« on: May 05, 2012, 05:56:04 PM »
o_o Can I have one?
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.
But why on earth would a $20k digital back use such outdated tech. You would think they would improve it over the years? I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm just really curious as to why! If such a sensor existed, even I would buy one. I would take out a loan if I had to. So if that is true that they could have advanced MF tech but didn't, that seems like the biggest marketing oops of all time, no? They don't want to expand the tiny MF market into something resembling the 1dx/D4 market, which I assume is many times bigger?
Fact is, Leica (S2), Pentax (P645), Leaf, Phase One, Hasselblad, probably put them all together and their sensor R&D budgets wouldn't go anywhere near that of Canon or Sony.
It's unfortunate, but MF technology is going to lag further and further behind, if not least because of their lower budgets. Take the latest sensors, the D800, D4, 5D3, and compare them on a *pixel level* (100%) to an MF sensor, half the time the 35mm outperforms the MF, and that's despite the individual pixels being a crudload smaller and closer together, and despite the MF sensors costing as much as a small house.
If Canon or Sony took what they'd learned from making APS-C and FF sensors, and put the same tech into an MF, that would be phenomenal. Take the low-light performance of the 5D3 and make those pixels twice the size again? Take the DR of the D800 and double or triple their full-well capacity and increase another 1 or 2 bits? Even take an MF sensor now and add gapless microlenses would bump up performance a stop or two.
I don't care how expensive that sensor would be, it would be phenomenal and leave even the IQ180 for dust.
Canon should make a 5d2 of the MF world. Something that is affordable enough for the masses, but super amazing. I don't see why they can't, but I know they wont.
Setting up an event for next week, I was 'checking the light levels' when this person 'walked infront of the camera'I really like this, little less motion blur would be wonderful, but hey, its candid, what can I say?
Thanks. A judge criticised the lack of catchlights on the first one and suggested that some should be put in, but it wouldn't have suited the mood I wanted to generate. He also criticised the other one for the model not looking at the camera .
more minor updates i guess?
oh wait more video stuff... great (that was sarcasm).
I think APS-H is unlikely for the "3D". I would sooner say 30ish megapixels in a 5D III body. I was impressed with Canon's decision to make the 1DX only 18 MP but they do need a high megapixel camera as well.
Who cares how many megapixels the 650D will have. It's barely relevant. We're well past the point of diminishing returns. There will be plenty of megapixels. More than you can shake a stick at.
Even if the megapixel count were of interest (which it isn't), keep in mind that going from 18 to 20 mpix involves a 5% reduction of sensel size in each dimension. Or, a 20 mpix sensor gives you 5% more pixels in each direction. Barely worth mentioning.
Now, onto the relevant bit. The real question is whether the 650D will have continuous video AF. Continuous video AF will be a very useful feature to many users. If Canon manages to pull it off so it'll be a very interesting camera and it'll sell well. If not, Canon won't be keeping up to Nikon and Sony.
The other relevant bit is the DIGIC-V chip. That should yield some performance improvement.
For those wishing for a 19-point AF module - dream on. Not gonna happen.
To start I will present you all (?) the alternatives I have as of now:
a)Buy the 7D now
b)Buy the 5D II now
c)Buy the 5D3 now
d)Wait for a 7D II (70D or 7D replacement anyway)
e)Sell all my glass and jump over the D800 train to start over (ouch!)
f)Wait for ... whatever
g) used 1D4 - all the extra function, none of the problems
I'm very lucky here in Salisbury having a good relationship with the manager and staff of Castle Cameras. I know they will never be as cheap as the web based businesses, but value the honest advice and friendship they freely offer - as well as the ability to try out kit (for as long as a week in one case) before buying. Local shops do need supporting in order to survive, we will miss them when they are gone.
London Camera Exchange is very variable. One in Southampton's Below Bar area is excellent while the Salisbury outlet is so unfriendly I refuse to walk through the door.
Jessops is a business in trouble. I hope it survives and I do buy small consumables from them once in a while, but would not dream of ordering anything or indeed spending large amounts there. A great shame to see a once well respected business so badly managed. They seem to show images of cameras in the window rather than the real thing, a sign of a cash-flow crisis I imagine.
For on line purchases I tend to use Warehouse Express as they have always treated me fairly.