Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 76

Thread: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

  1. #1
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Amazing announcement today - that the 1D and 1DS ranges are to be consolidated into one and that the pixel count hasn't been averaged but shifted downwards in favour of speed. As the man at Canon says, "there's more to image quality than just resolution'... and it's clear that their market research has shown them that faster shooting and processing, better and faster AF, better high ISO performance and more advanced video modes are what their customers want.

    Which leaves me plain wrong.

    I thought they'd go for something in the 30-50mp range, with improved DR, in a 1DS replacement and they'd focus the speed fiends on the 1DS range. Hmmm.

    This has direct implications for my IQ180/Phase 645DF ownership. I was selling up (had I found a buyer) in order to acknowledge that MF was no longer for me, given the strictures it imposes. However, I WAS placing a bet that Canon's next move would take it into S2 territory, which would have been 'enough' for my occasional higher resolution needs. But it's clearly not to be! Instead, I might even sell my Canon gear, since the Panny GH2 mostly covers my zoom and long lens needs and the M9 mostly covers my wide and FF needs.

    What a difference a day makes! And thank you everyone for not buying the gear off me before Canon's announcement...

    Tim

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    I'm sort of surprised because I thought the 1D folks that are wildlife shooters and want the fast focus and high frame rate also like the small 1.3 crop. Will be interesting to see the reactions in Canon Land. I haven't really looked at their forums.

  3. #3
    Senior Member kdphotography's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Carmel/Tucson
    Posts
    2,355
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    There's a lot of face-paced banter and speculation on other boards. The 1Ds Mark III successor is long overdue and what I'm (was) waiting for. Even with this recent announcement, I find it hard to believe anything until the dust settles... if anything new (more info, another body) is announced shortly and when the first bodies start hitting the sales counter.

    And so I wait.

  4. #4
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    I have looked at the forum chatter - pretty mixed, and the facts are being digested slowly but I'd say that most of the landscape and studio shooters that want more resolution and don't need the speed are shifting their hopes to a higher pixel count 5DIII...

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Port Orchard, WA
    Posts
    157
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    It's funny. I have a mixed reaction to the announcement. Canon has finally announced something that I want to buy to replace my 1DIII. I don't think I'll miss the 3MP difference between it and my 1DsIII.

    The biggest negative in my mind -- no 16bit processing. And unless they improved their 14bit work it's game over. The 1DsIII feels, to me, at ISO100 like a ZD back bit wise,

    Summary, yes I will buy it. Will it be my main camera, no. My 645AF w/ leaf will be my good daylight walk about camera. The RZ will still be king in the studio. Other fill in work will be performed by my 1DsIII (lens selection issues). And come inline speedskating races and dance recital season, there will be the new X.

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by tashley View Post
    Amazing announcement today - that the 1D and 1DS ranges are to be consolidated into one and that the pixel count hasn't been averaged but shifted downwards in favour of speed. As the man at Canon says, "there's more to image quality than just resolution'... and it's clear that their market research has shown them that faster shooting and processing, better and faster AF, better high ISO performance and more advanced video modes are what their customers want.

    Which leaves me plain wrong.

    I thought they'd go for something in the 30-50mp range, with improved DR, in a 1DS replacement and they'd focus the speed fiends on the 1DS range. Hmmm.

    This has direct implications for my IQ180/Phase 645DF ownership. I was selling up (had I found a buyer) in order to acknowledge that MF was no longer for me, given the strictures it imposes. However, I WAS placing a bet that Canon's next move would take it into S2 territory, which would have been 'enough' for my occasional higher resolution needs. But it's clearly not to be! Instead, I might even sell my Canon gear, since the Panny GH2 mostly covers my zoom and long lens needs and the M9 mostly covers my wide and FF needs.

    What a difference a day makes! And thank you everyone for not buying the gear off me before Canon's announcement...

    Tim
    Hi Tim,
    Honestly I never believed that either the new Canon (or Nikon D800/D4, or Sony A99) will deliever the same IQ as a MF camera.
    Otherwise I woud not have spent that much money for a S2 beginning of this year.
    MP is one thing, color/tonality another, and then all this information also has to "fit" through the lens.

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,499
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Just imagine if photographers found out the pixel resolution is not a limit to print size and that sensor size is more important than the pixel count.

