October 25, 2014, 08:39:05 AM

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Rocky

Pages: 1 ... 34 35 [36] 37 38 ... 43
EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Doesn't Need a Compact Camera System
« on: March 19, 2011, 05:20:02 PM »
I can understand why  Canon is hesitate going into the "mirrorless"/ "EVIL" business. They have already have the G12 and S95 for the high end non-professional area. So the new "mirrorless" needs to be in the professional area (read it as expensive). Let us have a look in what most of the existing "mirrorless" models (except Leica M9)now. They  all have auto focus with about 0.3 to 0.5  second shutter focus delay ( same delay for most of the point and shoot). Now howmany professional will or can live with this kind of delay?? Leica M9 takes a totally differeent approach. IT uses manual focusing with built in range finder.So thes hutter delay will be less than 0.1 second. However. This will make the lens and body focusing mechanism to be very complicated. That is why the lens and body are so expensive. Also how many people nowadays knows how to or want to use a range finder for focusing?? Until Canon can come up with a fast auto focusing system based on "Live View", Canon will be hesitate to go into the high end morrorless business.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Doesn't Need a Compact Camera System
« on: March 18, 2011, 01:56:06 PM »
I agree with CR. I think Canon need to come up with TWO mirrorless camera that will complete with Leica M9 and the Fuji FX100. The first one is for pro's with the need for lens changing capablity and FF. The second one is for simplicity and smaller size with APS-C sensor.

EOS Bodies / Re: The 7d with an aps-h sensor!!!!!!!!
« on: March 07, 2011, 01:10:25 PM »
Olympus has an acceptable swivel screen, something akin would work for a7DII/5DIII.

Ad APS-H, mirrors and LV: how about dropping the rigid EF/EF-s seperation? Give the mirror also a powerless resting MLU-mode that retracts a locking pin that would prevent bad matching between modes and lenses. For the viewfinder a beam splitter that merges/switches between the images from the mirror and a display would be an option that also opens a door for lots of other uses. Or simply use just the rear display as a screen for EF-s lenses. With the 10-22 it wouldn't hurt and with the standard zooms we're at least close.
Bonus points for merging the AF sensors into the imaging sensor, thus allowing PDAF in LV and movie modes. :)
EF-S lens will not work right with APS-H sensor due the the image circle of the EF-S lens  is not large enough for the APS-H sensor.

EOS Bodies / Re: 60D & 7D Rebates coming February 20
« on: February 20, 2011, 12:01:12 PM »
Amazon  is still having 7D at $1457 and 60D at $888

EOS Bodies / Re: canon 600d or 60d?
« on: February 19, 2011, 04:51:20 PM »
For a difference about $200 (not counting rebate). I definitely will vote for 60D. The following four items will make it worth to spend $200: 1. Much better hand grip (a lot more comfortable in the hand) 2. Penta prism ( brighter image in the viewfinder) 3. extra control wheel at the back ( a lot easier to set function). 4. LCD panel on top ( a lot easier to set and know the camera setting). For people that do not want to change the lens most of the time, 15-85mm will be a good choice or for people that hardly uses long lens, 17-40 f4.0 L lens  (27 to 66mm 35mm equilvalent) will be a good alternative.

Here is a Canon white paper about manufacturing sensors.

I've always wondered how large part of the cost of the camera that is the sensor. Does anyone know? It seems to me that if you buy a 5D a much larger part of the money goes to finance the sensor than if you buy a 7D.

The white paper says that a full-frame sensor can be 20 times more expensive than APS-C. The 5D is about $2500 and the 7D $1500. Is the 5D sensor as much as $1000, or even more?

If you use the number from Canon white paper. It is about right. The Cost of CMOS wafer is about $800, throw in the micro lens, AA filter, etc. that may round up to be $1000. 200 site per wafer for APS_C. that will be $50 per APS-C sensor.  FF sensor is 20 times more. That will make it to be $1000 per sensor. However, we should quetion the actual site count of the APS_C per wafer. 200 sound too high. 75 is a more realistic number. (Any- one can work out the number by himself). So the white paper is trying to justify the high cost of the FF DSLR

At the risk of violating my own rule about not discussing pixel size I wonder which is more likely to occur: cost reductions in the manufacture of sensors so as to allow larger sensors at less cost or improvements in imaging technology to allow improved image quality from smaller sensors.

CMOS process is a relative stable process and  has been around for a long time.. We cannot expect any substantial cost reduction in sensor from the process alone, except moving from 8 inch wafer to 12 in wafer. With  the same amount of physical work (mostly done with automation), a little more chemical, and a slight modification in process and you end up twice as much sensor.
As for improving the sensor performance, we should have high hope. just look at the latest sensor from Nikon( Sony). However, we have already pushed beyond the capability of the lens resolution with 18MP APS_C sensor.

As a foot note: Most other electronic device are enjoying huge cost reduction in the last 40 years due to the advance in processing technology and cost reduction in the processing itself and hence the internal device on the silicon is getting smaller and smaller and resulted in the actual silicon in each IC is getting smaller and smaller and hence it is getting cheaper and cheaper.  Unfortunately. This  does not appy to the DSLR snesor. The sensor size is fixed. So there is no cost reduction in shrinking internal device. Instead we end up with higher pixel count. We have moved from 2MP (APS-C) to 18MP (APS-C) in the last 15 years or so.

EOS Bodies / Re: T3 Sensor - question...
« on: February 14, 2011, 06:48:23 PM »
After reading more on different photo sites and forums here. I have the following thought:
1. There is s "slight" improvement between the 18MP and 10MP. But is the improvement worth the files being twice as big.
2. The improvement in the 18MP over 10Mp is it due to the sensor itself or due the processor and  14 Bit vs. 12 bit color  depth? Also the improvement shows after the 18MP is down sized to be 10MP.
3. Everything that I have read says the existing lenses (even the L lenses) cannot resolve more than 14 MP on APS_C. How true is it???
4. Based on the DXOMark data, the lens/sensor combination can only resolve about 50 lpmm. That translates to be about 3.4 MP. What is wrong with this picture??
5. If #4 is true, then the debate between 18MP and 10 Mp is almost a waste of time in terms of resolution.
6. One of the site compares different sensor by scaling them all up to 40MP. This is not  a fair test. The 18MP will always MUCH better than the 10 MP in terms of sharpness.
I am not trying to take side. Just hope someone in this forum can shine some light on the above points.

EOS Bodies / Re: T3 Sensor - question...
« on: February 13, 2011, 10:28:21 PM »
Last night I was looking at the noise performance (only) of 40D, 7D and 60D with DXOmark. At ISO1600 and 3200, 40D is the best performer by  a slight margin. This says a lot about the noise and pixel size.

Sorry, I was looking at the raw data(screen mode). The print mode does give the 18Mp sensors(7D and 60D)an edge on the high ISO noise. Thanks for all the advices of using DXOMark.

EOS Bodies / Re: Godwin's Law for Digital Photographers
« on: February 13, 2011, 04:29:21 PM »
I'm going to vote agree on one condition/criteria.. if there is a thread started *specifically* to discuss the merits or lack thereof of MP counts, then said thread is immune from said action. 

Works for me.
I would like to add that personal attack should be banned.

EOS Bodies / Re: T3 Sensor - question...
« on: February 13, 2011, 03:28:18 PM »
That said, the reason I've held off on buying a secondary body is because I haven't been impressed with Canon's APS-C sensors.  This new sensor in the T3/600D has a lot of potential because its photosites will be bigger, and it'll have the much more modern processing engine.  Somehow I doubt Canon would allow the cheaper camera body to outperform the more expensive ones though, so I'm not getting my hopes up. ::)
I am totally agree with you and the rest of the discussion on your post. Just hope Canon is smart enough to turn the T3 into  a High ISO performer and let the people that want 18MP to have the 7D, 60D or the T3i. I am going to throw another coal into the fire. Last night I was looking at the noise performance (only) of 40D, 7D and 60D with DXOmark. At ISO1600 and 3200, 40D is the best performer by  a slight margin. This says a lot about the noise and pixel size.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon 40D Shutter button **FAILURE**
« on: February 12, 2011, 09:10:55 PM »
Hi CR,

The diagnosis is confirmed by the button pressing half way to focus, focusing successfully and when the button is completely depressed the shutter does not go off.

heh, I did not know this was a common issue. I have a 40d and this issue occurred with me when I was at angkor in cambodia. I t hought it was actually exposure related because I didnt have any issues taking photos of bright scenes, it was in dark scenes that the trigger would not fire.

That said,  I havent had the issue since (or maybe so intermittently that i dont even recall it happening) and I didnt do anything to 'resolve' it.
I have the same problem with my 20D after 40K activation. Now it is sitting at the bottom of my " junk pile".

EOS Bodies / Re: 60D vs 7D with FF in the near future:
« on: February 12, 2011, 09:07:55 PM »
Ok so now I got the lenses down, only now to decided on the body. I like them both, I prefer the 7D a little more, probably the one I am going to get after the rebates roll in. I heard great things about it's AF, especially in low light. Maybe I should download the manual and get a head start, so when it comes I know what to do. Just a question, I never tried this with my A700 (12mp, I could lower it but no point at 6mp), but if I was to lower the MP's (if possible on the 7D, in the menu), to lets say 12mp from 18mp, I should get better hi ISO performance correct?
I got a feeling that you are looking for a "Transitional camera" that you will be moving into FF in December. I have a suggestion that is a little bit crazy and It may work for you. Spend $450 for a used 40D and $700 for a 17-40mm F4 L lens.  This is an excellent lens for APS-C sensor (I am speaking from my own experience). It should take care of most of you need (27mm to 66mm equilvalent)except when you need the telephoto usage. The lens is a true FFlens. So you will have an utawide to normal zoom lens for your FF. As for the 40D, at ISO 1600 its noise level is more that acceptable. At ISO 3200,  you will see some noise.You can sell your 40D later and get most of your money back.
Do not let the metal body to be your determioning factor of choosing between 7D and 60D. The shutter release switch may fail before the rest of the camera body. Please see other posts in this forum.

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon T3i/600D Announced
« on: February 11, 2011, 01:55:44 AM »
that's basically the way firmware works already.  minor updates are released via firmware patches to your existing cameras.  you are expected to pay for major revisions (aka purchasing a new camera).

Canon should sell the "major firmware upgrade" and let you keep the camera. Just like a lot of people upgrade their PC operating system from "Vista" to "Widows 7" without buying  a new computer.

EOS Bodies / Re: T3 Sensor - question...
« on: February 11, 2011, 12:45:34 AM »
I agree with Osiris 30 that we should not expect the noise will be substantially better just by switching to  a newer processor. I have both the 20D and the 40D. The High ISO  (1600) Noise on 40D is worst than the 20D by a very very  slight amount even the 40D have a newer  processor. In the semiconductor business, sometimes a newer product may be just  a cost cutting ( by going to smaller geometry and hence ends up with a smaller chip) move rather than a performance improvement. To be fair, by going to smaller  geometry, there may be a gain in  the processing  speed of the processor.
Therefore, the real improvemnet in noise is by improve the sensor of the XSi ( Gapless microlens, shorten the metal connection, amplifier built into each pixel etc. which is already done on the 7D sensor) and use it on the T3.  Canon may end up doing that in order to out perform the Nikon with the same pixel count sensor. That is my wishful thinking.

Pages: 1 ... 34 35 [36] 37 38 ... 43