Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
I quite agree. I think there is a way to go with sensor technology and smaller phototsites. A few years ago the D3 would have been unthinkable.Again, this may or may not be the case. With the past and existing sensors and how they were configured with different microlenses, we could see diffraction limits kicking in, especially with overaggressive AA filters. If Canon, and this is a big if, went to a newer sensor design (like placing the electronics beneath the photosites rather than inside as most CMOS sensors are built), and if the microlenses are reconfigured to better match the photosites on the sensors, it may be very possible to reduce some of those diffraction issues the kick in hard on some smaller pixel sensors now.
Until we start to see actual results, it may be premature to dismiss what this newer camera may or may not be able to do. I am not being a fanboy or anything like that here, as that is not my nature by a long shot. I just think that folks may want to hold judgment and decisions a bit longer until they actually see what some of the newer tech really is able to deliver. It may not amount to anything different, or it could be a very significant improvement that starts to rewrite some of our "rules" about how capable some things may be. My first inclination is to agree that diffraction could become a player, but I am not convinced it will be until we start to see actual shots. Even on the MF side of things where they have a lot more sensor real estate to work with, pixels are getting smaller, and IQ is not getting worse.
LJ
Hi Ben, this is a common misconception about the effects of diffraction. A given lens is diffraction limited at a particular f-stop independent of sensor pixel pitch. Smaller pixels mean that lens diffraction becomes limiting to overall resolution capture at a lower f-stop, but this is only because there is enough sensor resolution to perceive the lens diffraction. If the sensor pixels are large, then sensor pixels are the weak link; ie, the pixel pitch will limit capture to a lower resolution than the limit otherwise imposed by diffraction. If the sensor pixels are small, then they will no longer be resolution limiting and diffraction comes more into play.Of course with that much resolution you run into serious diffraction issues. Might be worth keeping at least one of my original 5D's just for when I have to stop down past f11!
Hi Jono, I agree also. However, if the Canon 50D has a real 1-1.5 stop advantage over the 40D in high ISO noise (as claimed by Chuck Westfall), then we are talking about a dramatic step forward. The 50D has a pixel pitch similar to the E-420. This kind of technology leap would give the E-420 a D300 quality high ISO performance.I quite agree. I think there is a way to go with sensor technology and smaller phototsites. A few years ago the D3 would have been unthinkable.
The 50D allows you to use that button for a user defined function so I can't imagine it won't be on all of their higher end cameras going forward.Rob,
I agree, but how hard would it be to offer a firmware hack that allowed us to use the print button as a user programmed button? I've never met a single person to have used the print button, nor read of it in consumer forums, flickr groups, etc. Sure I'm probably missing something, but literally hundreds of people ask for it to be programable as MLU.
I'm thinking (hoping) that between Photokina and the show in Feb. '09 that Canon will shake off the fog and step up on several issues.
Here is what I've heard...
Canon EOS 7D
16-21MP FF sensor
Digic IV
9-point AF (all cross-type)
Also shoots HD video!
6 fps
1.5 stops improvement in noise over 5D
All the other "goodies" from the 50D (new LCD, live-view modes, micro AF adjustments, etc)
I believe we'll see this camera announced on Tuesday, September 16th.
I hear that Canon also has another D-SLR to be announced this fall. I don't think it's a 1-series, but don't know any more details.
Mike
So the two tier replacement is fact?Just spoke to one of the engineers ( his a mate and client of mine ) of the upcoming 3d & 7d's ( the 5d replacements ) he said they will look into adding HD video to the next generation.. ie: way too late now to add a major feature like this to the units pitty as I had a whole list of 'must haves' I wanted added to the video feature.. and the res is about 16mps. just relax for another two weeks okays.
Tony
So the two tier replacement is fact?
Sorry, but I must be missing your point, Ben. If you are not a Canon owner, and do not like what they offer, why bother with them? If you are a Canon user, there is a lot of possibly good news on the way, so what is the issue. The 50D is not such a bad camera or deal if you really look at what you are getting. Lots of folks seem to think this the case. The 5D has been a very venerable offering for quite a long time, and any upgrade will most likely be substantial, and probably offer quite a bit of interesting things.Just as we will laugh at them if the 5D mkII is about as revolutionary and badly priced as the 50D. Laugh all the way to the Nikon bank.