User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » Third-Party Products »

Digital Camera Chat


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
Digital Camera Chat
Page 33 of 114 First Previous 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37  Next Last Thread Tools
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2012-01-07, 07:18

It's hard to know how noisy the D800 will be. You'd have to assume it will be better than the D700, even at high ISO, but Nikon might not have tried too hard, since the D4 will be the low-light model.

Here's a size comparison of the 85 mm Nikkors:



The optical design is somewhat similar to the f/1.4 model, and the MTF curve at f/1.8 looks excellent. Mechanically it will probably be disappointing, like other new low-cost AF-S lenses. Good minimum focus distance.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2012-01-07, 09:54

Canon talks mirrorless, sorta...

Wading through google translation is a bit like decoding an alien language, but the strong suggestion seems to be that the future demands smaller lenses, and it can't be done without a smaller format. Among mirrorless ILC shooters, we can see people getting bad color shifts with wide M mount lenses on Sony NEX cameras, and crazy lp/mm numbers from m43 lenses. Looks like larger retro-focal designs are needed for telecentricty, regardless of flange distance. Olympus may have been right afteral, but not until pixel densities really started to climb to more demanding levels. Sony, Fuji, Samsung, Nikon, and now Canon (intimating) that mirrorless systems will be sub 35mm.

Also interesting in the video and crop modes of the Nikon D4, there appear to be 3:2, 5:4, and 16:9 ratios, and 1, 1.2x, 1.5x and 2.7x crops. A 5:4 crop makes sense as a compositional aid for some types of work, 16:9 naturally for video, and 1.5x for system interoperability as well as 'cinema', even 2.7x (1080p) given what they're doing with the Nikon 1. I noticed that they added a 1.2x (30x20mm) crop as well - turns out that it was added to the D3s. Probably just added for a bit of APSH-like reach - when Canon was using this as the sports camera standard - and kept around because it cleans up the corners of certain lenses nicely since it doesn't seem to correspond to any of the video modes in the brochure.

That and 5:4 could be useful masks for a 70-200. 5:4 keeps just over 80%, and 1.2X keeps about 70%. I hope they include these masks on the D800.

Speaking of the Nikon 1. Rob Galbraith as a pretty god sample of an 85 f/1.4 on the Nikon 1 adaptor. Extreme bokeh effects for sure. More interesting though, that the FX prime seems to resolve lots of centre detail just fine. Pixel density would equal about 70MP or so on FX? Too bad the AF is a little on the slow side, or the F mount adaptor would make an excellent birding rig.

.........................................
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2012-01-07, 14:43

Some rumors indicate that Canon is going to continue to skip mirrorless for now and is developing a point and shoot body with a built in zoom and an APS-C sized (or slightly smaller) sensor. Something with a F2-2.8 zoom between 28-150mm or something like that, basically a G12 on steroids. I actually like that idea. As much as I like these ILC cameras, having a fixed zoom means it might be more compact.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2012-01-09, 11:27

Rob, they made this one just for you!

Canon G1X

I kinda like it... Interesting sensor ratio and size too: basically 4/3rds, just a tad larger at 18.7x14mm or about 260mm^2 vs 230mm^2 for 4/3
And there is some comment on the slightly taller ratio making better use of compact lens image circle.

Would be really interesting if, like Fuji, this is prelude to an ILC system, and we get yet another sub APSC size...

The lens is a bit slow at the long end (f/5.8), but it's still intriguing.

.........................................

Last edited by Matsu : 2012-01-09 at 13:27.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2012-01-09, 14:09

Yikes, the G1X is big compared to micro four thirds cameras. Of course it does have a viewfinder built in, and far superior manual controls. Looks like Canon missed the boat with this camera to be honest. Battery life is terrible, 250 shots per charge! The $799 price tag feels a little steep, so it is not for me. If Canon wanted this to sell well it should have been $649 to kill Nikon J1 sales. Based on the price I could upgrade my GF2 to the GX1. I think I'll wait to see what the full specs of the Fuji are. The system looks very nice, but if auto focus is not improved over the X100 and X10, I think it could hurt the new system.

