Mt Spokane Photography said:

The processor would need to be part of the sensor package, reliability would be poor, and you would be locked into old technology which would likely stop being made after 4 years.

Click to expand...

Not really. Senors are just arrays. The conversion to image is math. If you present the array to the software, along with the measured characteristics of the sensors and the location map of the pixels, then the processing to an image is a calculation, independent of the sensor. A firmware upgrade would be needed with a new sensor, but in many cases, probably not a new processing chip. The DIGIC 5 is much faster than DIGIC 2, even though the processing chip used is only slightly faster.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

I'd much prefer to get a whole new camera every three - four years. switches wear out, LCD's develop bad pixels, the body wears and gets scratched up, it isn't just about the sensor.

Click to expand...

That is more an issue of the build quality. More expensive bodies have longer duty cycles. I've burned out Rebel shutters in as little as a year, where my EOS 3 shutter is still perfect after 12 years. Same with LCD's. Scratches? Well, those happen.

Mt Spokane Photography said:

You cannot just change sensors from one type to another, they have totally different technology, different pin-outs, different numbers of readout channels, etc.

Click to expand...

Pin outs yes - that of course would need to be standardized.
Technology no. Sensors in DSLR's these days are almost all CMOS. CMOS sensors essentially all work the same - light enters, voltage comes out. They are all designed in a rectilinear or hexagonal array. They all map each pixel to a single physical location and to a hard wired pin out. They all have fixed physical dimensions (FF, APS-C, 4/3, etc). They all must output RGB. They all have similar power and cooling requirements (they use nearly the same batteries and fit in the same relative body sizes) The rest is software interfacing.

Thanks for the pictures of the Kirk - I have been looking at that plate and am very interested to see what people have to say about it.

I would be very interested to see pictures of the RRS L-bracket mounted on the camera in the same manner as those taken in this shot: http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5446.msg116666#msg116666

Mt Spokane Photography said:

I doubt if they are getting many orders, since it is basically a crippled unit compared to the one it replaces. It will not control older flashes, and it does not have the built-in AF-assist light, which was one of the popular uses of the old unit.

IMHO, its better to just put one of the new flashes on your camera, it will control the old models and the new ones if you have a mix, and has a built-in AF-Assist.

Thats likely what most buyers are doing. The lowered price is the law of supply and demand.

Click to expand...

Yes the lack of AF assist light is the the one big negative for me. I suspect sales will pick up as time goes on and when the 440EX-RT is available.

all tool for the job... all take great images.... i'd not stress about micro differences...

Ron still plans to put more reviews up soon, but for those interested in the resolution difference between the 5D3 and D800 he has this review up - http://www.ronmartblog.com/2012/05/first-look-nikon-d800.html

The detail on the D800 looks quite impressive, but I do agree with him that the 5D3 exposed better.

threedsnack said:

ok, so what's this tax!? is it really worth the loss of customers that you get over Canon (or insert other dslr video maker) paying a little extra for production with this tax (am I understanding what you said correctly)?

are there more outside sources about this? I would like to learn more.

Click to expand...

Here's one, but I'm sure you can use Google better than me to find other articles about the EU video camera tax. http://www.ephotozine.com/article/eu-add-import-duty-to-digital-cameras-5905

It is apparently close to 5%, according to the above-referenced article. That's about USD175 (I assume wholesale) that doesn't go to the camera manufacturer or the retailer at all. No one is losing relative sales to a competitor, since all manufacturers are subject to this tax.

Having said that, if you need to record continuously longer than 30 minutes, Canon and others have full lines of proper video cameras that can do that.

Other than the 5% of the time that I shoot a long-form program/event, I have not found this to be a problem. In fact, I'd guess that at least 60% of my shots are less than 1 minutes and the other 35% are less than 5 minutes.

No word from Canon about the 200/800 IS sound issue.
Will it be a firmware fix or hardware fix.

Will it be fixed, etc.
Anyone more info on this ?

