Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Canon MF coming?  (Read 84775 times)
narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 854


« on: May 11, 2006, 02:34:20 PM »
ReplyReply

anyone think Canon will bring out MF digital at Photokina?

it seems an obivious next step in their domination of digital photography -
something like a ZD done properly by canon with double size upgraded 1Ds2 chips should be an amazing machine.
Logged
Kenneth Sky
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 421


WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 11, 2006, 03:13:07 PM »
ReplyReply

From a business point of view, it's ridiculous. Invest p--- pot full of money to develop an entirely new camera to steal market share from their own niche! They would be commiting suicide just when they have a near stranglehold on the digital market.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2006, 03:13:42 PM by Kenneth Sky » Logged
RicAgu
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 267


« Reply #2 on: May 11, 2006, 04:10:35 PM »
ReplyReply

They will never produce a MFDB in my opinion.  It would be wild if they did, but I doubt it.

What will come out in September is the tentatively titled 1Ds MIII.  It will have 20 megapixels.  But it will also have the option to shoot at a lower MP around 10 or 12 using less of a the chip having to adapt to lens magnification in this mode.  It will also have a 3" screen!  So the body will handle every from the 1D Mark II all the way beyond the 1Ds Mark II.  An all in one camera.

They will also be introducing a 50mm 1.2 lens to accompany the new 85mm/1.2 II lens.

What more could you want. Now we just need 4:3 aspect ratio!

Hope that helps.  I am going to dump my two 1DsMII's in July or August and then wait it out till I can get the two new ones.

 

Quote
anyone think Canon will bring out MF digital at Photokina?

it seems an obivious next step in their domination of digital photography -
something like a ZD done properly by canon with double size upgraded 1Ds2 chips should be an amazing machine.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65122\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
kbolin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 220



WWW
« Reply #3 on: May 11, 2006, 05:03:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
But it will also have the option to shoot at a lower MP around 10 or 12 using less of a the chip having to adapt to lens magnification in this mode

I could never see Canon do this... and why would anybody want to have this.  Isn't what you are suggesting the exact same thing as performing a crop in photoshop?  

It's not the same as the current crop (sorry for the pun) of the chips used in D30, etc. as the photosites (and chips) in those cameras are a different physical size.  What you have suggested is the physical photosite would also get smaller.

However, if using less photosites of the chip would result in higher FPS... then I could understand that strategy.

Kelly
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7749



WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 11, 2006, 05:20:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I could never see Canon do this... and why would anybody want to have this.  Isn't what you are suggesting the exact same thing as performing a crop in photoshop? 
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65134\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The D2x does have such a function, and the difference with a PS crop is the speed of shooting.

Since the amount of pixels is lower, the d2x in cropped more (7 MP) can shoot at 8 frames per second. instead of 5 at its full 12.4 MP

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
kbolin
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 220



WWW
« Reply #5 on: May 11, 2006, 05:26:34 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The D2x does have such a function, and the difference with a PS crop is the speed of shooting.

Since the amount of pixels is lower, the d2x in cropped more (7 MP) can shoot at 8 frames per second. instead of 5 at its full 12.4 MP

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65136\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Agreed... as long as people didn't think it gave them greater reach as opposed to a crop effect.  

Kelly
Logged

narikin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 854


« Reply #6 on: May 11, 2006, 06:03:04 PM »
ReplyReply

To keep things on topic, the point is that a 20Mp sensor even with new ultra L lenses is at the absolute limit of 35mm lens optical resolution. Canon are not stupid, and can see where its headed - they *have* to produce an MF (larger sensor) solution if they want to go beyond 20Mp in any meaningful way.

It may not be a huge market, but Hasselblad is the last man standing in MF at the moment, so if Canon moved in they could sweep up the MF pro digital market worldwide, at $20,000 per starter outfit - that is real $ and canon should not ignore it. I doubt it would be simply a digiback, but a whole camera solution.

I dont care for 800lb gorillas, but quite frankly I'd totally welcome it. Imagine some of Canons know-how in AF and sensor technology done in 645 format...
Logged
RolandBaker
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 40


WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 11, 2006, 08:38:34 PM »
ReplyReply

We’re all just speculating here so I’ll add my two cents… My opinion is worth exactly what you are paying for it - nothing.

I know that the current management at Canon has made it very clear that they will not develop products that are not profitable. And I know the last time the local Canon sales rep came to our shop he said that a lot of people at Canon thought the 1Ds2 was too expensive and not enough people could afford it and that was a problem. What direction did Canon take after that? They came out with the 5D – a cheaper but very good camera that sold like crazy. That seems logical.

I would posit that the medium format market, even at $20K per kit or more would just not offset the development expenses of developing such a system. It would cost tens of millions of dollars to develop a medium format line at Canon. Would the management expect it to be profitable? Would they think that people could afford such kits? Would they expect it would attract a lot of buyers? These are the questions they would ask before developing such a system, wouldn’t they? It doesn’t seem justified from a profit perspective.

Yes, the Hassy H1 is the last man standing in medium format. Yes, Canon could kill Hassy immediately. But the medium format business so far these last few years has been doing quite a good job killing itself off. Every company has been consolidating and there just aren’t many players left now. Is Canon really worried by Hassy? Are they worried about Kodak or Dalsa? It is a niche market it’s it? I would think if they were worried about anyone right now it would be Sony. Between Sony and Canon they make up almost 90% of the market by volume don’t they? – 80%+ at least or something like that if I remember correctly. Everyone else is tiny by comparison. I don’t think Hassy worries Canon in the least.

I’m not trying to knock Canon or Hassy. For the record I’m heavily invested in both systems. I’d love to see what Canon could do. But I think Canon has bigger fish to fry. They need to develop a whole new line of wide angle L primes. That’s going to be a big, expensive job and they know it. Furthermore the 1Ds2 kicks butt and we all know it. How many of us have jumped out of medium format film and picked up a 1Ds2 for a lot of out projects? Come on it’s a killer camera as it is. If they could bump the color up to 16-bit, maybe do the crop thing for faster frame rates for a unified 1 series camera – toss in a 20MP sensor – you know we’d all buy one.

All Canon needs to do is look at the success (cough!) of the ZD (cough!) and they’ll run the other way. I think for the near term medium format will belong to niche players for better or worse. It requires a niche player to make the numbers work.
Logged

Best regards,

Roland
mcfoto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 938


WWW
« Reply #8 on: May 11, 2006, 09:12:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi
I am a Canon user and a Mamya ZD /Mamiya 645afd/aptus 22 user. I can't see Canon going into the MFD market. It is way too small. By the way I own both a Canon 5D and A ZD now. For our work purposes the ZD outperforms the 5D at iso 50. If I have to shoot at iso 400 I will use the 5D. They both have their place and the last I heard Mamiya has been sold. It will take a lot for Canon to get their chip to perform like the 22mp Dalsa chip. I can't coment on the Kodax chip as I haven't used it.
Thanks Denis Montalbetti
Logged

Denis Montalbetti
Montalbetti+Campbell
www.montalbetticampbell.com
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7749



WWW
« Reply #9 on: May 11, 2006, 11:06:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
To keep things on topic, the point is that a 20Mp sensor even with new ultra L lenses is at the absolute limit of 35mm lens optical resolution. Canon are not stupid, and can see where its headed - they *have* to produce an MF (larger sensor) solution if they want to go beyond 20Mp in any meaningful way.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65143\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There is plenty of evidence against that statement, starting wih the D2x.

Extrapolating the current resolution of the D2x to a 24*36 mm sensor, such a sensor would have 28MP.

The Nikkor lenses have absolutely no problem dealing with the resolution of the D2x sensor, even in the corners.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7749



WWW
« Reply #10 on: May 11, 2006, 11:07:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
From a business point of view, it's ridiculous. Invest p--- pot full of money to develop an entirely new camera to steal market share from their own niche! They would be commiting suicide just when they have a near stranglehold on the digital market.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65125\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It would make more sense if Nikon did it, wouldn't it?

They'd keep their APS sensor (D2x, D3x,...) and add on top of that a small medium format line up with new lenses...

Can keep dreaming.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
David Anderson
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 414



WWW
« Reply #11 on: May 12, 2006, 02:10:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Can't see the need for Canon Medium format myself.
The IDSII is all the resolution I need, and much easier to use then a medium format.
The only real weakness in the system is some of the lenses.

I hope that Canon are busy on some new wide primes !
Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3862



WWW
« Reply #12 on: May 12, 2006, 03:52:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Can't see the need for Canon Medium format myself.
The IDSII is all the resolution I need, and much easier to use then a medium format.
The only real weakness in the system is some of the lenses.

I hope that Canon are busy on some new wide primes !
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65188\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

My feeling is we'll get 22MP at the next 1Ds iteration 2006 then maybe a Foveon-type sensor with slightly *less* raster resolution in 2008 (gaining in color quality, and 3 subpixels per location), and then maybe some more resolution again, back to 22*3 in 2010 at which point the crystal ball runs out - but in any case the current lens line would suffice at least until about 2012 if sensor ehancements of ths type are used, while imarketing resolution enhancements of 1.4x could be claimed in each generation.

Edmund
Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
mtomalty
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 536


WWW
« Reply #13 on: May 12, 2006, 11:38:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The Nikkor lenses have absolutely no problem dealing with the resolution of the D2x sensor, even in the corners.
Unfortunately the corners of a D2X sensor are not the same as the corners
in a full frame sensor.
Don't you think the results might flounder a bit if the same lenses were used on a full frame
sensor?
I know that if I cropped off the outer half of many of my Canon lens captured images I would
be left with some pretty 'well-corrected' files as far as distortion,CA,and other anomalies
are concerned.

Mark
Logged
ericevans
Guest
« Reply #14 on: May 12, 2006, 12:46:53 PM »
ReplyReply

I would not buy even if Canon did build a mfd camera . I shot with Canon for several years and also went back to film for a while after using the 10d . Canon needs to get their color to 16 bit and get more accurate color at the same time and stay in the market they are in . Canon has a looong ways to go if they want to get up to the quality level of Leaf . I had to borrow a 1ds from a friend this week to finish up a job with as I needed to shoot at iso 800 and I was reminded of how much more work I had to do with Canon files . Canon does the 35mm digital well and I hope they stay at it and perfect it even more .
Logged
RolandBaker
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 40


WWW
« Reply #15 on: May 12, 2006, 01:10:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I would not buy even if Canon did build a mfd camera . I shot with Canon for several years and also went back to film for a while after using the 10d . Canon needs to get their color to 16 bit and get more accurate color at the same time and stay in the market they are in . Canon has a looong ways to go if they want to get up to the quality level of Leaf . I had to borrow a 1ds from a friend this week to finish up a job with as I needed to shoot at iso 800 and I was reminded of how much more work I had to do with Canon files . Canon does the 35mm digital well and I hope they stay at it and perfect it even more .
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65247\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Exactly. The color is really where Canon is weak on their digital bodies. Fix that and some new wide angle L primes and they are in good shape for another couple of years.
Logged

Best regards,

Roland
James Godman
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 126


WWW
« Reply #16 on: May 12, 2006, 01:40:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I would also like to see a 4:3 aspect ratio.  What would be even better is a 36x36mm square with the same Canon mount.  That would be awesome!  I use a Nikon D2x, and its been great, but I'd buy a square frame Canon in a second and pair it with their fast lenses.  I almost always want to crop the long dimension of my digital captures.
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7749



WWW
« Reply #17 on: May 12, 2006, 11:20:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Unfortunately the corners of a D2X sensor are not the same as the corners
in a full frame sensor.
Don't you think the results might flounder a bit if the same lenses were used on a full frame
sensor?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65240\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Mark,

You are obviously correct, but it does at least show that we are far from the limit in the central part of the image.

Now, whether it is technicall possible on Canon/Nikon mount to design wide lenses with a FF coverage that have enough resolution remains to be proven.

My guess is that we will see a rebirth of wide primes...  The MF market is basically primes only, it shouldn't be a problem.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7749



WWW
« Reply #18 on: May 12, 2006, 11:23:13 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I would also like to see a 4:3 aspect ratio.  What would be even better is a 36x36mm square with the same Canon mount.  That would be awesome!  I use a Nikon D2x, and its been great, but I'd buy a square frame Canon in a second and pair it with their fast lenses.  I almost always want to crop the long dimension of my digital captures.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=65253\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Then it might make sense to buy a reasonably cheap ebay Kodak Pro 645 back, wouldn't it?

I have been considering this for some time since it would give some life back to my sleeping Hassy H1 gear...

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
KenRexach
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65


« Reply #19 on: May 13, 2006, 10:06:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, If Canon went medium format it would absolutely obliterate the market since it would be the only one making its own sensors most likely. The problem is the glass although im sure they can figure that out in a hurry
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad