do you hope for sony sensors in the 5D MK 4?

[jdramirez]

I feel that this conversation is predicated on Nikon's decision. They outsourced the sensors... So why didn't Canon. Obviously don't is willing to sell their technology.

If Nikon kept their tech in house, I'm guessing there wouldn't be as much belly aching.

 

[jdramirez]

Jim Brown was an all American at both lacrosse and football... So it isn't a given that a split goal won't work.

I have almost zero use for video. While I appreciate that many users do have a use for video I think Canon and most other companies have moved away from the essence of a stills camera.

Will there come a point where the bestest still camera and the bestest video camera will be incompatable on the same body?

I also don't care about video and I wonder if my still cameras could be "better" if the design concentrated on still photography instead of video.

If a camera tries to be the best at both, is there a point when it ends up being the best at neither?

 

[jepabst]

... I'll bite too. I would like to see the sony sensors used... until Canon catches up.. then back to making their own. Diversity in the marketplace is good for us. Increases competition, pushes everyone to up their game. But if I was in the market for a new full frame in the coming 12 months, and I might be, I'd be happy with a Sony sensor compared to the weak marks DXO just gave to the 7DII

 

[Lawliet]

If Canon used Sony sensors, it reduces Sony's incentive to innovate. You'd have Sony, Canon and Nikon all using the same sensors. You want to talk about a company riding sensor technology for as along as it can? That's exactly what such a non-competitive scenario would encourage!

You're missing the other sensor manufactors in that equation - its not a Sony/Canon duopoly, there are quite a few other players in the game.
On the other hand just look what that self imposed lock in did with DPAF. What could be top of the line is hamstringend by legacy decisions while others deliver what DPAF should have brought.

 

[wockawocka]

We have clean ISO3200 with great dynamic range across the board with all DSLR's released in the last 3 years.

If you can't get a great capture with any of the existing technology you shouldn't be shooting.

I'll use the best complete system that helps me get the shot I need. I have no loyalty but Canon suits me for their pragmatic approach.

I'd like a fully functioning 1DX in a smaller body. That's what I'd buy.

 

[justsomedude]

All current and relatively recent DSLR cameras are great and provide excellent images, as has already been stated. While I agree that some of Sony's sensors have greater DR at lower ISOs, I don't personally see a need to push 3 stops out of my shadows.

Now, are there some Ansel-Adams-esque artists that demand that kind of range for their landscape and post-processing work? Sure - and for them, those sensors are their holy grail.

In the grand scheme, the low-ISO shadow pushing crowd is a small market niche to satisfy.

 

[danski0224]

No.

As others have mentioned, it will stifle competition and innovation.

I have no plans to get the 5DIV, so it is a moot point.

For those that long for a Sony sensor, you can buy one today and use Canon glass with an adapter.

If everyone that PAM'ed about the poor quality Canon tech bought a Sony, then maybe something would change... oh, wait, you can't build a camera company on 20 sales...

 

[pdirestajr]

Hey guys,

Will I get kicked out of the CR club if I admit that I actually am still satisfied with the images I can create with my 7D and 5DmkII?

Am I doing something wrong?

Just a heads up, but there are a LOT of threads on CR these days about Sensors, Sony and DRzzzzzzzzzz...

 

[Loswr]

On the other hand just look what that self imposed lock in did with DPAF. What could be top of the line is hamstringend by legacy decisions while others deliver what DPAF should have brought.

So improvements delivered by others are more important than DPAF to you. Like many people here, you apparently fail to understand that it's not Canon's goal to make products that will please you. Rather their goal is to make products appealing to the broadest possible market, to sell more cameras. Canon bet that improved AF for video (which certainly needed improving) would have broader appeal than improved low ISO DR and cleaner shadows with extreme post-processing (which don't seem to have much appeal apart from DxO and a few posters on Internet forums). Time will tell, but I suspect Canon made the right bet.

 

[Loswr]

Ooh! A troll poll!

please shut off when you have nothing on topic to say fanboy.

If it looks like a Troll

Sounds like a Troll

Smells like a Troll

Then Its a ...

Duck.

 

[Lawliet]

On the other hand just look what that self imposed lock in did with DPAF. What could be top of the line is hamstringend by legacy decisions while others deliver what DPAF should have brought.

So improvements delivered by others are more important than DPAF to you.

That conclusion implies a lack of comprehensive reading skills...so much for a clear mind.
It's not a matter of importance, but little details like having to disable the feature in certain video modes.
The feature would have an invariant value if the sensor could be read fast enough. Mandatory disabled due to a design flaw it has a value of...zero.

 

[Loswr]

On the other hand just look what that self imposed lock in did with DPAF. What could be top of the line is hamstringend by legacy decisions while others deliver what DPAF should have brought.

So improvements delivered by others are more important than DPAF to you.

That conclusion implies a lack of comprehensive reading skills...so much for a clear mind.
It's not a matter of importance, but little details like having to disable the feature in certain video modes.
The feature would have an invariant value if the sensor could be read fast enough. Mandatory disabled due to a design flaw it has a value of...zero.

More properly ambiguous language on your part...if you're trying to say something, don't bury it in innuendo. Or perhaps I'm unaware another manufacturer delivering PDAF on the image sensor where 16 million pixels (80% of the total MP) are used for AF.