-----
www.wildlife-photos.net
www.planepix.nl

I would skip the filter on the 50. I dont use one, but I do on my 85, 24, and 70-200. The 50's front element is far enough back that it is pretty well protected. Plus, you don't get any weather sealing with the filter on the 50 like you do on most L lenses.

Just my 2 cents.

Northstar said:

I have 70-200ii with 2x iii converter ....it works very well at 400.

Click to expand...

That's a good idea
can you post any pictures 100% crop ?
Thanks

I'm excited about The Hobbit being in 48 fps. The standard 24 fps rate drives me nuts. The judder during panning is particularly unpleasant.

It definitely feels different watching video at 60 fps versus 24 fps or 30 fps. It's smoother and sometimes looks almost "too real" for cinema. I'm guessing 48 fps will look odd for a little while before the brain adapts to a new frame rate.

small suggestion - get an external battery pack.

with that said 1/32 power shouldn't have drained that much power.

i have 2 600s and the st-e3-rt and tbh i haven't come across the same issue as i tend to have 12 batteries running into my 600's - assuming the draw is slightly higher then the 580 II's I replaced, i get about 2500-3000 shots a magazine as well as instant recycle (and 1 sec 1:1).

the funniest thing that happened with my kit was the master over heated after 700th shot shooting a poorly lit catwalk. lcd went red and i didnt know what the hell was going on lol

herbert said:

I believe the combination of sub-sampling, bit-depth, image size (e.g. 1920x1080) and frame rate (e.g. 24/s) are all combined to create a bit-rate for the movie. This is how many numbers are passed through the system per second. It is this final number that states the overall quality of the system and also the type of storage media requirements involved.

Click to expand...

Not really... The codec - the type of compression used to store the data is massively important in understanding bitrates. For example the 5DMIII has a 90mb/s intraframe codec and the far lower long GOP codec, which have the same subsampling ratio, image size, bit depth and frame rate.

Describing the bitrate as the 'overall quality of the system' is also quite misleading... I'd take the 1080p 24mb/s footage off a D800 over the 25mb/s 576i minidv footage off a pd150 or xl1 anyday

So bp you noticed that also on your 5D2? thats so interesting, its pushing me to invest in the 3 100%

untitled10 said:

plutonium10 said:

I think APS-H is unlikely for the "3D". I would sooner say 30ish megapixels in a 5D III body. I was impressed with Canon's decision to make the 1DX only 18 MP but they do need a high megapixel camera as well.

Click to expand...

I would say a professional body tbh, studio work requires a lot of portrait orientation use, with out having to pay for a grip, and personally I don't think there will be a 3d, maybe a studio committed 1dxs (or some ridiculous name like that) with a high 27-31 MP count.

Click to expand...

Whatever they call it, I think such a camera is very likely. As for the form factor, it's hard to say. A pro body would be more expensive to produce so I would say better to sell it at a lower price and have a high-quality battery grip as an option for those who need it.

Chris Burch said:

dppaskewitz said:

At least one observer thinks the 24-105 is parfocal:

Quote from The Digital Picture review: "The 24-105 L is deemed a parfocal lens - "There's a cam inside the 24-105mm lens that is designed to maintain an accurate focus when the lens is zoomed from tele towards wide." [Chuck Westfall, Canon USA] Though the image remains mostly in focus during focal length change, it is best to focus at the desired focal length."

But I'm not sure whether being "deemed" parfocal is the same as actually being parfocal?

Click to expand...

Well when I got my 24-105, I locked focus at the wide end, zoomed in and it was significantly off focus...like unusably off. Took me about 3 seconds to verify. From my digging around on the internet, I came across an article that said there are only a few lenses that Canon actually admits to being parfocal. Here is a link, but I can also vouch for the 24-70 as maintaining focus over the zoom range.

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2011/02/photo-lenses-for-video/4

Click to expand...

I used to use the 24-70 as if it were parfocal. I never had issues.