    I think Canon has made a really nice product. I think folks who really are invested in their photography understand there are somethings a 35mm sensor cannot do. This is not a case of being better or worse, but the characteristics that are imparted to the image--I certainly wouldn't complain if I could have Canon's ISO performance, but I would have to trade off on other things more important to me.

  8. #8
    Senior Member yaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    38

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Any bets on what the 5D replacement is going to be like, resolution and price wise?

  9. #9
    Senior Member Lars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    1,811
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    19

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Well, rumors pin Nikon's next "D800" at 36 Mpx and maybe $3500. Presumably Nikon wants to meet specs of next 5D?

    It's another five months until availability of the 1D X (six months if you believe the Swedish Canon branch), a lot of water will run under the bridges before then. Makes you wonder why the early announcement? My guess is it's a defensive move, D3s has been a sore point with Canon for two years.
    Monochrome: http://mochro.com

  10. #10
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Bottom line Canon is after market share and needs to sell many many cameras to support its organization and going against or being in MF land is simply not it. This announcement does not surprise me in the slightest. They basically own market share in 35mm in this price bracket and going to 40 mpx is not the answer for them. End of day folks this is about business and selling cameras. If the market for 40 mpx sensors was the greatest out there Hassy, Phase and Leica would be in heaven. Canon is not going to lose market share period.
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  11. #11
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by yaya View Post
    Any bets on what the 5D replacement is going to be like, resolution and price wise?
    The most striking part of this announcement to me is that if the 5DIII is going to be their higher-resolution camera (which is only rumor/assumptions) at a presumably lower price you wonder how likely they are to ship it within several months of the 1Dx shipping. Or even announce it before all the initial orders of the 1Dx are made. One oft-used strategy is to pre-announce a flagship, wait for all the big-$$ orders to be made, and only announce the little-sister product after that; this is done to prevent the buyers of the flagship from being tempted by the lower-end product (see also: Phase One P65+ and 40+). Of course life/business is complicated and this is only one of several strategies; also, the 1Dx is no longer such a clear "flagship" since it seems squarely pointed at the market previously filled by the 1D (non s), ceeding the 1Ds market to the 5D line.

    The 1Dx is scheduled for March 2012 and will likely be in short supply for several months (based on historical shipments of new flagships complicated by the recent manufacturing difficulties in Japan). So my guess is no 5DIII announcement until April for shipment in summer of 2012. Much later than I would have speculated prior to today.

    Just shows you that rumor sites are sometimes reliable leaks, sometimes purposeful misinformation, and sometimes just incorrect speculation.

  12. #12
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    My guess is Canon realized the majority of their lenses can't go much further, maybe weren't even up to the 1Ds3, so wisely decided to go forward on the fronts it can compete directly on -- full-frame capture speed and high ISO.

    If the 5D3 has better color (16-bit ADC) even with the associated slower processing, then that would make a lot of sense; plus more pixels can add tonality even if the lenses can't utilize it for real added detail.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    255
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    One important thing that Canon said in their press release:

    "The images produced with the EOS-1D X camera’s new sensor are so clean that files can easily be up-sized if necessary for even the most demanding high-resolution commercial applications."

    Having been a Canon customer for years in the past, they do not lie, and based on that the 1DX files would print better than 1Ds3.

    I think we should have a look at some X-files before we can write Canon off the high quality niche forever.

  14. #14
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    My guess is Canon realized the majority of their lenses can't go much further, maybe weren't even up to the 1Ds3, so wisely decided to go forward on the fronts it can compete directly on -- full-frame capture speed and high ISO.

    If the 5D3 has better color (16-bit ADC) even with the associated slower processing, then that would make a lot of sense; plus more pixels can add tonality even if the lenses can't utilize it for real added detail.
    I use a 5DII for about half of the wedding shots I take, so I'm all about a much better 5DIII!

    But I'll eat my hat if they use a high quality 16 bit A/D convertor in a $2.5k body. You'll see saphire LCD coverings on a Canon Rebel before you see the 5D add signifcant cost (in both components and processing horsepower requirements) to go after that last little bit of quality.

