*UPDATE* EOS 70D is Coming, The Future of Pro APS-C Will Change

[ishdakuteb]

yes Im paid 40000USD / month + what ever gears I want.
ugly? Im showing the different sensors characteristics, I have aspirations to make the picture quite

yep, those are ugly. not those images in here. i am saying those images that you have taken for universities and images that you have posted on you facebook (if they are all the right one).

yes they are, but I have been living on this ugly pictures as a photographer since 1984, how about you?

your mail box was to small

taking images is not my career though, but i know that i am better than you from taking picture to probalby science (chemistry, physics, math, programming languages, you name it but not biology) too...

 

[ishdakuteb]

you are a fanny man
I got this answer
what shall we do? what shall we do?
and stop accusing me, you will lose

I haven't accused you of anything, so I have nothing to lose. Try send each individually, duh! The Canon file will 100% come down I email them often. How big is the D800 file?

use rapidshare or mediafire instead...

 

[ishdakuteb]

Could a mod move all the Mikael Canon vs. Nikon stuff to some separate, dedicated thread for that topic? I would really prefer we don't destroy ANOTHER thread with the same old debate. People HAVE been asking for Mikaels original RAW files, but that discussion really doesn't belong in this topic. It belongs elsewere, isolated, in its own little world where the debate that will inevitably rage on won't ruin any other peaceful discussions.

+as many as I am allowed. He is destroying the fun of being here.......

agreed

"...meaning of sensor physics = read out noise and why banding occurs?"

i am laughing my a*s off when reading your "meaning of sensor physics".

 

[TheSuede]

The difference between a .CR2 or .NEF file and a DNG is that you can work the RAW file and then save to DNG and it appears unedited, you have clearly already edited the Canon file. What tiny bit of credibility you had due to your obviously limited but deep knowledge of one specific of a sensor has just been blown out of the water.

Mikael, you are an irrelevance.

Now I'm interested. Please show me a set of files - one .cr2 and one .dng made from that cr2 file - where the image data inside the DNG has been significantly altered...?

Of course it can be done. I could change the content of just about any raw file from any camera maker. Canon and some others have a control sum data tag that is supposed to protect against that kind of tampering, but that checksum encoding has been cracked since several years. So it's definitely not impossible, it just takes some work.

What I question is the general availability of those tools, and that you think that just about anyone can do it. AND the fact that you erroneously think that any normal program can change the image content of a raw file before saving it as a DNG. Yes, some EXIF tags may be repositioned, and some extra data may be saved - but the original image data is copied in a bit-perfect way. Bit-perfect as in "no single bit of the resulting image surface has changed between the original raw and the dng".

(actually that isn't 100% true, only 99.999% - Since Nikon and also Sony can use a kind of gamma / area coherency compression when saving a raw file, round-off faults in the conversion can appear since the DNG is LS-JPEG compressed, without gamma. That is, errors on the scale of +/-1 bit in a 14-bit file, or errors more than 13Ev down)

But still, show me the two files where the DNG has been seriously and provably tampered with. YOUR files, not someone elses.

 

[Hobby Shooter]

nope, they are uploaded by sprend to you.
come back if you have any questions

any one els who wants them?

Mikael, do you understand the difference between a DNG and an original RAW file? Post the untouched RAW files with intact EXIF please.

sorry , but I use DNG. If you have problems with that it is your problem, and please tell me what is the difference between a DNG and CR2 or NEF who can make a real difference?You have the exif there regarding time/f-stop and iso

The difference between a .CR2 or .NEF file and a DNG is that you can work the RAW file and then save to DNG and it appears unedited, you have clearly already edited the Canon file. What tiny bit of credibility you had due to your obviously limited but deep knowledge of one specific of a sensor has just been blown out of the water.

Mikael, you are an irrelevance.

I have reported this message to the moderator, I have declared the benefits of raw wise ADC at the sensor edge and
and this is well-known facts http://www.sensorgen.info/NikonD800.html Nikon d800
and Canon 5dmk2 http://www.sensorgen.info/CanonEOS_5D_MkII.html
I do not accept that you call me different things in your answers , my answer to you is: study different sensor types, DR, read out noise, analog path way and how banding banding occurs.
If you not have the knowledge to a real discussion is one thing, but stop to discredit me as a person and that Im now are cheating with DNG files.

Mikael, I think that is overreacting. Private simply called you something twice here and to me it didn't come out as an insult. I think you can be very harsh in some of your comments towards other people also which I find completely unnecessary. I don't understand why you are taking all threads into a discussion about sensor performance. A couple of weeks ago I asked you a question about reducing noise and you gave me a good answer that actually help me along. You more experienced and knowledgeable guys are really valuable on this forum sharing your insights and helping us less experienced on the way.

You being Swedish (as me) means that you've followed the debate the last few weeks about internet hate and how people anonymously are bashing and insulting other simply because they are expressing their views. You're a bigger man than that.

 

[ishdakuteb]

The difference between a .CR2 or .NEF file and a DNG is that you can work the RAW file and then save to DNG and it appears unedited, you have clearly already edited the Canon file. What tiny bit of credibility you had due to your obviously limited but deep knowledge of one specific of a sensor has just been blown out of the water.

Mikael, you are an irrelevance.

Now I'm interested. Please show me a set of files - one .cr2 and one .dng made from that cr2 file - where the image data inside the DNG has been significantly altered...?

Of course it can be done. I could change the content of just about any raw file from any camera maker. Canon and some others have a control sum data tag that is supposed to protect against that kind of tampering, but that checksum encoding has been cracked since several years. So it's definitely not impossible, it just takes some work.

What I question is the general availability of those tools, and that you think that just about anyone can do it. AND the fact that you erroneously think that any normal program can change the image content of a raw file before saving it as a DNG. Yes, some EXIF tags may be repositioned, and some extra data may be saved - but the original image data is copied in a bit-perfect way. Bit-perfect as in "no single bit of the resulting image surface has changed between the original raw and the dng".

(actually that isn't 100% true, only 99.999% - Since Nikon and also Sony can use a kind of gamma / area coherency compression when saving a raw file, round-off faults in the conversion can appear since the DNG is LS-JPEG compressed, without gamma. That is, errors on the scale of +/-1 bit in a 14-bit file, or errors more than 13Ev down)

But still, show me the two files where the DNG has been seriously and provably tampered with. YOUR files, not someone elses.

agree... i think that he thought that we have no way to find out or compare the two files. he is totally wrong... LOL

 

[jrista]

Is there any chance a mod could split this thread into two...the original thread up to the point Mikael came in with the screenshot of the D800 v.s 5D III, and everything from Mikael's post on in another thread...maybe "D800 vs. 5D III - The Truth"? This was a great thread until Mikael derailed it again. It would be nice not to lose the thread and the prior discussion due to the new debate.

 

[J.R.]

Is there any chance a mod could split this thread into two...the original thread up to the point Mikael came in with the screenshot of the D800 v.s 5D III, and everything from Mikael's post on in another thread...maybe "D800 vs. 5D III - The Truth"? This was a great thread until Mikael derailed it again. It would be nice not to lose the thread and the prior discussion due to the new debate.

+1

I woke up to see another great thread going rapidly downhill due to off topic comments and back and forth arguing. Guys, we don't need to get the Nikon cameras in every discussion, please take it up in a new thread.

 

[wickidwombat]

yeah that rat that jumped off the empire state building just hit the ground

 

[J.R.]

yeah that rat that jumped off the empire state building just hit the ground

Oooh ... Post some pics

 

[Loswr]

yeah that rat that jumped off the empire state building just hit the ground

Oooh ... Post some pics

Bright sun on the side of the building, deep black beady little rodent eyes and have to push the exposure 4 stops to see the detail in the matted fur. Gonna need at least 14.4 stops of DR, better not use a Canon.

 

[CanNotYet]

Ok, I think everyone needs a time out here.

Mikael, I am sure you mean well, and have excellent points to back up your claims, but please start your own thread discussing DR, banding, comparing sensors and such. It is NOT on-topic here.

The rest of you, don't bite. It turns into a flame war every time.

AND, I would ask you all to keep the tone polite. I know that it is hard when you get emotionally engaged, but for the rest of the forum's sake, please constrain yourselves.

Now, back on-topic: I think 70D and 7D2 will both be APS-C, as will all their successors. When the day comes and Canon goes 5 FF-models, they will no longer be successors of these lines, but rather something new. Like the 6D. (Canon could ofc reuse the names).

I think there will always be a place for pro "sub-FF" sensors, just because of the reach. Canon knows this, and for them, putting a APS-C sensor in the same body as a FF camera is a cost-effective way to create a new camera.

So, I would prepare for APS-C 7D2 and 7D3. I think it is only a question of what they improve every time, not change in sensor size.

 

[eyeland]

Ok, I think everyone needs a time out here.
Mikael, I am sure you mean well, and have excellent points to back up your claims, but please start your own thread discussing DR, banding, comparing sensors and such. It is NOT on-topic here.
The rest of you, don't bite. It turns into a flame war every time.
AND, I would ask you all to keep the tone polite. I know that it is hard when you get emotionally engaged, but for the rest of the forum's sake, please constrain yourselves.

+>1

 

[CanNotYet]

A small sensor does not inherently have "more reach". A sensor of dense sensels does have more reach. Often, smaller sensors have more sensel density than large sensors, but this is no rule written in stone. The D800 seems to point towards FF sensors using the same sensel tech as APS-C sensors.

-h

Yes, I know. Sorry for leaving that out. I mean that it will always be cheaper to make a small high density (APS-C) sensor, than a large high density (FF) sensor, and, as a consequence, the APS-C sensors will be leading the way in this (ofc the compact camera sensors are already there and improving).

It is simply a matter of scale (pun intended)

 

[DanielW]

Ok, I think everyone needs a time out here.

Mikael, I am sure you mean well, and have excellent points to back up your claims, but please start your own thread discussing DR, banding, comparing sensors and such. It is NOT on-topic here.

The rest of you, don't bite. It turns into a flame war every time.

AND, I would ask you all to keep the tone polite. I know that it is hard when you get emotionally engaged, but for the rest of the forum's sake, please constrain yourselves.

Now, back on-topic: I think 70D and 7D2 will both be APS-C, as will all their successors. When the day comes and Canon goes 5 FF-models, they will no longer be successors of these lines, but rather something new. Like the 6D. (Canon could ofc reuse the names).

I think there will always be a place for pro "sub-FF" sensors, just because of the reach. Canon knows this, and for them, putting a APS-C sensor in the same body as a FF camera is a cost-effective way to create a new camera.

So, I would prepare for APS-C 7D2 and 7D3. I think it is only a question of what they improve every time, not change in sensor size.

I'm glad that the people versus Mikael trial seems to have come to an end.
Regarding the new 7D: I'm in fact considering buying the current model ("mk1"), as it's better in almost every aspect than my 60D and will be cheaper when the mk2 is out. Even though better AF and low-light capabilities would be great, the current one is sure good enough for my needs (chasing my kid around being probably the most challenging situation I face). But... What do you more experienced guys think will be the price of the 7Dmk2? I might instead wait for the new model, if not too expensive.
Daniel

 

[DanielW]

Wow, it looks like the trial didn't end, after all...
It feels like attempting to persuade Sheldon to sit in another spot on the couch.

 

[CanNotYet]

A 2x crop sensor would have even more reach. I think it is more important what camera sensors can deliver "sufficient" quality for the applications that most customers care about, what camera systems can deliver the right lenses at the right price etc.

It might well be that well see m43 and FF, but APS-C will disappear. After all, it is a fairly recent format and there are not _that_ many good lenses designed especially for it (but many lenses that work for both crop and FF).

-h

Yes. But Canon has shown their hand with the EOS-M, that they will stay with APS-C for a couple of generations of cameras. Why create the M-mount otherwise? It is made to optimize size for APS-C. Thats a LOT of intent going into a sensor size. The M-lenses will ALL be designed for the APS-C sensor.

Sure, they could adopt a 4/3 sensor. Or Nikons 2.7X. But they didn't.
And, being Canon, probably won't do it unless FORCED to. That is why I believe the APS-C sensor has many years left.

 

[J.R.]

Wow, it looks like the trial didn't end, after all...
It feels like attempting to persuade Sheldon to sit in another spot on the couch.

YAWN...

 

[CanNotYet]

Mikael: Stop. Just stop. Feel free to start your own thread. This thread is about Canon EOS 70D and future Canon APS-C cameras.

 

[Don Haines]

Look at micro 4/3..... lots of sales there. Look at the Rebel lineup.... lots of sales there.

One would have to be a fool to argue that the image quality from a current high end FF camera and top quality lens is not better than that out of a reduced sensor size camera with an EF-S or micro 4/3 lens, but image quality is not everything to everyone.

Most consumers are not willing to pay $3000+ for a camera body or $1000+ for a lens. Most consumers want something physically smaller that they can carry around. Most consumers will be happy with "good enough", not "absolute best" image because they are not prepared to pay the penalty to go to the next level.

Of course the future will change..... does anyone think that things will stay the same with technology?

I really don't understasnd how some people have read into this that APS-C will change into FF. The bulk of the camera buying public is far more interested in smaller and lighter and more megapixels...WiFi and GPS and shooting video have more appeal to them than debates over pixel well sizes, bayer filters, 180nm manufacturing technology, or whatever. Face up to it.... we are the geeks, we are the abnormal ones, we are the ones out of touch with what the majority see as reality.

So what is the future of APS-C? The future is that it will be the bulk of Canon sales. Most of those sales will be Rebels and mirrorless.... there will be various models with various capacities and whatever the higher end one does or is called, it will be the "Pro-APS-C" model.