<?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: Rebel T2i Announced.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/</link>
	<description>You gotta know</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Jul 2010 00:22:04 +0800</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: 50/50</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-41125</link>
		<dc:creator>50/50</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2010 03:38:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-41125</guid>
		<description>Well, I&#039;ve since lost the link but someone on here had a link to a reviewer on DPR quoting a canon engineer regarding one of the reasons they opted against making the 1d IV FF as apposed to 1.3 and apparently this notion of image ghosting came up in some FF tests as a result of not being able to dissipate the charge, as I understood it both pixel density (as affecting resolution) and sensor size (whether this is again purely relating to pixel density or something more wasn&#039;t clear) have an effect on this undersized phenomenon.

The thing to be aware of with CCD, is that when doing the read out of a sensor after capture, it has in the past always been limited to row by row, so you can imagine you have to clear one row at a time, it&#039;s actually very slow. CMOS on the other hand allows for all rows to be read out at the same time which as a rule means you can get the image off the sensor and ready for the next frame a lot faster.

CCD is probably the better technology in a lot of ways, but due to production costs very little R&amp;D is done on it when compared to CMOS, ironically CCD was originally the technology associated with less noise and better IQ for the longest time until canon started producing their own CMOS sensors and winning the IQ/low noise game for a few years, at which point nikon started to look at alternatives to CCD as well. 

It still makes me laugh a little that the SLR market is dominated by CMOS, but the med format market is still using CCD for it&#039;s once upon a time better DR and lower noise in shadows, but then if you go down to the compact market... we see a lot of CCD&#039;s again which I think come mostly from sony still? although I&#039;m not 100% on that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I&#8217;ve since lost the link but someone on here had a link to a reviewer on DPR quoting a canon engineer regarding one of the reasons they opted against making the 1d IV FF as apposed to 1.3 and apparently this notion of image ghosting came up in some FF tests as a result of not being able to dissipate the charge, as I understood it both pixel density (as affecting resolution) and sensor size (whether this is again purely relating to pixel density or something more wasn&#8217;t clear) have an effect on this undersized phenomenon.</p>
<p>The thing to be aware of with CCD, is that when doing the read out of a sensor after capture, it has in the past always been limited to row by row, so you can imagine you have to clear one row at a time, it&#8217;s actually very slow. CMOS on the other hand allows for all rows to be read out at the same time which as a rule means you can get the image off the sensor and ready for the next frame a lot faster.</p>
<p>CCD is probably the better technology in a lot of ways, but due to production costs very little R&amp;D is done on it when compared to CMOS, ironically CCD was originally the technology associated with less noise and better IQ for the longest time until canon started producing their own CMOS sensors and winning the IQ/low noise game for a few years, at which point nikon started to look at alternatives to CCD as well. </p>
<p>It still makes me laugh a little that the SLR market is dominated by CMOS, but the med format market is still using CCD for it&#8217;s once upon a time better DR and lower noise in shadows, but then if you go down to the compact market&#8230; we see a lot of CCD&#8217;s again which I think come mostly from sony still? although I&#8217;m not 100% on that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: snaphappy</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-41111</link>
		<dc:creator>snaphappy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:30:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-41111</guid>
		<description>god dam, i just saved up for 5 months to get my 500D for christmas, oh well i guess thats how technology goes, i just thought the 500D would be replaced after the 1000D.
i want refund on 500D now so i can get 550D :) anyone know if that actully could be possible</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>god dam, i just saved up for 5 months to get my 500D for christmas, oh well i guess thats how technology goes, i just thought the 500D would be replaced after the 1000D.<br />
i want refund on 500D now so i can get 550D :) anyone know if that actully could be possible</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dariel</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-41038</link>
		<dc:creator>dariel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 13:35:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-41038</guid>
		<description>You are right concerning the issues on sensors charge dissipation problems, this is an issue. Large sensors are not in question from my perspective, but i may be wrong. There are also differences between CCD sensors and CMOS on that...

My two cents are that this issue is more related to pixel density and internal design of electronic function like peak detection and signal noise reduction. At high speed it&#039;s difficult to clear the sensors of the previous electrical charges. Hence the problems that are arising on remanent image, or remains of previous shots on a picture (somewhat seen of the 7D). I am pretty sure that CCD, more expensive, prone to heating, requiring to be charged to function (not passive capture), are relatively shielded from that problem...

The highest speed of D3s is achieved with DX format...but given the super coverage that a FF taylored AF would have on APS-H or APS-C coverage, and the enhanced tracking performances (pure speculation and whishful thinking here but...) it would have. I am pretty sure it will find great interest among photographers.

I am not sure on the Higher X-Synch, but yeah...at this price point, 300th should really be the minimum</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are right concerning the issues on sensors charge dissipation problems, this is an issue. Large sensors are not in question from my perspective, but i may be wrong. There are also differences between CCD sensors and CMOS on that&#8230;</p>
<p>My two cents are that this issue is more related to pixel density and internal design of electronic function like peak detection and signal noise reduction. At high speed it&#8217;s difficult to clear the sensors of the previous electrical charges. Hence the problems that are arising on remanent image, or remains of previous shots on a picture (somewhat seen of the 7D). I am pretty sure that CCD, more expensive, prone to heating, requiring to be charged to function (not passive capture), are relatively shielded from that problem&#8230;</p>
<p>The highest speed of D3s is achieved with DX format&#8230;but given the super coverage that a FF taylored AF would have on APS-H or APS-C coverage, and the enhanced tracking performances (pure speculation and whishful thinking here but&#8230;) it would have. I am pretty sure it will find great interest among photographers.</p>
<p>I am not sure on the Higher X-Synch, but yeah&#8230;at this price point, 300th should really be the minimum</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Koos</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-40994</link>
		<dc:creator>Koos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 07:30:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-40994</guid>
		<description>Beware of what? The new Nikon Coolpix P100 does ~10fps at 10Mpix and HD Video of 1080p at 30fps. Not bad for US$400. A sign of thinks to come?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Beware of what? The new Nikon Coolpix P100 does ~10fps at 10Mpix and HD Video of 1080p at 30fps. Not bad for US$400. A sign of thinks to come?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 50/50</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-40959</link>
		<dc:creator>50/50</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2010 03:08:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-40959</guid>
		<description>Well as I read pretty recently there are issues getting the electronic charge to dissipate from larger and higher resolution sensors, which would probably make 21.1 mp at 10 fps less possibly at present (or at least not without some negative side effects). I don&#039;t think it&#039;s an entirely bad idea to have a built in (dynamic crop) although I would argue &quot;extra reach&quot; is a bit redundant as you could just crop in post and it would have the exact same effect. How ever, if it could get the frame rates up or flash sync up I&#039;m sure some people would appreciate it.

I was actually really glad to see the 1d IV having a flash sync of 300th of a sec rather then 250th because I always assumed it would be logically possible considering they share the shutter tech between the two 1 series bodies and if the ff can do it in 250th the aps-h should be able to do it in less with the smaller plane to travel across.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well as I read pretty recently there are issues getting the electronic charge to dissipate from larger and higher resolution sensors, which would probably make 21.1 mp at 10 fps less possibly at present (or at least not without some negative side effects). I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s an entirely bad idea to have a built in (dynamic crop) although I would argue &#8220;extra reach&#8221; is a bit redundant as you could just crop in post and it would have the exact same effect. How ever, if it could get the frame rates up or flash sync up I&#8217;m sure some people would appreciate it.</p>
<p>I was actually really glad to see the 1d IV having a flash sync of 300th of a sec rather then 250th because I always assumed it would be logically possible considering they share the shutter tech between the two 1 series bodies and if the ff can do it in 250th the aps-h should be able to do it in less with the smaller plane to travel across.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Son of Daguerre</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-40921</link>
		<dc:creator>Son of Daguerre</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 22:36:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-40921</guid>
		<description>Sydlaexi</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sydlaexi</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WileeCoyote</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-40908</link>
		<dc:creator>WileeCoyote</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:55:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-40908</guid>
		<description>I wonder... is it possible to remove the T2i badge from a T2i and replace it with a 550D badge? I preordered a T2i and I have absolutely no liking for the name at all (although it&#039;s not as silly as what the Japanese will be getting, which is Kiss Digital X4 I think).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I wonder&#8230; is it possible to remove the T2i badge from a T2i and replace it with a 550D badge? I preordered a T2i and I have absolutely no liking for the name at all (although it&#8217;s not as silly as what the Japanese will be getting, which is Kiss Digital X4 I think).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MT</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-40864</link>
		<dc:creator>MT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 19:10:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-40864</guid>
		<description>the 550d is nowhere near a 350d!

the 550d is everything a 60d would have, except for the build...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>the 550d is nowhere near a 350d!</p>
<p>the 550d is everything a 60d would have, except for the build&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 50/50</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-40822</link>
		<dc:creator>50/50</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:38:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-40822</guid>
		<description>Well, the harsh reality is canon look at sales, and the 5dII outsells the d700 in the 2 markets I&#039;m in a position to check.

I&#039;m not saying there isn&#039;t room for a lower rez ff camera by canon, but chances are it wouldn&#039;t win them many more sales then they already have but rather make them split sales between the 5dII and the lower rez sibling. Which would mean higher production costs between the two bodies... potentially raise the price of both and net them fairly few additional sales.

I&#039;m inclined to think canon will at the least match the build quality and AF to some extent of the 7D in it&#039;s next prosumer FF body. But don&#039;t hold your breath for it being a blazing fast sports camera, a slight frame rate booste, and if you&#039;re really lucky they might not increase the mp, but I wouldn&#039;t be surprised if they did. 

Personally I think the 5dII is a very solid camera, it&#039;s af is a short coming, but it&#039;s IQ is imo the best over all of anything in the 35mm market atm and even it&#039;s DR is pretty respectable I pull 8-9 stops out of mine comfortably and that&#039;s better then mostly any color film ever does.

The camera isn&#039;t perfect, but if you can&#039;t get a great image on a 5d II your just not trying hard enough. Here&#039;s hoping the 5d III has a better af though :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, the harsh reality is canon look at sales, and the 5dII outsells the d700 in the 2 markets I&#8217;m in a position to check.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not saying there isn&#8217;t room for a lower rez ff camera by canon, but chances are it wouldn&#8217;t win them many more sales then they already have but rather make them split sales between the 5dII and the lower rez sibling. Which would mean higher production costs between the two bodies&#8230; potentially raise the price of both and net them fairly few additional sales.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m inclined to think canon will at the least match the build quality and AF to some extent of the 7D in it&#8217;s next prosumer FF body. But don&#8217;t hold your breath for it being a blazing fast sports camera, a slight frame rate booste, and if you&#8217;re really lucky they might not increase the mp, but I wouldn&#8217;t be surprised if they did. </p>
<p>Personally I think the 5dII is a very solid camera, it&#8217;s af is a short coming, but it&#8217;s IQ is imo the best over all of anything in the 35mm market atm and even it&#8217;s DR is pretty respectable I pull 8-9 stops out of mine comfortably and that&#8217;s better then mostly any color film ever does.</p>
<p>The camera isn&#8217;t perfect, but if you can&#8217;t get a great image on a 5d II your just not trying hard enough. Here&#8217;s hoping the 5d III has a better af though :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jan</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-40766</link>
		<dc:creator>Jan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:27:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-40766</guid>
		<description>Yap. The 3.7fps is an amazing improvement over the 3.4fps of the T1i/500D.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yap. The 3.7fps is an amazing improvement over the 3.4fps of the T1i/500D.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jb</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-40761</link>
		<dc:creator>jb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:19:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-40761</guid>
		<description>I can see that the introduction of the 60D would steal the spotlight from the 7D. So Canon do just that, defer the 60D until the time is right (ie. Nikon announces something) and then BANG! 60D comes out with all the features of the 7D minus AF.

I call this &quot;features war&quot;... while the camera with all the features might not necessarily be the better camera... only satisfying the needs of customer and creating new different selling points for making sales and that is what canon is doing IMO.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can see that the introduction of the 60D would steal the spotlight from the 7D. So Canon do just that, defer the 60D until the time is right (ie. Nikon announces something) and then BANG! 60D comes out with all the features of the 7D minus AF.</p>
<p>I call this &#8220;features war&#8221;&#8230; while the camera with all the features might not necessarily be the better camera&#8230; only satisfying the needs of customer and creating new different selling points for making sales and that is what canon is doing IMO.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jan</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-40760</link>
		<dc:creator>Jan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:14:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-40760</guid>
		<description>I personally don&#039;t like the 18MP because of the filesize and the time my PC will need to convert these. Already the workflow with my 400D&#039;s 10MP RAWs is really slow. In addition, the 550D doesn&#039;t offe sRAW or mRAW... so I would haven 20MB/picture. Probably without any advantage over the 10MB/picture I have now...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I personally don&#8217;t like the 18MP because of the filesize and the time my PC will need to convert these. Already the workflow with my 400D&#8217;s 10MP RAWs is really slow. In addition, the 550D doesn&#8217;t offe sRAW or mRAW&#8230; so I would haven 20MB/picture. Probably without any advantage over the 10MB/picture I have now&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jb</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-40759</link>
		<dc:creator>jb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:09:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-40759</guid>
		<description>I concur. However, depends on your needs though, for stills I dont think there will be much different and the 500D will produce fine images just fine, it is after all the person behind the camera that matters. However if you want to use the video feature as well, the video in 500D is terrible! I was baffled that manual exposure was absent, the external mic jack was absent and the built in mic is not great.

So yea, depending on your intended usage, both camera will do fine; but the 550D may do better at some areas that the 500D could not fare.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I concur. However, depends on your needs though, for stills I dont think there will be much different and the 500D will produce fine images just fine, it is after all the person behind the camera that matters. However if you want to use the video feature as well, the video in 500D is terrible! I was baffled that manual exposure was absent, the external mic jack was absent and the built in mic is not great.</p>
<p>So yea, depending on your intended usage, both camera will do fine; but the 550D may do better at some areas that the 500D could not fare.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: jb</title>
		<link>http://www.canonrumors.com/2010/02/rebel-t2i-announced/comment-page-2/#comment-40755</link>
		<dc:creator>jb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:01:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=3568#comment-40755</guid>
		<description>nor the kelvin white balance and the built in flash trigger I suppose :) yup... getting the 7D soon! I reckon the kelvin white balance is a must have feature for all JPEG shooters who wants to get the image right the first time around as for RAW shooters; its a different story :)

All Im hoping that is the 7D will go down in price with this announcement and the future 60D announcement :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>nor the kelvin white balance and the built in flash trigger I suppose :) yup&#8230; getting the 7D soon! I reckon the kelvin white balance is a must have feature for all JPEG shooters who wants to get the image right the first time around as for RAW shooters; its a different story :)</p>
<p>All Im hoping that is the 7D will go down in price with this announcement and the future 60D announcement :)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
