Messages

451

EOS Bodies / Re: 1Ds4 & 5D3 Timetable [CR1]

« on: March 16, 2011, 07:33:36 PM »

I don't believe a smaller sensor will ever have an advantage over a larger one. It has always been the case that a good big-un is better than a good little-un. Convenient and cheaper maybe, but for image quality at the end of the day, the bigger the captured image the better. It was always true with film and I'm convinced that it will remain true in this modern digital world.

It's interesting that Canon are said to be interested in acquiring a medium format foothold. While the Japanese have made the 35mm "full frame" size their own, the same is not true of larger formats. Pentax have at least made a start but Canon and Nikon seem to be a bit slow getting into the game.

Once digital technology matures, I can foresee 1.3x and 1.6x crop frame becoming a thing of the past.   

Given the economics of semiconductor production, smaller sensors will always have a cost advantage over larger sensors.  Since an APS-C sensor is good enough for many uses, we may well see crop frame sensors continue to be used.
Where a crop sensor has a distinct advantage is in areas such as wildlife photography on foot.  A photographer can carry lighter and cheaper lenses, and still get a chance at getting a shot.  (Imagine lugging a 600mm lens on foot across mountainous terrain with a few days' supplies and a tent in your backpack!)
I think the main driver of crop frame sensors will remain cost.  For most of the consumer market, a crop frame sensor is good enough.  This is because the resolving quality is good enough to produce the print sizes most consumers want, and many users are not concerned about the benefits of a full-frame sensor, such as shallower depth of field or better low light performance.

452

EOS Bodies / Re: The 7d with an aps-h sensor!!!!!!!!

« on: March 02, 2011, 12:13:05 AM »

Would be a better way to differentiate the XXD vs the 7D. When the 7D mark II rolls out it is probably going to pick up all that was missing from the original 7D that is on the 60D now (articulating screen + other video features), then the differences between the 7D and the XXD will become even more minimal. There is also heavy competition, from Sony and Nikon coming up (I also have a feeling the current 7D is going to hold up well against those). But I think current 7D owners with EF-S lenses would not like this idea, unless the XXD, picks up from were the 50D left off from.

What I am wondering is how feasible it is to build a weather-sealed articulating LCD.  It could potentially be expensive to build such a thing.  If the 7D is the only camera with an articulating weather-sealed LCD, I wonder if Canon could build such a component in sufficient volume to make it cost effective.

The reasons for buying a 7D over a 60D are now coming down to points like:
- Weather sealing
- autofocus microjustment
- autofocus system
- frame rate
- build quality
- shutter lifespan
- viewfinder
- PC sync connector
etc.


If you remove weather sealing, you start to diminish the value proposition of the 7D.

453

Lenses / Re: Affordable, non-L, Prime Lenses from this century please!

« on: February 21, 2011, 06:46:30 PM »

Why does Canon introduce a new Rebel every year but cannot seem to update there current line of affordable, non-L primes? Most of those lenses are pushing 15 to 20 years since there release date! Come on Canon, you can still make money on us non-rich guys. People would eat up a new version of the 50mm f/1.4 and I would love to see a 35mm x/f with USM.

Surely im not the only one who feels this way.

Please Canon, im begging you!

Any thoughts or comments?

A lot of points have already been addressed but, you need to consider:
- Only a small percentage of photographers buy prime lenses (mainly enthusiasts and professionals)
- Some of Canon's existing non-L primes (for instance the 50mm f/1.4) deliver excellent results despite
   their age.
- Zoom lenses have had a long period of development to catch up to the levels of sharpness and
   freedom from distortion of prime lenses.
- Especially in the area of sharpness a lot of Canon's zooms needed a refresh to cope with current sensors.
- Entry level kit lenses will always be designed to provide the level of performance for a current sensor at
   minimum cost.

Also consider that no matter how well a prime lens is engineered, many prime lenses, except the
most expensive (the 85mm f/1.2L USM II comes to mind) have significant issues with the aperture
wide open.  Sharpness at the fringes is an issue, even with L series primes.  Nervous foreground blur
is a frequent problem, and non-circular out of focus highlights often occur at the fringes.  That is
not to mention the level of vignetting that a lot of fast primes suffer from. (I don't know if it is possible
to build a light-weight, affordable fast prime that does not suffer from significant light fall-off at the
borders when the aperture is wide open.)

454

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Mirrorless [CR1]

« on: February 04, 2011, 05:52:48 PM »

You make good points. It is a topic I'd like to revisit when perhaps I'm making more money as a photography. I'm just trying to build more business and EF glass right now.

I think a good FF range finder would be great. But I will never happen. I don't think there is that much market for it just because it would have to be expensive, being FF. I have found myself wanting the 8 Grand to drop on a Leica M9.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there: the market for rangefinders is very limited - basically to serious enthusiasts and a small number of pros.  Even with film, rangefinders very quickly gave way to SLRs in the mainstream market.
That doesn't change the fact that for my compact camera requirements, I would be better served with a rangefinder than a camera like the G11.
Incidentally, I would even be very happy with a rangefinder with an APS-C sensor.

455

EOS Bodies / Re: Deep Hidden Meanings? EOS 6D/3D?

« on: February 03, 2011, 09:43:26 PM »

Sometimes it is right in front of your face....

1. Canon likely has shown a pictures from the advertising for the new camera.

2. Canon always has only photographs taken with the new body except for those photographs of the camera itself.

3. The photograph of the cranes is taken in low light with a very wide angle lens.

4. The only low light wide angle lens is the 16-35 f2.8 and it is only wide angle on a FF body.

Therefore, new camera is FF. Eithere that or they are going to announce a new printer.

Now if I could only count the pixels.....

I doubt the photo was shot with a wide angle lens.  At least in my opinion, the photo exhibits some
perspective compression, plus the point of view is almost on top of one of the egrets.  You would
need to be standing almost on top of the egret to shoot this with a wide angle.  If you did, you would
see perspective distortion from the wide angle.  Instead, the perspective is somewhat compressed.
I would say the should was taken with a telephoto, rather than a wide angle... - and I wouldn't
read anything into that either.

456

EOS Bodies / Re: “1Dsq” & 3D [CR1]

« on: January 27, 2011, 06:08:42 PM »

So?
Why would you crop it to a "normal" AR?
And what is a "normal" AR?
3:2 because that's what 35mm film used?
16:9 because that's what wide screen TV uses?
4:3 because that's what a lot of computer monitors are?

If a 3:2 is always cropped in order to fill a 16:9, then what's the point of a 3:2 sensor?
If a 3:2 photo never fills a 4:3 or 16:9 screen, what's the point of a larger screen?

The point here being that aside from historical bias towards 3:2 there is no reason for digital photographs to be that way.

Aside from the legacy of 35mm film, there is the proximity to the golden ratio that favours the
3:2 aspect ratio.  (Actually 16:10 would be closer.)
I get the point though of asking "what is a standard aspect ratio?"
Take a look at a wedding album - you will see all sorts of aspect ratios that can readily be printed.

What will be a technical consideration in working with a square sensor is that the sensor will be
higher (even if only 30.6mm) - quite a bit higher than 24mm.  That means that the reflect mirror
and pentaprism need to be totally redesigned (assuming a SLR design).
It has even bigger implications for the shutter.  Building a focal plane shutter than has to travel
30.6mm will probably be quite a technical challenge - especially when you want to maintain
a reasonable flash sync speed.  I doubt that 1Ds buyers would accept anything less than 1/250sec.
My uneducated guess is that with the same curtain travel speeds, you would not be able to
reach 1/200s on a 30.6mm high sensor.  (I stress - uneducated guess.)  By increasing
the travel speed of the curtains, you increase the mechanical stresses, which means durability
becomes an issue.  Another way around that is to go back to an electronic shutter, which however
is a compromise from an image quality perspective.

Canon would need to do a great deal of engineering to change the sensor aspect ratio.  That
said, there has been a long delay since the launch of the 1Ds3.

457

EOS Bodies / Re: “1Dsq” & 3D [CR1]

« on: January 26, 2011, 08:56:05 PM »

If you consider Canon's need to differentiate the 1Ds range from the 5D range, a square sensor could be a way to do that, given that it is probably a more practical aspect ratio for studio use.  Another benefit is for those instances when you have to use direct on-camera flash, and you have no way of avoiding ugly shadows other than keeping the camera upright, you don't lose so much in cropping.
That may be sufficient for wedding and portrait shooters to prefer a 1Ds series camera over a 5D series camera...
From an engineering perspective, a square sensor may be less demanding on lenses than a 2:3 sensor - because of less use of the fringes of the light circle.  While I do not have sufficient technical expertise in this area, I suspect a square sensor might allow Canon to pack in more, smaller pixels and still get sufficient image quality.
After all, a 24x36mm frame is purely a relic of 35mm film.

