This and That

[lol]

I don't want to incite the flamers here, but as someone who works in the product development & marketing world, I can tell you that companys tend to listen to their paying customers, not internet fanboys, and why they are smart enough to look at the competitive environment. That's the reason they left 4K resolution off of the C300 and why they aren't building a 30+ MP camera.

I agree this is likely the case with the 1D X where say 99.99% of internet posters about it would never buy something that level anyway, but I'm not sure that would be the case for a 5D3 level camera. That relative affordability means random internet posters could be a significant number of possible sales.

 

[motorhead]

I would not want a 3D to be less "endowed" with MP than the current 5D2, that would send completely the wrong message to users. No, If Nikon do produce this 36 MP D800 then Canon are going to be forced to respond and respond reasonably promptly.

I simply don't understand why they don't seem to grasp this simple reality. Whatever they do in other areas, they must at least match the opposition in things like noise, AF performance, DR, etc. And at the moment the main opposition seems to be Nikon.

Maybe they do understand it, but for reasons best known to themselves wish to play down the fact that Nikon and Sony might have stolen a march on them.

 

[briansquibb]

I would not want a 3D to be less "endowed" with MP than the current 5D2, that would send completely the wrong message to users. No, If Nikon do produce this 36 MP D800 then Canon are going to be forced to respond and respond reasonably promptly.

I simply don't understand why they don't seem to grasp this simple reality. Whatever they do in other areas, they must at least match the opposition in things like noise, AF performance, DR, etc. And at the moment the main opposition seems to be Nikon.

Maybe they do understand it, but for reasons best known to themselves wish to play down the fact that Nikon and Sony might have stolen a march on them.

The 3D would be aimed at a different segment - perhaps as an upgrade path for the 7D shooters

The 5DII replacement would be something else

 

[keith_cooper]

Article source

Just an FYI

The quoted English version of this is based on a suggested translation for part of the interview - I don't read Japanese, the English text was suggested on the item's G+ discussion

https://plus.google.com/104131608705810814739/posts/XZcnchwy1jf

 

[unfocused]

It seems as though most people didn't read the full story, but rather just the tiny bit that was quoted.

Whole story is quite interesting, although I'd love to have a better translation than Google.

Things I THINK I gleaned from the translation.

Canon is not unaware of the needs of studio photographers but that was not their target audience with this camera. It was sports and news.
The 1DX required a balancing act between pixel count and frame speed.
They are very proud of the ISO performance. The English translation says ISO 1,600 is "Beyond Comparison." They talk about ISO 51,200 and even say that ISO 204,800 will work for news photos.

It's pretty clear APS-H is DEAD. The Interview talks about how they determined that the new generation of tele-extenders and lenses perform well enough that they felt comfortable dropping APS-H and that the problem with APS-H was that there is no comparable way to compensate for the crop factor with the existing lens lineup for wide-angle shooting. Seems they figured it was easier to compensate with the telephotos and extenders.

They also seemed to be saying (and as a 7D owner I found this very intriguing) that they are watching the market reaction and may consider a professional 1.6 crop option if the market demands.

Interestingly (in my opinion) is that they make no mention of the "upsampling" idea that Canon first raised when they announced the 1DX. (As an aside, for those wondering why Canon would develop a super-high megapixel APS-H sensor and then drop the format, I believe I read somewhere that it might have been targeted for security cameras. Which makes sense to me. Need those high megapixels to nail your license plate when you run a red light)

They explained their rationale for the double-exposure feature (something I've been scratching my head over) by saying that even though it could be done in an image editing program their research showed their was some merit in being able to view the image immediately in the field.

They talked about raising the total AF performance both with the camera and with the new 300mm and 400mm lenses.

There is a new cleaning system that "burps" the dust off the sensor. (At least that was the translation)

I was fascinated by the pictures of the mock-ups and how much effort went into tweaking the design of the camera to make it as ergonomic and intuitive as possible.

They said they chose to include the LAN option because it is more reliable than wireless and for events like the Olympics and World Cup, the photographers want a wired LAN.

It appears they decided to offer wireless LAN and GPS as an add on because of the difficulty of coming up with a system that would meet worldwide regulatory requirements.

Finally, it ends with some discussion about mirrorless cameras. From what I could tell, it sounds like they feel they are competing very well against mirrorless in Japan, where mirrorless has been popular and adopted more quickly than in other countries. Didn't rule it out, but didn't indicate that Canon has a mirrorless option in the wings.

Anyway, those are my takeaways. Others may have their own interpretations and, of course, if someone can translate from the original Japanese, it would be much better.

 

[lol]

It seems as though most people didn't read the full story, but rather just the tiny bit that was quoted.

Whole story is quite interesting, although I'd love to have a better translation than Google.

*** snip ***

Anyway, those are my takeaways. Others may have their own interpretations and, of course, if someone can translate from the original Japanese, it would be much better.

Nice summary. I only managed to get about half way through the googlish translation before I had to give up!

 

[Justin]

My exact thoughts. My next thought was that I am for the first time seriously considering making a switch to Nikon. What a pain in the donkey....

They sound naive enough to not have thought this through. The 5D2 is a monumental success for it's balance between affordability, high resolution, and video. Take away any of those factors and you lose a bunch of sales.

...we want to see what the actual sales numbers will be for the 1D X and so determine how many 10,000s of customers we might be losing if we do not introduce a higher resolution camera and if the projected profitability of a higher resolution 24×36 mm format camera will justify development, marketing, and manufacturing investments...

This statement, if representative of Canon's position, suggests they have not even begun development of a high-MP FF sensor. That means those hoping for a high-resolution 5DIII are going to be disappointed, either because the 5DIII will use the 1D X sensor (most likely scenario), or because if there's going to be a high MP 5DIII, it won't come for at least 1.5 years.

 

[Justin]

I don't want to incite the flamers here, but as someone who works in the product development & marketing world, I can tell you that companys tend to listen to their paying customers, not internet fanboys, and why they are smart enough to look at the competitive environment. That's the reason they left 4K resolution off of the C300 and why they aren't building a 30+ MP camera.

I agree this is likely the case with the 1D X where say 99.99% of internet posters about it would never buy something that level anyway, but I'm not sure that would be the case for a 5D3 level camera. That relative affordability means random internet posters could be a significant number of possible sales.

+1 The 5D is an affordable (enough) camera that people with disposable income will buy it. Ergo tens of thousands of amateur sales.

 

[AG]

They also seemed to be saying (and as a 7D owner I found this very intriguing) that they are watching the market reaction and may consider a professional 1.6 crop option if the market demands.

This part was the key from what i have been hearing around the traps.

Its not a popular opinion, but there may be a possibility that Canon have decided to change their line up considerably.

For example

1D -X = Full Frame speed shooter.

5D mk3 = Could become the "video DSLR" taking the best parts of the C300 and 1DX video and putting that into the 5D3 body. Sure it won't be a C300 but it could possibly do 4K but its stills may suffer because of this.

7D mk2 = becomes the monster APS-C sensored camera to replace the older 1D APS-H, It could have all of the benefits of the 1D-X but with the Crop instead of FF and a much higher MP rate to suit....even dare i say as high as the fabled 36MP people want.

If you think about it this would cover the basics for the Pro market (sure not everyone will be happy and there will be plenty that threaten to switch to Nikon but that happens with any new announcement).

The 60D could evolve into basically what the 7D is now.

and the XXXD/Rebel can remain the profit generators that they have become.

Sure this post will be smite'd for suggesting such blasphemy buy it would make sense if Canon really wanted to streamline its footprint like they said when they merged the 1D series.

 

[airfang]

<p><strong>B&H Deal of the day

</strong>B&H has the <a href=\"http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/680103-USA/Canon_2751B002_EF_70_200mm_f_2_8L_IS.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296\">Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II in stock and selling for $2074</a> until January 7, 2012.</p>
<p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>

actually, there's a better deal for 70-200 at B&H that only costs $1974, I am not sure if it is a mistake:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=SHCA7020028L&N=0

It seems that searching by item ID or by the terms "canon 70-200" will lead to different product pages. Again, today is the last day of this amazing offer! Act fast if you want one!

