|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
Small snippet of info
I received this information today.
1Ds Mk IV will not have sensor cleaning since Canon has removed the 3-layer low pass filter to improve per-pixel acutance and microcontrast. Microlenses over the sensels would also not be 100% gapless like other recent Canon sensors because of M9-style offset microlenses to capture more light in the edges of the FF sensor.
cr
Rumors or official words?
It’s CR1, so rumor
Also, needs a lot of NaCL. Yes the 1Ds is a semi-studio cam but it’s also THEE wedding photog cam and they wouldn’t do that to the wedding shooters.
No lowpass filter? O.o
Huhh omg! I am sure this is not in accordance with the CaNicon feature releases …
http://nikonrumors.com/2010/06/10/who-dictates-nikon-release-schedule-engineering-or-marketing.aspx
Interesting huh ?
pure bullsit…..
trust me im working for canon germany.
anyway when will see this camera out ??
it’s pretty odd the delay, lateness of the flagship
does canon wait a new nikon to bring in the light the 1ds mark4 ?
more or less, it’s a waiting game as I see it…
september is not that far away….
From NikonRumors.com:
– “The technology is already here and new product are fully developed and ready to be released – the actual announcement schedule is decided by the marketing department”
You can bet on it.
We agree, regarding Canon too.
Although, some “unexpected” success (like the one the 5D Mark II got in the filmmaking/video field) changes a bit (or not so bit) the company roadmap
– “It seems also that Nikon and Canon agree on some product releases as well (timing, features, etc) – I have read this before, but could not find any references online.”
So we did.
But this kind of secret industrial/corporation agreements won’t be found fully (if any) detailed on internet (unless some reporter steal the info and want to put his/her career ons risk, or some executive get drunk and open his mouth in an inconvenient moment just when another guy willing to put full details on internet is hearing him…)
Although, some vague comments can be found (if you look well for them…).
There is NO doubt the technology is ALREADY here.
That also happens on other electronic fields. The problem is that the company cannot “burn” all they have…. so they give it gradually to customers… It’s obvious.
Nikon has been extremely quiet, so we should expect new products with new features in very near future…
We’re glad that Canon seems to be more open to customers suggestions and requests, that is HUGELY important for all of us (Canon users/customers), and make a difference too, aside the difference in features, prices, etc.
We are asking Canon to establish an official channel of communication to receive customers’ feedbacks & suggestions. Time will tell…
PS: Forgot to mention, those quotes were taken from this post:
http://nikonrumors.com/2010/06/10/who-dictates-nikon-release-schedule-engineering-or-marketing.aspx
Greetings to NR admin. A very nice guy.
What’s BS? If anything, this was about time, since the 1Ds line was always aimed as a cheaper alternative to MF. The MF digital backs all have no anti-aliasing filters, that’s why their output is so crisp even at the pixel-level.
Yes, like the Leicas and the MF cams.
Man, that post only meant that the rumors are even slower in the Noink land and the NRguy had to invent even more outlandish tales than we get here. Teh Lulz.
Well, not really.
In fact what NR Admin posted is right.
There was a specific brief and indirect “mention” to that kind of “collaboration” by a Canon executive in 2009…
There were also other mentions to that on other places (not easy to find of course), but that one was “official” (it came from a Canon exec.)
Aside that, it’s pretty obvious that these high tech companies are holding many of what they already have….
That happens in most developing companies, engineers are far ahead of products available to customers (which in fact is sad… but necessary to the company’s finances)
But if you think about the other face, it might be better that way: for instance Intel, AMD, nVidia, etc are always releasing new products that takes you in a “crazy race” making devices obsolete/old TOO fast.
The good: you can get new stuff faster.
The bad: your stuff get old and loose value faster too.
Of course those companies also hold some developments, maybe not as much as others, because the marketing pushes them to release faster and faster (somewhat crazy competition we all got inside)
I am inclined to believe it if the 1Ds4 has a high enough pixel count.
No low pass/AA filter? Possible. Other cameras have it. Personally I would not have the filter and apply the corrections in raw conversion.
No auto clean – BS. There will be be a piece of glass over the sensory. That will be a dust magnet.
I think this off-set micro lenses is pure fan-speculation.
I have tested the 24LII’s vignetting wide open on an EOS 3 (film) and on the 5D Mk II at both closest focusing distance and infinity. The differences were minimal.
Fixed off-set microlenes is a very inelegant solution. Leica gets away with it because of their blind and mostly uninformed (but deep pocketed) fan base. Also having a shorter variation in the frequently used focal lengths (roughly 20-90mm) helps Leica. Canon on the other hand goes from 14mm to 800mm. Working well for both 14 and 800 is a must for a 1Ds camera anyway.
