stanj wrote:
I have a 1Ds3, too, so I feel qualified or at least entitled to respond. And I do not share your sentiments. If they come with a 5D2 with 21MP or even with 25MP it doesn't make my camera obsolete, and if nothing else, by the time the 5D2 has hit the streets I will have used my 1Ds3 for a year, or about 60k clicks. I bought the camera to use it, not to worship it. I knew that it would be rendered obsolete, or at least surpassed in one or many aspects sooner or later, and I am actually quite happy if it's sooner, because that means an even better 1D(s)4 offering, which will benefit me once again....Show more →
Thank you for that comment. Thats imo the point. If one purchased a camera and used it for one year and made money with it, why crying when something new comes? You still can use your camera and make money. If one did it for pleasure and is unhappy now because spending so much money and would have got more pleasure in waiting for another year or looses pleasure by the fact there might be something "better" now ... its fine for me and thousends others. Why should anybone of us care about your pleasure behaviors.
If one got a "brickwall" not giving the chance to work with (what was not mentioned), one should fight against the company not against progress.
Since digital image processing exists. Its called anti aliasing. But it needs a hugh amount of (processing) time. So it was/still is easier to reduce aliasing optical before the image is taken. That is what an lowpass filter is for as far I remember. Both ways unsharp the final image anyway. Correct me if this is wrong, please.
Ralph Conway wrote: I am sorry. Looked in the dictionary and did not find "vetinary". So what does "vetinary permit" mean?
Ralph
Andy meant veterinary, meaning "of or relating to the diseases, injuries, and treatment of animals". You might want to look up pub ("a tavern or bar") and pup ("a young dog") as well
Ralph Conway wrote:
Since digital image processing exists.
so lets imaging a diagonal sharp while line strikes all the green sensels of a sensor without a lowpass filter. How das the magic image-processor know that this line is white and not green and it should add values to the surrounding red and blue pixels? A lowpass filter can do this, but a program?
Both do not "know" much. That is why they interpolate all the image to avoid stairs. They are interpolating details, too. Thats why they smooth the whole result. Software may be programmed more inteligent than existing one. Is it possible to tell an AA filter to ignore image parts, that would be fine?
It wouldn't surprise me if this is the 1dsIII replacement with a 1DsIV comming in the spring. Canon have some serious egg on their faces with the 1DIII and 1DsIII AF and view finder problems. The New Sony and Nikon 24mp FF DSLR's are dure very soon and Canon needs an imediate answer to them. The current 1DsIII is priced a lot higher then these new competitors and Canon's only camera that can head them off is the 5D replacement. I think that we'll find that this camera will redefine canon's marketing strategy for the next few years. Instead of the 1DsIII being the king of the pile and everything else being a subset or dumbed down version of the 1 Series. I think we'll see the 5D as Canon's flagship camera, with the 1 Series having some extra build and speed, maybe a few more MP. I also recon that the 1DIV will be unified, a single camera with either a FF sensor and a 1.3 crop high speed mode. It's got to happen some time and Nikon have shown that the market is ready for it.
Today 21mp is a huge jump, but then again 12mp was a huge jump 3 years ago. I remember that I got a number of emails questioning if anyone needed 12mp when i first got my 5D. I guess all that is about to happen again.
I like the idea of the sRAW option, I can shoot at 2 quality levels. I can shoot at 11mp for most of my work and bump up to 21mp for the odd shot as I need it. The extra stop in sRAW ISO ability would be very welcome, but not essential. I mostly shoot with fast primes anyway.
"Instead, it will be using the same 21 MP sensor that Canon originally developed for 2007's 1Ds Mark III"
Frankly, I could live with that. I don't own a Mark III because I am not a high earning pro who could write the camera off to tax, but the Mark III results I've seen blew my socks off! If I could get Mark III quality files out of a new Canon costing as much as the original 5D I would be bloody happy.
In relation to the lack of longevity in digital cameras, well what is the problem?
If you are a pro your Mark III was deducted against tax, you've earned alot of money from your camera, and think of all the film processing costs going digital saved you. Your Mark III still works. If there is a Mark IV your old camera can still produce the goods for you, and you can upgrade next year, or the year after.
If you are an amateur you need to realize that digital is a new technology still, would you like new technological advances to appear often, or would you rather wait 10 years to get better high ISO, more detail, better colour depth etc? I am in my early 40s, and I want to experience as many of the benefits of digital technology in the time I have left on this planet, so as far as I am concerned Canon can upgrade models as often as they can (I speak as a 40D owner whose camera was upgraded to the 50D by Canon in less than a year).
Buying camera equipment is NOT an investment like stocks or shares. Digital camera bodies are temporary.
I am going to buy the 5D Mk2 because I believe it will help me achieve the photographic results I want, not because my purchase will bind Canon into a pact where they never release a better camera again, or within a particular time frame!
well i think the aa-filter knows more because unlike the processinh-unit it has the exact prosition of the photons hitting it and it has all the color-information as well. So im pretty sure you cannot emulate that aa-filter. But maybe the the gapless microlenses play a part there as well now ...
Ralph Conway wrote:
Since digital image processing exists. Its called anti aliasing.
