TEN YEARS FROM NOW.

[Don Haines]

10 years from now the 7Dmark2 is FINALLY released..... people are still waiting for the updated 100-400F5.6...

 

[Don Haines]

4. Small, high quality cameras will be attached to animals. Cats will take awesome photos of humans in odd sleeping positions.


Thank you. Just what I needed this morning.

Been there.... done that.... Fluffy slept all day.... boring!!!!

 

[Woody]

9. DR will be around 16 stops.

The ideal FF sensor will have slightly more than a stop of dynamic range compared to today's sensors. See:
http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm#EOS%205D%20Mark%20III,D600,D800E,EOS%201D%20X,D4,Ideal_FX
Thus, if we believe DXOMark that the D800 sensor is capable of achieving 13.23 stops of DR at base ISO, then the highest achievable DR is at best 14.5.

 

[eml58]

AvTvM will buy a Canon Camera, and actually be Happy with it

 

[tomscott]

I don't think still photography will be anywhere near like it is now.

I think video will get so good that we will be taking high resolution stills, meaning if your a commercial photographer you will never miss a moment and can freeze that perfect moment.

Its already starting and will change the industry.

 

[Pi]

sensors are near their theoretical limit for efficiency,

Would love to educate myself on this. Pls can you guide me where I can read up on this statement. Thx.

The starting point is that the dominant noise at high ISO is the shot noise a.k.a the photon noise, google them. It is not a sensor noise (the sensor has its own noise, most visible in the shadows, or everywhere with long exposures). It is due to the discrete nature of light (on a certain micro scale). This is a noise of the projected image, to be more precise, it is a noisy image of the actual object in front of the lens, and nothing can be done about that for a given amount of total light. An ideal sensor would register every photon in its exact location, and the image will be noisy depending on the exposure (same sensor). This is the physical hard limit.

The reason that not ideal sensors create noisier images, even noisier than the hard limit is that they do not capture all the light (and then we have read noise, etc., but let us ignore this at the moment). If they capture, say 50% (called Quantum Efficiency (QE)), then you lose 1 stop of light, and get 1 stop worse noise than the hard limit

Next, a few smart people calculated the QE of many sensors here: http://www.sensorgen.info/, using DXO data. Today's sensors are around QE=50%. Now, this is with Bayer design, on the green channel (if I remember well). Color separation amplifies the noise, color dependent. If you keep the Bayer design and the color filters and increase the QE to 100%, you gain 1 stop. That's it. You cannot do better than that.

If the future brings sensors with a different design, more light can be captured; how much, it depends on the color. The gain for green(ish) colors would be around 2x (1 stop), for the other would be more but we are not so sensitive to them. There would be (hopefully) no need of color conversion, which can give you a bit more, depending on the color. You get 2+ stop possible improvement but less than 4 stops.

I hope I am wrong!

 

[Radiating]

It is a bit quiet here and until the 7d2 or the high mp camera here is something for us.
I think it may be fun to predict what camera technology will be like in December of 2023.
Here are my few predictions:
1. DSLR's will be used only by top end sports/wild life shooters.

Why? Mirrored cameras simply work better for taking photos than mirrorless, the only advantage of mirrorless is size, which pros don't really care about considering the lenses have the be huge to resolve the amount of detail they do and collect the amount of light they do.

2. Mirror less would have evolved and be thriving.

Sounds reasonable, but I don't think they will take that much market share away.

3. Point and shoot would be dead.

Agree 100%

4. Canon cameras will have 4 stops better ISO.

Absurd.

This literally defies the laws of physics. Camera noise is actually a function of quantum physics, the noise you see is the variation between the intensity of the random distribution of photons that hit the sensor. The way you reduce noise is by increasing your sample size meaning you collect a larger percentage of photons that hit the sensor.

Cameras currently collect around half the photons that hit the sensor, the rest are absorbed or scattered. That means your camera would also have to be a time machine for it to improve more than 1 stop. It's physically impossible.

Most of the ISO improvements of cameras have come from improvements in marketing not technology. In the LAST 10 years cameras have improved around 2/3rds of a stop. You can expect a similar improvement in the next 10 years.

Marketing has made it so that what used to be ISO 6600 is now "ISO 12800!!!!!!!1111ONE ONE", cameras seem to have settled to nearly doubling stated ISO from actual ISO as the standard for now though.

The nest possible invention will be micro prism technology which may give is that 2/3rds of a stop in 3-4 years.

5. There will be lenses with 6 stop IS.

Sounds reasonable.

6. Canon and Nikon would share equal percentage of the market.

nobody can say

7. Canon will have 65 mp full frame camera.

reasonable

8. The fast version Canon camera will shoot 18 fps.

reasonable

9. DR will be around 16 stops.

reasonable

10. 1d form factor will stay.

agreed

We all need to put our thoughts down by early next year and then look at this ten years from now and tickle ourselves.

Sanjay
[/quote]

 

[Grumbaki]

TEN YEARS FROM NOW.

The capslock epidemics will be solved.

 

[Marsu42]

1. DSLR's will be used only by top end sports/wild life shooters.

I don't quite get this - because phase af is supposed to be better than sensor af even a decade from now? If not, mirrorless is ideal for fps junkies, you need space-age tech to get 12-14fps on the 1dx, but any mirrorless could deliver as many frames as your buffer can hold and card can write.

4. Canon cameras will have 4 stops better ISO.

Maybe, if they sacrifice 2 stop of dynamic range

5. There will be lenses with 6 stop IS.

Absolutely, if the marketing guys go crazy there will be a 8 stop IS because no one ever defined what an x stop IS is supposed to be - is it for 100% equivalence @100% crop? If so, with higher mp the real IS rating of lenses will go *down* rather than up. But I agree there might be more clever handheld detection coming up improving IS in general.

8. The fast version Canon camera will shoot 18 fps.

See above, the fastest Canon (mirrorless) will shoot 180fps.

9. DR will be around 16 stops.

But only on low iso - maybe Canon will get closer to Nikon again, and you're already getting 14ev now (and 14.5ev with Magic Lantern ).

 

[EchoLocation]

2. Mirrorless will follow point and shoot cameras into the abyss of consumer cameras being replaced by camera phones.

I think it will be 100% the opposite. DSLR's or medium format(which will then be easily available in DSLR sized cameras) will still be used by most pro's but by only very serious hobbyists(think Neuro, the guys on this board, etc.)... But nearly all the rebel, 70D, 6D market will be replaced by mirrorless cameras.
Yesterday was the day I made the move. I bought the a7 and will soon sell all my DSLR gear. I cannot imagine a reason to go back to DSLR's as long as the weight is nearly double an a7 sized camera and the size is much larger
I firmly believe this trend will continue.... Just imagine how excited people on this board will be when Canon makes a FF mirroless with good AF. Everyone on here will buy one as a backup, and most wont really need their DSLR anymore.... I don't.

 

[Pi]

Yesterday was the day I made the move. I bought the a7 and will soon sell all my DSLR gear. I cannot imagine a reason to go back to DSLR's as long as the weight is nearly double an a7 sized camera and the size is much larger

How much would a 70-200 lens for the a7 weigh and how much smaller would it be?

 

[Hillsilly]

Advancements will have slowed to a snail pace with new features more related to processing speed (eg better/faster AF) and connectivity than sensor / IQ improvments. With only incremental improvements to IQ, most photographers will start seeing their camera as "good enough" and sales of higher end cameras will decline. To counter this, we'll see a more modular approach to the 5D5 and IDX3 with most components able to be upgraded easily (but not necessarily cheaply) at Canon service centres. Even though many people won't update their camera as frequently, Canon will hope that many people will still give their cameras a mid-life refresh 2 to 3 years after buying it.

One they sort out on-sensor AF, Canon will jump over to mirrorless. But just as you can still but a 1V, you'll still be able to buy a DSLR. Interestingly, the mirrorless version will be touted as the higher end model, as it will have more accurate focus and faster fps.

On the 1 series bodies, Canon will take a hybrid aproach. They will still have a mirror, but at the flick of a switch, the camera enters mirror-up mode and an EVF screen appears in the viewfinder. Best of both worlds. (Keeping the EF mount allows Canon to do this).

