Comments on: PowerShot News [CR2]

By: yvesson

yvesson — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 09:23:29 +0000

Hej, dynamic range can be improved with sensor technology (see fuji), I suppose. You have no reason to shoot at slow apertures on a small sensor, cause you need light and you have a large DOF anyway, and diffraction comes in very fast, you are right. CA ? you mean chromatic aberrations ? Those come from the lenses ?
Remains bokeh, which I’m no fan of anyway.
Small sensor will continue to exist, and improve, at least because there are bridges and video cameras which need them, and compact/ultracompacts. A clean 800 ISO would be something huge on a 1/2.5′ sensor… I’m sure it will happen, but within 2 years, 5 years… Who knows.

But so few rumors 10 days before the announcement ? Either canon hides its secrets well, or it is that bad that it’s not even worth leaking anything.

By: Jack

Jack — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 04:55:41 +0000

Larger sensor doesn’t only give the benefit of lower noise. Even if EXMOR R can produce lower noise, larger sensors would still beat it in terms of CA, Bokeh, Dynamic Range and Diffraction limits at small apperture.

If Canon wants to introduce a large sensor P&S, I think G11 with fixed lens would be a good platform.

I always thought that interchangeable lens is mostly hype in compact cameras. The m43 started with only 2 lenses and whatever comes after that costs a lot. I owned the G1 and EP1 before and both times I realized that in order to make full use of interchangeable capabilities, I have to invest heavily into a new system that is never going to be as good as my primary system. Besides, some of these other lenses would make the camera bigger, thus defeating the initial intention of having a second, smaller camera to complement my primary dSLR.

Besides, the G1 and EP1 is nowhere near being pocket cameras. Now, my PnS is a true PnS in the form of f200EXR.

If the G11 can be a compact camera with APS-C sized sensor and a decent fixed lens, eg 24-105. I think it will be enough for most purpose and still remains compact.

Canon would also not need to worry about creating a new mount and a new set of lenses.

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 22:58:58 +0000

If they can just make the lens of the SX10 faster at tele it would be great. F5.7 is way too slow. A 720p HD video + at least a 1/2 stop faster lens at tele would make me buy it (and maybe some in camera cromatic aberations correction). If not, Panasonic FZ38 is my future camera (with its F4.4 at tele, and even F3.5-F4.0 at focal lenghts where the Canon has F5.0). I really want to stick to Canon, but they need to provide a little more.

By: Harold Beagle

Harold Beagle — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 05:13:23 +0000

T&S lcd screen, and a proper, fast (f2) lens – how much longer do canon want me to hang on to the G3?

By: David

David — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 00:54:14 +0000

somehow I don’t think they’d release a G11 that was not an improvement over the G10, which is by far the best in it’s class, so Canon is only topping themselves with a G11 at this point.

By: David

David — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 00:33:33 +0000

less MP does not necessarily mean better pictures either. there’s plenty of crappy low MP cameras on the market. all this MP bashing is BS, it’s a camera per camera issue.

By: David

David — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 00:31:34 +0000

so true…$500 cheaper though, push down FF price, woo hoo

By: yvesson

yvesson — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 23:23:38 +0000

Hej, it’s innovation if they can keep a fast lens and the same zoom range as G10, otherwise there is nothing new, they could have done it 2 years ago, it’s just a different design, and I feel it will look like last year’s LX3…

By: David

David — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 23:05:39 +0000

well you call an increase in sensor size pathetic, but that sounds like innovation to me

By: David

David — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 22:44:23 +0000

you may well be right

By: Gusto

Gusto — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 21:35:42 +0000

Precisely. Innovation is the key here.

By: Gusto

Gusto — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 21:34:45 +0000

If groundbreaking changes in small or densely packed sensors can reap lots of benefits, imagine the possibilities when these changes are applied in larger sensors.

By: StefanN

StefanN — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 20:56:21 +0000

I’m no lens designer, but I’d guess that the mount part is negligible compared to the required resolving area and light gathering capabilities (not many would fancy an f/6.3-8 lens for instance. People even complained about the F/4 on the Sigma DP1).

I don’t want to sound like such a sourpuss, but it’s just that I myself has so long hoped for a compact camera with a ‘wide-to-short tele’-zoom lens and large sensor, but come to realize that it’s probably not doable in the foreseeable future. But with some compromises it might still be interesting (narrower zoom area, smaller sensor etc).

By: yvesson

yvesson — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 20:54:10 +0000

Hej, I agree with gusto in one way : when others (olympus, panasonic and sony) come up with inovative stuff (micro4/3 compacts and new sensor technology), canon is gonna release a G11 with what could be expected from the G9 and G10… Bigger sensor with less pixels, and that means small zoom on a compact, too, or a slow lens.
I think the future is new sensors technology, with small sensors producing cleaner high ISOs, just because people want a bit of zoom, and not a slow F5.
Maybe it’s also super fast autofocus and very high frame rate, but canon isn’t going there either atm.