Definitely go with the 70-200 2.8... Not only do you have the extra stop, the IQ is amazing. Even if you're shooting static subjects in low light, I've found that 1/30 sec is good enough for hand held.

Everyone will be loyal to the gear they own and I understand that but it seems apparent to me that while the 7D offered very capable video technology it tended to offer better still photography features that set it apart from the 60D for me. The awesome AF system and best in class FPS were all contributors for me in making the choice of the 7D over the 60D. Maybe I should have been more specific but what I meant was that the 7D appeared to me to offer greater capability for still photography which is why I was upgrading (XSi/450D was the last Rebel to not offer video) I felt that the fact that the screen articulates on the 60D seemed gimmicky to me rather than of any real practical use (in my case) since I do most of my reviews off camera on a hi-res computer monitor and don't shoot video where it would likely be of greatest use nor did the screen resolution hamper my choice for the same reason.

With regards to the viewfinder comment my thinking was that with awareness that your camera employs a 100% viewfinder which can super impose the two-way level there should be no reason to "mindlessly" frame your subject, but that is probably attributable to me being the less than amateur guy I am!

I read many reviews and opinions on the IQ of both bodies and it seemed to depend on which one you read as to which one seemed to have what always amounted to a "negligible" difference either way. Certainly too small to be considered when not employing "L" class lenses for sure and the low-light advantage remains with the 7D, and for me I need all the help I can get!

The weather resistance advantage that the 7D has over the 60D was also important though admittedly not at purchase, it was only afterward when I was caught in a rain shower at our local botanical gardens while shooting with a buddy that it proved invaluable, since my 7D came through the wetting down flawlessly while my friends 50D did not.

Since my interest remains firmly in the still photography realm "Magic Lantern" is of little interest to me at this time though who’s to say that when it becomes available for the 7D I might give it some thought.

Lastly I couldn't ignore the unbelievable low price I paid for the 7D. It was cheaper than what you can purchase a 60D for today on Amazon.com! (When you include a kit lens as I did with my 7D)

Marsu42 said:

Minnesota Nice said:

Actual write speed may vary it's not always what it says on the card unfortunately.

Click to expand...

With a camera body that supports magic lantern, you can fine-tune (raise or lower) the bitrate = write speed so that it maxes out the card's potential.

Click to expand...

that is exactly what I do, I usually drop it a little bit if I'm having issues.

any word on body only timelines for adorama?

neuroanatomist said:

psolberg said:

....their 17mm Ts lens is already leaked in a patent and just a matter if time....

Click to expand...

So...patents always become products? Canon has had well over 2000 patents issued per year for at least the last 5-6 years - how many products per year have they released?

Agree on the 14-24, though - a very nice lens. Not enough to make me switch, my MP-E 65mm is too much fun.

psolberg said:

I have seen plenty of Nikon 24ts lenses around and will soon order mine...I'm the target audience of the d800

Click to expand...

Just don't try rotating that PC-E 24mm on the D800 - the shift control knob hits the protrusion of the popup flash which prevents full rotation. Just one more little ergonomic 'bonus' from Nikon. :-X

Click to expand...

I think you have some bad information on the 24mm nikon. the control does NOT hit the top on during TS operation so you can still get the full TS range which is the primary thing. As you say during rotation it does in one direction which is annoying but you can rotate the other way I suppose. Yes Nikon's popup flash choice is strange on that camera.

Nikon D800 and Nikon PC-E 24mm.mov

As usual uninformed internet rumors are highly exaggerated If the TS action was limited then I wouldn't get it fore sure.

The BIGGEST drawback with the lens is that Nikon hasn't yet adopted the independent axis canon slapped on the 17 and 24. That's more of an issue. It will be interesting to see if the 17mm Nikkor addresses the clearances and adopts the independent TS axis. Right now you can do it on the Nikon but I saw you have to remove screws and change the alignment yourself.