 

[StevenBrianSamuels]

Canon Buys Mamiya [CR1]

 

[aldvan]

One thing that amazes me is that Canon doesn't seem to care much about the opinion of its 'real' users. I am a Gold member of CPS, with a very typical and standard kit, but I never received a questionnaire or interview aimed to know my desires. I find this rather unusual, if I compare the behavior of brands in other sectors, such as automotive or electronics, for instance ...

 

[moreorless]

I agree this is likely the case with the 1D X where say 99.99% of internet posters about it would never buy something that level anyway, but I'm not sure that would be the case for a 5D3 level camera. That relative affordability means random internet posters could be a significant number of possible sales.

Again though even as someone who's one of them to some extent I'm not sure the more vocal internet posters really represent the majority of Canon's amature userbase. For most users I'm guessing that a relatively cheap jack of all trades 5D mk3 with say 6 fps, slightly improved AF and exellent ISO and a less demanding sensor would be more than welcome.

That seems like the main advanatge of the 1DX sensor route to me, the pro's who have the money to spend are forced to spend more of it on longer lenses compaired to ASPH and the amatures who have less to spend get a good all round camera even with just a 24-105 to go with it.

And just to move totally into fantasyland here, what if they made a medium format mirrorless camera? Future scenario: other mirrorless players largely beef up contrast AF such that it can rival phase even with motion tracking and do it smaller than entry level DSLR, which in turn become undesirable. DSLRs only have one retreat: bigger sensors for shallow DoF

Along with an "M9 killer" psuedo rangefinder mirrorless based on primes that actually seems like a good tactic to me. Considering most landscape/studio users are going to be using wide/normal lenses most of the time(and shorter tele when they do) you have the potential for a reasonabley well balanced system thats similar in size/weight to a 5D.

 

[lol]

7D mk2 = becomes the monster APS-C sensored camera to replace the older 1D APS-H, It could have all of the benefits of the 1D-X but with the Crop instead of FF and a much higher MP rate to suit....even dare i say as high as the fabled 36MP people want.

While I have no fear of MP count, I think 36MP would be highly unlikely in a 7D2. Given what the 1D X has shown us, I suspect the 7D2 could have an increased fps rate but generally there is a speed/resolution tradeoff. High speed doesn't easily go well with high resolution too unless you throw a lot of money at it. So that would put pressure on keeping the MP count lower.

For example, the Sony a77 has 8fps with a 12fps boosted speed model (no I haven't checked out what the exact limitations are in the boosted speed modes). The 1D X has 12fps boost to 14fps. Let's say Canon could go for 10fps with boost to 12fps on a 7D2 with a hypothetical sensor at say 21MP and same processing capability as 1D X. Why 21MP? I think they would continue the MP count growth here slowly as they would continue to reuse the same sensor in lower bodies also. Or perhaps they would throw a curve ball and bring out a drop to 16MP (not 15 or 18 as that would confuse with their existing sensors).

 

[Orangutan]

Every serious sports/action shooter would want it because it could also be a 24- or 30-fps still camera. That's more chances to capture the "exact moment" something happened. Yes, there are photographers who do this well by anticipating the action, but why not have the extra option? Your assistant can be grabbing 4K video while you anticipate action, then take the best of both.

Of course, I'm presuming that the camera allows manual exposure control on your video: it's well-known that true video and true still photography do not use the same exposure settings for similar circumstances. (As I understand, true video needs a slower shutter to make movement look natural)

One of the reasons DSLR video is so great is that it pushes what can be accomplished with stills as well.

Why would anyone want to buy a camera with 4k video?...Chances are you can't display 4k video

 

[Sunnystate]

Considering the circumstances, when prices in the 35 mm class are far exceeding prices for most incredible medium and large format glass from Rodenstock, Zeiss, Shneider, maybe time to revive German camera industry is near?

