Messages

346

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: June 01, 2012, 06:18:21 PM »

I still believe canon will pull something out of its sleeve. they need an ACE IN THE HOLE, and i believe the 7D II may be that ace if it has the following specs. APS-H - 14-18MP

Hope dies last!

Let us daydream for while .

The 7DII will be out in the next 6-9 months ... with an 1.6x sensor
So, now is the time to daydream.

nice   In order to label this camera a "7D2" it would have to (it seems to me) be a 1.6x, and continue the current stratification of the 1.6x line into three distinct product lines.   But as long as we're daydreaming, consider the "indirect competition" advantage of APS-H suggested by Lonebear, perhaps called a 7DX or even some new single digit number.  what if Canon pulls an APS-H fast one on us (in spite of this site's owner who postulates that APS-H is dead), and introduces a new 22mp APS-H, 12fps ,dual digic 5, weather sealed, spot metering, AF-updated worthy successor to the venerable 1D4.  Whether they leverage the 7D body or the 1D body doens't matter to me either

347

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: June 01, 2012, 01:03:50 PM »

lots of engaging reading here guys.  much appreciated.  baring some conspiracy on Canon's part to deliberately code the digic processor to do bad things in low end cameras, some conclusions I draw from recent posts are:

1.  folks read articles and generalize things about pixel pitch that are true, but can't  necessarily  be used by themselves  to predict overall IQ performance of two different cameras.    I could be missing something here, but what I'm seeing presented here recently  is evidence that the 7D should produce better pictures than the 1D4.

2.  Canon must be either oversimplifying or mis-stating  things, or the quote about larger pixels was taken out of context 

3.  There must be factors beyond pixel pitch that contribute to overall IQ.  i.e. the end-to-end system from to LPF to sensor  to Digic processing to  jpg conversion, etc. . SNR of the sensor itself must certainly not be the only  factor, although it appears to be the most engaging and the one assumed to dominate IQ

4.  the preocupation with SNR vs pixel pitch and size causes one to loose sight of technology cycles, manufacturing techniques, and the influence of those other factors mentioned in (3) above  on overall IQ considering the entire IQ "value chain". 

no, I'm not a physicist or a sensor technology expert.  I'm just not following the line of reasoning as it applies to real world cameras in different technology cycles.   

348

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T4i/650D Specs [CR2.5]

« on: May 31, 2012, 06:37:03 PM »

right, good catch.  So its only useful for out-of-box jpeg with no post, works only for lenses that the mfg is motivated to include, can't be updated without a firmware flash, and the feature has the potential to damage the final result.  I suspect this is a marketing job to convince buyers that it is good,  but as a practical matter it would only benefit those who use the DSLR as a point-and-shoot and are more likely to stick with the kit lens --  and in these situations the user is less likely to even know or detect the benefit and hard pressed to know if it is working well or not!

I do tend to disagree here. I would love my current body to have in-camera CA correction. Why you ask? I don't want to do anything in post but try to get it right when opening the shutter. I'm only a beginner, but I try to learn, and I tend to think that it may be harder but is more rewarding, even though I know that a little bit of post could do wonders.

sure I didn't mean to say it has no use at all  I meant to call out that its broadest appeal is likely to occur under situations where it matters least and is most difficult to verify -- meaning a broad set of beginners would not care about the difference, nor would they know whether or not it is working.  But you represent a notable exception to that glittering generalization -- you are a discriminating beginner who wants to submit to the discipline of creating good jpgs with no post processing.  nice approach!  honestly that use case did not occur to me because when I transitioned from film to digital I never did go "without post" -- but my film days brought just the discipline you are submitting yourself to.  I sent many a roll of K64 to 925 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto CA.

this is not to say one can't learn digital photography without first shooting jpg with no post.  but it will definately help you learn,  and allow you to more fully appreciate the flexibility of things like Lightroom when you are ready.

My sense, given your chartered course,  is that you will  soon (6 months) want to move to raw shooting and transition from "shooting for jpg" to "shooting for lightroom" or whatever PP you choose to use. 

349

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: May 31, 2012, 04:32:12 PM »

<lots of good research>

Given Canon's leading position in lens technology over Nikon, I would expect the main battle area for the two big giants in the next few years will be in the sensor area. However, if Canon places in directly a counterpart high MP body to compete with Nikon, and coundn't beat it (which is quite likely from what we can see now), Canon might risk some landsliding loss of market share. If I were Canon, I would try to use some indirect approach, without direct confrontation. One of best candidates to test Canon's new sensor technology is an APS-H body. If it succeeds, then it can be introduced in a FF body. If it fails, it's still a comparison between apple and orange. Besides 7 series is not flagship, any failure in it will not cause any big disaster.
      If let me speculate, the most possible megapixel in the possible APS-H 7Ds or 7DX could be around 21MP to 24MP. 21MP is around 36MP in FF in terms of pixel density. 21MP in APS-H has larger pixel size than current 7D, which should naturally provide better IQ given all other factors are kept the same. If any extra improvement can be provided, the new 7 series body is almost for sure will be a success, and that will buy enough time for Canon for its high MP body.

DISCLAIMER: my above take is actually heavily biased.
     I am fully captured by the 24-70L II, but my most used focal range is somewhere from 30 to 90mm. That needs an APS-H body to shift the range to my favorite area. Hence, the hope of continuing APS-H line.
 

shout out to lonebear for your most useful collection of thoughts, analysis of pixel density,  and speculations worth reading -- and even for revealing your own bias.  I don't care what they call it, but I'm with you and wish for something with an APS-H sensor!

350

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T4i/650D Specs [CR2.5]

« on: May 31, 2012, 10:45:40 AM »

Unless there is some key advantage I'm not aware of, I would rather update my PP software than update my camera's firmware to deal with a new lens, for example.

It's convenient when shooting out of the box jpeg - but since there's no way to upload custom (3rd party!!!) lens profiles to the camera, it's no replacement for pp and might even hurt it: If you have vignetting on the lens, the camera raises ev in these zones and you have to lower it in post because the shot was overexposed, you're loosing dynamic resolution. And concerning CA correction, I don't think a in-camera solution can be as effective as Lightroom 4.1.

right, good catch.  So its only useful for out-of-box jpeg with no post, works only for lenses that the mfg is motivated to include, can't be updated without a firmware flash, and the feature has the potential to damage the final result.  I suspect this is a marketing job to convince buyers that it is good,  but as a practical matter it would only benefit those who use the DSLR as a point-and-shoot and are more likely to stick with the kit lens --  and in these situations the user is less likely to even know or detect the benefit and hard pressed to know if it is working well or not!

351

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T4i/650D Specs [CR2.5]

« on: May 30, 2012, 08:30:24 PM »

... the Nikon seems to have the better image quality because of it's sensor, as well as some of the in-camera lens correction the Canon doesn't have (CA and lens geometry distortion correction). ...

just a thought here, but I dont' look to the camera body to provide lens correction.  To me that belongs in post processing software that can continually update its library and add its own adjustable CA reduction capability.  Lightroom, for example, is very good at this.  Unless there is some key advantage I'm not aware of, I would rather update my PP software than update my camera's firmware to deal with a new lens, for example. 

352

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: May 30, 2012, 08:19:13 PM »

Your amount of friends with a 7d1 just dropped to zero :-p

it has to do with administrating the warranty -- adding call center folks to field claims, writing documentation to support the call center agents, involving the legal dept, etc. etc..

While I thought the Canon 7d was a great camera and I was very close to buying one, I don't understand why I am being shunned because of my decision to not purchase something that did not meet my requirements.

Im confused as to what a weather sealing warranty has to do with any of this, your personal  camera choices, or why anyones 7D freind count matters  

I didn't see any shunning either, btw

353

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: May 23, 2012, 05:16:58 PM »

I understood there is no warranty on weather sealing? It may work if you're lucky, but if it fails Canon will always tell "you it's your fault"? If this is the case, then noobs who use their eos for diving shots will help Canon service to make some money.

yea I think what Canon is leaning on here is reputation and the fact that "it works" rather than put a guarentee of some sort in place, which would just add cost.  Really, they can produce the same camera for some $$ less without a warranty on the weather sealing, and that cost has nothing to do with how good the seals are,  it has to do with administrating the warranty -- adding call center folks to field claims, writing documentation to support the call center agents, involving the legal dept, etc. etc..   brilliant strategy though;  just $$ in their pocket to skip the warranty.    it will be interesting to see if the Pentax approach will impact the 7D2 though, and if Canon will rest on their "un-warranted" weather sealing laurals or increase the price to cover the costs of a warranty.

7D2 needs to be 'fully' weather sealed in my opinion, just like the 1D4.  in fact, 7D2 should be a lot like the 1D4 imho, although I'm riding the fence re: gripped body.    What I'm not sure of is whether or it would be feasible to adapt the 1D body to APS-C,  though I personally suspect 7D will retain the current body and become the first fully sealed non-gripped body for Canon. 

354

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: May 23, 2012, 02:57:53 PM »

Oftentimes on this forum, I read comments that imply that the only thing average consumers care about is more and more megapixels. That other features don't matter. But, really, people care about megapixels because that is what manufacturers told us to care about during the early years of DSLRs. It made sense at the time because the technology was developing rapidly and the sensor advancements from generation to generation were significant.

 
true, and at the time (for example, from 8 to 10),  a megapixel jump told the essential story of realizable, end-to-end resolving power and also represented the technology frontier.   

Now as the technology matures and resolution becomes less important, manufacturers are looking at other features to differentiate themselves.

I would draw a distinction between megapixels and resolution, and suggest the differentiator should really be end-to-end system resolution, not just the number of megapixels or the theoretical resolving power of the sensor.  Marketing departments should express end to end resolution in a way that is easy to understand, and that includes the capability of the LP filter and the processor as well -- some metric that would differentiate two cameras in a 10 second elevator speech. Maybe it is "effective pixels" I don't know, but some way to express the capability of the entire technology chain.   

I've never thought that much about weathersealing. But as with any successful ad campaign, this one certainly caught my attention and got me thinking about the advantages of full weather sealing. Now I want it in the 7DII and I didn't even know I did. Good marketing.

nice observation!  now I want it more than I did before, and I want full 1D4 capable weather sealing

The point here is not to turn this into a discussion of the pros and cons of weathersealing, or to do a big comparison between the various levels of the current 7D, 5D and 1D, but to point out that the conventional wisdom that drives many of the discussions on this forum can be quickly upended by what happens in the marketplace.

no kidding.  and maybe as the actual number of pixels within the sensor become only part of the story, perhaps we will see some creative marketing on Canon's part, and I for one am looking foward to comparing the vision in my head of what the 7D2 should be, with what Canon sees and actually produces!

355

Lenses / Re: Patent: 600 f/4 DO IS & 400 f/2.8 DO IS

« on: May 23, 2012, 12:00:43 PM »

With all these DO patents, We can expect an major unveiling of an entire new Canon DO line-up sometime in the future. Its would be a nice to have an more affordable versions of the larger longer lenses 300mms and up.

+1 on that.  I wonder if 600mm f/4 DO would represent an alternative to the 500mm f/4, for wildlife -- in terms of weight and hand-holdability implied by the shorter physical length.  ... and what would the price be, and how would Canon position this one along side the today's 600mm.  And would it play well with a 1.4x....

All that aside, a shorter/lighter/cheeper 600mm f/4 would be wonderful, and give wildlife folks a new option.

356

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: May 23, 2012, 11:17:34 AM »

If the 7D mk2 really does look to target the 1D market for a high quality crop action camera I wonder whether Canon will back it up with future quality EF-s lenses? the crop is much more significant afterall and I'm guessing alot of users would like a 17-55 2.8 IS with professional build/sealing.

true enough, but I'd suggest Canon's strategy is not there, it is to compel us to buy a FF body.  In this respect, the wildlife body is positioned as a 2nd (specialized) body where high quality wide angle lenses are not important.  and if they are, the serious guys will have a FF body anyway. 

I'm seeing a Canon revenue strategy to encourage more people to have two cameras and to invest in more "L" glass. 