Last edited by PB PM : 2012-01-09 at 14:25.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2012-01-09, 14:28

Speaking of the Fuji X-Pro 1... here is the press release.

http://photorumors.com/2012/01/09/fu...#ixzz1izUI03fR

Edit more info
http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/01...mXPro1_Preview

Other new of interest, Olympus is going to release a OM style M4/3s camera. (OM = Olympus's film camera like the Nikon FM).

Last edited by PB PM : 2012-01-09 at 16:17.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2012-01-09, 14:37

Wow, the Canon battery life really sucks. It's still sorta interesting though. I know what I would have wanted for it, faster lens for sure, maybe something that only extends to 85mm equivalent, but is faster at least f/4 at the long end, and ruggedized, splashproof, etc. That sensor size is such an odd choice, someone will probably soon check if it matches any other Canon ILC patent filings. If it's a slice off their 18MP APSC, it should be pretty good.

X seems to be the most popular letter for cameras these days...

.........................................
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2012-01-09, 15:36

Yeah the battery life of the G1X is a real turn off, even my GF2 gets around 350 shots per charge (and it is a smaller camera!).

X does seem to be the letter of choice from the Japanese companies (expect Nikon) right now. I guess everyone saw the success of the Fuji X100 and decided it must be a lucky letter.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2012-01-09, 18:39

The Fuji looks good, really good. See the way the viewfinder slides in, or the 1/3 stop aperture clicks on the lenses, or the function button and menu? You can tell just from the video that the haptics are going to be top notch - like what a modern digital M should be if Leica made an AF version. Too bad Fuji didn't do a full frame version. Even the focal ranges chosen would serve dual purposes well 18=27, 35=52, 60=90macro all useful in either of APSC or 35mm. Although, it doesn't look from the size of the 18, that it could have full frame coverage. The 35? I'm not so sure, nor the 60, but it's just wishful thinking...

The sensor tech rumors finally makes sense. They eliminated the anti-alias filter and changed the pattern to a 6x6 grid. If it works it's an ingeniously simple way to lower sensor production costs and up overall resolving power. Look at the pattern: interesting design, though hardly random. Any red pixel has 5 green pixels and 3 blue around it; any blue pixel has 5 green and 3 red in the opposite order or mirror overlap of the red; and, any green has at least 2 red, 2 blue and 4 other green, though in 6 possible different orders. So, the 36 pixel grid, contains a variety of smaller, 9 pixel grids that repeat continuously, and overlap when laid edge to edge with more 36 pixel tiles. Whoever figured this out had to achieve enough spatial precision to record detail evenly while dispersing color with enough complexity to defeat fine moire patterns. This is probably not going to work with our generic RAW converters But if it works, they get a slightly cheaper sensor build - one less layer - and greater detail from existing pixels, no blur (AKA anti-alias) filter. Simple, clever engineering solution. I like it. They promise 9 lenses between this year and next. I'm starting to want one...

.........................................
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2012-01-09, 19:35

My problem with the Fuji X-Pro 1 is the price, $1700 body only! Yikes! $650 for each lens in addition! So you are looking at $2300 (before taxes) just to get into the system. It looks like a great camera, but will I be getting one? Based on the price, not a chance. If I was going to use it as my primary camera (if I was a street photog) then the answer would be very different (most likely). Basically this is a cheap Leica M9, with auto focus and a sweet hybrid viewfinder.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2012-01-10, 15:15

Think of it as a 75% off M9

see pic: link

Just about the same size, probably more or less the same resolution. Likely better dynamic range and low light performance.

Interesting mount. We can see that the throat is perhaps the same size, or even a smidge larger on the Fuji. With the sensor set 17.7mm back and lens designs optimized for large rear elements, performance should be good for relatively compact fast wide and normal primes. It would make a full-frame version possible as well, if they decided to do that.

.........................................
  quote
Chinney
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ottawa, ON
 
2012-01-10, 20:59

The X-Pro 1 is very interesting, but it is probably more camera than I need or can justify to myself given my limited picture taking habits. I continue to wait to see if they will update the X100 to work out some of its quirks. A Fuji X101, if and when it arrives, may be my next camera.

When there's an eel in the lake that's as long as a snake that's a moray.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2012-01-10, 21:06

Amateur photographer has an interview with fuji's uk chief. There's going to be a range of lenses and a couple more bodies. I'd bet on something smaller, perhaps x100 size, but evf only, and probably even something higher up. Maybe no fixed lens update for a while - the x100 being more of a proof of concept and market test, and less a priority now. There's a 23mm f/2 lens on the roadmap for this year, and I think we know where that design will come from...

.........................................
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2012-01-11, 05:27

I can't keep up with Fujifilm's sensor innovations. For all its theoretical faults, the Bayer-type array works astonishingly well. It's also supported by most raw conversion applications, so it's hard to beat in the real world.

I'm intrigued by Canon's new PowerShot, the G1 X. This camera can be interpreted as a stalling tactic while Canon figures out what to do with the mirrorless interchangeable-lens market, but it can alternatively be seen as the compact camera everyone was waiting for: a large-sensor, zoom-lens compact from a big brand.

It's a serious bit of kit. The 1.5"-type sensor is slightly larger than the Four Thirds sensor, and consists of 14 million 600D pixels. Image quality should be solid across the ISO range.

The lens is an impressive feat of miniaturisation. It retracts into the body, but it has 11 elements in 10 groups, including an astonishing 6 aspherical surfaces. When you consider that lens design and manufacturing is the one area Canon can still legitimately claim world leadership, you have to expect great things from this lens. Photojournalist Gary Knight has good things to say about it in the video on this page.

And there's more info in this Canon PDF.

I do like how it looks too, though the design is bound to divide people. It reminds me of a Land Rover Defender. Very functionalist:









Here is a good intro by people who know what they're talking about.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2012-01-11, 05:49

I agree that the G1X looks nice, but the poor battery life is what put me off more than anything else. You might need to carry two, or maybe three batteries for a full day of shooting (with 250 shots per charge). For the price, I expect better battery performance.

On a side note, Thom did a test of ILC cameras and found the the Nikon 1 system is by far the best for anyone who wants to shoot action (including birds in flight) thanks to its fast and accurate AF. I hope Nikon develops some more lenses for the system. If the Canon G1X has decent AF performance, at the price it sits, it could put pressure on the Nikon 1 V1.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2012-01-11, 09:36

I swear I saw a rumor site posting a long while ago about a patent registration for a new Canon mount. There was some fake stuff and some more reliable stuff, and at least one seemed to suggest a slightly smaller than ASPC sensor. Might Canon be road testing just such a thing? It might have been equally easy to stuff in a current or old gen 1.6x sensor from their Rebels, except they argue that the taller ratio makes better use of the glass and/or more compact designs...

.........................................
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2012-01-11, 11:18

Battery life isn't great, it's true, but I find that less important for a compact than an SLR, since I'm more likely to be taking only occasional shots with a compact. The Nikon D4 also has a worse battery life than the earlier D3S (though still 10x greater than the much smaller G1 X).

While the lens of the G1 X is impressively small, the body isn't particularly small. This makes me wonder whether Canon used the existing 60D shutter unit. If it instead transpires that Canon designed a new shutter for the smaller sensor, then perhaps that's an additional sign that a MILC based around this new sensor size is in the works.

Personally, I have little interest in a Canon MILC, since there are already plenty of options out there with more lens support. But the G1 X is interesting in its own right, albeit a lot bigger than my LX3.

The new 4:3 aspect ratio sensor in the G1 X does make better use of the lens' image circle than a 3:2 or wider sensor would, but following that logic would give us square or even circular sensors. Ultimately, I dislike the 4:3 aspect ratio. Wider ratios are more narrative; square is more formal. 4:3 falls awkwardly in between, though I'm sure it's lovely for full-screen viewing on 1990s CRTs!
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2012-01-11, 11:35

One of the Panasonic m43 cams has what appear to be variable ratios that are not simple crops of the frame, can't remember which one, but it maintains a fixed diagonal length over either 4:2, 3:2, 16:9 proportions. It's obviously not a circle, just a slightly larger rectangle into which the 4/3 image circle diameter is cropped at different ratios.

They spent a little time extolling its virtues, a sign they're thinking about it. I didn't do the math, but if 4/3 has a 22.5mm diameter, Canon's would be about 23.5-24, or virtually the same, a 1.9x vs a 2x crop.