At some point it has to be profitable to enter digital market by companies with know how to build quality 35mm camera shell, even with electronics developed by somebody else.
How could be possibly justified price for 35mm electronic gadget even in magnesium alloy box to be higher than for example Swiss made, highest quality, space age precision build Sinar instrument?
Let's hope current camera industry will not create cost prohibitive high end professional environment without possibility to enter by people that are serious enough about photography to be the lifetime hobby for them, but don't own really profitable studio to write off the cost.

I owned two large format cameras (four in fact including my two antique collectibles), two twinlens Rolleiflexes, basic still "brand new" Hasselblad system, Fuji medium format compact, some other small 35mm Rolleiflexes, Leicas, and yes least important Canons and/or Nikons cameras only for convenience.
It was really exciting to have the opportunities after some saving time to be able to afford what the best in the industry are using, learning and enjoying the "real magic" in photography, that people who never used large format camera won't understand.
Than digital cameras come in to the market.
It started with argument that we are saving on film and processing so the cost of the body is justified, but this argument starts to be bit silly now when we are getting offers with four zeroes in the price tag for the 35mm format systems.
My wish is simple, that serious photography will not be taken away and placed in the hands of any kind of small elites, ending this incredibly exciting process of democratizing photography that we have witnessed in recent years, even for the cost of army frustrated professionals that had no choice, but start learning again to compete. Thank you.

 

[briansquibb]

For movie I would like to see HD@120fps so we get real slo-mo

 

[Bob Howland]

5D mk3 = Could become the "video DSLR" taking the best parts of the C300 and 1DX video and putting that into the 5D3 body. Sure it won't be a C300 but it could possibly do 4K but its stills may suffer because of this.
streamline its footprint like they said when they merged the 1D series.

Why would anyone want to buy a camera with 4k video?

Chances are you can't display 4k video on your computer and if you can afford a home-video system with a 4k projector, then money is not a problem for you and you'll buy yourself a camera, today, that can do 4k video.

4k TVs are a long way from being affordable, never mind you actually finding a place to sell you one. The only place I've seen a 4k projector (I was lucky enough to get a demo) was in a HiFi store that has $100,000 amps in the showroom for demo purposes.

By the time 4k video becomes common enough in the home, the 5D3 will be relatively ancient history.

To whit the only people today that would have any serious interest in 4k video are those shooting for the big screen and the big screen only. How many people is that? I'd guesstimate that it would be between 1% and 10% of the total number of cameras sold - maybe not even 1%.

Consider that if you uploaded a 4k video to youtube, nobody that is using a current model laptop will be able to view all 4k of the video and an incredibly small number of people will be able to view it on their computer in full resolution. Well, there's another question of whether or not someone with a monitor big enough will have a computer powerful enough to watch 4k video.

The most likely impact of 4k video, today, will be movie files on your computer that are over 4 times larger than 1080p and that editing the video is consequently that much slower too!

It would seem that 4K video has become a numbers obsession to replace the MP obsession. People need to get over it already.

People are still watching movies made before 1940. That's over 70 years ago. Is somebody making a movie today supposed to assume that their work has so little artistic merit that nobody will want to watch it, say, 20 years in the future when 4K DVD players and television/monitors will likely not only be available but even common? From what I understand, 4K is the preferred production resolution, even if 2K is the resolution shipped to the movie theater. However, a movie produced in 4K can be re-released in the future in 4K when the viewing hardware catches up.

 

[JimKarczewski]

Canon Buys Mamiya [CR1]

Oh.. PLEASE Yes, PLEASE

I have 6 Mamiya AF lenses collecting dust. Though canon would probably do something stupid and come out with a new mount system. D'oh.

 

[Bob Howland]

Yet people in Hollywood are quite happy using 2k video to supplement 4k movies, today, which tends to support the theory that everyone who is out there making money cares about what is needed for today and not some arbitrary point in the future.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Present_value

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_value

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discounting

Update: This actually explains it better: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_rate_of_return

There is also the issue of selecting camera resolution of a $25 million project when the difference in cost of renting/buying 2K vs. 4K camcorders is, for example, $200,000.