  15. #15
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Doug,

    Who said the new 5D would be a $2.5K body? Canon may be parting the waters in both directions here based on the environment it's going to be used in -- the 1 series sports and journalism shooters need the robust body, fast framerates and AF that can keep up; the 5DX wedding and studio shooters want image quality, image quality and more image quality, accurate AF and decent high ISO performance. But there is NOTHING preventing Canon from adopting the same pricepoints for each line especially if they are that different functionally... I have no crystal ball, but it's certainly a possibility.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  16. #16
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Doug,

    Who said the new 5D would be a $2.5K body? Canon may be parting the waters in both directions here based on the environment it's going to be used in -- the 1 series sports and journalism shooters need the robust body, fast framerates and AF that can keep up; the 5DX wedding and studio shooters want image quality, image quality and more image quality, accurate AF and decent high ISO performance. But there is NOTHING preventing Canon from adopting the same pricepoints for each line especially if they are that different functionally... I have no crystal ball, but it's certainly a possibility.
    The 5DII is used for a lot of video applications. I'm not so sure lots more resolution would be helpful or not.

  17. #17
    Workshop Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    3,275
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Doug,

    Who said the new 5D would be a $2.5K body? Canon may be parting the waters in both directions here based on the environment it's going to be used in -- the 1 series sports and journalism shooters need the robust body, fast framerates and AF that can keep up; the 5DX wedding and studio shooters want image quality, image quality and more image quality, accurate AF and decent high ISO performance. But there is NOTHING preventing Canon from adopting the same pricepoints for each line especially if they are that different functionally... I have no crystal ball, but it's certainly a possibility.
    True enough!

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,499
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    The 16-bit RAW file is not going to contain any useful information--no one can really use the 16,000 luminance levels in each color channel right now, adding another 50,000 levels is not really going to do much. I doubt the camera companies are going to bother going with it unless they use it as a marketing point, but they already use the last two bits for other things.

  19. #19
    Senior Member Lars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    1,811
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    19

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    The 16-bit RAW file is not going to contain any useful information--no one can really use the 16,000 luminance levels in each color channel right now, adding another 50,000 levels is not really going to do much. I doubt the camera companies are going to bother going with it unless they use it as a marketing point, but they already use the last two bits for other things.
    I beg to differ - shoot any scene outdoors with scattered clouds and sun behind a cloud and you'll quite possibly use 16 stops in latitude if you want to capture deep shadow detail as well as not blow highlights in clouds. This is why people research HDR merge technology.

    Perhaps you mean that the sensor cannot give 16 bits of useful information, doesnt have the DR?
    Monochrome: http://mochro.com

  20. #20
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,499
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Lars Vinberg View Post
    I beg to differ - shoot any scene outdoors with scattered clouds and sun behind a cloud and you'll quite possibly use 16 stops in latitude if you want to capture deep shadow detail as well as not blow highlights in clouds. This is why people research HDR merge technology.

    Perhaps you mean that the sensor cannot give 16 bits of useful information, doesnt have the DR?
    Bit-depth refers to the number of luminance levels an image is binned into. It has nothing to do with dynamic range which is related to how much signal can a photo site absorb. So a 16-bit image does not automatically give you more dynamic range. It just means your signal will be divided into 65,000 luminance levels rather than 16,000 luminance levels (for 14 bit), but the dynamic range is not determined by this. If you can't get what you want out of 16,000 levels, then you are going to need something more than extra bit depth.

  21. #21
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,869
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    I am not so sure if there will only be the 1DX in the future and not also a 1DS with maybe 36MP. Would this make sense? Marketing wise, if Nikon moves down that path yes. IQ wise I doubt, both because limitation of even pro grade 35 lenses and also noisy images because of small pixel size.

    But I still think that everything is possible.

    One other observation I have is, that we obviously reach some technology limitations, as it takes so long time spans to introduce the next significant jump in resolution (and IQ). Some years ago we saw a doubling in MP count every 2 years, now it takes much longer, if achieved at all.

    Coming back to the 12MP of my E5 and the advanced processing Olympus does in the E5 to achieve highest quality IQ with rather lower resolution, maybe Canon has adopted that way of thinking for their D1X. Anyway I must say that my E5 experience tells me every day it is better to have less resolution but stellar processing and lenses than the other way round in order to achieve great IQ

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    I think a this thread/forum has brought up a lot of smart comments and arguments for want and need. I was also looking forward to this announcement, being the latest and greatest from Canon, makes me eager to leap, but I'm not convinced. I was shooting the M9, Nikon D700 and Canon 5D2, having sold the previous two so I'm definitely still in 35mm land!

    I think ultimately if you're not shooting sports or Wildlife, then you can almost certainly cross off the list 61AF points and 12/14fps. I personally think the biggest gain here is in its sensor with the increased pixel pitch and high ISO, low noise handling. Being FF, it will satisfy hardcore photogs who dislike the Crop factor for their wonderful L-lenses. Personally the physical size will be a downer for me.

    If the 5D MarkIII was to be release with higher bit depth and MP and better high ISO, that would personally be my camera of choice. Even if Canon only decided to give ONE amazingly accurate AF point. The decision to remain with Canon myself, I definitely prefer the colors I get and I think the L-lenses are just better than what Nikon has to offer (subjective I know). Although I would love to see improved Dynamic range similar to MF, I might be dreaming (or am I missing something here). I don't think any manufacturer has given more MPs without the delivering the quality at this level, so I am not worried about that aspect. However, Guy made a point about the market and business to keep it down and I can certainly see why. I have a lot of friends who already do own these cameras and lenses but would quickly complain about the size of the files, while the rest of US won't! Not all of us have tens of GB server storage spaces, or computers to handle large files.

    I certainly know a lot of people who would want to be shooting 4K RAW video files and have 16MP stills to choose from that, so definitely another argument FOR larger MP besides those who understand super-sampling and like it. I think it's quite clear what the 1DX market is for and what it has to offer, the question is, will the 5D3 be delivering the rest of it. If NOT, I will certainly still be saving up for my MF cam

    Oh, another thing, there were rumors a while back of a 3D range of cameras!

  23. #23
    Senior Member Graham Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    London/Kiev
    Posts
    1,079
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    What I like about this camera is that it's not trying to compete with the medium format cameras. It's doing what they can't do, and doing it very well, e.g. 61 point AF versus 1 point, very high ISO, very fast frame rate, and of course video. Basically it is MORE useful now to supplement medium format cameras, instead of trying to be everything to everyone and not being the king of anything.

  24. #24
    Administrator, Instructor Guy Mancuso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    23,623
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2555

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Well said. Most of us have the king of the hill here anyway from 40 mpx up in any flavor. This is a compliment to that
    Photography is all about experimentation and without it you will never learn art.

    www.guymancusophotography.com

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    296
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    "One oft-used strategy is to pre-announce a flagship, wait for all the big-$$ orders to be made, and only announce the little-sister product after that..."

    so if this is the flagship what will the little sister product be?

  26. #26
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Graham Mitchell View Post
    What I like about this camera is that it's not trying to compete with the medium format cameras. It's doing what they can't do, and doing it very well, e.g. 61 point AF versus 1 point, very high ISO, very fast frame rate, and of course video. Basically it is MORE useful now to supplement medium format cameras, instead of trying to be everything to everyone and not being the king of anything.
    Well said Graham!
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  27. #27
    Senior Member Lars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    1,811
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    19

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Shashin View Post
    Bit-depth refers to the number of luminance levels an image is binned into. It has nothing to do with dynamic range which is related to how much signal can a photo site absorb. So a 16-bit image does not automatically give you more dynamic range. It just means your signal will be divided into 65,000 luminance levels rather than 16,000 luminance levels (for 14 bit), but the dynamic range is not determined by this. If you can't get what you want out of 16,000 levels, then you are going to need something more than extra bit depth.
    Actually that's not entirely correct. Since the processing pipeline from sensor to raw image is linear, bit depth in the processing pipeline clips effective dynamic range regardless how good the sensor is.
    Monochrome: http://mochro.com

  28. #28
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Well said Graham!
    +1.

    -Marc

  29. #29
    Senior Member Graham Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    London/Kiev
    Posts
    1,079
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Lars Vinberg View Post
    Actually that's not entirely correct. Since the processing pipeline from sensor to raw image is linear, bit depth in the processing pipeline clips effective dynamic range regardless how good the sensor is.
    Actually Shashin was correct. You can have a 16-bit image with only 1 stop of DR, or an 8 bit image with 16 stops of DR. The DR of the sensor is independent of the number of bits used.

  30. #30
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by lowep View Post
    "One oft-used strategy is to pre-announce a flagship, wait for all the big-$$ orders to be made, and only announce the little-sister product after that..."

    so if this is the flagship what will the little sister product be?
    Mirrorless with EVF?

