-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
EF-S going L?
- Thread starter Edlo
- Start date
Wm. Bates wrote:
.
--
RDKirk
'TANSTAAFL: The only unbreakable rule in photography.'
.
I'd put money down that this point was at least discussed at length. The fully pro cameras don't have 1.6x sensors. L lenses are designed for pros. I have no doubt somebody in marketing argued that no L lens could be in a mount that won't fit the fully pro cameras.
--
RDKirk
'TANSTAAFL: The only unbreakable rule in photography.'
You may be right about that
The only reason I took issue with your earlier post is that you said:
"Why is there an expectation of doing it at both the highest quality AND the cheapest price?"
I just wanted to clarify that Edward wanted the best quality possible, but seemed willing to pay the higher prices that that would entail. It is of course quite possible that, "L-worthy" or not, the 18-85 EF-S lens will be as fine optically as current technology permits.
--
Chuck
I meant to write that "It is of course quite possible that, "L-worthy" or not, the 10-22mm EF-S lens will be as fine optically as current technology permits."You may be right about that
The only reason I took issue with your earlier post is that you said:
"Why is there an expectation of doing it at both the highest
quality AND the cheapest price?"
I just wanted to clarify that Edward wanted the best quality
possible, but seemed willing to pay the higher prices that that
would entail. It is of course quite possible that, "L-worthy" or
not, the 18-85 EF-S lens will be as fine optically as current
technology permits.
--
Chuck
Sorry for the confusion.
--
Chuck
R
Rich
Guest
Oh I agree that 6mp is enough; heck, I have an old Kodak dcs-330 right now with 3mp and love it. The sensor is about the size of the new 4/3 sensor. The pictures for me have plenty of detail (of course that may have something to do with my removing the AA filter). Don't know how they'll increase dynamic range, guess we'll see this fall whether Fuji's S3 really works
Henrik Andersson
Senior Member
So, how can a picture taken with Kodak 25 film resolve alot more then a 6MP 10D with the same lenses.
Henrik
--
Henrik
Jason Hutchinson
Forum Pro
The answer.... decent lenses resolve WAY more than 8MP bayer. My primes would laugh at 8MP. I connect up a 2x TC to the back of them, and they resolve gobs more detail that wasn't there before the TC was added. In other words my 8MP sensor didn't have enough resolution to extract all the detail from the lens so I had to add the TC as effectively a magnifying glass.
Jason
David Kieltyka
Veteran Member
Do you see increased moire effects with the AA filter gone? I suppose resolution is lens-limited, though, with that camera.
If Bayer mosaic technology continues to dominate over the next half-decade or so we may see higher resolution cameras with true color decoding as an option. That is, each output pixel would be made up of four photosites on the sensor. No de-mosaicing needed. A 24mp sensor would thus give you a 6mp true color image. This could be done already, and I'm kinda surprised no-one has written a RAW converter that does it. I'd love to see what a 1.5mp true color 10D image looks like. Or a 2.75mp 1Ds image.
-Dave-
R
Rich
Guest
Oh yeah! Not a problem to get rid of in Photoshop though.
I suppose resolution is lens-limited, though, with that camera.
Mm, not really, the pixel size is actually slightly larger than cameras like the 10D et al.
Mm, interesting idea, but I'm not sure it would provide any benefit over taking the regular data and just downsizing. I would think you would might end up with more "jaggies".
Travis Feisthamel
Senior Member
BUT how do we not know that the EF-S lenses are the new standard as Full frame lenses go by their 35mm wayside. Not within the next few years - but soon, film is dead.
Travis
http://www.pbase.com/fototravis
Canon Digital Rebel and Powershot A80 User
The optimist will say, "This is the best a 10-22mm zoom can be!" The pessimist will say, "This is the best a 10-22mm zoom can be."
I'm afraid the pessimist may be right. There must be some reason none of the major manufacturers has come out with a lens that short for full frame. The 16-35mm L is long in the tooth--and for that matter, so is the 1Ds. If we don't see either of them replaced by April, I'll wonder about the longevity of Canon's full-frame digital interests.
--
RDKirk
'TANSTAAFL: The only unbreakable rule in photography.'
David Kieltyka
Veteran Member
Oops, It didn't occur to me 'til after I posted that the DCS-330 might be a D-SLR.
I was thinking older compact digicam.-Dave-
Henrik Andersson
Senior Member
David Kieltyka
Veteran Member
Your point misses the fact that I was referring to the 1.6x sensor. I'd be the last person to deny that larger sensors offer greater potential resolution. I've used the Phase One P25 22mp medium format back. It's in another league entirely from anything Canon makes. It also uses a 49x37mm sensor with about half as many photosites per sq. mm as the 20D's sensor. The larger photosites combined with the greater sensing area make for a superior image (in technical terms) despite the lower density. USM is an option, not a necessity, with P25 images.
Maybe with higher quality photosites chip designers will be able to eek out a little more detail in the 1.6x format from existing lenses compared to the 20D's sensor. I wouldn't expect much more, though.
-Dave-
Jason Hutchinson
Forum Pro
With good lenses, LOTS more detail. First, there is a lot of detail bayer misses. Secondly, a good lens will still resolve well right down to the pixel level with a 2x TC mounted. That implies that is 4 times the resolution in the 1.6 crop up from grabs if the resolution doesn't fall off much at the edge of the 1.6x crop. For the lenses I am talking about, in fact the quality doesn't drop much at all to the edge fo the 1.6x crop.
Jason
Henrik Andersson
Senior Member
Agree, As a limited proof you can just refere to the Nikon D70, the lack of AA-filter (or a week one). At the places the D70 show 'color moire' the lens have extracted extra detail that the sensor can not resolve correctly.
What sensor are you refering to ? 6MP, 1.6x ?
6*4=24MP bayer pattern pixels on 1.6x. Sounds correct.
(60MP bayer on 36x24mm
With color film, there might not be a use of higher resolution 35mm optics.
But we are no were near to see the limit of electrical sensors yet, maybe we need new optics in the future
... distant future :-(--
Henrik
MitchAlsup
Veteran Member
What I see happening is Canon is testing the waters. If Canon sells
a lot of 10-22s at good fraction of its MSRP this will indicate back to
Canon that there is demand for medium dollar EF-S lenses. Then
Cannon can respond with any product Canon wishes to lob at that
market segment....
However consider:
32mm F/1.4 EF-S based on the 50mm F/1.4 USM
22mm F/1.4 EF-S based on the 35mm F/1.4 USM
17mm F/1.8 EF-S based on the 28mm F/1.8 USM
Anything larger (FL > 50mm) is well served by the current primes.
One could argue that the 32mm is not needed, however comparing
the MTF charts of the 50mm F/1.4 and the 35mm F/1.4 we see
that the 50mm optical prescription has a distinct advantage in the
astigmatism department. And that's what we would get with a
1.6X shrink of the regular EF focal length prescriptions.
--
Mitch
Since most likely based on non L f2 35mm, not L1.4
http://public.fotki.com/wibble/public_display/
--
http://public.fotki.com/wibble/public_display/
Similar threads
- Solved
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum