Two New Full Frame Cameras in 2014? [CR1]

[Mitch.Conner]

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!

I'm glad you phrased it as "let" quotation marks and all because I just don't feel that legally there is much they could do about it unless there are facts that I'm unaware of. I think legal action would not only have created negative PR, but may very well have resulted in unfavorable legal precedent for Canon if the ML folks had adequate legal representation and some means of legal funding.

The problem as you pointed out earlier is that they likely have neither, and Canon could force an attorney for ML to rack up an unaffordably large number of billable hours responding to near-ridiculous motions. I say "near" with ABA PR Rule 3.3 in mind. (Model Rules of Prof’l Conduct R. 3.3 cmt. 4 (1983)) - not proper citation form, but this is a forum discussion, not a brief.

I'm not sure that I agree with you about everybody being happy. I imagine 1Dx owners feel a little bitter about sort of being penalized for owning Canon's non-C flagship EOS. No?

What would be interesting is if maybe one of the full-frames to come out next year is a 5DC - an entry level C-series EOS. Not saying I think it would happen, just that it would be interesting.

 

[Marsu42]

I would also point out that these days, we have some pretty good tools, like Topaz DeNoise 5, which can recover lost dynamic range.

In credit of my 6d I have to say I didn't see any banding yet, ever, and shadow recovery with LR pv2012 is very good. But ettl it's still kind of a workaround, because when manually exposing (and not for example using auto-ettr of Magic Lantern) you still are operating on the edge of the camera's ability and have to spot meter all the time or guess what underexposure is necessary to prevent as many blown highlights as possible - no software recover these, the data simply isn't there.

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.

Unless photogs with Nikon/Sony sensors also know Topaz which is a definite possibility

 

[jrista]

I would also point out that these days, we have some pretty good tools, like Topaz DeNoise 5, which can recover lost dynamic range.

In credit of my 6d I have to say I didn't see any banding yet, ever, and shadow recovery with LR pv2012 is very good. But ettl it's still kind of a workaround, because when manually exposing (and not for example using auto-ettr of Magic Lantern) you still are operating on the edge of the camera's ability and have to spot meter all the time or guess what underexposure is necessary to prevent as many blown highlights as possible - no software recover these, the data simply isn't there.

Certainly. I have always felt that Canon cameras underexpose a bit much to preserve highlights. I always seem to have HUGE headroom in my RAW files. I photograph the moon a lot, and I can make it a nearly pure white disc in live view, and still not clip the highlights. The cameras meter tries to make it a medium toned gray disc, which is always significantly darker than the moon looks naturally.

I understand that preserving highlights is critical for certain kinds of photography, such as weddings and events, but you would think that they wouldn't try to preserve so much highlight headroom unless you enable HTP or something like that.

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.

Unless photogs with Nikon/Sony sensors also know Topaz which is a definite possibility
[/quote]

I'm not sure what Topaz has to offer an Exmor user. They already have practically zero noise...what exactly would they denoise? (BTW, debanding and DR recovery only really apply at low ISO...at higher ISO, it doesn't matter what brand you have...its all the same in the end.)

 

[Marsu42]

I'm glad you phrased it as "let" quotation marks and all because I just don't feel that legally there is much they could do about it unless there are facts that I'm unaware of. I think legal action would not only have created negative PR, but may very well have resulted in unfavorable legal precedent for Canon if the ML folks had adequate legal representation and some means of legal funding.

... which of course they haven't, few people could stand against the global might of an enterprise like Canon if they are set upon sueing some individuals to the end of days. Canon might still try this, even if reverse engineering the fw is not forbidden in *all* download license agreements... but you have to break a very weak encryption to look at the code, which might be considered illegal or not.

The main thread above the heads of Canon users are:

• Canon could try to invalidate all warranties if they manage to detect ML was installed (like if your camera breaks and you aren't able to remove the bootflag),
• Canon they could add a *working* firmware* encryption, currently it's only weak XOR which means they *allow* the fw to be decrypted. The stronger AES is possible since 550d, but Canon chose not to use it (guess why ). If they really wanted, they could use really strong asymmetric public key encryption in the next camera models and the ML project would be dead since you cannot just dump the fw from the camera but have to re a fw update.

 

[eml58]

I imagine 1Dx owners feel a little bitter about sort of being penalized for owning Canon's non-C flagship EOS. No?

No, good point, but No.

For myself Canon could take out the Video function on the 1Dx, reduce the price 1k, and I'll sell my current 2 1Dx bodies & buy 2 of these, if I want video I use a Video Camera, or better still, let my Son take the video.

what would make me even happier (and I'm Happy with what I have, but happier is better, No ??), would be jrista's wish list.

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

Which I feel could all be possible, except the last line, $6,999 ?? Possible ?? Yes, Probable ?? Don't think so, still, Canon will need to compete with the Nikon D4x due soon as well, so they'll need to keep the price competitive, but I see the 1Dxs being a premium over the 1Dx, maybe an 8k Camera Body.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

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?

???

 

[jrista]

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?

Usually, in such cases, you would likely be at a (much) higher ISO setting than 100 or 200, which GREATLY negates the value of having that extra DR. Beyond ISO 800, there is no meaningful difference, either way...things become physically limited. Even in broad daylight, I rarely photograph birds at ISO as low as 800, and rarely shoot wildlife below ISO 400. That is maybe a fraction of a stop better DR in the best case, but generally speaking I can't recall needing to lift such photos by that much anyway.

There may be some circumstances where you are lucky enough to need more DR and have motion slow enough where you could get away with ISO 100. In those (very rare) situations, sure, more DR would be awesome.

 

[jrista]

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!

Totally agree here. Canon only benefits from ML's activities and their firmware. It certainly doesn't steal sales from the company, on the contrary more often than not many photographers stick with Canon for the sole reason that ML exists for it.

 

[Marsu42]

It certainly doesn't steal sales from the company

Maybe not on the accumulated sales side, but certainly a lot of people buy a Rebel because you can fix usability and feature shortcomings with ML and Canon cannot use "it has xyz brackets" as a marketing item. Also the raw video of the 5d3 might lose them some 1dx sales...

... but I still think Canon profits from ML as a system, even if Panasonic recently prevented 3rd party fw on their cameras because of increased support costs there is a reason Canon does allow it.

 

[sanj]

So so sorry but what is 'ML'. Pls do not laugh, just tell me the full form. Pls.

 

[Zv]

So so sorry but what is 'ML'. Pls do not laugh, just tell me the full form. Pls.

Magic Lantern

http://www.magiclantern.fm

 

[Marsu42]

So so sorry but what is 'ML'. Pls do not laugh, just tell me the full form. Pls.

Magic Lantern an add-on that runs alongside the original Canon firmware and brings very useful to near-essential features to the camera (raw video & histogram, 14ev dynamic range, focus stacking, focus peaking, intervalometer, unlimited bracketing, ...). It's the one reason I'm using Canon and not Nikon. See link above for their homepage, they've also got a forum with tutorials over there.

 

[mkabi]

In restrospect, magic lantern is a third party add on that only works with Canon DSLRs.
Of course, its helping Canon more than crippling them... because ML doesn't make hardware of their own, only software.

No point in thinking anything else... if you don't have a body, and its lenses... what good does the software that helps run it have?

Canon should really pay them for what they do.

 

[Eldar]

Canon should really pay them for what they do.

Maybe they do If so it would be a rather cunning way to verify new concepts and test reactions in the user community.

 

[unfocused]

Canon should really pay them for what they do.

Maybe they do If so it would be a rather cunning way to verify new concepts and test reactions in the user community.

Or maybe it just looks really good on your resume when Canon is interviewing software engineers.

 

[Don Haines]

In restrospect, magic lantern is a third party add on that only works with Canon DSLRs.
Of course, its helping Canon more than crippling them... because ML doesn't make hardware of their own, only software.

No point in thinking anything else... if you don't have a body, and its lenses... what good does the software that helps run it have?

Canon should really pay them for what they do.

So Canon takes Magic Lantern to court and wins... and now the Judge has to award damages.... "So because of this unauthorized software you sold an extra 10,000 units and your company's profits went up by $5,000,000.. I award you damages of -$10,000,000.... please pay it to the people at Magic Lantern".... Just NOT gonna happen

 

[Rienzphotoz]

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!

Totally agree here. Canon only benefits from ML's activities and their firmware. It certainly doesn't steal sales from the company, on the contrary more often than not many photographers stick with Canon for the sole reason that ML exists for it.

+1

 

[sanj]

So so sorry but what is 'ML'. Pls do not laugh, just tell me the full form. Pls.

Magic Lantern

http://www.magiclantern.fm

Oh ok. yeah I know magic lantern! Thx.

 

[sanj]

So so sorry but what is 'ML'. Pls do not laugh, just tell me the full form. Pls.

Magic Lantern an add-on that runs alongside the original Canon firmware and brings very useful to near-essential features to the camera (raw video & histogram, 14ev dynamic range, focus stacking, focus peaking, intervalometer, unlimited bracketing, ...). It's the one reason I'm using Canon and not Nikon. See link above for their homepage, they've also got a forum with tutorials over there.

Thx

 

[Zv]

So so sorry but what is 'ML'. Pls do not laugh, just tell me the full form. Pls.

Magic Lantern

http://www.magiclantern.fm

Oh ok. yeah I know magic lantern! Thx.

No problem there were some things I was unsure of at first and shamefully had to look up on Google!

I remember being like "What the hell is AFMA??" I was convinced I could figure it out on my own but eventually gave up and Googled it!

And it doesn't help when "ML" is sometimes used to say Mirror-Less, but I think context helps! Confusing when they are talking about Magic Lantern on a page about Mirrorless cameras!! Haha!!

There should be a CR glossary of terms!!