-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Canon G13 with interchangeable lens...
- Thread starter Le Kilt
- Start date
They contain a huge amount of real resolution.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
Barrie Davis
Forum Pro
Do they? OK. But I'll believe it when I see it.... so go ahead and SHOW it, if you are certain.
Tell you what.... I will accept a G12 (G13) sensor sized section cropped from an APS or FF sensor as exposed behind any Canon lens of your choice made for those formats. It does NOT have to have been exposed onto a sensor with the higher pixel density of the G12/13.¼
If the lens is up to the resolution demands of the tiny format that is less than 1/16th the area of FF, then we will be able to see it even without the extra pixels. If it ain't, we'll be able to see that, too.
I should point out that I have been using lenses on formats that they were not originally designed for across a period of many years professional shooting, so I do have an idea of what works and what doesn't....
... as a general rule you are better off using 'em on bigger formats than they are intended for, rather than smaller ones....
.. like, for instance, I know that the 105mm Mamiya Sekor intended to cover the 2¼" square format of Mamiya TLR cameras happens to cover the much larger 5x4" film to good resolution standards, if it is used for close-ups where a bit of bellows extension is going to be applied.
--
Regards,
Baz
"Ahh... But the thing is, they were not just ORDINARY time travellers!"
This was taken with the equivalent of 0.75 micron pixels (like a G12 sensor with stacked 1.4x and 2x teleconverters) through a full-frame zoom lens (70-200/2.8 L IS).
Not enough for you? How about this:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=37493247
That's from the equivalent of a G12+2x teleconverter through a full-frame prime lens, and it's sharp at the pixel level.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
Barrie Davis
Forum Pro
But this image of Jupiter is blurred. The fact that nearly all images of Jupiter are blurred if seen through the atmosphere doesn't make this one any sharper.This was taken with the equivalent of 0.75 micron pixels (like a G12 sensor with stacked 1.4x and 2x teleconverters) through a full-frame zoom lens (70-200/2.8 L IS).
Besides that, I can't tell from you figures how large it was on the sensor, which is crucial to the exercise.
Well it looks blurred to me... although, in fairness, it looks more like camera shake or subject movement, to me.... (it seems to have top-right/bottom-left directionality to the smear.) Moreover, I still have no idea how many linear millimetres of sensor are represented by the image on-screen... [??]
Have you got any ordinary subjects? You know, the sort of thing that would make more sense as a rez test?
Oh, dearie me!! Some smart-Rs at DPRreview has stolen the forward-slash-question-mark and appropriated it as shortcut for the SEARCH function. No-o-o-o-o-o-o- !!!
--
Regards,
Baz
"Ahh... But the thing is, they were not just ORDINARY time travellers!"
No, pixel size is what matters in this case. In this case, the image was a very, very tiny fraction of the smallest sensor.
Remember, that's from the equivalent of a G12 + 2x teleconverter. Look at it at 50%. It's tack sharp.
By the way, tack sharp = undersampled. If it's sharp at the pixel level, that means plenty more resolution was available to be extracted if the pixels had been smaller.
Planetary targets are some of the best for resolution tests because they are all about resolving power.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
DSPographer
Senior Member
The new 400 f/2.8L II that should finally ship next month is supposed to be much sharper.
Much sharper than pixel sharp on an 18MP 1.6-crop sensor with 4x worth of TCs on it. It's sort of astounding, don't you think?
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
DSPographer
Senior Member
An adapter for small sensor interchangeable lens cameras- like the Pentax Q-mount- to use EOS lenses might be popular with astronomers. The adapter should include an effective baffle system to eat the light that would otherwise spill around the edges of the tiny sensor. Manufacturers are currently demonstrating small sensors with 1.1 micron pixels: which is just about small enough to eliminate the need for teleconverters with Canon's big telephoto lenses. The new 400/2.8 might justify even smaller pixels though.
Astro folks tend to buy a lot more aperture for a lot less money (no AF, no IS, slow f-stops, but lots of aperture and resolving power). For the cost of the new 400/2.8, you could get a C14 with a pretty decent mount, and for around 1/3 that cost, you could go to a C11 and mount.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
Great Bustard
Forum Pro
- Messages
- 45,961
- Solutions
- 17
- Reaction score
- 34,046
He was a witch, so they burned him at the stake. I hear he came back as dark and sinister force, however!Now that's not fair, you know that that joe mama guy was just a rebellious visionary...This post on that topic:Now there would be a coup !
Please Canon, how about joining in the interchangeable lens camera race with something great... a G13 with some great compact lenses (fast ones for me please) and the ability to adapt EF-S and EF lenses with AF and all...
Go-on Canon, you can do it...
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=25067732
is only four years old.
;-)
Actually, the problem with my older post is failing to understand, at the time, that the lenses for smaller sensor systems need to be significantly sharper to be able to compete. In other words, the lenses for a 4x system need to be 4x sharper than the lenses for a FF system to resolve as well.I'm repeating myself, but in fact what I would like is a G12 with a faster lens, this is my round-about way of asking for it...
Thus, a 4x system would really need new lenses. Using existing lenses on it, with some exceptions, would likely prove disappointing.
Le Kilt
Senior Member
Yes, I'm sure he's lurking somewhere not far from here, makes me shiver just thinking about it!He was a witch, so they burned him at the stake. I hear he came back as dark and sinister force, however!Now that's not fair, you know that that joe mama guy was just a rebellious visionary...This post on that topic:Now there would be a coup !
Please Canon, how about joining in the interchangeable lens camera race with something great... a G13 with some great compact lenses (fast ones for me please) and the ability to adapt EF-S and EF lenses with AF and all...
Go-on Canon, you can do it...
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=25067732
is only four years old.
;-)
Well, fitting a large EF lens on one would be mostly for occasinal fun, although the other section of the thread is debating that the 400mm f/2.8 L might be sharp enough! Maybe one of the better EF-S lenses could be more viable for a bit of shooting.Actually, the problem with my older post is failing to understand, at the time, that the lenses for smaller sensor systems need to be significantly sharper to be able to compete. In other words, the lenses for a 4x system need to be 4x sharper than the lenses for a FF system to resolve as well.I'm repeating myself, but in fact what I would like is a G12 with a faster lens, this is my round-about way of asking for it...
Thus, a 4x system would really need new lenses. Using existing lenses on it, with some exceptions, would likely prove disappointing.
But yes, a few new smaller high quality lenses for an interchangeable system must be on its way...I hope
I would love them to get out the blue-prints for the Pro1 (a G8 in disguise) and adapt its lens (28-200 f/2.4-3.5) to a G13... (ok, it would be 'chunkier'). Too many compact or bridge lenses get slow when you zoom to 200mm or so.
Panasonic seem to have been much more innovative on the lens side of compact cameras :-/
John Sheehy
Forum Pro
Primes could be faster and wider, while still smaller than zooms.
The adaptability for the EF lenses is the most intriguing thing, to me. You could mount the camera on sharp telephotos and longer macro lenses, without wasting the lens on large pixels, where you would otherwise crop with a DSLR. You could dispose of TCs, too, and get good AF.
--
John
John Sheehy
Forum Pro
You couldn't be more wrong; this is a much better solution than using TCs for the same effect on a DSLR.
--
John
John Sheehy
Forum Pro
The Q doesn't collect a lot of light, that's for sure, but it probably collects more per unit of sensor area than any DSLR except the D3s, and for those mounting the Q on DSLR lenses with adapters, the Q will give much better results than a DSLR setup with equivalent TCs. Also, it would not need any sharpening due to an AA-filter, lessening noise in fine details.
--
John
TechOutsider
Senior Member
mwh66
Well-known member
like the Fujifilm X100. Digital Rebel Sensor with a fixed 20mm to 30mm f/1.8 lens. Won't be as buggy as the X100
BertIverson
Senior Member
Probably so, but is OP not talking about a smallish camera capable of being carried using a neck strap.
Bert
I would never in a million years buy a camera that had a fixed prime lens.
--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
Knight Palm
Senior Member
While I agree a logical step of Canon would be to make the G13 an interchangeable lens camera, especially when reading the dpreview conclusion:Now there would be a coup !
Please Canon, how about joining in the interchangeable lens camera race with something great... a G13 with some great compact lenses (fast ones for me please) and the ability to adapt EF-S and EF lenses with AF and all...
Go-on Canon, you can do it...
-We have no hesitation in saying that the G12 is the best Canon G-series camera to date, but its original USP - as a bridge between compact cameras and DSLRs - is in danger of being eroded.
But should they stay with the 1/1.7" sensor? Well, yes if G13 will become an ILC.
Otherwise, a frontal attack on Panasonic/Olympus, using the same sensor size. Canon is no longer the king of CMOS sensors, and might be looking for alternative sourcing. Running for a MFT sized sensor could be a positive large scale economy benefit. Also the video aspects of Canon using the same sensor size as Panasonic could put some stress on the video giant Sony.
--
Ludwig Wittgenstein; British philosopher born in Austria; a major influence on logic and logical positivism (1889-1951):
“What can be said at all can be said clearly; and whereof one cannot speak thereof one must be silent”
Similar threads
- Question
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum