Sure! Could be fun
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
So..., is Canon becoming the Japanese Kodak?
- Thread starter Deardorff
- Start date
...is a material, but not CRITICAL part of their total portfolio. This is a large, rich company that will not go away. If they somehow find they did totally screw up, they have plenty of money coming in to correct this.
Compared to Nikon (who I love with all my heart, and is not going anywhere), Canon is vastly better prepared to withstand any upsets this year, or this decade.
Compared to Nikon (who I love with all my heart, and is not going anywhere), Canon is vastly better prepared to withstand any upsets this year, or this decade.
ozgazza
Well-known member
That article is a good read.
Ross the Fidller
Active member
Strangely, the camera doesn't see the view as an OVF(output image), but more like the EVF sees it! So what's your point?
Ross the Fidller
Active member
It's a shame you can't add an EVF (or even an OVF) to the EOS M. What an oversight! Or just plain arrogant thinking. At least they have moved ahead in that direction with the G1-X Mk II (& with a 4/3's size sensor
).
Ross the Fidller
Active member
There's a certain amount of 'retro' or something intriguing from the past, fascination there too.
--
Ross
Ross the Fidller
Active member
Ross the Fidller
Active member
Keith Z Leonard
Veteran Member
Actually neither is true, with OVF you have the DR of your eye, which is greater than the camera, with EVF you have the DR of the EVF, which is less than the camera. COULD there be EVF in the future that does the DR of the camera, has insignificant noise, and doesn't suffer lag issues in low light?? YES, of course, but it's not here yet. And for those of us using remote flashes a lot...it wouldn't help in that case anyway.
I look forward to EVF becoming what it promises.
David Hull
Veteran Member
I consider myself somewhat of an audiophile but I have never understood the Vinyl thing (or the Tube thing either). Some people say the sound is better, but it is just different. I certainly don't miss the trouble of setting up and maintaining a vinyl setup not to mention dealing with acoustical coupling etc. They can have it.
rwbaron
Forum Pro
+1 on vinyl and tubes for audio reproduction. Don't miss the rumble along with the distracting clicks and pops. In the vinyl days I would buy an album and record it on a Crown SX824 the first time it was played and then put the record in storage and listen to it on tape to eliminate the acoustic coupling issues and preserve the record. What a PIA!
Tubes did (maybe still do) have their place with guitar amplifiers. There was a characteristic referred to as a "hot tube" sound that up until the time I stopped following the industry was very difficult to simulate with a solid state amp. For all I know technology may have solved this too.
Bob
Ramesh
Well-known member
Canon has been called "lone Wolf" among Japanese companies. It charts its path almost oblivious of what is going on around it. Its responses to innovations of other companies is often preceded by palpably long latent periods. When Minolta revolutionised autofocus with Maxxum 7000, Nikon responded almost immediately with N2020. But Canon took more than 2 years to come-up with EOS 650. Canon often appears to be caught pants-down by some technological progress (other such latent responses include off the film flash metering, auto ISO, wide angle lenses etc.). But somehow they end up doing just enough at the end of the latency, to be a viable competitor. Those who are not aware of Canon's track record are sure to write it off as a imaging company. What is causing certain amount of apprehension and despondency even among Canon-ites is the inordinate length of latent period in responding to progress in sensor technology. Will the past record hold up?
--
rr
--
rr
Last edited:
brightcolours
Forum Pro
Uhmm.... Let me show you what a high DR looks like.
On the left, a normal tonal curve, of the way our eyes more or less perceive the world, with a DR of about 8 stops. On the right, what 14 stops of DR will look like.
That is what the camera "sees" (after RAW is converted from its non-linear data to a linear representation).
Last edited:
brightcolours
Forum Pro
Tell that to the real pros who travel with large aperture tele lenses. Ask them how nice those small, hard to operate MILC 's are.
brightcolours
Forum Pro
The same "shame" as any of the smaller EVF-less mirrorless cameras from other manufacturers, right?It's a shame you can't add an EVF (or even an OVF) to the EOS M. What an oversight! Or just plain arrogant thinking. At least they have moved ahead in that direction with the G1-X Mk II (& with a 4/3's size sensor
brightcolours
Forum Pro
You will hear the "better" sound part wen you get a good record player. Problem is, such a deck costs many 1000's of dollars/euros/pounds. And then you need a good pre-amp costing lots again.
True, vinyl is a hassle.
brightcolours
Forum Pro
Well, depends on how you look at the AF history.
In 1971, Nikon made a prototype AF lens.
In between, Leica did a lot of AF research, and showed an AF SLR in 1978.
in may 1981 Canon was the first to introduce an AF lens to the market, with all the AF stuff in the odd looking lens. It could be put on any FD camera. All the AF stuff was done inside the lens (FD 35-70mm f/4 AF). The lens actually measured the distance to the subject with IR light.
Pentax followed in november 1981 with a 35-70mm f2.8 AF lens, for the ME-F SLR, which used TTL contrast detection.
Olympus came out with a lens similar to that Pentax in 1983, with the Olympus Zuiko 35-70mm f4.0 AF Zoom.
Then Nikon came out with the F3AF in 1983, with two lenses (80mm and 200mm). The lenses had the AF motor inside of them, but the AF brains in the huge pentaprism housing of the F3AF (PD AF).
In february 1985, Minolta introduced the Minolta a-7000 and (late 1985) a-9000, cameras who had the AF motor inside the body and PD AF.
Also in 1985 (april), Canon came with the T80, an AF SLR which had 3 lenses in its AF line up (50mm f1.8, 35-70mm, 75-200mm). It used a CCD to look at contrast (just how live view CD AF works today). It could not compete in speed with the PD AF of the Minolta.
In 1986, Nikon came out with its response to the Minolta, with the F-501.
In march 1987 Canon came out with the EOS system, with the EOS 650 and a few months later the EOS 620. In contrast to the Nikon and Minolta solutions, the EOS system had in-lens motors and electronically controlled apertures.
Last edited:
G
gbdz
Guest
Minolta bought Leica's autofocus patents. They had the Maxxum/Dynax/Alpha autofocus line which was the first commercially succesfull autofocus SLR in the market. Exxon sued them for the double 'xx' and Bell&Howell for the patent infringements in their autofocus system.
Minolta is living on as the Sony Alpha.
Minolta is living on as the Sony Alpha.
Ross the Fidller
Active member
Last edited:
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum