Two New Full Frame Cameras in 2014? [CR1]

[jrista]

+1 ... why should we "just rip" someone's photos "to shreds"?

Because that is the nature of pack animals.

Seriously? Insulting just one of us wasn't enough, so now you have to insult the whole lot of us by calling us "pack animals"?

You have lost all credibility. You've fallen back on the most baser level of animalistic instincts yourself here, and stooped to the lowest level. There is nothing more to say to you.

I encourage everyon to ignore Dilbert, either figuratively or literally via this forums ignore feature, and get back to the original topic of discussion. Because this man is NOT worth responding to.

 

[sanj]

What i don't get is that your thick skinned enough to put yourself out there in a discussion like this, but not to put your images out there.

Maybe *I* don't think highly enough of them to post.

it is ok, relax. We all feel insecure about our work. But it is important to share photos and get into healthy discussions to open up and grow. If we all wait for just the best of the best before posting, we may never ever post.

 

[Zv]

I had to go back 4 pages to catch up on this latest CR drama!

Still not sure what sparked it, was it Dilbert's DR graphs? Then some talk of RAW files and color and then a snide comment about Jrista's photos and here we are!

I have to say the outlook doesn't look to good for our antagonist, Mr Dilbert! I'm sure he's a nice fellow an all but come on, seriously, don't be dissin other peoples work. That's not cool. You'd have to be extremely talented (even then it's so not cool) to offer criticism like that without backing it up with evidence of your experience. And experience can be taking pictures, working as an editor etc etc. so if you are such an expert shouldn't you offer constructive advice?

But whatever, carry on this is amusing and it distracts me from work which is very boring right now! Haha!

 

[Rienzphotoz]

+1 ... why should we "just rip" someone's photos "to shreds"?

Because that is the nature of pack animals.

Seriously? Insulting just one of us wasn't enough, so now you have to insult the whole lot of us by calling us "pack animals"?

You have lost all credibility. You've fallen back on the most baser level of animalistic instincts yourself here, and stooped to the lowest level. There is nothing more to say to you.

I encourage everyon to ignore Dilbert, either figuratively or literally via this forums ignore feature, and get back to the original topic of discussion. Because this man is NOT worth responding to.

On second thoughts (after I had a chance to step back and cool down a bit) I don't think its a nice thing to ignore someone because of a comment we feel is rude ... but I've said/done a lot of things in life that I'm not particularly proud of, but God has still been kind to me and am glad that people who I've wronged did not ignore me. I would ignore a pervert or a stalker but not a long time forum members who does have some valid points at times, who knows if we were to meet him personally we might all get along famously. OK, I'm not giving a lecture to any one, this is for me personally ... just "thinking out loud".
jrista, for the record, I still feel strongly that, what dilbert said was not cool ... but what I said wouldn't be considered cool either. I come to CR to learn and maybe share whatever little that I know ... I've always learned a great deal from the photos you post and I'm glad you post them.
Hey dilbert, no hard feelings man, nothing personal ... but try and be nice to us sometimes Cheers and have a good day.

 

[jrista]

+1 ... why should we "just rip" someone's photos "to shreds"?

Because that is the nature of pack animals.

Seriously? Insulting just one of us wasn't enough, so now you have to insult the whole lot of us by calling us "pack animals"?

You have lost all credibility. You've fallen back on the most baser level of animalistic instincts yourself here, and stooped to the lowest level. There is nothing more to say to you.

I encourage everyon to ignore Dilbert, either figuratively or literally via this forums ignore feature, and get back to the original topic of discussion. Because this man is NOT worth responding to.

On second thoughts (after I had a chance to step back and cool down a bit) I don't think its a nice thing to ignore someone because of a comment we feel is rude ... but I've said/done a lot of things in life that I'm not particularly proud of, but God has still been kind to me and am glad that people who I've wronged did not ignore me. I would ignore a pervert or a stalker but not a long time forum members who does have some valid points at times, who knows if we were to meet him personally we might all get along famously. OK, I'm not giving a lecture to any one, this is for me personally ... just "thinking out loud".
jrista, for the record, I still feel strongly that, what dilbert said was not cool ... but what I said wouldn't be considered cool either. I come to CR to learn and maybe share whatever little that I know ... I've always learned a great deal from the photos you post and I'm glad you post them.
Hey dilbert, no hard feelings man, nothing personal ... but try and be nice to us sometimes Cheers and have a good day.

To be honest, I really don't care if someone thinks my work is junk. Dilbert is free to have his opinions.

The thing that really ticked me off was him calling the whole lot of us "pack animals". That is pretty low, a blatantly and intentionally rude jab, the kind of thing a child usually does when they lose an argument.

Sorry that it made me angry...but it made me angry. Your response here is dead on, and very commendable. Honorable and reasonable. I truly applaud your will.

I debate because I want people to have truthful information to work with, not because I have any kind of personal vendetta (although I'll happily admit I really personally despised Mikael...that guy was the epitome of a narcissistic, arrogant antagonist who seemed to have an unhealthy attachment to dynamic range..........I can't say how much I'm glad he's gone...) When people stoop to childish lows and start making things personal and insulting, or try to evade a reasonable discussion about facts vs. conjecture with snide and rude remarks, it really irks me. It's uncalled for, it doesn't help anyone, and it derails topics like this.

I can't say I'll ever stop trying to keep the facts honest. And I mean facts...people are free to rumormonger and share their wish lists and the like, but I'll probably always step in when someone gets going about how canon equipment "sucks" because they don't have the absolute best of the best top notch world dominating drguzzling sensor on the market, or how they can't even compete anymore because they are dominated by the marketing monster or crap like that. When people like dilbert start flinging around global insults, sorry...but that isn't acceptable. He can insult me personally all he wants, I'm happy to let all that slide off my back (although I might point it out...very powerful debating tool that, when someone decouples their responses from the argument and gets personal. ;P)

It just isn't right to call everyone animals when you lose an argument...



Anyway...as for the topic at hand.

I like Canon to take their time. As it has a positive effect on their next product tech wise. I won't be in the game for a 5DIV. The 5D3 still remains more camera than I ever can handle properly 8) So as improved high ISOs beyond 25k are my main interest, I will be glad to see the 5DIV's specs which will kinda forecast what the 5DV will be based on. 1/2 a stop to a full stop better high ISO by 2018 would be a tremendous leap for the 5DV. Till then I am well equipped. Still working on my first 10k frames with the 5D3.

This was my last favorite comment from this thread. I totally agree...Canon can take their time on the 5D IV and 1D neXt. Far too early to replace those cameras. I suspect the big camera Canon will be at least announcing next year will be the big megapixel camera...the 1Ds X or whatever then end up naming it. The landscape and studio photography camera.

Personally, I hope it gets the following (this would be my wish list for the 1Ds X):

• 180nm sensor fab process, 60% Q.E.
• 46mp (8350x5567) or 54mp (9000x6000)
• 16-bit on-die parallel ADC (3e- flat read noise)
• 15+ stops DR
• ISO 52100
• 1D X meter and AF system
• 61pt AF unit
• 5fps frame rate (FF), 7fps (APS-H cropped), 9fps (APS-C cropped)
• Integrated intervalometer, 9999 max frame count, configurable inter-frame delay, configurable pre-start delay, manual mode or bulb mode support, bulb-ramping
• Price not to exceed $6,999

 

[Rienzphotoz]

I like Canon to take their time. As it has a positive effect on their next product tech wise. I won't be in the game for a 5DIV. The 5D3 still remains more camera than I ever can handle properly 8) So as improved high ISOs beyond 25k are my main interest, I will be glad to see the 5DIV's specs which will kinda forecast what the 5DV will be based on. 1/2 a stop to a full stop better high ISO by 2018 would be a tremendous leap for the 5DV. Till then I am well equipped. Still working on my first 10k frames with the 5D3.

This was my last favorite comment from this thread. I totally agree...Canon can take their time on the 5D IV and 1D neXt. Far too early to replace those cameras. I suspect the big camera Canon will be at least announcing next year will be the big megapixel camera...the 1Ds X or whatever then end up naming it. The landscape and studio photography camera.

+1 ... I totally agree!

 

[Loswr]

I don´t need to talk about new gear because I have it.

I see that our dear friend, M.ST, has left our tight-knit little community. How very, very sad. No more will we get to hear about the great performance of the 1D Xs MkIII and 5D MkVIII bodies that he's been using for years now…

Unless, of course, he turns up again like some other bad pennies have been doing… :

 

[Mitch.Conner]

I'm relatively new, so I don't know about the forum dynamics/politics/etc., but in my short time as a member I've seen a lot of negativity on this board. Not sure what to make of it, exactly, but it's discouraging.

As for the topic. I'm reluctant to believe that the 5DIII will get upgraded to a 5DIV next year. I see 2015 being the year for that. Especially as Magic Lantern is getting more and more attention and Canon can milk an existing product that appeals to budget-minded aspiring film-makers. As I understand it, right now the 5DIII is the top-dog for Magic Lantern given that they're hesitant to touch the 1Dx after getting threatened with legal action (which IMO Canon would have a difficulty following through with if you are familiar with the cases Sega Enterprises v. Accolade Inc., 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992) and Sony Computer Entertainment v. Connectix Corp., 203 F.3d 596 (9th Cir. 2000) - even though these cases are both from the 9th circuit).

However, more full-frame cameras is otherwise great news to me. I think it will result in more lenses designed with full-frame users in mind. I might be wrong there, but that's how I view it.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

not sure if this could happen, but...

2 FF bodies rumored, but not a 5d4 and not a split to the 1d line...

Many have said it could be a 6d2... I think this is very logical because its entry level which if it follows the pattern of other entry level products, 1-2 year cycle, so the 6d2 could very well be one of the new FF bodies..

the second...

how about this as an idea --- a 5dS perhaps? what else would they name a big mp studio camera that isn't 1 series? 2D? doubt it...3d...everyone says that won't happen... a 4D???/ maybe...5 is out, 6 is out, 7 is out...and I doubt they'd make an 8d or a 9d because that would be really confusing...

 

[traveller]

This was my last favorite comment from this thread. I totally agree...Canon can take their time on the 5D IV and 1D neXt. Far too early to replace those cameras. I suspect the big camera Canon will be at least announcing next year will be the big megapixel camera...the 1Ds X or whatever then end up naming it. The landscape and studio photography camera.

Personally, I hope it gets the following (this would be my wish list for the 1Ds X):

• 180nm sensor fab process, 60% Q.E.
• 46mp (8350x5567) or 54mp (9000x6000)
• 16-bit on-die parallel ADC (3e- flat read noise)
• 15+ stops DR
• ISO 52100
• 1D X meter and AF system
• 61pt AF unit
• 5fps frame rate (FF), 7fps (APS-H cropped), 9fps (APS-C cropped)
• Integrated intervalometer, 9999 max frame count, configurable inter-frame delay, configurable pre-start delay, manual mode or bulb mode support, bulb-ramping
• Price not to exceed $6,999

Finally, we're back on topic (fingers crossed!).

I notice that there's a rumour over on SAR that Sony has a 54MP full frame sensor in the pipeline, but at the moment it's too expensive to produce.

http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-54-megapixel-2/

There's probably some truth in this, as SAR is effectively an unofficial informal channel for Sony's marketing department! I wonder if they'll sell it to Nikon first for the rumoured (far higher price point) D4x? We may even see this sensor tech make it into the next generation of Hasselblads...http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-hasselblad-and-sony-to-make-a-joint-sensor-announcement/

Canon must be doing something similar; maybe they're having cost/yield issues as well?

 

[Artifex]

I'm relatively new, so I don't know about the forum dynamics/politics/etc., but in my short time as a member I've seen a lot of negativity on this board. Not sure what to make of it, exactly, but it's discouraging.

As for the topic. I'm reluctant to believe that the 5DIII will get upgraded to a 5DIV next year. I see 2015 being the year for that. Especially as Magic Lantern is getting more and more attention and Canon can milk an existing product that appeals to budget-minded aspiring film-makers. As I understand it, right now the 5DIII is the top-dog for Magic Lantern given that they're hesitant to touch the 1Dx after getting threatened with legal action (which IMO Canon would have a difficulty following through with if you are familiar with the cases Sega Enterprises v. Accolade Inc., 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992) and Sony Computer Entertainment v. Connectix Corp., 203 F.3d 596 (9th Cir. 2000) - even though these cases are both from the 9th circuit).

However, more full-frame cameras is otherwise great news to me. I think it will result in more lenses designed with full-frame users in mind. I might be wrong there, but that's how I view it.

Thank you for those judgement reference. Although I have very little knowledge in American laws and jurisprudence, I am very curious of the precedent that could apply to a possible legal action between Canon and ML, since American court would probably be the correct forum in this case (although I know nothing about American international private law). Still, I have one silly question, as a non-american and non-under-common-law person, what is the 9th circuit? Are those first instance court? Thanks for your help.
P.S: Sorry if I made mistakes, I studied law in a different country and a different language!

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I'm relatively new, so I don't know about the forum dynamics/politics/etc., but in my short time as a member I've seen a lot of negativity on this board. Not sure what to make of it, exactly, but it's discouraging.

As for the topic. I'm reluctant to believe that the 5DIII will get upgraded to a 5DIV next year. I see 2015 being the year for that. Especially as Magic Lantern is getting more and more attention and Canon can milk an existing product that appeals to budget-minded aspiring film-makers. As I understand it, right now the 5DIII is the top-dog for Magic Lantern given that they're hesitant to touch the 1Dx after getting threatened with legal action (which IMO Canon would have a difficulty following through with if you are familiar with the cases Sega Enterprises v. Accolade Inc., 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992) and Sony Computer Entertainment v. Connectix Corp., 203 F.3d 596 (9th Cir. 2000) - even though these cases are both from the 9th circuit).

However, more full-frame cameras is otherwise great news to me. I think it will result in more lenses designed with full-frame users in mind. I might be wrong there, but that's how I view it.

Thank you for those judgement reference. Although I have very little knowledge in American laws and jurisprudence, I am very curious of the precedent that could apply to a possible legal action between Canon and ML, since American court would probably be the correct forum in this case (although I know nothing about American international private law). Still, I have one silly question, as a non-american and non-under-common-law person, what is the 9th circuit? Are those first instance court? Thanks for your help.
P.S: Sorry if I made mistakes, I studied law in a different country and a different language!

From what I hear it's more that they have decided that they don't think it would be right to try to turn a 1DX into a 1DC and that they are also afraid of playing with the 1DX in general because they don't want Canon to try to lock out the next firmware for all cameras and also the 1 series bodies are expensive and they are not getting paid to do this work and a few 1DX test bodies costs a heck of a lot of money. Also, until very recently they didn't even have a clue how to work with dual digic bodies either.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Adams was happy to work within the limitations of his systems DR, that certainly had less than the Sony/Nikon sensor, he was all about realising his artistic vision regardless of where in the range of tones the primary subject was, he blew highlights and blocked shadows when he wanted. His point was to expose the key tones correctly and let the rest fall where it may.

AFAIK, he also spent hours in the lab trying dodging and burning and trying to mess around with the chemical baths and so on to get more and more and more out of what he had to deal with, trying to get the most out of what existed and to further improve it.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

wait there is no such forum coz DR in sensors holds no value for those who really know how to work DR with proper lighting and diffusion.

and there he goes again

and you wonder where the DR crowd gets the mad, simply mad idea, that the fanboys ever say such things about more DR is useless or is only needed by incompetents

BTW, please come to my next shoot and make sure to bring enough lights to light up a few square miles and enough helpers to do it all instantly at the snap of a finger and oh make sure they do it in a way that looks natural and that none of their equipment shows up in the shot. And make sure you are always there at a snap, whenever needed.

Send me return air tickets plus all expenses paid and I'll show you how I do it with my Canon sensor to get the same results.

even in the cases where the scene is too complex for split ND filters and stuff is moving too much for multiple shots to be combined?

 

[privatebydesign]

I'm relatively new, so I don't know about the forum dynamics/politics/etc., but in my short time as a member I've seen a lot of negativity on this board. Not sure what to make of it, exactly, but it's discouraging.

As for the topic. I'm reluctant to believe that the 5DIII will get upgraded to a 5DIV next year. I see 2015 being the year for that. Especially as Magic Lantern is getting more and more attention and Canon can milk an existing product that appeals to budget-minded aspiring film-makers. As I understand it, right now the 5DIII is the top-dog for Magic Lantern given that they're hesitant to touch the 1Dx after getting threatened with legal action (which IMO Canon would have a difficulty following through with if you are familiar with the cases Sega Enterprises v. Accolade Inc., 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992) and Sony Computer Entertainment v. Connectix Corp., 203 F.3d 596 (9th Cir. 2000) - even though these cases are both from the 9th circuit).

However, more full-frame cameras is otherwise great news to me. I think it will result in more lenses designed with full-frame users in mind. I might be wrong there, but that's how I view it.

Thank you for those judgement reference. Although I have very little knowledge in American laws and jurisprudence, I am very curious of the precedent that could apply to a possible legal action between Canon and ML, since American court would probably be the correct forum in this case (although I know nothing about American international private law). Still, I have one silly question, as a non-american and non-under-common-law person, what is the 9th circuit? Are those first instance court? Thanks for your help.
P.S: Sorry if I made mistakes, I studied law in a different country and a different language!

The difference between those cases and a possible Canon corp action against ML is size, both previous defendants were multi million dollar corps in their own right. ML is not, they could be swamped in legal actions with the bat of a multi billion dollar corps eyelid. They couldn't afford to counter the motions Canon could throw at them.

No they are an appellate court with regional jurisdiciton. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_Circuit_Court_of_Appeals

 

[Don Haines]

Adams was happy to work within the limitations of his systems DR, that certainly had less than the Sony/Nikon sensor, he was all about realising his artistic vision regardless of where in the range of tones the primary subject was, he blew highlights and blocked shadows when he wanted. His point was to expose the key tones correctly and let the rest fall where it may.

AFAIK, he also spent hours in the lab trying dodging and burning and trying to mess around with the chemical baths and so on to get more and more and more out of what he had to deal with, trying to get the most out of what existed and to further improve it.

He was good, no question about it, but with the limited dynamic range of the sensor he was using his HDR images always seemed to look like the colour was washed out...I'm sure that if he had a Nikon (Sony) sensor in his 8x10 camera that the blues of the sky would not have looked so grey

 

[Mitch.Conner]

I'm relatively new, so I don't know about the forum dynamics/politics/etc., but in my short time as a member I've seen a lot of negativity on this board. Not sure what to make of it, exactly, but it's discouraging.

As for the topic. I'm reluctant to believe that the 5DIII will get upgraded to a 5DIV next year. I see 2015 being the year for that. Especially as Magic Lantern is getting more and more attention and Canon can milk an existing product that appeals to budget-minded aspiring film-makers. As I understand it, right now the 5DIII is the top-dog for Magic Lantern given that they're hesitant to touch the 1Dx after getting threatened with legal action (which IMO Canon would have a difficulty following through with if you are familiar with the cases Sega Enterprises v. Accolade Inc., 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992) and Sony Computer Entertainment v. Connectix Corp., 203 F.3d 596 (9th Cir. 2000) - even though these cases are both from the 9th circuit).

However, more full-frame cameras is otherwise great news to me. I think it will result in more lenses designed with full-frame users in mind. I might be wrong there, but that's how I view it.

Thank you for those judgement reference. Although I have very little knowledge in American laws and jurisprudence, I am very curious of the precedent that could apply to a possible legal action between Canon and ML, since American court would probably be the correct forum in this case (although I know nothing about American international private law). Still, I have one silly question, as a non-american and non-under-common-law person, what is the 9th circuit? Are those first instance court? Thanks for your help.
P.S: Sorry if I made mistakes, I studied law in a different country and a different language!

The difference between those cases and a possible Canon corp action against ML is size, both previous defendants were multi million dollar corps in their own right. ML is not, they could be swamped in legal actions with the bat of a multi billion dollar corps eyelid. They couldn't afford to counter the motions Canon could throw at them.

No they are an appellate court with regional jurisdiciton. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninth_Circuit_Court_of_Appeals

I don't disagree. I think maybe the EFF might be interested in representing them if they wanted to seek a declaratory judgment on the matter, but you've described an unfortunate classic problem in litigation and why many cases settle.