357

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: May 23, 2012, 11:09:56 AM »

Now that I Think about the canon lineup, 1.3X could work like this

1DX- full frame

5DIII - full frame

7D2 - 1.3X w/10 fps

70D - 1.6X crop,

Rebel - 1.6X Crop

Even with a 1.6,  7D2 could still be the premiere crop body with dual digic 5, and some derivative of the 5D3 AF system, and 10fps, mag body weather sealed, and differentiated from the xxD.   I like the 1.3x though that would be a nice surprise, and make the 7D2 a worthy successor to the 1D4, although it might not be called a 7D...

358

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: May 23, 2012, 10:23:17 AM »

The 7D is one heck of a camera. It is loaded with features and is still "high-tech" even from today's standards. They would have to replace it with something that would make even the 5D3 stand up and take notice. I mean heck, they took the best of the 5D2 and the best of the 7D to make the 5D3!

  much depends on the future of Canon's participation in the premier wildlife (crop) body space.  If they stay in it,  then 7D2 will have to make the 1D4 take notice, I would say. 

18MP cannot be where Canon levels the playing field, even if it is an "upgraded" sensor. If the new 7D2 is 18MP, I cannot imagine too many features added that would justity upgrading my current 7D. (Even if it shoots 10 FPS, or more and dual digic 5)  Now, IF the 7D2 came with a 24, 30, or higher MP sensor (ASP-H, or ASP-C) sensor and shot 8 or 10 FPS, then I might consider it. Or if it came with a FF sensor, but I wouldn't trade it for a "lesser" MP sensor (14, 16, or otherwise) for the current 7's speed.

But -- consider that Canon just announced a new18mp (FF) camera, with a new sensor along with a boat load of featuers beyond the 7D.  Moreover, today's 16MP 1D4 is still suprior to todays 7D in many respects

 
Now that being said, if the 7D2 was 16MP FF and shot 10 FPS, then I may look into it. Video is not something I care about (or use) so I don't worry about what features or not it has with video.

consider that you can purchase a 1D4 today, which exceeds these requirements.

My opinions are based on a possible "entry" level of a cheaper FF camera (that is also rumored to be 18MP) from Canon. They need bodies to fill different price ranges and features. A return of the 70D to the status it had before (I.E. 40D, 50D...) would make the placement of any 7D upgrade a difficult one for Canon.

Agreed that the 7D2 positioning will be interesting to watch, especially if 1.3x goes away.  I don't see xxD line filing the premiere wildlife crop-of-some-sort market ,but 7D2 could do that if the  timing with the 1D4 was carefully done.   The 1D4 is aging, but still spanks the 7D (except for price!), so the 7D2 intro would have to leap frog the 1D4 in my opinion (even if a breakthrough in price per performance).  Canon appears to be forcing the serious high-dollar wildlife guys into buying a lot of glass (move from crop to 1DX), so many would like to see 7D2 as the premiere crop  body wildlife body -- including the possibility of 1.3x. I'm in that camp too.

359

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS 70D & EOS 7D Mark II Speculation [CR1]

« on: May 22, 2012, 02:26:26 PM »

ok good to know.  still, if it takes dual digic5+ to get to 14fps,  what does that say about the the capability of a single digic 5+ to exceed the present 8fps requiring dual digic 4? 

At first glance, and a cursory read on wikipedia, it does appear that 1 digic 5+ would outrun a pair of 4's, but with all the extra noise processing going on I'm not sure how much of the Digic 5 speed actually translates into fps capability

and you're right about the mirror being part of the limitation.  interesting to see what 7D2 does in that regard, i.e. will it offer a mirror-up burst, or what is the practical upper limit when the mirror is operational. 

360

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon EOS Rebel T4i/650D Specs [CR2.5]

« on: May 22, 2012, 02:06:34 PM »

In my opinion, it would be unusual  to introduce a third Rebel update with the same sensor and it is unusual for a 1.6x sensor to last that long in the first place.

... or, as I'm not growing tired of speculating: Canon simply cannot do any better in the aps-c segment at the moment.

lol well, what a fun show to watch...  if Canon simply cannot do any better in the aps-c segment, then you could be right they are just squeezing the last bit of blood out of that turnip by introducing a single Digic-5 Rebel with measureably better IQ than Digic 4. 

But if this were the case, time is running out for Canon to either produce or buy a better sensor!