August 29, 2014, 08:04:16 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 - Diko

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5
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 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 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:

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 and this enabled Canon to capture 9.3% of the mirrorless camera market share (see 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!

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: 40D with grip for $300, or something else?
« on: February 06, 2014, 04:57:48 AM »

Hi Mr Canuck.
I still have my 40D as a backup to my 7D, still a great camera main thing lacking as far as I'm concerned is AFMA, if your lenses are good on the body it does great, if like me the kit lens was OOF (took me way too long to realise the problem) the pics won't stand pixel peeking! Have a good copy of the kit lens now and it takes great pics, still fire off a few frames with it due to the certain something it seems to give the images, they look good. Incidentally there is someone in Manchester UK selling a very rare new one £399! eBay!

Cheers Graham.

Excuse me... what is AFMA (Auto Focus ... ??) ? What is OOF (out-of-focus?)  ???

Thanks in advance for the explanations :-)

Hi everyone...

I wonder what would be the impact of this camera over the market segmentation:
Samsung's dual grip WB2200F Smart camera boasts 60x optical zoom

Here are some additional details.

These three specs details IMO are a small nightmare.... If these were better it could have been a game-changer.

* - Sensor size: 1/2.3" (6.17 x 4.55 mm)
* - ISO: 80 - 6400
* - Screen dots: 460,000

EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 29, 2013, 06:22:07 AM »
While the 700D deserves everything it gets, don't forget everything Canon has done with glass in the last few years. Had I been shopping for a high end camera in 2009 I very well may have gone for the NIkon D700, Nikon glass was very competitive at the time. But that's not when I entered the market, from what I can see Canon has very little competition right now, their recent lenses mop the floor with the competition (at least on the long end, we'll see what happens with the short end next year).
If you're looking for a nice walk-around camera, sure, switching to a different company might be easy. If you want anything more specific out of your camera the number of options falls quickly, pretty much right down to 2. Compact system manufacturers simply don't have the lenses, and as I pointed out above, the nearest competitor has some catching up to do. I'm confident Canon's lens line-up can carry them for quite a while when it comes to the high end market. The real problem is cell phones.
We are on the same line here. It is CANON's leverage to its leadership's position in its amateur/pro line.

The fact is that everyone here are kind of either trying to explain me what the obvious situation here is. Or the one with customerS & CANON's shareholders' happiness goals.

Does anyone realize that the majority of efforts here are on explaining to 2-3 individuals how we are wrong to want more and should accomodate our wish lists according to the majority of people?

When one reads this whole topic, he/she would stay with the impression that everyone's happy with CANONs doings...

For GOD's sake, wake up people! This is a RUMOR site. NOT a final TECH SPECs listing place. Stop speaking obvious facts that we all know.

Better concentrate on what you WANT!
Not on EXPLAINING Canon's reasoning.

If I were from CANON's marketing dep. and read this here (and someone of you definitely is, even if as a guest) I would report that people around here acknowledge this and that issue... but are pretty, pretty happy - ergo could put the solution's R&D on this and that on a lower priority level for now.

It depends on us that CANON doesn't sleep :-))))

And don't forget that you are:

:D :D :D

I am sorry for the pathos but got in the mood, because of that MEGATROLL pic, which is hilarious! :D :D :D I laughed for a while quite a bit.

I have read a few quite good examples of trolling here, but alongside every once in a while maybe you are missing some good points. ;-)

EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 26, 2013, 07:47:10 AM »
  But patent attorneys need research-based claims to file on, so clearly Canon is spending a lot of money on R&D.

I was at a Canon presentation tonight and the video they showed said they spend 10% of global revenues on R&D.  They also quoted global revenue at us$45.6 billion.
That is a Significant R&D budget, regardless of which company or business you compare it to!

Now someone's talkin' digits.

I guess it could be true (trying to turn off that "everybody lies" mode for a brief moment). Than definitely I must agree with Eldar.

Having in mind that HP back in the days invested about 14% then they went down to 3-4% (if I recall it correctly) and now after the crisis they turned it back to 8%.

EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 25, 2013, 05:31:13 AM »
Regardless of what Canon is doing, there are other companies that most photogs have bought into that do the same thing or worse i.e. apple and most continue to buy in. Bleeding out tech, coming out with things later than others, charging 50-200% more than the competitors for the same or less hardware, disabling compatibilities unnecessarily, withholding bs features from one model only to help create product separation for the next model. To me, canon isn't even as guilty as they are (if they do happen to be guilty of any of those things).  Bottom line, they are not alone if they are trying to make a profit through these measures. If you're going to blast canon for it, you might see if you can head over to all the other forums for the other companies you have purchased products from to do the same thing.

Can we all please just recognize that none of these companies are non-profits with YOUR specific desires/needs at the forefront of their business decisions? Go out and take some pictures please.

Interesting perspective you have.  To compare Canon to Apple though, is rather silly, don't you think?  And if your main complaint with Apple has to do with the products they make, or the lack of control you as a consumer have over their products, or them as a company in general...well that's amusing!

I think you completely missed my point.

I don't care whether these companies are doing it or not. What I was saying was that people should stop saying companies are horrible simply because they aren't tailoring their business decisions to that specific consumer's specific need as a consumer.

You are right. It is silly which is exactly the view I thought I expressed.

Actually I don't find it silly. As absurd as it is (yes, I do acknowledge it's absurdity in a way) look at the new iPhone 5c & the "new" EOS Rebel SL1/Kiss X7 in White. I always thought that crippling just comes as is with a lower price tag... Now it comes, but with style;D ;D ;D

The last time I checked both companies were STILL quite everything else but NON-profit  8)
So then they have tailored the design according to the true needs of the majority of consumers.

[sarcasm] Now my dream will come true and I will probably get the ORANGE 1DXs for Christmas 2014.

I know - I am the only person on this forum to actually ask for better ISO & DR in the same body... I have to admit quite unnecessary features indeed. [/sarcasm]

EOS Bodies / Re: New EOS-1 in 2014 [CR1]
« on: November 24, 2013, 05:39:19 PM »
I don't really understand why a bunch of people here are so fanatically trying to defend CANONs interests instead of their own?

What I had to say I've said it. I am interested in my needs not in anyone else's needs. And I don't really need any basic knowledge in Economics.... I tend to understand CANON's steps (generally speaking). And I don't like them... That is my point of view.

And as a good agent acting in the free market will be unhappy with CANON's current doings. But that's me.

BTW my guesses are that Neuro is on that picture of CANONs 1D developers :D :D :D

I am a fan of big and heavy (for both bodies & lenses) due to the steady factor and also can't wait for the new CANON 1D (megapixel) and would love to combine it with that awesome Carl Zeis Otus babe. ;-)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5