The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

The D800 has competition - resolution is not the king anymore in MF

malmac

Member
On the assumption that this is true - as a Canon and Phase 1 user, this would certainly find a place in my camera bag.

Would I sell my Phase 1 gear - NO.

I am also pleased to see the camera come out as a full bodied DSLR - if it carries over the features of my 1DMk4, I will be a very happy boy.

Thanks Canon for turning on the light at the end of my tunnel - was looking a bit gloomy for a bit there.


Mal
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
Whilst I don't doubt this will be a great camera, MF will of course remain the "king" of resolution until someone in 35mm land brings out a sensor with more than 80MP.

Note that would require a pixel size of 3.3 microns.
 

gazwas

Active member
So, Canon pass over Photokina (the biggest photo event in the world) for a release of their much anticipated D800 quasher and decide to instead reveal a watered down consumer camera in the 6D.

Only a month later they announced the most eagerly anticipated camera in recent years at a photo show that anyone outside of the US has no idea what it is????
 

malmac

Member
What features in particular?
Thanks!
I love the simplicity of controlling the 1D when compared with say my 5D2.

The camera always feels good in my hand when working with it - well blanced.

The focus system is really easy to use, except I dont really like the way Canon use a small switch for auto Vs manual focus where as the Phase one has a traditional ring system.

Just a few points as an example.

Mal
 

torger

Active member
So, Canon pass over Photokina (the biggest photo event in the world) for a release of their much anticipated D800 quasher and decide to instead reveal a watered down consumer camera in the 6D.

Only a month later they announced the most eagerly anticipated camera in recent years at a photo show that anyone outside of the US has no idea what it is????
Not too unsual these days. Canon high-end cameras are announced many months before they are released and not always at big shows. Consumer products gain more from being released at big shows.

It should be noted though that Nikon rumors have recently been much more accurate than Canon rumors. So this could be all wrong... if I would make a guess though I think it is true.

I don't know about "most eagerly anticipated", high MP count is crossing over to the tiny MF land. Eagerly anticipated by me and other MF users perhaps, but we are not so many. The masses in DSLR land talk about high ISO and high ISO only, and Canon has delivered quite well on that already.

With the D800 there may have been a change though. Canon fanboys want a camera to hit Nikon fanboys over the head :). I think Canon regard a high MP DSLR as a niche camera and don't expect to sell that many of them. They may be proven wrong though... the D800 has probably raised the interest of high resolution in DSLR land.

Remains to be seen if Canon can match Sony at base ISO. Rumors talk about a somewhat new sensor design though, so maybe they're up to something. The 16 bit rumor is promising, probably all fake like MF 16 bit of course, but I don't think they would have the guts to put in 16 bit there if the noise characteristics at base ISO is like 5D mark 3.

It shall be highly interesting to see how Canon lens lineup performs with this kind of resolution. Concerning resolution I think Canon has a better lineup than Nikon.

If they'd release a 35mm tilt-shift and update the 45 and 90 I think it can be painful to compare that system with my Schneider-based 33 megapixel MF system... I like my tech camera and the slow peaceful workflow, but if DSLRs start performing almost as good as the tech system I can afford it will be a tough one to defend. I almost hope that it will not perform that good so I don't have to face that tough decision if I should continue with MF or concentrate my funds on my Canon system :). I don't really have enough money to have two systems with too large overlaps. Not likely to see that important 35mm though, and I don't think the 24mm+1.4x combination many use today will be good enough for me.
 
Last edited:

kdphotography

Well-known member
A higher megapixel update to the 1Ds Mark III would be a welcome update for me----assuming similar build qualities.

A good high-end (capabilities) DSLR has always been a good complement to a MFDB, rather than making a choice between one format or the other. It's having the best tool for the job---er, and sometimes on these fora overseen by Dante, having all the tools... ;)

For now, imho, the D800 is the perfect complement to a current generation MFDB. I'm entrenched in Canon lenses, so I eagerly await to see what Canon's response will actually be to Nikon's D800, and offer a similar ideal MFDB complement.

ken :)
 

Shashin

Well-known member
Why 16-bit? These are going to be really small pixels and the well capacity must be limited.

BTW, when did 35mm become medium format? Shouldn't this be in the Canon forum?
 

torger

Active member
Why 16-bit? These are going to be really small pixels and the well capacity must be limited.
Probably just a marketing trick. Pixels wont be insanely small though. It will be 4.3 um pixels if I calculated correctly, the IQ180 has 5.17um.

A D800 has ~45000 full well capacity on 4.7 micron. If Canon can keep that efficiency on 4.3 that will be ~39000, and to represent that number you need 16 bit. However there is noise at the bottom so you don't really need 16 bit anyway, and this has always been true with MF too, therefore MFDB makers have been much criticized for talking about "16 bit image quality", since it is, well, a lie.

Not the whole area of the pixel captures photons, this was even worse in older sensors. A H3D-50 with 5.93um pixels has only ~39000, that is the same as Canon might get, and actually less than the D800. So in practice if we mask away all sensor area that is not used for capturing photons a 48x36mm H3D-50 is actually *smaller* than a 36x24mm D800.

MF sensor tech need to stay on the frontline of technology too, they don't get *that* much for free by being larger.
 

stephengilbert

Active member
"BTW, when did 35mm become medium format? Shouldn't this be in the Canon forum?"

Too late now. I complained about this when cell phone cameras were talked about here. It should be Medium Format Systems, Digital Backs, and Anything with Lots of Pixels, or Which Might Irritate MF Owners.
 

gerald.d

Well-known member
Mal,

We (Phase One DB owners) all seem to be waiting for the "revolutionary" Phase One camera to replace the aging 645DF (and DF+). Otherwise, our IQ180 backs will become expensive paperweights. If Canon does introduce an EOS-3D X, I predict that your Phase One kit will get little use. Spoken by a guy who rarely uses his MF kit now that he has a D800E. Just sayin'.

Joe
Worth mentioning Joe that there are of course plenty of Phase One DB owners who have no need for the Phase One body.

Regards,

Gerald.
 

Graham Mitchell

New member
As anyone who has used the D800 will know, it's the system resolution which counts, not just the sensor, and if the lenses are not up to scratch you are just wasting the sensor. How many Canon lenses do you think will be sharp from edge to edge at most or all apertures on a 46MP sensor?

Apart from that, Canon's 5D3 pricing leads me to believe that this camera will be pretty pricey.

And yes, this thread really does belong in the Canon forum.
 

Paul2660

Well-known member
To me it's the system overall DR. So far Canon still seems to have the pattern noise/color problems in low iso/shadows and in high iso. Lloyd Chambers shots with the 1dx show it seems to also follow this. My brief shooting with the 5D MIII produced the same noise issues.

If Canon can pull of 41, 46 whatever with a much improved overall DR, then they will have a real contender.

Price point/based on photos tell me more in the 6 to 7K price range however. But still will be a one of a kind for now.

Paul
 

Valentin

New member
... Which Might Irritate MF Owners.[/I]
Life is too short to be irritated by a thread posted in the "wrong" area, don't you think?

One of the arguments made over time (in favor) of the MF was the high pixel count (for one). Second, the D800 as well as the Lunar it's been discussed in the MF section.

That's the reason I didn't ask the moderators to move the thread when I noticed it was posted in the MF are. Also, I didn't know people were THAT sensitive.
 

malmac

Member
Mal,

We (Phase One DB owners) all seem to be waiting for the "revolutionary" Phase One camera to replace the aging 645DF (and DF+). Otherwise, our IQ180 backs will become expensive paperweights. If Canon does introduce an EOS-3D X, I predict that your Phase One kit will get little use. Spoken by a guy who rarely uses his MF kit now that he has a D800E. Just sayin'.

Joe
Joe

You may be right and only the future will tell - what will happen for me is that I will find it a lot lot harder to talk myself into buying additional lenses for the Phase 1 when I have a pretty good line up of Canon lenses.

I have considered the idea of buying a T/S lens for the Cambo but that is the camera system which may really struggle for attention - as 99% of the time I prefer to use the Phase 1.


Mal
 

Bryan Stephens

Workshop Member
Just my two cents...... It is one thing to have the camera with the high MP, but you also need the extreme high quality glass to get the best results. I may be wrong, but it seems that the camera companies are really pushing the boundaries with more MP, which is great as a photographer, but the lenses seem to lag somewhat as far as advancement.

Any thoughts?
 

johnnygoesdigital

New member
"BTW, when did 35mm become medium format? Shouldn't this be in the Canon forum?"

Too late now. I complained about this when cell phone cameras were talked about here. It should be Medium Format Systems, Digital Backs, and Anything with Lots of Pixels, or Which Might Irritate MF Owners.

You must be a devoted MFD user...It's relevant when a few (Nikon) 35mm DSLR are rated better than several of the most expensive MFD sensors, hence the title. It's useful because it might contain discussions that would educate someone interested in MFD.
 
I'm certainly interested in this, having struggled with an old AFD for my P45+. I really miss the sheer all-round competence, engineering excellence and total reliability of my 1DsIII (and all the 1Ds series cameras I had). If Canon can get close to the colours and tonality of the Phase back, it will be a great achievement and I'll definitely have one.

I think the 24 TS-E II will work very well with this camera - it was startlingly sharp when used on a Hartblei HCam with P45+. OK, pixel pitches are not close to this rumoured camera, but I suspect more MPixels won't be wasted. And 50 F1.2, 85 F1.2, 70-200II, 24-70II etc. will be good too.

Of course, there is one spectre that no-one has mentioned: diffraction. I suspect F7.1 will be the sharpest aperture so to get decent depth of field will require T/S lenses. I'd like a 35 TS-E too. Certainly the old 45 and 90, whilst sharp, are a long way behind.
 
Top