It'll be interesting to see what they do
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2012-01-11, 11:54

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matsu View Post
One of the Panasonic m43 cams has what appear to be variable ratios that are not simple crops of the frame, can't remember which one, but it maintains a fixed diagonal length over either 4:2, 3:2, 16:9 proportions.
Indeed. My LX3 offers this too. This feature makes most sense with small sensors, where it's important to extract maximum surface area from the tiny sensor. The tiny chip is a small proportion of the camera's manufacturing cost, so making it a bit larger than needed for any one aspect ratio costs only a little extra.

With larger sensors, more of the camera's overall cost goes towards the sensor, so it's less sensible to make it larger than necessary for any one aspect ratio. Instead, it's important to make use of more of the lens' imaging circle, as Canon has done with the G1 X by using a 4:3 ratio. With large sensors, keeping lens size down becomes more important.

This was true in the film era too. The smaller the film, the wider the aspect ratio, since the worry of lens bulk declines as the imaging area drops:
  • Large format: 5 x 4 inches (nearly square)
  • Medium format: 6 x 7 cm, 6 x 6 cm, 6 x 4.5 cm (square to 4:3 aspect ratio)
  • 35 mm: 36 x 24 mm (3:2 aspect ratio)
  • APS: 30.2 × 16.7 mm (16:9 aspect ratio)
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2012-01-11, 20:54

I think any ratio can work. My weakest photos often end up as squares when I crop them. These days it doesn't seem that its all too important to keep pro 35mm lenses small at all, but I can understand why Canon might want to maximize the sensor within a smaller format - if they can't get significantly smaller lenses, why bother with a new format or compact...

.........................................
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2012-01-12, 14:50

Someone at FredMiranda had a look at the D4 in person, and mentioned its lighter weight here. Presumably the weight reduction is noticeable, then? It's not as much as I hoped, but at least it's not heavier than before!

That thread also includes speculation that the lower battery capacity was dictated by Japanese safety regulations.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2012-01-12, 15:10

I think that new Japanese regs prohibit exposed battery contacts, or the shipping of batteries with these types of contacts , or something like that, and there were also new US regs coming into effect regards lithium batteries, so there's a good chance that the changes are driven by standards and regulations in a number of markets.

.........................................
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2012-01-12, 17:07

Yeah. It's odd that Canon's new 1D X battery has a much higher capacity, though, isn't it?

I've been digging around the usual hotspots for more info on the D4. This thread on DPReview is pretty fascinating. The sensor technology seems unusual and very promising for all-round performance. As of now, Eric Fossum (CMOS image sensor inventor) has just dropped in, so the thread will only get better...
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2012-01-12, 18:26

Judging by the graphs, are we seeing a significant jump in dynamic range?

Also, Canon's branded their G1 X sensor with it's own moniker - the 1.5" format - as distinct from 4/3rds, a pretty strong indication to me that this is destined for an ILC product of some kind. Maybe by end of year...

.........................................

Last edited by Matsu : 2012-01-12 at 18:39.
  quote
Chinney
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Ottawa, ON
 
2012-01-12, 18:41

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matsu View Post
[...] Maybe no fixed lens update for a while - the x100 being more of a proof of concept and market test, and less a priority now. [...]
I can understand why that might be the case and I think that you are probably right. Still, frustrating from my perspective.
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2012-01-13, 04:12

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matsu View Post
Judging by the graphs, are we seeing a significant jump in dynamic range?
Sorry for not getting back to you last night, Matsu. Yeah, it looks like the dynamic range might be substantially better than the D3S at ISOs below about 1600. Above that the jury's out: early expectations seem to be that the quantum efficiency might be a tad lower than the D3S, but that the camera has a lower read noise at any ISO.

There's an inherent trade-off in pixel design between sensitivity and charge handling capacity, which is why Nikon SLRs have so often had a base ISO of 200. By reducing the charge handling capacity of the pixel, better sensitivity was achievable (i.e. better high-ISO performance). The speculation in that DPReview thread is that Nikon might be using novel techniques to make that trade-off less stark, possibly even using Aptina's new "dynamic response pixel technology". Aptina has figured out a way to switch on and off a capacitor at the pixel site to adjust its charge handling capacity depending on the selected ISO setting. At low ISO the capacitor is switched on to increase the full-well capacity. At high ISO the capacitor is switched off and an additional analogue gain circuit is switched on inside the pixel, resulting in higher sensitivity and lower read noise.

If true, this is a significant change in the way sensors work. It would mean that the full-well capacity changes with ISO setting!