I can imagine them not having gapless microlenses or even not having sensor cleaning all together. But nothing really warrants off-set microlenses the way Leica has implemented them.
That long?
remember, this site is for our entertainment. Some take a CR1 rumor seriously.
We will be getting accurate information about 1 or two weeks before the release, so its just make up your own story time right now.
If there is to be a October availability, long lead items are indeed in the production process. hard tooling takes a lot of time to develop and refine. a lot of parts will be common to other cameras, but the body will be different, and the sensor and electronics and software will also have major modifications.
There has been no indication that this will be a big advance in video, but, if it could focus reasonably quickly while taking video, that would be a step forward.
Maybe the piece of glass over the sensor is in the form of a Pellicle mirror like the old RT and RS cameras had in film days. That would solve many of the challenges for quality AF during Liveview, and stop the dust, right?
Yeah !
Hi tech is here. Well I got email like form CR0. 100 mpx for point and shoot. ISO 500 000 for point and shoot … 200 % gapless photon sites, fistf***ing each other… Marketing department is under hi pressure, how to change the laws of physics and how get consumers to buy stuff again and again…
The rumor description doesn’t seem to indicate the use of a pellicle mirror. In the traditional sense, the “sensor” unit (which includes the various layers of filters, etc.) is separate from anything related to AF (refer to technical diagrams). Even if a pellicle mirror is going to be used, it has little to do with the sensor unit itself to warrant modifications to the latter.
The pellicle mirror was originally intended to keep the continuous shooting rates high. It’s unlikely that Canon would put this now in a [slower shooting] 1Ds when they didn’t put it in the latest [faster shooting] 1D.
I’m not sure whether you’ve used a Canon camera without an AA filter but I have a 50D (read high pixel density sensor) without an AA filter and I really rather have an AA filter.
With fine detail (e.g. grass at a distance) the lack of an AA filter results in colour artifacts similar to moire. It also makes images look the “bad kind of” digital (the “good kind” being Foveon-like).
When the lenses aren’t up to it, such as when fast lenses are wide open, this problem isn’t as bad. But removing the AA filter doesn’t overcome the theoretical resolution bottleneck introduced by the Bayer design.
Unlike the Nikon AA filters on their FX sensor which are too strong, Canons have very mild AA filters. I call them mild because with sharp lenses I often see slight moire on my stock 5D2. I know that without an AA filter I’m just going to get “false detail”.
It seems that people are buying in to the marketing tricks of digital medium format. AFAIK, it’s very expensive to produce AA filters. The DMF AA-filterless strategy could just be a glorified cost cutting measure. The reason why DMF produces better detail is because of the larger image digitising area that’s not as demanding on the lens. I also have doubts about how sharp the standard DMF lenses are. If you ever look at 100% crops from a shake-less DMF image taken with a good lens (or even sharp M9 shots), you’ll see lots of demosaicing artifacts. But when was the last time AA-filterless supporters did that? :)
agree. a timely camera from canon in 2010 without sensor cleaning seems not possible – not even the famous marketing department will dare to do that :)
smells like a Canon fanboy’s wet dream
As soon as you hear the rhetoric of it being “M9 like” or “no AA filter” or parading gapless microlenses technology as a panacea – you know it’s just wishful thinking
Read it again, fanboi, the rumor said it would *not* have 100% coverage/gapless microlenses, same as the 5D2 and 1Ds3 sensor, which are incidentally, full-frame sensors, while the smaller sensors in the 1D4, 50D, 500D, 7D, 550D all have these gapless 100% coverage microlenses. Take that into consideration.
In my opinion, sensor cleaning does not depend on AA filters. If you shake the AA filter unit or the sensor that doesn’t make any difference. Just, you need a stronger “shaker unit” for the heavier sensor.
But what about exchangeable sensors … with AA for those who want/need it, without AA for those, who don’t want ist. 12 MPix full frame for the sleepless night photographers, 30+- MPix full frame for landscape and studio photographers?
I know that the sensor is a very expensive unit in the camera, but who would like to buy a new camera for a new sensor and to learn everything newly?
Yeah I did…but is it not parading gapless microlenses technology as a panacea? I’m not saying the person things of it as a panacea, but they are still in that mindset of it as an even credible piece of technological progress. As in… it was highly touted, but not used in this camera because they don’t think it should have been paraded as gapless microlenses technology
…
so yeah.