October 31, 2014, 09:09:53 AM

Author Topic: What's Next for Canon?  (Read 25500 times)

AvTvM

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1029
    • View Profile
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #135 on: October 27, 2013, 06:10:20 AM »
... It is really essential to understand that axis-counting is no good as a way to determine effectiveness of an IS system.

con we agree that in practice camera shake can and will occur "in any direction, sideways and rotational - in all three axes of our three-dimensional world (x, y, z) and even in any combination therof? 

Yes, number of axes stabilized does not tell us anything about an IS system's effectiveness (how well it stabilizes ... 0, 1,2,3,4,+ stops - and under what conditions?). But offering stabilization in more/all directions is essential to build a dramatically better IS system than one working "in 2 directions (x,y - angular) only.

And as for in-lens IS "being specialized for each lens" this really is a marketing joke. Of course it has to be "specialized" and "built to order" for each lens, because of the differences in optical design. After all in-lens IS introduces an additional, moveable lens element/group in the light-path, which would otherwise not necessarily be needed to yield the desired imaging capabilities.

At the sensor level however, shake is shake. It has direction/s, frequency and amplitude. Amplitude will be larger, the narrower the FOV of the mounted lens, that's all. For teh system to work well, it does not have to be tailored to each lens. It just has to be effective in quickly moving the sensor exactly in the right direction/s by the required amount of travel. Irrespectively of whether a lens with 10mm lens or 800mm focal length is mounted, and what optical lyout is used in that lens.

The best in-sensor IS systems today are every bit as effective as in-lens IS ... at a fraction pof the cost. Since it is needed only once per body, not once in every single lens. The only inherent advantage of in-lens IS systems is the ability to stabilize the viewfinder image in a DSLR. In mirrorless cameras with EVF, this is not needed, since the viewfinder image comes directly from the sensor and will automatically be stabilized. No matter what lens, as long as the amplitude of the camera shake is within working limits of the IS system. :-)   

canon rumors FORUM

Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #135 on: October 27, 2013, 06:10:20 AM »

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 14799
    • View Profile
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #136 on: October 27, 2013, 08:48:27 AM »
con we agree that in practice camera shake can and will occur "in any direction, sideways and rotational - in all three axes of our three-dimensional world (x, y, z) and even in any combination therof? 

Yes, number of axes stabilized does not tell us anything about an IS system's effectiveness (how well it stabilizes ... 0, 1,2,3,4,+ stops - and under what conditions?). But offering stabilization in more/all directions is essential to build a dramatically better IS system than one working "in 2 directions (x,y - angular) only.

The best in-sensor IS systems today are every bit as effective as in-lens IS ...

We can agree that shake can occur in any direction, as long as we also understand that the detrimental effect of shake is not of the same magnitude for all of those directions.  Thus, better correction of the more impactful types of motion may yield a better overall result than mediocre correction of all of them.

Your assertion about 6-axes being 'essential to build a dramatically better IS system' is nice in theory, but from a practical standpoint, your later statement is the relevant one: 'the best' recent in-body IS has finally caught up with the effectiveness of in-lens IS.  Of course, you conveniently omitted an important caveat: for smaller sensors.  I'm sure there's a very good reason that Sony didn't include in-body IS on their new full frame cameras...because it wasn't effective enough.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

J.R.

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1514
    • View Profile
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #137 on: October 27, 2013, 09:00:03 AM »
... It is really essential to understand that axis-counting is no good as a way to determine effectiveness of an IS system.

con we agree that in practice camera shake can and will occur "in any direction, sideways and rotational - in all three axes of our three-dimensional world (x, y, z) and even in any combination therof? 

Yes, number of axes stabilized does not tell us anything about an IS system's effectiveness (how well it stabilizes ... 0, 1,2,3,4,+ stops - and under what conditions?). But offering stabilization in more/all directions is essential to build a dramatically better IS system than one working "in 2 directions (x,y - angular) only.

And as for in-lens IS "being specialized for each lens" this really is a marketing joke. Of course it has to be "specialized" and "built to order" for each lens, because of the differences in optical design. After all in-lens IS introduces an additional, moveable lens element/group in the light-path, which would otherwise not necessarily be needed to yield the desired imaging capabilities.

At the sensor level however, shake is shake. It has direction/s, frequency and amplitude. Amplitude will be larger, the narrower the FOV of the mounted lens, that's all. For teh system to work well, it does not have to be tailored to each lens. It just has to be effective in quickly moving the sensor exactly in the right direction/s by the required amount of travel. Irrespectively of whether a lens with 10mm lens or 800mm focal length is mounted, and what optical lyout is used in that lens.

The best in-sensor IS systems today are every bit as effective as in-lens IS ... at a fraction pof the cost. Since it is needed only once per body, not once in every single lens. The only inherent advantage of in-lens IS systems is the ability to stabilize the viewfinder image in a DSLR. In mirrorless cameras with EVF, this is not needed, since the viewfinder image comes directly from the sensor and will automatically be stabilized. No matter what lens, as long as the amplitude of the camera shake is within working limits of the IS system. :-)

IS in the camera itself is a great concept but suffer from inherent limitations as well. The lenses need to have a bigger imaging circle which can take into account the sensor movement range. With telephoto lenses, the sensor needs more room to move - now think in terms of super-tele focal lengths ... improbable at 800mm. Ever wondered why the new mirrorless EVFs don't have IS built into the camera? The small form factor will be thrown out of the window.
5D3, 6D, 600D, RX100
16-35L, 24-70L II, 70-200L II, 100-400L, 50L, 85L II, 135L, 24TSE, 40, 100 macro, 18-55 II, 55-250 II, 600RT x 4
I come here to learn something new, not to learn how bad my gear is - I know that already ;-)!

Lichtgestalt

  • Guest
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #138 on: October 27, 2013, 09:28:01 AM »
Quote
The best in-sensor IS systems today are every bit as effective as in-lens IS ... at a fraction pof the cost. Since it is needed only once per body, not once in every single lens. The only inherent advantage of in-lens IS systems is the ability to stabilize the viewfinder image in a DSLR. In mirrorless cameras with EVF, this is not needed, since the viewfinder image comes directly from the sensor and will automatically be stabilized. No matter what lens, as long as the amplitude of the camera shake is within working limits of the IS system. :-)

im pretty happy with my IS lenses.. but i read many complains about the different in body stabilizations from panasonic and olympus. and those are m43 sensor cameras. on a FF sensor i guess IBIS would be somewhat more dificult.

and as long am my canon DSLR´s don´t have a EVF... i want IS in my lenses.

AvTvM

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1029
    • View Profile
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #139 on: October 27, 2013, 09:51:21 AM »
IS in the camera itself is a great concept but suffer from inherent limitations as well. The lenses need to have a bigger imaging circle which can take into account the sensor movement range. With telephoto lenses, the sensor needs more room to move - now think in terms of super-tele focal lengths ... improbable at 800mm. Ever wondered why the new mirrorless EVFs don't have IS built into the camera? The small form factor will be thrown out of the window.

Of course there are limits to evrything. :-)

No problem to continue use of in-lens IS on long (Super)tele lenses. IBIS-Camera either switches to lens-IS when detected or camera makers eventually get both IS implementations to work in tandem for even greater effectiveness. After all, its just just a matter of the right sensors, algorithms, and processing power.

Ruined

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 649
    • View Profile
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #140 on: October 27, 2013, 12:39:39 PM »
In 2014, Canon needs to do three things and they will be just fine:

#1 Release the darn 7D2, and make sure it is a masterpiece since it took so long.  5D3 autofocus, articulating touchscreen, headphone jack, DPAF, etc.

#2 Surprise everyone with a 6D2 which is a very similar refresh of the 6D, only difference being addition of touchscreen and 7D1-class autofocus; maybe add a popup flash too for triggering and portable situations.  This would differentiate it enough from the 5D3 as the autofocus still won't be as good and it will be missing other features, but it would make the 6D2 attractive enough for enthusiasts to pull the trigger.  Right now the autofocus is too weak, and the touchscreen might entice people who are used to touchscreens on cameraphones.

#3 Release some of the more requested lenses, i.e. 50mm non-L IS, 135mm non-L IS, 100-400L refresh, 24-70L IS, 14-24L.  I think those would satisfy most and continue to make Canon the obvious choice.

Personally I think the 5DIII does not require update as it is so strong.  Canon's main weaknesses are the 6D, 7D, and some of the older lenses.  It remains odd to me that the 5DIII and 70D are so attractive in their pricerange, yet everything between those two appears unattractive.  Likewise, I find it odd that crop users have effective 24-70 f/2.8 range with IS for some time, yet Canon is still stringing along full frame users with non-IS lenses in this focal length for no obvious reason except marketing.

To summarize this post, Canon needs to gimp their cameras and especially lenses less.  Yes, they should still offer differentiating features, but not so much as to make the product unattractive for many.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2013, 01:23:16 PM by Ruined »

Lichtgestalt

  • Guest
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #141 on: October 27, 2013, 01:53:15 PM »
well i have a 6D and for 1570 euro it´s hard to find something better.

yes stay away if you are a sports shooter.
but for most prosumer the AF will be just fine.
in fact a lot of 5D MK3 user are only confused by the AF.

it´s only one of my backup cameras but i have no problems to use my 6D for portraits, landscapes, travel and shooting kids. i use the middle AF point in such cases 99% of the time.

only when i shot BIF or sports i need my 5D MK3 and the superior AF.


canon rumors FORUM

Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #141 on: October 27, 2013, 01:53:15 PM »

Niki

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 127
    • View Profile
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #142 on: October 27, 2013, 02:01:57 PM »
I just started shooting on FILM...with a really cheap camera from Canon...where have they been hiding these things...the image is GREAT! 

Lichtgestalt

  • Guest
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #143 on: October 27, 2013, 02:09:15 PM »
I just started shooting on FILM...with a really cheap camera from Canon...where have they been hiding these things...the image is GREAT!

a great deal of them are in my office. :)

film was nice and still has some attraction.
but today working with film is slow (and expensive when you shoot like you shoot digital).
i could not imagine working with film these days.

i edit my work in PS, i have to upload it to stock agencies.
film is too slow for that.

but it´s fine for hobby shooter who are not on a deadline.
or when you are a pro who is going artsy.
but then i would shoot MF film. 
« Last Edit: October 27, 2013, 02:11:02 PM by Lichtgestalt »

Ruined

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 649
    • View Profile
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #144 on: October 27, 2013, 03:59:49 PM »
well i have a 6D and for 1570 euro it´s hard to find something better.

yes stay away if you are a sports shooter.
but for most prosumer the AF will be just fine.
in fact a lot of 5D MK3 user are only confused by the AF.

it´s only one of my backup cameras but i have no problems to use my 6D for portraits, landscapes, travel and shooting kids. i use the middle AF point in such cases 99% of the time.

only when i shot BIF or sports i need my 5D MK3 and the superior AF.

I am not saying to refresh the 6D with 5DMK3 autofocus, but something along the lines of the 7d/70d's autofocus would make sense.  For me, it is difficult to spend $1800 on a 6D when a $600 650D has 9x the amount of cross-type AF points.   Do you need that many cross points?  Maybe not, but then again you could argue you don't "need" full frame, either.  The point is the 6D's autofocus system appears too dated compared to its peers for its price point.  If it worked really well then I would not mention this, but I see tons of complaints from 6D owners about the AF.

Lichtgestalt

  • Guest
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #145 on: October 27, 2013, 05:38:50 PM »
If it worked really well then I would not mention this, but I see tons of complaints from 6D owners about the AF.

shooting what?
BIF, motocross?

then they bought the wrong camera.

i see your point and i agree from a customers point of view.
how could i not.. the more i get for my money the better.

a 7D like AF would be nice to have in the 6D, no question.

but from canons point of view it makes absolut sense.
i had not bought a second 5D MK3 as backup body if the 6D had a 7D like AF.

is the D600 AF performance much better? from all i have seen, not really.

« Last Edit: October 27, 2013, 05:40:39 PM by Lichtgestalt »

dude

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 40
    • View Profile
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #146 on: October 28, 2013, 09:23:11 AM »
If it worked really well then I would not mention this, but I see tons of complaints from 6D owners about the AF.

shooting what?
BIF, motocross?

then they bought the wrong camera.

i see your point and i agree from a customers point of view.
how could i not.. the more i get for my money the better.

a 7D like AF would be nice to have in the 6D, no question.

but from canons point of view it makes absolut sense.
i had not bought a second 5D MK3 as backup body if the 6D had a 7D like AF.

is the D600 AF performance much better? from all i have seen, not really.

I've not used a 6D but own a 5Diii and have owned a 7D. Just to be clear, we are not calling the 7D AF system good, are we?
1DX, 5diii, M
L lenses for all occasions

Lichtgestalt

  • Guest
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #147 on: October 28, 2013, 09:27:44 AM »
If it worked really well then I would not mention this, but I see tons of complaints from 6D owners about the AF.

shooting what?
BIF, motocross?

then they bought the wrong camera.

i see your point and i agree from a customers point of view.
how could i not.. the more i get for my money the better.

a 7D like AF would be nice to have in the 6D, no question.

but from canons point of view it makes absolut sense.
i had not bought a second 5D MK3 as backup body if the 6D had a 7D like AF.

is the D600 AF performance much better? from all i have seen, not really.

I've not used a 6D but own a 5Diii and have owned a 7D. Just to be clear, we are not calling the 7D AF system good, are we?

???

well the 7D AF is pretty good. and that seems to be the common opinion:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=8576.0

what are you shooting and what are your complains exactly?

of course the 5D MK3 AF is better but then... the camera cost twice as much.
and if you need the best low light AF performance the 5D MK3 or 1D X is sure the way to go.

but does that make the 7D AF bad? i don´t think so.

and a great deal of 5D MK3 customers, who are not professionals, are totally confused by the 5D MK3 AF. so i bet they use only 25% of it´s potential. :)

you would call the 7D AF bad?
« Last Edit: October 28, 2013, 09:41:55 AM by Lichtgestalt »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #147 on: October 28, 2013, 09:27:44 AM »

Sella174

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 714
  • So there!
    • View Profile
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #148 on: October 28, 2013, 09:58:19 AM »
Strange how Sony contradicts the assumptions that in-body IS is preferable by providing the A7/R without that. Wouldn't they jump on the opportunity to use their existing technology, if it were as preferable? It is really essential to understand that axis-counting is no good as a way to determine effectiveness of an IS system. I believe that the A7/R coming without in-body IS just demonstrates that Sony has proceeded through the learning curve far enough to realize that they can achieve better results with in-lens IS, simply because this is optimized for each lens.

I believe Sony left IBIS out of the A7 and A7r in order to keep the unit cost down, so that these cameras can compete with the FF offerings from Nikon and Canon (especially the EOS 6D). And possibly it was part of the deal with Olympus that they may not use it in a FF camera (meaning Sony bought it for the NEX series).
Happily ignoring the laws of physics and the rules of photography to create better pictures.

Lawliet

  • Canon 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 422
    • View Profile
Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #149 on: October 30, 2013, 08:24:06 PM »

I believe Sony left IBIS out of the A7 and A7r in order to keep the unit cost down, so that these cameras can compete with the FF offerings from Nikon and Canon (especially the EOS 6D).
The sensor already sits on piezoactuators - the big difference between anti-dust and sensor based stabilzation is the control software.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: What's Next for Canon?
« Reply #149 on: October 30, 2013, 08:24:06 PM »