However, the introduction of this dual conversion gain switch (a transistor, essentially) to the pixel would reduce its light-sensitive area, and therefore its quantum efficiency. It remains to be seen if that reduction is significant, and whether the D3S still performs a bit better at high-but-frequently-used ISO settings such as 3200 and 6400.

By the way, a Romanian guy who got his hands on an early D4 has some photos up to ISO 200k here. Not sure what to make of them at this point. ISO 100k looks a bit better than my memory of the D3S at that ISO, as expected, but other than that I'm not sure how they compare.

On the D4's battery again, I think I found something a bit more definitive here. Looks like the battery has been optimised for its expected use, and the CIPA battery test doesn't reveal its new strengths. This explains why the battery doesn't actually weigh much less than the old one, despite its lower nominal capacity. It has new and more robust chemistry, with lower internal resistance at high currents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matsu View Post
Also, Canon's branded their G1 X sensor with it's own moniker - the 1.5" format - as distinct from 4/3rds, a pretty strong indication to me that this is destined for an ILC product of some kind.
An astute observation. I think you're right. And 1.5" is easy to advertise against Nikon's 1" sensor in the J1 and V1.
  quote
Dorian Gray
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Paris, France
 
2012-01-13, 04:57

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorian Gray View Post
However, the introduction of this dual conversion gain switch (a transistor, essentially) to the pixel would reduce its light-sensitive area, and therefore its quantum efficiency. It remains to be seen if that reduction is significant, and whether the D3S still performs a bit better at high-but-frequently-used ISO settings such as 3200 and 6400.
One more thought related to this. Although Nikon said after the D3S introduction that in the future the company would try to better balance high-ISO performance and pixel count, the D4 doesn't seem to do that. It pushes ultra-high-ISO performance even further, and 16 megapixels on FX in 2012 is at least as conservative as 12 megapixels in 2007. If Aptina's new tech is used, however, that would explain the low pixel count: (a) it's easier to maintain high quantum efficiency while accommodating 16 million dual conversion gain switches than, say, 24 or 30 million, and (b) if low-ISO dynamic range is improved, that's another reason to go with the new tech in exchange for high pixel count.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2012-01-18, 17:58

I mentioned a few weeks ago that I would post an image comparing the size of the Gitzo GT3531S and Manfrotto 055XPROB. My Gitzo arrived today, so I had to wait a while, but here is the picture. Size wise these two tripods are almost identical (in terms of height). The Gitzo's legs are wider, which makes it more stable. The base plate of the Gitzo makes my current Manfrotto tripod head hard to use, the tension knob hits the head plate on the Gitzo. So for the time being, until I can afford the Kirk head, I will still be using the Manfrotto 055XPROB.


First impressions, the Gitzo is a much nicer feeling tripod overall, thanks to the carbon fibre construction. The twist locks on the legs will take some time to get used to, but I like them so far. It handles the weight of my gear far better, I can tell just by looking through the viewfinder and watching for vibration. Overall, money well spent, I think.

I might need to wipe the tripod down, as there is still a decent amount of grease (from the manufacturing process I assume) on it.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2012-01-19, 03:46

In other news Kodak filled a chapter 11. I think the restructuring will bring and end to the film devision altogether. Sad news for those who holdouts who still shoot film, but for most people it's a bit of a yawn. Kodak has done nothing innovative since they killed off their high end DSLRs a number of years ago.
  quote
Matsu
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2012-01-19, 06:51

Hey, nice pods, I know it's a new toy an everything, but try not to get the Gitzo too greasy

Sad story about Kodak: killed by their own technology. I wasn't aware of this, but basically digital photography wouldn't exist if not for the R&D of Kodak and the numerous patents they earned, but they just never figured out a way to commercialize it. There are some really interesting research papers from Kodak - not that I fully understand them - but that anticipate lots of the quirks of high resolution digital in comparison to film.

.........................................
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 33 of 114 First Previous 29 30 31 32 [33] 34 35 36 37  Next Last

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
iPad's lack of built-in camera, video chat rdlomas Apple Products 47 2010-02-04 09:37
Good Digital Camera for First Time Digital kieran Purchasing Advice 3 2005-11-18 18:20
New Digital Camera! PowermacG5newbie Genius Bar 2 2005-05-17 23:07


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:30.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2024, AppleNova