Wrong. Anti-aliasing occurs in the optical (analog) domain, before the sensor and before any digitization. Digital image processing is not anti-aliasing. Anti-aliasing is the filter in front of the sensor that eliminates the high spatial frequencies that would alias back into the lower spatial frequencies due to the Nyquist sampling theorem.
David Baldwin wrote:
"Instead, it will be using the same 21 MP sensor that Canon originally developed for 2007's 1Ds Mark III"
Although I agree witht he rest of your post, i doubt that this sensor will be the same as the 1DsIII's sensor. Although they are likely to share a simular resolution, I seriously doubt that the output will be the same. Canon are making a big thing about their new Digiv IV processor, weak AA filter, gapless micro lenses and low voltage CMOS. The 1DsIII uses a Digic III procesor with an entirely different sensor design. So I'd expect the new 5DII images to exceed the current 1DsIII in several key areas. Image / pixel clarity, iso ability and dynamic range. If you look at the original 1Ds images file sand compare them to the 5D, the resolution is simular but the images look very different. Noise and colour rendition are completely different.
I'm looking forwards to a 5DII, but what if Canon massively reduce the price of the current 1DsIII to clear their stocks? Now that would be a difficult choice to make.
maybe I used the wrong terme? When I started in 3D Visualisation in 1980 with cubicomps "Picturemaker" I first used anti aliazing to avoid those horribel jaggies in diagonal lines and fields image calculation causes in creating images pixel by pixel.
The way to avoid this was called always and sill is called "anti aliasing".
Monito wrote:
Wrong. Anti-aliasing occurs in the optical (analog) domain, before the sensor and before any digitization. Digital image processing is not anti-aliasing. Anti-aliasing is the filter in front of the sensor that eliminates the high spatial frequencies that would alias back into the lower spatial frequencies due to the Nyquist sampling theorem.
gazzajagman wrote:
Although I agree witht he rest of your post, i doubt that this sensor will be the same as the 1DsIII's sensor. Although they are likely to share a simular resolution, I seriously doubt that the output will be the same. Canon are making a big thing about their new Digiv IV processor, weak AA filter, gapless micro lenses and low voltage CMOS. The 1DsIII uses a Digic III procesor with an entirely different sensor design. So I'd expect the new 5DII images to exceed the current 1DsIII in several key areas. Image / pixel clarity, iso ability and dynamic range. If you look at the original 1Ds images file sand compare them to the 5D, the resolution is simular but the images look very different. Noise and colour rendition are completely different.
I'm looking forwards to a 5DII, but what if Canon massively reduce the price of the current 1DsIII to clear their stocks? Now that would be a difficult choice to make. ...Show more →
It will be a new sensor, based on the technologie shown first with 50D.
phibes wrote:
since when can a lowpass-filter be emulatied in software?
Leica tried it in the M8. It seems like they used a Fourier transform circuit to take out data at the interference wavelength. In my opinion it made a 10 megapixel camera look like an 8 megapixel camera in terms of detail capture. Meanwhile the 5D looks every inch a 13 megapixel camera after a touch of sharpening. So IMO you can try to do it that way, but it doesn't really work (unless you have a very loyal customer base :).
dave chilvers wrote:
If what I`ve been reading over on DPr is true( apart from camera after camera after camera) having had my 1dsmk3 for less than a year, I can`t help feeling let down by Canon. I know all the arguments about the 1 series being built like a tank and be able to take plenty of stick etc etc but if they have managed to upgrade the body of the 5D replacement to anything like the D700 with as many pixels as the 1dsmk3 then what is the point I think they need to respect their pro following and not leave a taste in the mouth.
Yeh! great if you are using a 20D or 40D and can step up into a camera like the article suggest for a fraction of the cost of a 1 series (and good luck to you) but are they trying to do away with the 1 series cameras or just trying to P*** off their loyal followers?
Yeh! it is a bit of sour grapes but can you blame me?
stanj wrote:
I have a 1Ds3, too, so I feel qualified or at least entitled to respond. And I do not share your sentiments. If they come with a 5D2 with 21MP or even with 25MP it doesn't make my camera obsolete, and if nothing else, by the time the 5D2 has hit the streets I will have used my 1Ds3 for a year, or about 60k clicks. I bought the camera to use it, not to worship it. I knew that it would be rendered obsolete, or at least surpassed in one or many aspects sooner or later, and I am actually quite happy if it's sooner, because that means an even better 1D(s)4 offering, which will benefit me once again.
Peter Le wrote:
They are going to p"""" off some of you no matter what they do. If they don`t make an amazing 5DII everyone will say they failed and are washed up. If they do you will say why did I pay so much for a 1DIII......sounds like they can`t win. I personaly hope they push tech. as far as they can.....top what Nikon and Sony put out......it will be to all our advantage in the long run. It will also mean the 1DIV will be even more amazing my friend so don`t hope for a failed update for your own gain...........Peter...Show more →
+10 Peter and Stan.
My 1Ds3 still does exactly what I bought it for. I did not buy it expecting some sort of moratorium on development. When I buy a DSLR I write off the whole cost in my mind immediately. Just like computers. Canon already has credit with me for producing the 5D, a camera that could hold its own for more than 3 years, which is waaay longer than I expected. The better the new cameras are, the more EOSfun there is.
I am sorry. Looked in the dictionary and did not find "vetinary". So what does "vetinary permit" mean?
I think they need to respect their pro following and not