The 17mm TS from Nikon is just a matter of time as I said:
http://nikonrumors.com/2012/04/27/nikon-patents-for-17mm-f4-tilt-and-shift-10mm-f4-16-30mm-f4-5-5-6-and-28mm-f1-4-lenses.aspx/

You're correct not all patents become products, but all Nikon glass always traces itself to one patent. There is nothing stopping Nikon from making a 17mm TS lens and the patent just confirms it is just a matter of time. I have little interest in 17mm FL for UWA photography, but I'm sure many nikonians will love that thing. I like wider. That 10mm f/4 full frame lens will surely make it to my bag on day one. To the greater point, switching has never been easier. Long gone are the days where Nikon's glass was lacking. Leaving canon was no easy decision but it had more to do with time and hassle than with lens choices. At least for me, there isn't any one lens on canon's system that would make me stay, or in Nikon for that matter.

Is it fine white powder? (No, I am not implying Canon or the retailer are involved in drug trafficking!)

I have seen this before. It is from some sort of low-density plastic or rubber, from what I gather, probably as an agent to keep it dry enough not to harbour fungus (think talc). From what I have read, it being of the amount that it is visible is rare (perhaps limited to a particular batch), but is also quite stationary and "stuck" to the surface upon which it sits. I guess it isn't a good idea to throw your lenses around, which would likely loosen it, but that probably applies white dust or not.

I would vote for lightroom for the workflow, however for the mkiii dpp will provide much sharper image - you can refer to other threads on this where we discuss this topic...

Axilrod said:

rHellfire said:

My idea is, that if the 1D-X and 1D-C are really the same concerning the hardware, why don't they sell the extra 4K-video stuff as an extra firmware update? You could produce ONE camera, that would be able to do both. But the basis cam is an 1D-X. If you want the 4K you just send the cam to Canon or something. Canon and the customer would safe lots of money, I suggest!
My first thought was, if it's the same hardware, then some people will be able to make the 1D-C firmware run on the 1D-X sometimes!

Click to expand...

Considering the price difference I would think there would have to be some hardware differences, $7k is way too much if it's all in the firmware. If this were the case it would probably lead to riots in front of Canon headquarters.

Click to expand...

There may or may not be hardware differences but there will certainly be manufacturing process differences. In the PC industry, a lower end Intel CPU ($300) might actually share the same die as a high-end one ($700+) but the best yields from the wafer are usually kept for the high-end CPU to provide better overclockability. In fact, when the i7 architecture first came out, the lowest CPU (the i7 920) was able to overclock really well to match its higher counterparts costing twice as much. The non-extreme series were also crippled with locked multipliers to protect the $1K extreme series. When the latter batches of the 920 arrived, Intel were using the worst yields they have for it so it didn't threaten the sales of the more expensive stuff (it didn't overclock as well). Intel further introduced a limitation on the non-extreme CPUs in the second generation of the architecture (Sandy Bridge) to limit overclocking to 10% only (the first batch of the 2.66GHz 920 was overclockable to 4Ghz+ on air). Heck, Intel even started selling $50 vouchers (a software tweak) to overclock the CPUs of those who weren't willing to risk voiding the warranties.

The comparison is not direct here, but the point is that a high-end product would certainly needs more attention and human involvement in the manufacturing process as the error tolerance tends to be low. You can bet this will get the best-yield sensors and have the best parts. Is it necessary? Maybe... maybe not. When you go up the ladder, it is more the question of prestige and the perceived premium than the actual cost of things.

I certainly don't like this but that's the way businesses work. Brand loyalty is a silly thing. One should always search for the best value for their money wherever it's present.

Canon has them up on the refurb site right now for $3,999. Soooo tempting, but i think i'll keep waiting for my pre-ordered 1DX.

I pre-ordered mine but it seems Canon will be releasing the 1Dx when the 1Dx Mk II is available. Canon should reduce the price for those who pre-ordered thinking we would have the camera in March. Cut the price Canon!