• UPDATE



    The forum will be moving to a new domain in the near future (canonrumorsforum.com). I have turned off "read-only", but I will only leave the two forum nodes you see active for the time being.

    I don't know at this time how quickly the change will happen, but that will move at a good pace I am sure.

    ------------------------------------------------------------

Do Canon still develop Full Frame Cameras?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jakeymate
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
jakeymate said:
Yes there's a complaint, it took 3 years, IF it arrives this year. That is my whole complaint.

...

On a 3 year cycle, you're happy but I am not. Clearly :-)

you nailed it. I did not get that you were complaining about release cycles as a whole, big picture thing.

honestly, it makes me happy to hear that there are photographers doing well out there that have the money and inclination to purchase new gear or an annual or 18-month basis. when all we hear about in the industry is doom and gloom and slowdown, frankly it's encouraging to see people doing well by doing good work.

I really like the work on your site; I definitely also believe we have dramatically different noise tolerances. for instance, even at web-view sizes, you dirt biking photos show clear signs of noise reduction. everyone's taste is different, and I'm not going to second-guess yours, since clearly you're doing strong business with the work you're putting out there.

I don't think anyone is going to deny the red-channel issues, or the banding on the 5DII. I like the grain from the 1DIV far better and I think even that can be improved upon.

overall, I still give canon the benefit of the doubt. I'm willing to believe that the reason they don't do annual or bi-annual updates is because they'd rather dedicate resources towards large advances instead of incremental advances that defer resources away from major breakthroughs. I have no idea if in fact they have enough operating budget to do both. believe me, I'd love to work in Canon's financial department for a month and see how they allocate capital.
 
Upvote 0
jakeymate said:
kirillica said:
jakeymate, I'm fan of you! ;D post more, it's pleasure to read you :)

Really? I think I've posted more than enough for one lifetime :-)
Really. Some people have already mentioned here, that you should write poems or so ;D
BTW, checked your site. It looks awesome, but IMO too much skin glow/toning ::)

And (or moderator ban me for offtopic): I was waiting for 5dmIII and, disappointed, bought 5dmII approx half a year ago. Yes, I'm happy with the camera and it's fantastic. But I still ready invest some more and upgrade to 5dmIII: please deliver it until I'm not "overburned" :)
 
Upvote 0
NotABunny said:
Kit. said:
NotABunny said:
I'm not sure I understand you. By "several readouts" do you mean several "exposures"? Obviously having more light per photo gives you lower noise.
By "several readouts" I mean several readouts. I.e. several attempts to amplify and digitize the same charge accumulated by the photo cell.

Light (shot noise of the arriving photons, to be exact) is not the only source of the noise in the pictures. Another source is the read noise (thermal noise in particular) of the sensor+amplifier. And it is relatively larger for smaller cells. You can average it between several cells of a higher-resolution sensor, but you can average it between several reads of the same cell of a lower-resolution CMOS sensor as well.

That's a neat trick, but my instinct says that can't work. (Sure, my instinct said that a photo at ISO 1600 can't have a lower noise in the shadows than one at ISO 100.)

I mean, if the electrical charge sits there for longer, isn't it more affected by the thermal noise? (I mean, doesn't it degrade in time?)

Do you know of anyone who has such a sensor?

I realized that this goes hand in hand with the possibility to have hand-held HDR by having multiple ISO readings for the same exposure.

I don't know how the reading is actually done, so I initially thought that this can be done only by splitting the sensor in a grid 2 * 2, where each grid pixel is read with a different ISO (by a different AD converter). Of course, it might be possible to do a parallel reading (with multiple AD converters) for EVERY pixel (though I wonder if the electron charge can be properly split among all converters).

This would mean that it may be possible to have both hand-held HDR using different ISOs, and better (= averaged) reading for the same ISO.
 
Upvote 0
I guess I'm a bit late since the OP has removed his post, but I'll throw something in anyway.

I switched from Olympus to Canon last year and man was I torn between choices back then.

I didn't care so much about going with a mainstream brand, but still Canon and Nikon were the two choices. I actually wanted a good supply of used equipment since with Oly, you had to buy everything new.

I looked at both brands long and hard back then. And even though I went with Canon, I do think that Nikon makes better cameras (even with that said, I'm not switching camps any time soon though).

The gripe I had with Nikon was that damn, they don't get anything done. Canons line seemed brand spanking new at that point when compared to Nikon (at least on paper).

I actually wanted an APS-C - camera since I do mostly nature photography and the extra reach is always welcome there.

So Nikon has the D300s (no D7000 at that time), which is based on technology from the original D300 (2007) and was released in 2009. And it still hasn't been replaced. That's 4 years which needless to say is a damn long time.

My Olympus E-3 was also from 2007, so no chance I'd trade in my camera for a model which is as old as the old one.

The D700 is from 2008 and would not make me want to switch to that either. Same goes actually with the 5D MkII, so even-steven there.

If they had released the D7000 back then, I might be with Nikon now, but somehow I think I would still have wanted the D400 or what ever it may be once it's released.

It's actually funny, I stated that Nikon makes better cameras and the people who use them probably know this for a fact (otherwise nobody would buy their cameras since they are so old), but when you come from an outside brand, they just don't have an appeal.

In the end I went with the Canon 7D, quite happy (except with the low ISO noise) but that was the only APS-C - camera at that time which interested me and that hasn't changed.

After all this time, I think and at least hope that there's improvements to be put in new cameras, now all we need to do is stop the manufacturers playing the "I'll show you if you'll show me yours first" - game and get something out.

I don't think it's going to be a revolution, not anymore, but evolution is also good. On the other hand, I don't want constant updates for every little evolutionary step that comes along.

Even though the prosumer to pro market isn't that big, it's still relevant since it keeps the line-up appealing and when you get someone to buy a dslr, they are buying into a system which is important for the company.

A bit of rambling there, but that's just me :D
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.