458

Software & Accessories / Re: Thoughts on 430EX

« on: January 26, 2011, 08:15:06 PM »

Thanks everyone. I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing something and this confirms that.

I would consider the following:
- Is build quality an issue to you? The 430 feels decidedly flimsy compared to the 580.  Also, is weather sealing an issue to you?
- Is strobe flash a requirement for you?
- Do you need your flashes to be able to put out exactly the same amount of light? - If so, stick to 580EXIIs
- The point about how much light output you need has already been mentioned
- The 7D can't trigger a flash that is behind the camera
- Will you work a lot in bright daylight - i.e. overpowering the sun - if so get every bit of power you can
- Do you use light modifiers on your speedlites?  They will eat up a lot of flash output.
- Do you need a PC sync socket on all your flashes - if so, the 580EXII is the only choice for you.

FWIW, the speedlites I have access to are a 580EXII, a 430EX and a 430EZ (yes!).  I make do with those out of necessity at the moment, and most of the off-camera flash work I do is manual (using RF triggers and optical slaves).
What will probably be the trigger to buy another 580EXII is for my wife's work to be able to do decent off-camera TTL flash work, where the power of the 580EXII is a factor - especially using a light modifier (probably a brolly) and balancing flash with ambient light.

459

EOS Bodies / Re: 1Ds Mark IV & 5D3 Thoughts & Lens Patent

« on: January 20, 2011, 11:29:23 PM »

As long as either Canon or Nikon can pump out those megapixels while keeping the image noise free, then I guess I wouldn't mind 38-42MP. Storage is getting cheaper by the day, and in a year or two, computers are going to be much faster as well.

I personally am far more interested in better, higher ISO images. 20mp is pretty solid for me as you can print pretty large with not much problem. Depending on the situation. I can shoot at 4000-6400 ISO and get good looking images (some may need some form of noise reduction). If I could shoot at 23-4 times that ISO and get similar or better results, that would sell me the next 1D day one even if it was only 20mp. Pixel count is only important to a certain extent. I think the shift needs to be made toward ISO for the moment until a larger pixel count can produce extremely clean image at the higher ISOs.

Another point, which I forgot to mention earlier, is that the current crop of L series lenses is really close to its limit when mated with a 1DsIII or 5DmkII.  In fact, a number of currently available L series lenses are downright soft at the fringes on these bodies.  I don't know how much of an increase in resolution you will actually get with a 40MP sensor over a 21MP sensor, even with a 70-200mm f/2.8L.  I suspect the improvement may be marginal.  (Medium format systems do still have an advantage in that respect.)
Canon would need to release an entirely new crop of lenses to really take advantage of a 40MP sensor (i.e. very expensive!)

As you said - low noise under high ISO/low light - that is what everyone wants.  There is not much demand for more resolution.

460

EOS Bodies / Re: 1Ds Mark IV & 5D3 Thoughts & Lens Patent

« on: January 20, 2011, 10:11:01 PM »

As Canon/Nikon head to 40+ megapixels, it becomes an interesting question as to who needs those resolutions.  A lot of photogs will need to upgrade their computers and storage in order to support a workflow on image files of 40-50Mbytes from such a camera.

Given that 20"x30" (or possibly slightly larger) prints are entirely viable off a 5DmkII/1DsIII, it would seem that a 40Mp camera is hunting more in medium format territory.  That would seem to suggest that a 40Mp 1Ds4 would squeeze Hasselblad/Phase One and friends into an even smaller niche. - You would literally only need a medium format body for large billboard work, or where a leaf shutter is essential (HSS TTL flash has already narrowed that niche).  For most enthusiasts, 18MP is already overkill.
What I suspect photogs will be demanding, more and more, is for the manufacturers to focus on high ISO/low light performance, rather than adding more pixels. - This has, of course, been said time and time again already.
My view is that there will remain to be a market for crop frame sensors since they reduce the cost and weight of glass that sports and wildlife photogs need to carry around with them.  There would probably be a lot of unhappy sports shooters if Canon discontinued the APS-H format.
Wedding/event photographers would probably settle on a 5DmkII at 28MP, while a 40MP+ 1DsIV would probably mainly be interesting to fashion/advertising types who haven't already abandoned their medium format gear.