 |
ecka84
Lives in
Lithuania
Joined on
Sep 18, 2009
|
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
Beat Traveller: Brace yourself... the 'equivalent aperture' posts are coming.
aperture ~ amount of light
exposure = amount of light * exposure time = aperture * shutter speed
ISO ~ pixel sensitivity (size and tech) * signal amplifier (processing)
image brightness = exposure * ISO = aperture * shutter speed * ISO
The magic happens when the image projection (the light) is captured as a digital image. Unlike the image projection, digital image doesn't lose its brightness when enlarged and that may be the cause for confusion. In the world of photography ISO means something. In the world of electronics ISO is just to make it simple for photographer to understand and calculate. If ISO values were reported objectively for each format then it would be like:
APS-C ISO 100-6400 real ISO 250-16000
P&S ISO 100-6400 real ISO 1000-64000
For example, 18mp APS-C camera can produce same image brightness as 18mp FF, but it doesn't mean that aperture has the same value for whatever pixel size there is, it means that smaller pixels are used with higher REAL ISO values.
Next stop - EF-S 55-250/4-5.6 STM ?
Pix Man: I've just bought one of these with the old 650D badge on. Same camera, different badge. Oh and the 700D is a whopping 69% more money than I paid for my new none grey import from the same UK dealer.
That's a very expensive new badge!
I'm afraid that 650D vs 700D has less differences than 650D vs T4i :))
Yes! New lens caps! Finally! :)
rondhamalam: Do we really need FF ?
FF is coming from Film era. A bulky shape derived by the standard set of lenses that difficult to move away from. But eventually smaller camera will be the niche market.
DOF and everything else can be delivered from smaller cameras. Sony and Olly etc are leading the way toward miniaturization since Sony's Walkman time, and the concept continues.
So do we still need FF ?
Yes, we do need FF. Smaller sensors cannot deliver the same amount of "DOF and everything else" ... that's physics. If you are happy with less "DOF and everything else", then you may find your ideal non-FF cameras from hundreds available right now.
Miniaturization? I'd rather choose twice bigger and much better camera over the cheaper, almost good enough in the smallest possible package with lots of compromises and shortcomings.
ecka84: Full Frame Mirrorless
50+ megapixels with optional pixel-binning
(e.g. 4µm ~ 54mp 9000x6000,
2x2 binning mRAW 4500x3000 for flawless, sharp details at low ISOs,
3x3 binning sRAW 3000x2000 for low noise at high ISOs and/or faster burst)
Various crop modes (digital zoom basically, for tele, macro or non-FF lenses)
Sturdy "all weather" body
Comfortable size and grip (no pocket-camera nonsense please)
Big and powerful battery
Vari-angle LCD with Touchscreen AF
Built-in EVF and good manual focus assist
All the dials and buttons
Hot-Shoe and built-in flash with wireless flash control
CF card slot (which is faster and more reliable than SD)
or at least dual SD (no SD+CF format mixing)
Wi-Fi for tethering, wireless file transfer, on the fly backup and sharing
3-5 native mount fast prime lenses
(like 20mm ~ 35mm ~ 55mm ~ 85mm ~ 135mm)
Optional adapters for most existing lens mounts
$2000-$2500 price
Because $500 price is not realistic for such camera.
Full Frame Mirrorless
50+ megapixels with optional pixel-binning
(e.g. 4µm ~ 54mp 9000x6000,
2x2 binning mRAW 4500x3000 for flawless, sharp details at low ISOs,
3x3 binning sRAW 3000x2000 for low noise at high ISOs and/or faster burst)
Various crop modes (digital zoom basically, for tele, macro or non-FF lenses)
Sturdy "all weather" body
Comfortable size and grip (no pocket-camera nonsense please)
Big and powerful battery
Vari-angle LCD with Touchscreen AF
Built-in EVF and good manual focus assist
All the dials and buttons
Hot-Shoe and built-in flash with wireless flash control
CF card slot (which is faster and more reliable than SD)
or at least dual SD (no SD+CF format mixing)
Wi-Fi for tethering, wireless file transfer, on the fly backup and sharing
3-5 native mount fast prime lenses
(like 20mm ~ 35mm ~ 55mm ~ 85mm ~ 135mm)
Optional adapters for most existing lens mounts
$2000-$2500 price
ddwo: I don't quite understand how a full frame camera can support APS-C lens, only use the centre part of the sensor? And how to adjust the viewfinder, put a small rectangle inside the view?
