Coming Tech & More [CR2]

[gkreis]

Honestly, the only thing I care about in that rumour is DR.

I still have my old trusty 40D as I wait out the 7D,60D, etc. family of sensors. If they can give a big jump in DR with a tech improvement that is introduced across the sensor lines then I will be TICKLED!  My wait will be worth it.  Give us even lower noise and 2 stops more in DR and I am finally going to own a 7D2....  drats...  I am hooked in the Rumors again.

Oh no......

[NotABunny]

But once you're photon limited the only way to increase DR is by lowering the base sensitivity, expect a glass ceiling.

A DRAMATIC increase in dynamic range (and reduction in noise) can be achieved with tricks like multiple ISO readings of the same exposure. Of course, if they only mean a dramatic increase then maybe they have some fancy tech that does it.

OLED is also very welcome, I can already imagine  the screen of my Galaxy S on a canon camera (drool)

That's what I was expecting they meant with "surprise", something not to big, not too small. SAMOLED+ is bloody brilliant on my SGS2. Of course, on a photo camera there may be other requirements in terms of color calibration (especially over time).

I have no idea how the LCDs from the 7D / 60D look in direct sun light, but my display is usable, at least on par with similar LCD based PDAs from the competition.

[Stuart]

Battery life is very useful for continuas video use.

[Flake]

If they are going to use an OLED back light I do hope they manage to put a decent one in.  Apple crippled the iMac by using a cheap OLED which has a narrow Gamut and a response which is anything by linear.  By comparison Dells U2711 uses the same panel but has a conventional back light & is a supreme performer.  There's more to a back light than many people think!

More battery life is nice but not if that involves me having to change all the LP-E6 batteries and replace them with larger ones like the NP-E3

More dynamic range is always welcome, but I'll not be selling the ND grads just yet!

As for video I don't use it a great deal (not normally professional but some do want it) but any progress is welcome.

[AG]

If they are going to use an OLED back light I do hope they manage to put a decent one in.  Apple crippled the iMac by using a cheap OLED which has a narrow Gamut and a response which is anything by linear.  By comparison Dells U2711 uses the same panel but has a conventional back light & is a supreme performer.  There's more to a back light than many people think!

Um you may want to check your details on that claim.

As far back as i can remember Apple have been Anti OLED

[senduran]

If they are going to use an OLED back light I do hope they manage to put a decent one in.  Apple crippled the iMac by using a cheap OLED

Um you may want to check your details on that claim.

As far back as i can remember Apple have been Anti OLED

Err, you're both talking nonsense. Firstly there's no such thing as an OLED back light. OLED displays do not have backlights.  Apple use LED backlights in their LCD monitors.

Secondly, OLED is relatively new tech and only available cheaply in small sizes, so is "as far back as [you] can remember" only 1-3 years? Apple have never been "anti" OLED, the tech just isn't mature enough yet. Apple is eager to use OLED, what with their multiple patents needing them.

On-topic, for those who actually know what an OLED display is, it's a great feature to look forward to on Canon cameras.

[-zero-]

You shouldn't really worry about that since 1080p on Canon cameras is "fake 1080p" and in reality closer to 720p. Lets just wait if they can come up with a real 1080p first.

Care to explain that?

[kubelik]

If they are going to use an OLED back light I do hope they manage to put a decent one in.  Apple crippled the iMac by using a cheap OLED

Um you may want to check your details on that claim.

As far back as i can remember Apple have been Anti OLED

Err, you're both talking nonsense. Firstly there's no such thing as an OLED back light. OLED displays do not have backlights.  Apple use LED backlights in their LCD monitors.

Secondly, OLED is relatively new tech and only available cheaply in small sizes, so is "as far back as [you] can remember" only 1-3 years? Apple have never been "anti" OLED, the tech just isn't mature enough yet. Apple is eager to use OLED, what with their multiple patents needing them.

On-topic, for those who actually know what an OLED display is, it's a great feature to look forward to on Canon cameras.

yep.  OLEDs can be done well or poorly, just like LCDs and LEDs.  done well, OLEDs provide excellent viewing and save on weight and size, as well a energy consumption, which is critical when we're talking about the back screen on a DSLR.  chimpers rejoice.

[neuroanatomist]

You shouldn't really worry about that since 1080p on Canon cameras is "fake 1080p" and in reality closer to 720p. Lets just wait if they can come up with a real 1080p first.

Care to explain that?

I would also like an explanation of the 'closer to 720p' part.  Is the 'p' part fake?  With Canon camcorders, when you record at 30p or 24p, it's really recording at 60i but outputing 30p/24p.  But you're still getting the full 1920x1080 resolution, so I have no idea where the 720 statement comes from.

[NotABunny]

I would say that the gamut of the SAMOLED+ on SGS2 is (about) aRGB because I can compare it to my NEC desktop (which is about 98/99 % aRGB).

(In OLED, the pixel itself is emitting light, which means that black has virtually no light loss - there actually is some when the display is totally black and seen in total darkness.)

[NormanBates]

About DR:
Here's what I'd do: add two new colors to the bayer pattern, white (clear) and black (nd), and move from the current RGGB to something like RGGBWWWKK with a 3x3 basic structure. This should deliver both clean shadows (thanks to W) and safe highlights (thanks to K)

About 720p:
It's a well documented fact that the 1080p video that Canon dslrs deliver comes from upsampling the image that results from the line skipping process, which is much closer to 720p than to 1080p (and that's definitely p, as in "not interlaced, otherwise I wouldn't even touch it")

[bwhitz]

You shouldn't really worry about that since 1080p on Canon cameras is "fake 1080p" and in reality closer to 720p. Lets just wait if they can come up with a real 1080p first.

Care to explain that?

I would also like an explanation of the 'closer to 720p' part.  Is the 'p' part fake?  With Canon camcorders, when you record at 30p or 24p, it's really recording at 60i but outputing 30p/24p.  But you're still getting the full 1920x1080 resolution, so I have no idea where the 720 statement comes from.

1080p is only a format... the actually resolved detail of the "1080p file" the Canon DSLRs record is only around 720p. This is actually fairly common in video cameras though... most video cameras that RECORD 1080p, come up short from the mark. If you get a chance to... go shoot with a GH2. I've got one along with my 7D and the difference in detail is INSANE!!! The GH2 is true and fully-resolved 1080p... it has nearly double the detail when viewing full-screen. If Canon can do this with their 4:2:2 50mb/s codec and a FF sensor... then they are going to seriously dominate. I'll probably buy two of the MarkIII's if it's true.

[gkreis]

About DR:
Here's what I'd do: add two new colors to the bayer pattern, white (clear) and black (nd), and move from the current RGGB to something like RGGBWWWKK with a 3x3 basic structure. This should deliver both clean shadows (thanks to W) and safe highlights (thanks to K)

I've always wondered if you couldn't just have staggered RGGBs, if their size was small enough and bias their exposures so one set is giving you an offset exposure at the same time as the other set.  That would mean then that you would need 20 or 30mpx to get effectively 10mpx. So if you have a tech that offers super high density with decent noise performance, you could effectively take two or three photos at once with offset exposures that would be merged in camera to a lower res shot with high DR, right?  Am I nuts?  Did I just give away a patent idea?  ;-)

[motorhead]

chrome_dude,

That sounds like something I thought at least one camera is already doing. Combining 3 images to produce a better DR final product. I'm just not sure which camera which shows how daft I am!

It's certainly a useful trick for static or nearly static scenes.

[bwhitz]

About DR:
Here's what I'd do: add two new colors to the bayer pattern, white (clear) and black (nd), and move from the current RGGB to something like RGGBWWWKK with a 3x3 basic structure. This should deliver both clean shadows (thanks to W) and safe highlights (thanks to K)

I've always wondered if you couldn't just have staggered RGGBs, if their size was small enough and bias their exposures so one set is giving you an offset exposure at the same time as the other set.  That would mean then that you would need 20 or 30mpx to get effectively 10mpx. So if you have a tech that offers super high density with decent noise performance, you could effectively take two or three photos at once with offset exposures that would be merged in camera to a lower res shot with high DR, right?  Am I nuts?  Did I just give away a patent idea?  ;-)

I think Fujifilm has a patent on a sensor like this... not sure if it exists yet though.