Quick wikipedia-ing: the EOS 1V did 10fps on a moving mirror, the EOS1nRS did 12fps on a pellicle mirror. And the current 1Dmk4 does 10fps on a moving mirror. (and the best I can find out about the F1 is 9fps, although there probably was a motor drive for 14fps that i didn't find).
Surely it's gotta be possible to go above thiese numbers, we've had 11 years of tech since the 1V, there's got to be a more efficient motor and materials capable of the G-forces involved by now. If the mirror can do it, the rest is just software.
I definitely like the idea of the "2 frames per mirror drop" (or 3).
- Firstly, it'll have to be via a custom function, only for those who want it, because it will almost definitely reduce hit-rate (at least in the first incarnation, coding and algorithms will get better over time).
- Second, they drop the mirror in between each shot for AF-tracking. See my post elsewhere quoting canon talking about their new "dream AF in the near future". If this AF really is that good, maybe it can predictively track moving targets with only dropping the mirror after every 2nd or 3rd shot? Or it can process the images it takes quickly and has improved contrast-based AF to help it keep up without dropping the mirror?
Speculation now, of course, and it may not be in this release, but it will be in *something* within a few years, i'd bet. It'll take processing power and good coding, but it's not impossible.
As for the 18MP FF sensor, I just don't believe it one bit. There is absolutely 0% chance they are going to drop the flagship MP-count DOWN, even if it does 1 million ISO as well as my 7D does iso400, it ain't gonna happen.
If it's 18MP, whether it's FF or APS-H, it's got a 1D-label (or 3D, or 6D, just NOT 1Ds or 5D).
18MP could be the "APS-H crop" mode (i'm too lazy to calculate how big an FF sensor would be for that). If they release an 18mp camera now, then they pretty much have to follow nikon's route with the D3/D3x and release a 30+mp 1Ds sooner rather than later, or too many actual pros will jump ship (and i'll be on ebay to get all their 1Ds3s when they do).
Alternatively, it might be an 18MP FF sensor, iff (which reads 'if and only if' to you non-maths nerds), it's a Foveon-type. (but will they brand it as a 54MP sensor a-la Sigma?).
And just because nikon may or may not have a patent on hardware-cropping, doesn't mean canon can't work around it. P&S cameras have had "digital zoom" for years. the 60/600D has digitalzoom/hardwarecropping for video, so some are already getting around it in some way or another.
Does nikon have the patent just for APS-C cropping? canon can get around that by using APS-H cropping, or even their own APS-C cropping (seeing as canon's APS-C is a different size than nikon's APS-C). Depends on how the patent (if it exists) is written as to how easily they can get around it.
More things to speculate on that noone's mentioned yet.
- Modularity? We can already change focussing screens, how about the whole prism (ie, to a sports-finder?). Will than affect Weather-Sealing too much?
- Flip-Screen? Is pretty much out on a pro-body, for ruggedness and sealing. How about a separete plug-in screen? Even a battery-powered screen via the HDMI plug? Pretty much the same as tethered to a laptop, just a smaller screen and more portable.
- Square sensor? You're going to lose a lot of the image circle with a 36mm square sensor. And using one to crop 36x25 and 25x36 images wastes a lot of real-estate around the edges. Very unlikely.
I don't know if someone already mentioned this , since I am commenting on this as I read it.
But the Frames Per Second issue is not the motor in the cameras , it's the speed in which the sensor can dispurse its electrical charge , and prepare for the next shot - the sensor must drain , and refill with each image shot , and the speed of cicuitry is slowed the larger the sensor is , and the more power the CPU uses - so although they are comming up with new faster ways to charge and discharge the sensor , the MP always going up slowly balances it out from giving huge FPS increases. All we can hope for is a new rapid current charge and discharge that does not affect battery , or more seriously , sensor life span.
I did not know that. Very interesting!
I'm curious.. So the expansion pack on the faster film cameras merely provided more power?
I can't be certain with the film camera's - I am all digital myself - in search of the best digital technologies , and theories I can find within each of the manufacturers.
It sounds likely though - although not for the same reason , since film cameras have no sensor -
But I can see the film cameras needing more power to flip up the mirror , advance the film , and actuate the shutter.
In SLR's I'm sure they had to make the mirror retract mechanism stronger , needing a more powerful motor to flip it up each time , and the same with the shutter curtain - it would require a quicker , more accurate actuation as well. Then the film has to advance quick enough to keep up with everything else , while still allowing enough exposure time per frame. Man , people had to be all over high ASA (800+) films back then to keep the camera exposure on par with the shutter speeds lol , I mean if they wanted to keep increasing FPS at that point.
To clarify, the power grip that came with my A1 allowed to wind wind the film on at a rate of 5 frames a second. There was no buffer on film it just had to be set right.
No, asa800 film wasn't needed to use it at that rate either. It was like any other situation, sunny day and you could get away with asa100. Grey miserable day and use asa800...
The problem with 5fps on film was, only 7 seconds of shooting with a 36exp film!
It wasn't the ability to do 10fps, it was the why? 3.5 seconds worth of exposures, all requiring to be developed. You would have needed multiples of bodies with lenses etc to keep up with that rate, and some one to keep changing the film.
64gb cf card will hold nearly 2000 shots from a 5D2 at full RAW mode producing images in the 20-30mb size. No change of film, body or lens required. And if the light changes, just alter the iso!
Yep, digital is much easier than film. And that's not a pop, technology has made it easier...