Waiting to see the full review, this preview just doesn't have too much sense...
In a similar way APS-C camera can support FF lenses, by using only 40% of the glass.
ecka84: OMG! SX50HS got RAW! Finally! :D I've been waiting for it since SX10IS.
I did. I just never understood why this series had no RAW by default, while all the competition did.
bitoclass: Are you sure that (as per the spec above) the SX50 HS has GPS (via some sort of connected mobile device)? I haven't seen this mentioned on other sites and would be very happy if true as lack of GPS in the SX40 was what had put me off buying it and made me hold out for the SX50 to be announced. Does anyone have any more info on how this GPS setup would work? Thanks! I think this will be my next camera - wonder when it will hit the UK shops.
I wonder if this GPS would account for an image of something that have been shot from like 2 miles distance at 1200mm eqv. That could be a different country :))
"One change compared to previous EOSs is that the mode dial rotates freely though 360 degrees, with no end-stops."
Alleluia! :))
OMG! SX50HS got RAW! Finally! :D I've been waiting for it since SX10IS.
I wonder how would this new 40/2.8 pancake lens work with extension tubes. For now, it is on the top of my WTB list :).
No ISO 3200-10000 samples? Why? Is it bad?
mugupo: That is very impressive price consider is 1.8 and is for full frame.. canon cost way more than that.
I hope that it is better than 28/1.8USM, which is 17 years old by now (released in 1995). Canon should release an updated version ASAP. Not because Nikon did it, but because their 28/1.8USM is a pretty crappy lens for the price ($509.99 MSRP), specially on FF. For crop... Sigma 30/1.4HSM and Nikon 35/1.8G put it to shame for years :). Canon's marketing is a mystery for me. I'm sure that this new toy will bring joy for many Nikon users. Not me, unfortunately. I can't stand that Nikon style of backward mount, zoom and focusing directions, it just feels wrong :), not to mention Nikon pro grade prices and the lack for some L equivalents. It seems like they (both N and C) are avoiding the real "fight" and challenge by releasing products which are either "too different" or too far away on the time scale (many 15-20 year old designs are still in production) for direct comparison. It must be bad for business.
mugupo: That is very impressive price consider is 1.8 and is for full frame.. canon cost way more than that.
Actually, Canon 28/1.8USM is ~$200 cheaper :)
IlGrandeZippo: Canon g1x lens:
• 15.1 - 60.4 mm (35mm equivalent: 28-112mm)
• F2.8-5.8
Why in the test we have used 112 mm e F7.1??
Yes, why using the extreme telephoto end for benchmarking? It's not very good for IQ.
If only they had made it mirrorless EVIL ... :(
Tom Goodman: The manufacturers can invent new labels for cameras nearly as quickly as they can variations for existing ones. "Enthusiast" is perhaps the most pernicious of these labels. The S95 and its competitors within this dubious category are simply inadequate to make quality images (and here's the important part) for anyone who has more than "enthusiasm" for photography. Any time I have taken my S95 with me instead of my Nikon D300 I have regretted the decision.
IMHO, "Enthusiast" is a person who actually likes to carry his big DSLR everywhere, not just a guy with a small P&S in his pocket. Considering the price, Canon S is not such an attractive "enthusiast" camera anymore, because now you can have a mirrorless camera for the same money. Smartphone camera can do as well when the pocketability is critical.
Tom Goodman: The manufacturers can invent new labels for cameras nearly as quickly as they can variations for existing ones. "Enthusiast" is perhaps the most pernicious of these labels. The S95 and its competitors within this dubious category are simply inadequate to make quality images (and here's the important part) for anyone who has more than "enthusiasm" for photography. Any time I have taken my S95 with me instead of my Nikon D300 I have regretted the decision.
Photography is not about putting something in your pocket.