April 20, 2014, 11:11:44 PM

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 - Diko

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5
Technical Support / Re: Magic Lantern Issue/Question
« on: March 01, 2014, 05:25:12 PM »
There is... in 12 hours I will provide link... curently not on my computer... there are very few features implemented. You can forget about dual iso or similiar ;)


 I had a brief discussion with a forum mate from there. Obviously the so called build 108 is not OK.

40D OS is VxWorks. Newer bodies (aside from 1 Dx, for which I don't know) use (Canon internally developed) DryOS. Magic Lantern enhancement uses DryOS ONLY:-(

Check this topic and see for yourself the status of development (in case you haven't alredy done that)

As for all done so far here is a download site. I am sorry for misleading you. I thought that it was already working. :-((((

Have fun!

EOS Bodies / Re: Is Dual Pixel Tech Coming to the EOS 5D Mark III?
« on: February 28, 2014, 05:54:59 PM »

EOS Bodies / Re: Hardware Hack for EOS Cameras Coming Soon? [CR1]
« on: February 28, 2014, 05:51:01 PM »
IMO the way this whole article has been written it deserves no more than CR0.

And it really sounds like if the author's nigerian cousins, that he hasn't seen for quite a long time, dropped him a letter with the new idea... ???


1/ the talk is about the motherboard and NOT about the sensor.
2/ I wonder what CANON has to say about in legal terms about unathourised tunning.

PS: I hate tablets

Most probable and IMO well expected move from Canon is to move out of cheap (under $200) cameras due to the ever increasing market share of the phone cameras.

According to digicame-info.com Fujifilm,Olympus, Panasonic, Casio are also considering that.

As a trend below is an estimate of DSLR and DSC market shrinking with huge 15% in just 5 years:

Picture source: image-sensors-world.blogspot.com

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 19, 2014, 04:40:04 PM »
I might have been wrong about the wafer size change  :( Although according to one guy README the cost reduction is more a of a fuzz.
When I mentioned about the DPAF patent I was quite clear with patenting filling time... I mentioned it because for example now we can't be sure that the next 1dx won't be with foveon quatro remember that Canon has a patent? Fossum and his team would need 20 years perhaps.....

Canon General / Re: Canon lack of innovation
« on: February 19, 2014, 04:10:08 PM »
So from what I've just understood Neuro is no longer a neuro academic, but a farmer who refuses to be a PR. On the other hand Stella refuses to admit that the next 1Dx could be with a Foveon sensor even though Canon has filed such a patent. And worst of it all my precious 24-70 f2.8L is no longer supported. Did I missed something aside from the refrigirator engineer and the Rockwell guy?  :o
Ah yes - I hate tablets and I am in phase one according to Schoppenhauer

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 19, 2014, 02:01:21 AM »
 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

You remind me of this:

Your knowledge is adorable... And yet quite interesting that you DO continue to fight with the idea that he may have did it.

If you stop just for a second using your knowledge from  here whereby this is an improvement of the CMOS:

And the regular physics knowledge... Yeah I had that moment with the jots and the wavelength just as you did. But I do know that he is quite longer in this business than you and me together ;-)

DO you believe that he will reveal every detail of his study to the world so someone could steal it from him? ;-) And do you believe that he would continue for 10 years to research in that field within a reputable university and some sponsor (it could be even Samsung)?

IF scientist were so sure like you and so negative... we would be in the medieval age, no offence.

There is a pdf (if in those presentations not included back dated from 2010, if I recall correctly where Fossum represents that they are to try to implement that technology (of course quite away from Q.E. of 100%) in 3 stages....
The first one on a regular CMOS. The last one on a new superconducting material... so there you go...

As for:

There are significant challenges in order to make Fossum's DFS/QIS concept a reality. Which is why, even after at least nine years, it is still just a concept.

Please go back where I first mentioned the QIS. I said that at the moment the current technology is not ready yet for QIS or something along those lines.

Additionally I said that our brains would be half a kilo smaller on average. Let me elaborate - that means about 20 -30 years from now... Unless you are younger than me ;-) CHEAT: live a healthy life! :D :D :D

As for the CANON.. Officially 200mm is what I have head as well about CANON... but you have to admit that if you were CANON you wouldn't reveal of you are already on a 300 or 450mm wafer, now would you?

A proof that is this very topic here - we even are not sure what the new 1Dx m2 and 7D m2 would be look like... we are pretty confident they will include dual pix though....

Which reminds me that we even didn't know about the DUAL PIX just before the release of 70D - a few months before that we had some rumor about new focus tech... And you, as well as the others are quite aware that Dual PIX AF didn't emerge like that in the last 6 months before the 70D, now did it? ;-)

UPDATE: Since Jrista is as curious as I am and I respect that and like these people - here is the latest on QIS

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 18, 2014, 06:19:32 PM »
CIPA aggregates the data, there are many years' worth here:


You are the best... but I guess you know that! :-)))

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 18, 2014, 04:53:30 PM »

The Q.E. is indeed high. I don't know about 90%, even with a BSI design unless he is supercooling, there is going to be a certain amount of loss due to dark current.
Actually that is the idea: the Q.E. to be at almost 100%. Here is an extract of some more recent materials about QIS:

Fossum writes:
QIS "vision" is to count every photon that hits the sensor, recording its location and arrival time, and create pixels from bit-planes of data.

That sounds to me as 100% Quantum Efficiency ;-) No?

Having a high Q.E., however, does not change the notion of digital grains. In the presence of low light, you have low incident photon counts. The whole entire DFS/QIS design is based not just on jots, but on the fact that jots are organized into dynamic grains. In low light, all it takes is ONE jot to receive a photon in a grain for the ENTIRE grain to be activated. Let's say grains start out containing 400 jots each (20x20, a 16µm pixels...HUGE). Lets say were shooting in very low light, starlight. The moment one jot in each 20x20 size grain receives a few photons (lets say 50% Q.E., so two photons), then all 400 of those jots are marked as active! So, under low light, it might seem as though you actually received 800 photons, rather than just two! Big difference...you are now simulating the reception of a lot of light, however it is at the cost of resolution. At 16µm a grain, your resolution is going to be pretty low by modern standards...roughly 3.375mp.

Now, lets say a crescent or half moon comes out, and we take the same picture again. We have about two to three more stops of light. Instead of two incident photons, we now have ~8 incident photons per grain. Lets say a dynamic grain division is set at 8 photons. Once our jots receive and convert eight photons, our grains all split. We now have four times the resolution (10x10 grains, or 100 jots per grain, four times as many grains). We have a stronger signal overall, but roughly the same signal per grain as we did before. However we now have an image with four times as many megapixels, 13.5mp to be exact.

Now a full moon is out, and we take the same picture. We have another two stops of light. We get about 32 incident photons. Our grain size is now 5x5, or 25 jots per grain. Our resolution has quadrupled again. Same overall SNR, but our image resolution is 54mp.

This is what Eric Fossum has designed. A totally dynamic sensor that adjusts itself based on the amount of incident light, maintaining relative signal strength and SNR regardless of how much light is actually present. It does this by dynamically reconfiguring the actual resolution of the device...very low light, very low resolution, low light, low resolution, adequate light, good resolution, tons of light, tons of resolution. Technologically it is pretty advanced, conceptually it is relatively strait forward.

I've greatly exagerrated the scenario above...you wouldn't be able to have 54mp under moonlight. You would probably have something closer to 0.8mp under starlight, maybe 3mp under full moonlight, 13.5mp under morning or evening light, and maybe finally be able to achieve 54mp under full midday sunlight.

Actually he intends to put more than 4K jots in 1 pixel :D :D :D  However I believe:
1/ your info might be a little out-of-date.

2/ Fossum knows what he is doing if he is doing it for more than 10 years now. And he already has created something befre (the CMOS).

3/ I hope you will agree that we both are a little bit behind - no matter how much we know, with our understanding of this TO-EMERGE technology ;-)

Here is some more recent presentations:


Absolutely. I'm 100% sure. It makes no sense for Canon to try to break into a niche market that already has not only it's dominant players, but dominant players with a HELL of a LOT of loyalty among their customers. There have been Canon MF rumors for years. I remember reading MF rumors here back in the 2005 era. Nothing has ever come of them, despite how often Northlight tends to drag the subject back out.

The only way Canon could make a compelling entry into MF is if they launched an entire MFD system. Cameras with interchangable backs, image sensors that at least rival but preferably surpass the IQ of the Sony MF 50mp, a wide range of extremely high quality glass (they are certainly capable here, but it still is a MASSIVE R&D effort), and a whole range of necessary and essential accessories like flash. Canon has to do this all UP FRONT, on their own dime, to cover the massive R&D effort to build an entirely new system of cameras that can compete in an already well established market.

Now, they've done that once. They did it with Cinema EOS. But the cinema market is a lot broader with more players, and is a significant growth market with the potential for significant long-term gains, even for a new entrant like Canon. The medium format market is not a growth market. It's a relatively steady market, that has its very few players and it's loyal customers. Since there are so few players who already dominate the market, breaking in for a new player like Canon would be a drain on resources, and there is absolutely zero guarantee of any long-term payoff.

So, yes, I'm sure. Canon won't be offering a medium format camera any time soon.

 - Yes about SYSTEM, of course. I have never imagined CANON selling digital backs, or sensors to anyone :-))))
 - Yes about glass
 - No about light
 - Perhaps CANON has been in the MF R&D since 2001 with the introducing of 12"' Si wafer
Let us not forget the BIG SENSOR or the BIG 120 MPs APS-H sensor - the 2007 success?

Silicon Wafer Sizes Trend The picture I provide is more relevant to intel then to SONY or CANONn and yet it is a trend:

Let me make another comparison exactly with the small Cinema EOS success. It's like an early bird. FF sensor from DSLR equipment against ARRI, RED & SONY APS-C Cinema solutions..... Hmmm... Who knows... ;-) Extra dollar is always welcomed. Even if it is from 0.5 market share. If CANON succeeds to sell 2k MF bodies in 3 years, let's say 10K$ each.... 2 million extra dollars... I ask

WHY NOT? ;-)

... But…in 2013, there were close to 14,000,000 dSLRs sold worldwide.  Stephen Shulz, head of Leica's photo division, estimated that the annual worldwide market, all brands, is just 6,000 MF cameras.  14 million vs. 6 thousand.

NEURO, Could you be so kind to provide some links for those statistics about the 14 million DSLRs sold in 2013. I can put them in good use for personal doings :-)

Thank you in advance.   :)

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 18, 2014, 11:09:28 AM »
Canon won't be doing any kind of medium format anything any time soon.
Now , about the last statement are you sure?

A CR1 that is based on NL site is hardly something to take seriously...

:-) I will agree with you about the site renomee, since I am not very into the tech rumor business. :-)

Have in mind that a third (SONY developed MF CMOS) player, the Pentax (now RICOH IMAGING645D, is a fact now.

IF you have the first APSH 120 MP and the biggest in-house developed CMOS sensor (202 х 205 mm or 7,95 х 8,07 inches) since 2007 it is quite a feasible option.

To be the biggest DSLR vendor without MF body? IMO not an option. At least not after in-house developed BIG CMOS is already existing.

And btw I have a speculation why this is happening now. Aside from the years for everyone to improve CMOS logic there is one major factor. A transition among the big players has begun to 18 (450mm) wafers. Even on a 11,8 inch (300mm) wafer one could make about 30 CMOS 44x33 (taken the SONY's size which is actually 1.5 crop MF).

In times when even Fujifilm is in the FF market I believe a slow entering in MF market is an viable option for more profit. I even believe it to be a trend.

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 18, 2014, 02:49:26 AM »
there is already  lossless jpg ver9 something... could be implemented in any of the next canon bodies (DIGIC 7 or 8 perhaps)

There is also a rumour that Canon has lossless RAW file format. :) The problem with any lossless compression is that you end up with large file sizes... If lossless jpg isn't much of a savings over RAW, why bother?
Good to know :D :D :D I mentioned it only due to the chit chat about DR and JPG.

If by QIS you are referring to Eric Fossum's Digital Film Sensor (DFS), that is a very old concept. Almost a decade old now, given this original paper: http://ericfossum.com/Publications/Papers/Gigapixel%20Digital%20Film%20Sensor%20Proposal.pdf

I read that many, many years ago. Very intriguing concept...however it doesn't mean that you actually have a gigapixel sensor. The notion of a digital film is that the sensor works more like actual film which has silver halide grains, wherein the "jots" combine to make up large digital sensor "grains". Under lower illumination where there are fewer incident photons, one jot strike within the region of a grain would "illuminate" the entire grain as if each jot had received a photon. Grains remain large, resolution remains low, SNR is high, noise is low. Technically speaking, this isn't all that different from downsampling a high ISO image in post.

Under high illumination, where photon strikes are frequent, most jots would receive photon strikes. By employing a mechanism to "divide" digital grains, one could dynamically increase resolution, since smaller grains with fewer jots could still achieve a higher SNR. It's most definitely an intriguing concept, but it is also requires technological capabilities beyond what we are currently capable of (at least, as far as image sensor fabs go). Jots are considerably smaller than your average pixel...they would have to be close to deep red wavelength (somewhere between 750 and 800nm...current APS-C pixels are 4000-5000nm, current full frame pixels are 6000-9000nm).

To make an ideal Digital Film Sensor, I'd combine the Jot concept with the Titanium Nitride superconducting material and microwave comb readout to produce a sensor with infinite dynamic range, exact color replication, and effectively the highest resolution possible for an image sensor. The TiN technology is still pretty new, and pixel size is much larger than a jot (the only existing sensor is 44x46 pixels in size), and it still requires cooling in a dewar jar. But it would probably be the best sensor on earth. ;)

Yes I do mean the same concept. These days Fossum calls it QIS. As for the thin film added to APS CMOS innovation from Canada IMO you have the whole concept wrong... No matter how he calls his pixels he claims of gathering 90%of the incident light and what is more important his intend is NOT to put it through ADC descrete process ergo the gigabytes. But even I could be wrong since he and his fellows are researching it as we speak.

Canon is not in the image sensor market. Canon is in the photography market.


Canon won't be doing any kind of medium format anything any time soon.

Now , about the last statement are you sure?


As for CANON selling sensors...? How on earth did you come up with this one?!? I've returned the topic here What's Next from Canon? by mentioning the competitors and reminding of some old Canon rumors that for number of reasons I believe or at least hope to be true.

Canon is making its own in house developed sensors and having in mind the CR MF rumors... I would love to hear what you think about it :-)

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 17, 2014, 08:43:34 PM »

1/ there is already  lossless jpg ver9 something... could be implemented in any of the next canon bodies (DIGIC 7 or 8 perhaps)

2/ quantum image sensor (QIS) is on the way by the father of APS CMOS. The main obstacle for its research ending is IMO is the current lack of power that would be able to process raw data from the sensor in the terabytes

3/by the time QIS is reality most of us would have lost about half a kilo of brain matter ( so really no folio needed) and will either suffer some neuro related sickness like Parkinson's desease or will be stupid enough to feel overwhelmed with the QIS menu.

And yet here we are and I wonder why there is not even a single person to mention something about FF or MF, which IMO is also partially the topic.

SONY made its MF epic debut and it wasn't with Nikon. Hasselbad and Phase One...aditionally there are rumors about the ex-pentax with their 645 (mark 2) ;) I bet that 44x33 mm CMOS is BI.

BTW SONY's contract with Nikon is about to end this month. Any updates on that one?

So I wounder if the Canon MF beast will come out this year or next... What do you think?

Ps: I hate tablets :))))))

EOS Bodies / Re: What's Next from Canon?
« on: February 16, 2014, 02:46:20 PM »
The EOS M isn't that popular in Japan either, but at $300 it is at least affordable.

That is entirely FALSE.

After its price cut, the EOS-M is the SECOND most popular mirrorless camera in Japan in 2013 (see http://bcnranking.jp/news/1312/131227_27056.html) and this enabled Canon to capture 9.3% of the mirrorless camera market share (see http://bcnranking.jp/news/1401/140110_27101.html). In contrast, Panasonic and Nikon with their MULTIPLE camera models only managed to capture 14.2 and 9.2% market shares.

Please get your facts straight before you post rubbish on the web.

BTW Do you happened to have any other similar statistics for US EU and world wide? :-)

Lenses / Re: lenses cut in half @ dpreview
« on: February 16, 2014, 08:34:38 AM »
Thank you for this great link!

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 5