EDIT: OR why large entities with deep pockets can intimidate people into never filing a lawsuit to begin with or jumping through hoops to avoid a lawsuit being filed against them, even if it's frivolous.

 

[privatebydesign]

With regards ML I think Canon have taken a masterful and probably coincidentally pragmatic approach, all the more remarkable given the type, size and style of company they are.

ML adds a very welcome boost to 5D sales, it made the 5D MkII a cult product and that has continued with the MkIII, indie film makers, small time videographers and wedding photo/video shooters love them, but Canon have laid down their stance on encroachment of the Cine line, a much smaller and better funded market segment anyway.

ML have created a buzz and good feeling around the 5D, Canon have "let" them do it, a PR positive instead of the PR negative legal action would have generated. ML have helped sales, which I am sure Canon appreciate, but ML don't see the value, if any, in hacking the C line firmware, which Canon also love.

This has to be a very rare occurrence of everybody being happy and living in comparative harmony, wonder how long it can last!

 

[jrista]

I'm relatively new, so I don't know about the forum dynamics/politics/etc., but in my short time as a member I've seen a lot of negativity on this board. Not sure what to make of it, exactly, but it's discouraging.

As for the topic. I'm reluctant to believe that the 5DIII will get upgraded to a 5DIV next year. I see 2015 being the year for that. Especially as Magic Lantern is getting more and more attention and Canon can milk an existing product that appeals to budget-minded aspiring film-makers. As I understand it, right now the 5DIII is the top-dog for Magic Lantern given that they're hesitant to touch the 1Dx after getting threatened with legal action (which IMO Canon would have a difficulty following through with if you are familiar with the cases Sega Enterprises v. Accolade Inc., 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992) and Sony Computer Entertainment v. Connectix Corp., 203 F.3d 596 (9th Cir. 2000) - even though these cases are both from the 9th circuit).

However, more full-frame cameras is otherwise great news to me. I think it will result in more lenses designed with full-frame users in mind. I might be wrong there, but that's how I view it.

Thank you for those judgement reference. Although I have very little knowledge in American laws and jurisprudence, I am very curious of the precedent that could apply to a possible legal action between Canon and ML, since American court would probably be the correct forum in this case (although I know nothing about American international private law). Still, I have one silly question, as a non-american and non-under-common-law person, what is the 9th circuit? Are those first instance court? Thanks for your help.
P.S: Sorry if I made mistakes, I studied law in a different country and a different language!

From what I hear it's more that they have decided that they don't think it would be right to try to turn a 1DX into a 1DC and that they are also afraid of playing with the 1DX in general because they don't want Canon to try to lock out the next firmware for all cameras and also the 1 series bodies are expensive and they are not getting paid to do this work and a few 1DX test bodies costs a heck of a lot of money. Also, until very recently they didn't even have a clue how to work with dual digic bodies either.

Aye, these are the reasons I think ML guys gave themselves, particularly the last one, that buying several 1D X bodies is just unrealistically costly.

 

[jrista]

Adams was happy to work within the limitations of his systems DR, that certainly had less than the Sony/Nikon sensor, he was all about realising his artistic vision regardless of where in the range of tones the primary subject was, he blew highlights and blocked shadows when he wanted. His point was to expose the key tones correctly and let the rest fall where it may.

AFAIK, he also spent hours in the lab trying dodging and burning and trying to mess around with the chemical baths and so on to get more and more and more out of what he had to deal with, trying to get the most out of what existed and to further improve it.

That isn't all that different from what we do today. Even with a D800, you are still going to dodge and burn in photoshop or lightroom...those are LOCAL DR adjustments, not global, and if you really want to extract perfection from your work, they are two of the most critical tools for doing so.

I would also point out that these days, we have some pretty good tools, like Topaz DeNoise 5, which can recover lost dynamic range. Canon's worst problem, for example, isn't that they have noise in the shadows...it's the kind of noise they have in the shadows: banding. DeNoise 5 has some pretty amazing debanding and black point adjustment, which can clean up that nasty banding in the shadows, and fix the black point to recover DR. You can't recover all of the lost detail, but you can recover almost a stop, which puts Canon photos right back into the game with sensors that have more native DR.

As you said, you work with what you have, and you use the tools and techniques available to you to get the most out of your source materials.