    At some point it seems that Canon will have to step-up to emerging technologies ... no matter what some of may feel about it, it is coming ... maybe faster than we may think.

    -Marc

  31. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,069
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    83

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Could it be possible that Canon is making room for a new camera line focused in IQ - larger sensor,higher MP, 16bit processing etc., so now you end up with a top dog 35mm SLR, and a IQ king at the lower end of the MF market, aka Pentax 645 or S2...

  32. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    691
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Despite more favourable colours and lens choices from Canon, I still bought into Nikon for three reasons. CLR Flash system, High ISO'ability and that absolutely incredible 3D AF. At the time I thought 12MP was already sufficient and full-frame, cleaner files was more important. Canon already have their flash system and have addressed the remaining two items. They're clearly targeting D3/D700 owners (trying to win them back). I guess it's choice to upgrade to 18Mpix and presumably some tricks in their new AF. After what, 15 years of development (?) my feeling is (like CPU clock speeds) the market has plateaued, Nikon realised this earlier. Canon continued the MP war, whilst Nikon looked at their system.

  33. #33
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by jagsiva View Post
    Could it be possible that Canon is making room for a new camera line focused in IQ - larger sensor,higher MP, 16bit processing etc., so now you end up with a top dog 35mm SLR, and a IQ king at the lower end of the MF market, aka Pentax 645 or S2...
    As mentioned earlier, there probably isn't a big enough market for that kind of Canon camera ... especially considering who is already there competing for market share in a niche area of photography.

    I think Leica pulled it off so far based on the strength of their lens making prowess, but like others have said, the Canon lens line-up would have to be revamped (especially if the sensor is larger than 35mm FF). Pentax could do it because it already had a user base for 645 cameras.

    I think what they have done with this camera is to be commended ... a real 35mm digital camera that does what 35s should do.

    -Marc

  34. #34
    Senior Member doug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    708
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by fotografz View Post
    I think what they have done with this camera is to be commended ... a real 35mm digital camera that does what 35s should do.
    Pretty much my thoughts too. OTOH several wildlife photographers have pointed out that there are no AF points that work at f/8 so an f/4 lens with 2x TC is manual focus.

  35. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    99
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    My hunch is that Canon will introduce an entirely new FF line within the next year. The new camera will be geared towards still photography. I think the pixel count will be around 60 MP.
    Bob Rosinsky
    Lakeland, Florida
    www.topdogimaging.net

  36. #36
    Senior Member Thierry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    329
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Absolutely.

    Thierry

    Quote Originally Posted by Graham Mitchell View Post
    Actually Shashin was correct. You can have a 16-bit image with only 1 stop of DR, or an 8 bit image with 16 stops of DR. The DR of the sensor is independent of the number of bits used.
    Thierry Hagenauer
    [email protected]

  37. #37
    Senior Member Graham Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    London/Kiev
    Posts
    1,079
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by BobDavid View Post
    My hunch is that Canon will introduce an entirely new FF line within the next year. The new camera will be geared towards still photography. I think the pixel count will be around 60 MP.
    Which lenses would you use on such a beast? Canon won't produce a low-volume, high quality, expensive line of lenses just for their top end camera. That's not how they operate.

    In fact I'm not even sure you could use 60MP when you take diffraction into account. What's the point?
    Last edited by Graham Mitchell; 18th October 2011 at 23:42.

  38. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Graham Mitchell View Post
    Which lenses would you use on such a beast? Canon won't produce a low-volume, high quality, expensive line of lenses just for their top end camera. That's not how they operate.
    It makes a lot of sense, although Canon did show off a 50MP sensor in one of their expos in recent years, however, showing their know-how doesn't always materialize into production for what you suggest. Although it is very interesting, DXO mark suggests their L-primes also have better resolution than Nikon or Zeiss equivalents.

  39. #39
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,869
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Graham Mitchell View Post
    What I like about this camera is that it's not trying to compete with the medium format cameras. It's doing what they can't do, and doing it very well, e.g. 61 point AF versus 1 point, very high ISO, very fast frame rate, and of course video. Basically it is MORE useful now to supplement medium format cameras, instead of trying to be everything to everyone and not being the king of anything.
    +1, very true!

