brainiac wrote:
Unfortunately Canon CAN'T move the 1D to full frame because a great many photographers still (erroneously IMO) believe that there is some 'reach' advantage in smaller sensors in pro cameras. I think it's mad, and clearly so does Nikon, but Canon's installed base of APS-H experts will probably continue to spoil the party in Canon's market research. Who knows if this entrenched prejudice will ever die. Perhaps when the last pro moves to Nikon Canon will see the light. Crop sensors in pro bodies with full frame lenses: wooohoooo!
Richard I agree with what you are saying, but there is a kernel of truth to the reach advantage of small sensors in the 1D series. What really matters for reach is pixel density, which Richard I know you know. But there will be a relationship between pixel density and sensor size whenever throughput and fps are held constant. In the 1D series Canon clearly aims at maximum throughput and fps and these numbers would be the same for both a full frame sensor and crop sensor as they are limited by processing power not sensor size. Given that throughput equals megapixels of the camera by frames per second (which will all be the same regardless of sensor size on a 1D camera) and pixel density equals megapixels divided by sensor size, then for the 1D series the larger the sensor the smaller the pixel density and the shorter the "reach" of the camera. Said in plainer English, if Canon makes the 1D series to be as fast as they can and process as much information as they can, then a 1D series camera with a crop sensor will always have more pixel density (i.e., 'reach') than a 1D series camera with a full frame sensor.
If Nikon does release a D700x it's going to be really really hard to ignore. Would I dump ALL of my Canon compatible lenses for a D700x and new Nikkor 35 f1.4 G AF? Maybe. I would like to see a Nikkor equivalent of the 17-40 too, but at that point there really would be nothing stopping me, since, as you say, Canon wants $8000 for entry into full frame with pro AF.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Richard I agree with what you are saying, but there is a kernel of truth to the reach advantage of small sensors in the 1D series. What really matters for reach is pixel density, which Richard I know you know. But there will be a relationship between pixel density and sensor size whenever throughput and fps are held constant. In the 1D series Canon clearly aims at maximum throughput and fps and these numbers would be the same for both a full frame sensor and crop sensor as they are limited by processing power not sensor size. Given that throughput equals megapixels of the camera by frames per second (which will all be the same regardless of sensor size on a 1D camera) and pixel density equals megapixels divided by sensor size, then for the 1D series the larger the sensor the smaller the pixel density and the shorter the "reach" of the camera. Said in plainer English, if Canon makes the 1D series to be as fast as they can and process as much information as they can, then a 1D series camera with a crop sensor will always have more pixel density (i.e., 'reach') than a 1D series camera with a full frame sensor....Show more →
Thankyou Steve - that's the first coherent argument in favour of APS-H I've heard in months. I actually liked the solution that Nikon came up with for shooting DX at a higher rate. That way you have both cameras in one. I genuinely think the reason that Canon doesn't follow that route is that it is scared of the reaction from the APS-H faithful.
skibum5 wrote:
I sort of think they should try to do more like FF 18MP myself for the 1D4 but doesn't sound like it.
Seriously, a FF 1D IV with 18MP, pushing 10fps, would instantly obsolete the 1Ds III. Also what price are you prepared to pay. This camera would have to still be $7K ~unless Canon are prepared to admit their 1Ds pricing has been a blatant ripoff. No one would consider the 1Ds III and their used value would plummet. I'm not sure too many people would be happy spending $7K rather than $4K on a camera as they have with the 1D non s series. They would lose face completely if they could sell it for close to current 1D III money.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Seriously, a FF 1D IV with 18MP, pushing 10fps, would instantly obsolete the 1Ds III.
Not really with the 1Ds4 coming right afterwards. The 's' has been half a year behind the other one. If at the same time (or, 6 months later) they come with a 36MP, 5fps 1Ds4 @ 8k, I for one am buying one. They don't care if I buy the 1Ds3 because I already have one - and in general, at this point in time, so has everyone who really wants one. The bargain 1Ds3 hunters will come when the 1Ds4 is announced, or even shipping.