 

[sandymandy]

perhaps a retro neo hipster camera will come out that looks like the 7D. tbh i dont think anything really big will happen.

 

[Eldar]

I don´t believe there is any question that the future is mirror less. As soon as EVFs become good enough, there is no question that the benefits and flexibility they can provide will make mirror based cameras redundant.

A few advantages:
1: It can give you better viewing capabilities in low light
2: It can give you true FF, APS-H APS-C selection capability, where the viewer adapts to the selected format
3: It can give you a near silent shutter
4: It can give you higher fps
5: It gives you design options you can´t have with a mirror based body
6: It removes mechanical parts, which should improve its MTBF
7: It will give more AF functionality options

But!
I believe the current mirror less cameras (I have not looked through a only A7/A7R yet) still have a way to go to outperform a mirror based camera.
I don´t believe the A7 type bodies are what we will see in the future, but rather new designs that gives further improvements in functional layout and mechanical design, which does´t necessarily mean small.

 

[Woody]

I don´t believe there is any question that the future is mirror less. As soon as EVFs become good enough, there is no question that the benefits and flexibility they can provide will make mirror based cameras redundant.

One of my biggest gripes about EVF: not as bright as OVF, poor DR compared to OVF. I doubt the EVF can ever match OVF in this department because the human eye adapts far more quickly than EVFs.

 

[EchoLocation]

Yesterday was the day I made the move. I bought the a7 and will soon sell all my DSLR gear. I cannot imagine a reason to go back to DSLR's as long as the weight is nearly double an a7 sized camera and the size is much larger

How much would a 70-200 lens for the a7 weigh and how much smaller would it be?

the Sony FE mount f4 version is pretty similar to Canon's current offering(based on a visual comparison alone.)
That being said, if you read my whole comment you would see that I specifically mention that most pros will still use DSLR's. However, I know about 10-15 people with DSLR's(all amateurs) and only 1 of them has the 70-200(the f4 he bought for 350 bucks on CL) or anything longer(besides those cheap 18-300 superzooms.)
I myself want a small camera with a few small primes for when I travel for extended periods of time and for carrying around daily in my backpack.
If I have to sacrifice ergonomics with long lenses, that I never use, for this, then that is an easy choice to make.
I know for people who regularly use long, heavy lenses this sentiment may be very different, but that is not the majority of DSLR buyers.

 

[Niki]

canon and nikon will be able to match the pixels in a film frame

 

[Rat]

Thus, if we believe DXOMark

Well that's a bit of a stretch.

 

[Efka76]

My predictions:

1) No significant changes in lenses. Some lenses will be updated, sharpness, overall IQ slightly improved. If we take a look how old current lenses are we will see that some of them were introduced 10 years or more ago. However, I would expect that Sigma and Tamron will be on the same level as Canon / Nikon. Canon / Nikon will loose quite significant share to Sigma and Tamron in lens area.

2) I would expect introduction of new sensors generation (also, I would not be surprised if Canon would stll use "old" sensors, i.e. introduced next year, even after 10 years)

3) All DSLRs will include wi-fi, GPS and some other features which are included in current P&S cameras In 10 years I expect to see 2 additional generations of DIGIC processors, which will enable higher processing power required for high MP cameras. Semi-pro, pro cameras will have 40-60 MP (I do not think that Canon or Nikon will go so deep in medium format area and introduce 100 MP in FF cameras).

4) Hasselblad, Phase One and other MF companies will be bought by Canon, Nikon, or Sony. MF will still be used by professionals only, however, MF cameras and lenses prices will be much lower (but still not affordable to amateurs). What's a difference if cameras system costs not USD 50,000 but USD 30,000

5) In Canon rumours people will still be moaning that cameras should have better DR, should be able to cope with high ISO and require more megapixels. Many current CR forum members will be pensioners and will switch to mirrorless cameras as they are much lighter

6) Ken Rockwell will still be begging everybody for money but on a much higher scale (many Internet TV channels)

 

[Pi]

11. The DR of Canon will reach that of Nikon today.