<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8220;G&#8221;MOS Revisited</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/gmos-revisited/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/gmos-revisited/</link>
	<description>You gotta know</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 03:59:42 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/gmos-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-12399</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 07:08:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=1579#comment-12399</guid>
		<description>SBÃ¯Â¼Â</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>SBÃ¯Â¼Â</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shawn DeArmond</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/gmos-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-10474</link>
		<dc:creator>Shawn DeArmond</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 16:51:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=1579#comment-10474</guid>
		<description>Oh, and for God&#039;s sake, no AVCHD.  Keep it a straight h.264 MP4 file PLEASE!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oh, and for God&#8217;s sake, no AVCHD.  Keep it a straight h.264 MP4 file PLEASE!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shawn DeArmond</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/gmos-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-10473</link>
		<dc:creator>Shawn DeArmond</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 16:40:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=1579#comment-10473</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d be happy with 720p as long as it&#039;s 30fps.

Also, I&#039;m all for 12MP instead of 15.  If they can get better high-ISO performance, I&#039;d take 8MP.

1/1.6&quot; sensor means a 2x3 aspect ratio, right?  That would be cool!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d be happy with 720p as long as it&#8217;s 30fps.</p>
<p>Also, I&#8217;m all for 12MP instead of 15.  If they can get better high-ISO performance, I&#8217;d take 8MP.</p>
<p>1/1.6&#8243; sensor means a 2&#215;3 aspect ratio, right?  That would be cool!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: William Lee</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/gmos-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-7573</link>
		<dc:creator>William Lee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2009 01:53:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=1579#comment-7573</guid>
		<description>If the G11 has 1080p 20 fps like the Canon EOS 500D / Digital Rebel T1i, the camera HD video
will be useless.  

The G11 will be a good camera IF IF it has at least 1080P with at 30 fps. I would have got the G10 if it had 1080p with 30 fps.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the G11 has 1080p 20 fps like the Canon EOS 500D / Digital Rebel T1i, the camera HD video<br />
will be useless.  </p>
<p>The G11 will be a good camera IF IF it has at least 1080P with at 30 fps. I would have got the G10 if it had 1080p with 30 fps.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dorkage</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/gmos-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-6612</link>
		<dc:creator>dorkage</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 21:31:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=1579#comment-6612</guid>
		<description>I&#039;d take a decent 12MP w/ high ISO over a 15MP that has trouble over ISO 400... Was the one reason I passed on the G10.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d take a decent 12MP w/ high ISO over a 15MP that has trouble over ISO 400&#8230; Was the one reason I passed on the G10.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cat</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/gmos-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-6604</link>
		<dc:creator>Cat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 20:40:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=1579#comment-6604</guid>
		<description>Gotta love the site, though,,,</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gotta love the site, though,,,</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DeeWee</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/gmos-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-6598</link>
		<dc:creator>DeeWee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 20:05:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=1579#comment-6598</guid>
		<description>The GMOS moniker makes me cringe, wonder who&#039;s sharp idea was to call it G-frikin-MOS, makes no sense whatsoever :(</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The GMOS moniker makes me cringe, wonder who&#8217;s sharp idea was to call it G-frikin-MOS, makes no sense whatsoever :(</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: yvesson</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/gmos-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-6596</link>
		<dc:creator>yvesson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 18:24:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=1579#comment-6596</guid>
		<description>Hej, since Cmos in SX1 is just for frame/s and HD movie, can&#039;t see the point anymore putting this in a G cam. Or they will make a 16/9 screen for it, too ? Oo
Would sound better if they put a 2/3&quot; sensor with 12Mpixels, CCD would be enough prolly for better ISOs, but of course they can&#039;t make such sensor themselves.
Digit V seems early to me too, but maybe they&#039;re not happy enough with Digit IV afterall.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hej, since Cmos in SX1 is just for frame/s and HD movie, can&#8217;t see the point anymore putting this in a G cam. Or they will make a 16/9 screen for it, too ? Oo<br />
Would sound better if they put a 2/3&#8243; sensor with 12Mpixels, CCD would be enough prolly for better ISOs, but of course they can&#8217;t make such sensor themselves.<br />
Digit V seems early to me too, but maybe they&#8217;re not happy enough with Digit IV afterall.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/gmos-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-6595</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 16:04:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=1579#comment-6595</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m more expecting the LX4 for the larger aperture and AVCHD movie mode.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m more expecting the LX4 for the larger aperture and AVCHD movie mode.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rob</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2009/03/gmos-revisited/comment-page-1/#comment-6594</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2009 15:53:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=1579#comment-6594</guid>
		<description>Any more news and/or some fake pics of 500D for us to have a look at??</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Any more news and/or some fake pics of 500D for us to have a look at??</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