I agree with pixelperfect- no way we're getting an 18mp FF 10fps cameras
I think what we're going to see is a 60d- an incremental improvement over the 50d with video. I doubt that they will even tweak the autofocus- unless they release an 11 or 17 point. There's no way they're going to release anything remotely full-framed... itt'l cut into 5dII and 1dsmkIII sales. They may release a smaller APS-H camera, which would make a ton of sense: a 1d-lite
nathanlake wrote:
Why do you hope they don't up the Mp. I would assume that R&D is ongoing that allows Canon to increase Mp while controlling the sideeffects (noise, etc).
You could have made the same request when the 1Ds was released in FF with 11Mp.
I never said I don't want them to up the MP. I said I hope they don't do it to the 15-16MP range.
12 or 13 max would be great.
More resolution and AT LEAST the same noise, possibly a little bit less with the gapless lenses and software evolution.
But with 15-16MP, I am almost sure they won't be able to achieve the same amount of noise, let alone diminish it. At least not without strong in-camera NR that eats away fine details.
Look at the 40d-50d.
The 50d has new sensor technology that was supposed to make it a great low-light camera. However, in bad light (like indoors with no flash), the IQ just fall apart. In good light, yes you do get great IQ. But in bad light...
Please don't get me wrong, I seriously hope I'm mistaken!
16MP on a APS-H with less noise and at least as good IQ as the 1DMIII would be a dream! I would get one without a second thought!
fraga wrote:
But with 15-16MP, I am almost sure they won't be able to achieve the same amount of noise, let alone diminish it. At least not without strong in-camera NR that eats away fine details.
Noise will be an iinteresting measure of the Mark IV. If the M IV is as much better than the M III as the MIII was better than the M II, I don't care how many Mp or the sensor size. It will sell.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Seriously, a FF 1D IV with 18MP, pushing 10fps, would instantly obsolete the 1Ds III. Also what price are you prepared to pay. This camera would have to still be $7K ~unless Canon are prepared to admit their 1Ds pricing has been a blatant ripoff. No one would consider the 1Ds III and their used value would plummet. I'm not sure too many people would be happy spending $7K rather than $4K on a camera as they have with the 1D non s series. They would lose face completely if they could sell it for close to current 1D III money.
IMO talk of a FF 1D IV is fanciful at this stage. ...Show more →
ok make it 17MP then
but seriously if canon doesn't make it soon then Nikon, who didnt even do FF, will end up doing it first which will be a lot bigger loss of face than upsetting the 1dsmiii (whichis old and played out at this point anyway) and the they can make a new 1Ds at 36MP
Canon does care the least about used prices either.
Kazman442, nothing against your photography at all, but your shots exhibit shadow/sky noise that is the sole reason I have yet to buy a 5d2.
kazman442 wrote:
Just wanted to say that I have had pretty good luck with my 5D2 for in flight shots, I would say it's not the same as my 1Dmark3 but I would not make the comment you have made.
fraga wrote:
I never said I don't want them to up the MP. I said I hope they don't do it to the 15-16MP range.
12 or 13 max would be great.
More resolution and AT LEAST the same noise, possibly a little bit less with the gapless lenses and software evolution.
But with 15-16MP, I am almost sure they won't be able to achieve the same amount of noise, let alone diminish it. At least not without strong in-camera NR that eats away fine details.
Look at the 40d-50d.
The 50d has new sensor technology that was supposed to make it a great low-light camera. However, in bad light (like indoors with no flash), the IQ just fall apart. In good light, yes you do get great IQ. But in bad light... ...Show more →
Why do you keep basing what the MKIV will do at high ISO's off what the 50D does? The 50D has a 15mp APS-C sensor, the 1DIV would, speculatively speaking, have a 15-16mp APS-H sensor--two different size sensors, two different pixel densities/pitches, two entirely different cameras and markets. As for the 50D, I'd consider it an accomplishment considering they packed 50% more MP's in an APS-C sensor that performs very similar to the 40D when samples are up/down sized. Neither the 40D or 50D were 'designed' with low light work in mind...that is why Canon offers the 5D/5DII and 1-series. If you want good high ISO performance you will need to pay for it, the same applies to AF performance and build quality. Just a few more reminders of the Canon marketing theme: Product Differentiation.
but seriously if canon doesn't make it soon then Nikon, who didnt even do FF, will end up doing it first which will be a lot bigger loss of face than upsetting the 1dsmiii (whichis old and played out at this point anyway) and the they can make a new 1Ds at 36MP
Canon does care the least about used prices either.
I'm not so sure: Sony has not revealed any plans for a mid pixel (~16MP) FF sensor and in fact are not even close to releasing a new sensor for the D300, hence the D300s. Nikon may release a D700x, based on the 24MP sensor, but as we've seen with the D3x it can only do 1.8fps in 14 bit mode. So no high speed camera will be based on this sensor for quite a while if ever.
Even if the 1Ds IV comes along and is 36MP, it still doesn't let them off the hook if now they can release an 18MP sensor that can do 10fps, for ~$4K. At least drop the price of the 1Ds III to $4K in the interim. Anyway I don't beleive the 1Ds IV will jump this high in pixels, 30MP max IMO, and it won't be seen until at least the PMA 2010.
but seriously if canon doesn't make it soon then Nikon, who didnt even do FF, will end up doing it first which will be a lot bigger loss of face than upsetting the 1dsmiii (whichis old and played out at this point anyway) and the they can make a new 1Ds at 36MP
Canon does care the least about used prices either.
I'm not so sure: Sony has not revealed any plans for a mid pixel (~16MP) FF sensor and in fact are not even close to releasing a new sensor for the D300, hence the D300s. Nikon may release a D700x, based on the 24MP sensor, but as we've seen with the D3x it can only do 1.8fps in 14 bit mode. So no high speed camera will be based on this sensor for quite a while if ever.
Even if the 1Ds IV comes along and is 36MP, it still doesn't let them off the hook if now they can release an 18MP sensor that can do 10fps, for ~$4K. At least drop the price of the 1Ds III to $4K in the interim. Anyway I don't beleive the 1Ds IV will jump this high in pixels, 30MP max IMO, and it won't be seen until at least the PMA 2010.
Pixel Perfect wrote:
I'm not so sure: Sony has not revealed any plans for a mid pixel (~16MP) FF sensor and in fact are not even close to releasing a new sensor for the D300, hence the D300s. Nikon may release a D700x, based on the 24MP sensor, but as we've seen with the D3x it can only do 1.8fps in 14 bit mode. So no high speed camera will be based on this sensor for quite a while if ever.
Even if the 1Ds IV comes along and is 36MP, it still doesn't let them off the hook if now they can release an 18MP sensor that can do 10fps, for ~$4K. At least drop the price of the 1Ds III to $4K in the interim. Anyway I don't beleive the 1Ds IV will jump this high in pixels, 30MP max IMO, and it won't be seen until at least the PMA 2010....Show more →
who cares if 14bit mode is 2fps? all that means is the slow read actually lets you use the 14bits for ISO100 DR for landscapes, which is actually a plus. The 14bit canons don't make use of the 14bits with their fast reads, they could store the same images packed into 12bits.
anyway we'll see but I now bet, if this rumor is true, that Nikon will make it much quicker to the first fast, high density FF and produce the first true digital EOS 3 (well ok only with all those thousands of nasty nikon buttons and dials covering every inch of the body and the small non-EF mount )
M Vers wrote:
Why do you keep basing what the MKIV will do at high ISO's off what the 50D does?
The past two generations of the 1D series have had the same number of megapixels and have been based on the same technology as the xxD series – the 1DII and the 20D/30D had 8mp/12bit sensors, and both the 1D3 and the 40D had 10mp/14mp sensors.
It is logical to assume that the 1DIV might be based on the same technology as the 50D.
Hopefully, though, Canon are ready with their next generation technology and will be able to increase the resolution without making the ISO worse – as was the case with the 50D.
Anyway in the end it doesn't really matter who makes the first high density FF 3D.
It's not a race, even if nikon puts out a D700x first, so long as it doesn't take over certain segments so totally that it hurts Canon's future development, so long as canon follow within a year, whatever.
anyway my comments are done on the 1d4 for now, it's all rumor still and i dont like brick bodies and wont buy it regardless of what its specs are.