DPAF is disabled at one of the many possible resolution/frame rate combinations, but works at all of the others. That's 'hamstrung'? The new Samsung NX-1 delivers 15 fps...but at anything above single shot frame rate, it drops from 14-bit to 12-bit RAW. Does that mean continuous shooting on the NX1 has a value of...zero?

Much like your flawed understanding of the use of non-electronic ballasts in lighting, your views are apparently at odds with reality.

 

[Lawliet]

More properly ambiguous language on your part...if you're trying to say something, don't bury it in innuendo.

The language I use tends to be very precise - precise enough to find out whether the other person actually reads or just looks at a few words and fills in the blanks. The latter case offers additional insights, of course.

Or perhaps I'm unaware another manufacturer delivering PDAF on the image sensor where 16 million pixels (80% of the total MP) are used for AF.

Apart from being wrong, as anyone who knows how PDAF works realizes, that numbers game doesn't matter. Its about the functionality provided - is the PDAF grid dense enough to track a subject?

DPAF is disabled at one of the many possible resolution/frame rate combinations, but works at all of the others.

"One" is not the exact number...

That's 'hamstrung'?

Yes, considering its symptomatic

The new Samsung NX-1 delivers 15 fps...but at anything above single shot frame rate, it drops from 14-bit to 12-bit RAW. Does that mean continuous shooting on the NX1 has a value of...zero?

That depends on whether a picture with the tonality and luma resolution of the 5D3 offers at base ISO has a value of zero. Again - function over spec sheets.

Much like your flawed understanding of the use of non-electronic ballasts in lighting, your views are apparently at odds with reality.

Reality: Operating a lighting system that the 7D2 could compensate for would get you a fine or some time behind bars - violation of the equivalent to workplace security and similar regulations plus the intrinsic properties of common utility AC motors - in just about any country I've worked in. Across five continents that sums up.

 

[Maui5150]

Will Sony even still be in Camera business. Sony is bleeding cash and has no clear direction.

Betamax
Walkman

Remember all those Sony Vaio laptops... Sold off.

TVs... Sony selling that off too...

See a trend???

 

[Loswr]

The language I use tends to be very precise

I'm sure you believe that's the case. Metacognition is not everyone's strong suit.

 

[Lawliet]

The language I use tends to be very precise

I'm sure you believe that's the case. Metacognition is not everyone's strong suit.

That's why I have others, not involved, but quite often bemused by the reactions, check that from time to time and get independent confirmation.
NB: quite the typical reaction for people who can't deal with the garden path challenge

 

[Loswr]

quite the typical reaction for people who can't deal with the garden path challenge

If your goal in posting here is to intentionally trick people, that says something about your character. I misinterpreted your post in light of the context of the thread at that point. Happy now? Feel special and important? Good for you.

 

[jrista]

Nope. Personally, I don't want Canon to use Sony sensors. I want Canon to become the force that makes Sony innovate harder and faster, by innovating harder and faster themselves. I want Canon to step up their sensor manufacturing game, and become a bigger player in the image sensor market, against Sony, Aptina, Omnivision and other companies. I don't expect Canon to start selling their sensors openly on the market...but I do want them to join the fray and become a solid competitive force that keeps sensor technology progressing for digital cameras.


There is a TON of sensor innovation these days, however the majority of it seems to be getting done in much smaller form factors, and for sub markets other than digital photography...things like security video, cinematography, car rear view sensors (booming new market), astrophotography (sony changed the game there as well), etc. The only major innovation I've seen Sony make in the digital photography market since the introduction of the Exmor...what, maybe around five years ago now in the K-5 (?)...is the minor changes for the A7s, and the coupling with BionzX for digital signal NR.


I would really like to see Canon introduce a game changer. A layered sensor with at least 14 stops of DR would be disruptive at the very least, for a little while. That kind of full-constituent spatial resolution with that much DR would be...amazing. It should spur the competitive spirit in the likes of Sony, Aptina, Toshiba, etc. to get similar technology onto the market. I'd love to see bayer sensors disappear in the long run, in favor of something like either Foveon-esque designs, or perhaps dual-color array designs with color splitting (vs. color filtration, as filtration cuts out 60% or more of the light, greatly reducing overall Q.E., where as color splitting/microprisms preserve the vast majority of the light.)


I don't want Canon to use Sony sensors. I want Canon to become a major competitive player in the digital photography sensor world, to join the fight and help push image sensor technology farther, faster.

 

[Marauder]

Of course not. Even if I believed Sony sensors were so greatly superior (and I do NOT believe that), Canon surrendering their own in-house sensor tech would be a huge mistake. A mistake not only for themselves, but for customer's as well. Letting any one company form a monopoly would be bad news for photographers, stifling innovation and progress.

 

[Lawliet]

quite the typical reaction for people who can't deal with the garden path challenge

If your goal in posting here is to intentionally trick people, that says something about your character.

Wouldn't a neuroantomist know that the garden path has the simple purpose of estimating a persons mental work set, it's part of the required curriculum after all? Which in turn leads to obvious implications.
As a reminder: this challenge doesn't trick people who approach a problem with either an open mind or the capacity to reflect on a perceived contradiction and take their preconception into account.