  40. #40
    Senior Member Graham Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    London/Kiev
    Posts
    1,079
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by pophoto View Post
    It makes a lot of sense, although Canon did show off a 50MP sensor in one of their expos in recent years....
    The sensor isn't the issue. A 60MP sensor in a full frame 35mm camera would be usable up to about f5.6 before it is diffraction limited. And most lenses can't resolve the necessary 130 line pairs per mm anyway. Not even close. So tell me again why this makes sense.

  41. #41
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    889
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Graham Mitchell View Post
    The sensor isn't the issue. A 60MP sensor in a full frame 35mm camera would be usable up to about f5.6 before it is diffraction limited. And most lenses can't resolve the necessary 130 line pairs per mm anyway. Not even close. So tell me again why this makes sense.
    The part that makes sense, was to do with what YOU said in your previous posting about Canon not operating like this

  42. #42
    Senior Member Graham Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    London/Kiev
    Posts
    1,079
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    ah ok

  43. #43
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    296
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Am I right in guessing this announcement is not bad news for MFDB manufacturers, dealers and traders, as Canon has politely kept its big paws out of their honey pot.

  44. #44
    Senior Member yaya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,168
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    38

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    I wonder if this is not just a 1-2 yr product...filling a gap before a new body design comes out...

  45. #45
    Senior Member KeithL's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    832
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by lowep View Post
    Am I right in guessing this announcement is not bad news for MFDB manufacturers, dealers and traders, as Canon has politely kept its big paws out of their honey pot.
    Would Canon's big paws fit such a small pot?

  46. #46
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Manchester/Jerusalem
    Posts
    2,652
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    290

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Personally I think you're all rejoicing prematurely....
    I am not a painter, nor an artist. Therefore I can see straight, and that may be my undoing. - Alfred Stieglitz

    Website: http://www.timelessjewishart.com

  47. #47
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Graham Mitchell View Post
    Actually Shashin was correct. You can have a 16-bit image with only 1 stop of DR, or an 8 bit image with 16 stops of DR. The DR of the sensor is independent of the number of bits used.
    Quote Originally Posted by TH_Alpa View Post
    Absolutely.

    Thierry
    Actually, Lars is correct -- You can have 1 stop of DR displayed in 16-bit, but you really only need one of the bits to do it; and you very definitely cannot have 16-stops of DR displayed in only 8 bits of data per channel, the math won't allow it. Bit-depth IS directly related to rendered image DR. It is an often misunderstood concept, but it is all in the math.
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."

  48. #48
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    296
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Personally I think you're all rejoicing prematurely....

    hope you are right

  49. #49
    Senior Member Graham Mitchell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    London/Kiev
    Posts
    1,079
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    Actually, Lars is correct -- You can have 1 stop of DR displayed in 16-bit, but you really only need one of the bits to do it; and you very definitely cannot have 16-stops of DR displayed in only 8 bits of data per channel, the math won't allow it. Bit-depth IS directly related to rendered image DR. It is an often misunderstood concept, but it is all in the math.
    Sorry, Jack, you're wrong. Remember that the DR is about the difference in light in the *scene*, not the file itself. You can capture a scene with 12 stops of DR, and save the file as 8-bit, and the scene will still be representing 12 stops.

  50. #50
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Shashin's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Florida, USA
    Posts
    4,499
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    141

    Re: Canon 1DX and implications for MF

    Bit depth is the the coding of the sensor response, as Graham is saying. No matter the DR, the bit depth simply bins (divides) the luminance levels into the number of levels it represents--it is simply part of the conversion of the analog signal into a digital one. Adding more bits dos not extend DR, it just divides it into small luminance levels/steps.

    The advantage in bit depth is in processing where it can help prevent things like banding. The reason 8-bit is the minimum in imaging is that to give the illusion of a seamless gradient going from black to white, you need approximately 200 levels of gray. 8-bit is 256. But if your histogram has only one third the information over its range, when you expand that data, banding will start to appear--this can be prevented with images with higher bit-depths. This also helpful in areas of the image like the highlights and shadows when you want to expand the data to show detail--highlight recovery would be an example. (But RAW processing cannot change the DR of an image--the sensor is responsible for that and has already encoded the information in the file before you can process it.)

    Photshop et al. makes this even more confusing as all the numbers and preview images are 8-bit--open a 16-bit image in levels and the white point is at 255, not 65,535. Make a really large change to the image and it will band in the preview, but smooth out after the correction is applied.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •