky if we get enough to fill orders by early 2008. if you don't have a camera right now and will have $8k to blow on a 1Ds3 in november then do yourself a favor and buy a 40D, 5D, 1Ds2, or something so you can take photos. any camera is better than none.
Heh, I was hoping on a Sigma DP1 to tide me over since it was announced last September and figured for sure I might have my hands on it by now. That plan seems a bit off!
As an aside, is the sensor size really a full frame sensor on the 1Ds? I am a bit confused as to whether it is or isn't.
So why is the 1DMkIII 1.3 factor vs 1Ds being called full frame? Or on flip side why isn't the 1DMkIII not full frame if its the same sensor size?
I envisioned a full frame sensor being the size of a frame of 35mm SLR film and a 1.3 factor 1D being FF/1.3 and crop being FF/1.6 in relative dimensions of the sensor.
edit - oh, and Canon website has 1D with aps-h and 1Ds as 36x24 so not same I don't think.
Edited by yellowducky on Aug 20, 2007 at 08:38 PM GMT
yellowducky wrote:
So why is the 1DMkIII 1.3 factor vs 1Ds being called full frame? Or on flip side why isn't the 1DMkIII not full frame if its the same sensor size?
Nobody ever said that. 1Ds, 1Ds2, 1Ds3, 5D are full frame. All others are not. Well there was the SLR/n and SLR/c and 14n, but those barely count
yellowducky wrote:
Any bets on the odds of availability BEFORE December? My next vacation is late November so would be awesome to have this new camera with me for it.
Especially since I already passed my 20d to my father and so currently have nothing!
There are folks who are still waiting for their 1D Mark III here,in Canada.
As I remember, there was never a shortage or 300D 10D and 20D cameras. Seems like only hi-end cameras are usually back ordered.
Paul Gardner wrote:
I would have prefered the 16 bit over the sensor upgrade by far. I am really disapointed that the GPS did not make it to the ds3 from the ds2 for those of us who shoot landscapes. Looks like Canon is going to milk the technology for another two years. Oh well maybe Pentax will come through, if not there is always the ZD. If the 5D2 does not have 16 bit Canon has lost me.
Have you tried the ZD? Slower and more complicated camera (menu wise) is hard to find. I think the phase one p21 or p30 is a much better option than zd.
The problem here is Competition. There is none. Nikons dismal performance leaves Canon in a position to lope along as they please.
My 1Ds2 allows me to create stunning 24x36 prints. Other than resale value it will hold its own until the 1Ds4 is available.
madmax200 wrote:
Lack Luster specs at best.
No dynamic range specs? Improved or not? No mention! (Doubtful)
Only 4 megapixel increase (4.4 to be exact).
Iso 100-1600 are you kidding me? My 4 year old 1ds2 has that??
Only 5FPS? Why not add another digic3 processor and make it 8?
I doubt I will upgrade for "Liveview" and dust cleaning.
Im looking at a P45 back now. This new canon camera is really sad. To top it off it has the MK3 focus system and we all know how well thats working out.
OH and all this for the LOW price of how much? -------------------> 8,000 dollars. What a deal!
Edited by madmax200 on Aug 19, 2007 at 04:34 PM GMT...Show more →
Paul Gardner wrote:
I would have prefered the 16 bit over the sensor upgrade by far. I am really disapointed that the GPS did not make it to the ds3 from the ds2 for those of us who shoot landscapes. Looks like Canon is going to milk the technology for another two years. Oh well maybe Pentax will come through, if not there is always the ZD. If the 5D2 does not have 16 bit Canon has lost me.
But the Zd is not 16 bit either, nor does it have GPS........
DmitriM wrote:
I wonder what a RAW file size will look like...
Double the 1D Mk III RAW file size, and you'll get an idea.
According to the Canon-provided data at DPReview, it's about 25 MB per RAW shot.
rscheffler wrote:
From one 1DIII review I read, they estimated just over 11 stops. I would expect the 1DsIII would be very similar.
[...]
True dynamic range (as opposed to numeric space) is linked to the size of the photo site. The photo diode area remains unchanged, compared to the 1Ds II. Canon moved the photo sites closer, so they were able to increase the density.
So, with that in mind, the DR will be roughly the same as the 1Ds II. Assuming the DR is the same as the 1D III is wrong, because the 1D III has bigger photo diodes.
So what dealers in the US had 1D III available early and with somewhat decent prices? I'd like to get a pre-order in and on the waiting list for a 1Ds III. How early did Amazon fill 1D III orders?
xrayvision wrote:
The problem here is Competition. There is none. Nikons dismal performance leaves Canon in a position to lope along as they please.
My 1Ds2 allows me to create stunning 24x36 prints. Other than resale value it will hold its own until the 1Ds4 is available.
Actually resale value of the 1Ds mk2 should hold nicely...UNTIL the 16mp 5D "mk2" comes out next year, still id hold on to it, its not like suddenly the 1Ds2 cant output nice files because a new camera is out
Tentacle wrote:
Double the 1D Mk III RAW file size, and you'll get an idea.
According to the Canon-provided data at DPReview, it's about 25 MB per RAW shot.
??