Oh my gosh! Latest info from my dealer.

Thomas Gardner said:

Joe Ciarcia said:

Thanks for the info Thomas... I'm REALLY looking forward to the
1D's replacement. I'm a little skeptical of the 12mp but Canon's
hardware and firmware engineering team really does have their act
together so I wouldn't put it past them.

Click to expand...

You're welcome

After sleeping on it a night, I came up with the idea that the
software people could use the through put of the sensor anyway they
want from FF, using all the twelve mega-pixels to a limited 1.3x
crop, using only four mega-pixels.

To me, this would make sense as it would give everybody what they
want.

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me

Click to expand...

Do you mean have the camera take a 12MP image and then downsize it to 4MP before storing it? If this were the case, I don't believe the downsized image would not suffer any loss unless it were exactly 1/4 the size of the 12MP image, and 3MP would actually be a bit too small. It's the first option I thought of, then realized this is why the 1Ds has a 2nd optional size that's 1/4 of the full size. Maybe this would be viable if we were talking about a 16MP sensor, but that would be pushing it.

Of course, there's no reason why the camera couldn't take a 12MP image and then do a crop, not a resize, before it stores the image. Like I mentioned elsewhere, the viewfinder could have a smaller frame to indicate the crop. Or, who knows, maybe a small quality loss would be considered acceptable in resizing the image in camera and allowing a 100% viewfinder image of the 6MP type shot?

At this level, I wouldn't think they'd resize, but who knows. The exciting thing is there are just a lot of options for a clever engineer.

Mike

Lol you think canon have to make these cameras on 2 differnet lines?

If Audi can make Any body combination/colour combination/ and interior combination they want on one line you dont think canon cant make these near identical cameras on the same line?

Thomas Gardner said:

DDP-YLS said:

Why would canon kill a camera thats selling faster than they can
produce them? It doesn't make sense when you're king of the hill
with a camera that's still state of the art and people are waiting
to buy them. Who other than nikon is competition for canon, not
olympus, pentax or contax? Eventually both cameras will be replaced
but I don't think it's going to happen yet.

Click to expand...

Why that's a simple on teach.

All sensors created will be used on just one sensor body. You'll
be able to shut down one assembly line and combine the two cameras
into one. As a business, you not only have sales but you have the
obvious business costs and it's the business costs that kill you.

Combining the two lines into one sensor body makes sense. One CMOS
manufacturing line and two basic packages; the 300D/10D and the 1D
do everything, end all FF sensor body.

From a business point of view, it makes sense.

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/nick_eos/

Thomas Gardner said:

Jim-H said:

I remember seeing this discussed before and was told with the
current design it is not possible.

Before you can do any cropping, you must first have the full raw
data from the sensor. If the sensor could somehow be divided into
sections then I suppose it would be possible. As you may have
guessed, I'm no EE.

Click to expand...

And through software, the sensor is divided, before the image is
capture. Exactly what you speak of.

Maybe you are an EE and just don't know it

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me

Click to expand...

As I mentioned elsewhere, I've read about some advances in the speed of in-camera processing. Maybe the bottleneck right now is the time it takes to actually store the data. So, a camera like this could possible take a 12MP image and then simply discard the cropped-out 6MPs before storing the final image to the card. This would all be transparent to the user. He or she would simply know that a 6MP image had been selected and it worked. It would solve the problem of having to try to divide the sensor, and it would provide quick enough storage for the quick FPS. It would only be dependent on the cameras processing speed, and it certainly wouldn't be the first time that a increase in raw processing power solved a problem like this.

Mike

This is very well possible Thomas. "We" do exactly the same thing with our astronomical CCDs and MOSs when we want timing info. Just put it in timing mode. Loose a lot of pixels and readout fast! Canon should know that, they use "our" MOS technology...

Peter

Thomas Gardner said:

Also, couldn't Canon include a sofeware switch to limit the area of
the sensor, so you could get both a FF sensor image at twelve
mega-pixels, 3FPS, like the 1Ds and then flip the switch and have a
reduced 1.3X crop at five/six mega-pixels, 8 fps? Of course
keeping the tank like build of the current 1D.

Would that be so far fetched?

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me

Click to expand...

hartog said:

This is very well possible Thomas. "We" do exactly the same thing
with our astronomical CCDs and MOSs when we want timing info. Just
put it in timing mode. Loose a lot of pixels and readout fast!
Canon should know that, they use "our" MOS technology...

Click to expand...

So if I can think it and you're actually doing it, maybe Canon will get onboard with the idea

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me

OK, I'm making myself a bit hyper thinking about this camera, lol. Maybe I should calm down a bit and wait and see what pans out.

While I'm as enthusiastic as anyone about this, I'm still on the fence as to if it's just wishful thinking or not.

The type of camera we've been discussing would certainly be a 1D and 1Ds replacement, and the one thing that really makes me skeptical is the fact that there really isn't the competition out there to drive this type of change.

Realistically, this type of leap usually takes place in a highly competitive market, and, frankly, the high-end in digital just isn't that competitive right now.

Who knows, Canon may prove that they are capable of thinking outside this paradigm. Or maybe they're responding not to what's on the market but what they anticipate to be on the market from one or more of their competitors quite soon.

Time to take a deep breath and wait for those darned brochures.

Mike

The bottleneck is getting the raw data off the sensor, not the time it takes to store the data, that's why we have buffers. Cropping or downsizing after that is easily done.

mike_botelho said:

As I mentioned elsewhere, I've read about some advances in the
speed of in-camera processing. Maybe the bottleneck right now is
the time it takes to actually store the data. So, a camera like
this could possible take a 12MP image and then simply discard the
cropped-out 6MPs before storing the final image to the card. This
would all be transparent to the user. He or she would simply know
that a 6MP image had been selected and it worked. It would solve
the problem of having to try to divide the sensor, and it would
provide quick enough storage for the quick FPS. It would only be
dependent on the cameras processing speed, and it certainly
wouldn't be the first time that a increase in raw processing power
solved a problem like this.

Mike

Click to expand...

nick_eos said:

Lol you think canon have to make these cameras on 2 differnet lines?

If Audi can make Any body combination/colour combination/ and
interior combination they want on one line you dont think canon
cant make these near identical cameras on the same line?

Click to expand...

Then we'll have to check with Audi then, won't we

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me

OK, I'm admittedly no expert on digital camera design. I simply assumed that the buffer was quick, volatile memory that stored a rapid succession of images because all that data could not be wriiten to a storage device in such a brief amount of time. It was just an assumption.

Mike

Jim-H said:

mike_botelho said:

As I mentioned elsewhere, I've read about some advances in the
speed of in-camera processing. Maybe the bottleneck right now is
the time it takes to actually store the data. So, a camera like
this could possible take a 12MP image and then simply discard the
cropped-out 6MPs before storing the final image to the card. This
would all be transparent to the user. He or she would simply know
that a 6MP image had been selected and it worked. It would solve
the problem of having to try to divide the sensor, and it would
provide quick enough storage for the quick FPS. It would only be
dependent on the cameras processing speed, and it certainly
wouldn't be the first time that a increase in raw processing power
solved a problem like this.

Mike

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Thomas Gardner said:

By making a 12 mega-pixel, FF sensor that has a software adjustable
sensor, you'll be able to combine two production lines, to
manufacture one sensor body (consentration of efforts), that sells
to three different markets. You'll only have to make one type of
sensor, not two and concentrate all your development/marketing
efforts on one sensor body. You'd sell this one sensor body to
PJ/SJ, studios and well heeled hobbiests.

From a business viewpoint, this would be incredibly efficent.
You'd kill the competition and your sales, price point wise, would
go through the roof for the next couple of years.

Soooooo, from a business point of view, why not?

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me

Click to expand...

some of my old Oly SLR friends found this a reason to go Nikon instead of Canon--that they were focusing on one sensor/size rather than having 2 (and now 3 sensors). I didn't find this a reason to consider other cameras because I felt that Canon would eventually end up FF at some point or other and my lenses would be what I was more concerned about. I could be happy with a 1.3x rather than a FF--and I'd like, for now, about 8MP, not 12 (that would mean a new CPU if I did it now LOL). However, I continue to watch all of this much as someone above suggested--like a voyeur LOL.

Diane
--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic/galleries
B/W lover, but color is seducing me

I do hope so. Can't imagine that Canon doesn't monitor this site. So let's post all our ideas here LOUD!

Peter

Thomas Gardner said:

So if I can think it and you're actually doing it, maybe Canon will
get onboard with the idea

Click to expand...

Jim-H said:

From a manufacturing point of view - YES

But from the more important point of view, Profits - NO

Canon will continue to improve specs based on the market and
competition. Not what their engineers are capable of.

Click to expand...

I don't think they are going to 'give us everything' right off the bat.
--
Diane B
http://www.pbase.com/picnic/galleries
B/W lover, but color is seducing me

The D60 is selling like hot cakes. You have to wait forever to get one. Imho no $2000.00 camera can produce a smooth, film like image like the D60. Somebody comes along and says the new improved model is going to cost 25% less. We laugh him out of the forum. Oh well you get my drift. I hope this turns out to be true. I am a betting man. I bet this is true. I'll bookmark this thread and see what happens. Thanks for the info Thomas.

Thomas Gardner said:

Just got this as I was ordering a 85mm f/1.8.

1D replacement will be 12 mega-pixels and FF coming out at it's
current street price of $3,500.00.

He doesn't know what the frame rate will be or if it's gonna be
CMOS or CCD but I'm betting it's a CMOS like the 1Ds.

Suppose to be out about Thanksgiving time.

He'll have printed brochures in two or three weeks. I'll check
back then to see if he's able to give me any more details.

I asked how reliable the info was and he said 85%.

Woo Hoo! I'm off to the emergency room to get some heart pills

Ooooooh my gosh!

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me

Click to expand...

--
Mike Morbach
I'm still learning
http://www.pbase.com/spike777

I know I claimed I was going to calm down a bit, but this just occurred to me. I was in a major photo store a couple of days ago and was talking to the salesman, one of the resident digital specialists, about the 1Ds, the 1D and the 10D. I didn't really have the b*lls to come out and say 'hey, what do you know that I don't know?', so I hinted a bit, said how it was hard to take the plunge not knowing what might be just around the corner.

Well, this guy didn't bite, but I did mention the 3D type rumor that's been going around for some time, and I couldn't help but notice a fairly obvious reaction on his part. At the time, I remember thinking to myself that I hit a nerve but he wouldn't say anything. Not only did I seem to hit a nerve, but he also seemed to be a little confused when I said '3D'.

Maybe that's because he knew about a 2D? If that were the case, my mentioning a new camera and a 3D would have hit a nerve and also caused a bit of confusion, which is exactly how he seemed to respond.

Lol, if I had heard this rumor at that time, I would have just come out and asked.

Mike

Thats sounds like an accurate assumption to me.

mike_botelho said:

Mike

Jim-H said:

mike_botelho said:

As I mentioned elsewhere, I've read about some advances in the
speed of in-camera processing. Maybe the bottleneck right now is
the time it takes to actually store the data. So, a camera like
this could possible take a 12MP image and then simply discard the
cropped-out 6MPs before storing the final image to the card. This
would all be transparent to the user. He or she would simply know
that a 6MP image had been selected and it worked. It would solve
the problem of having to try to divide the sensor, and it would
provide quick enough storage for the quick FPS. It would only be
dependent on the cameras processing speed, and it certainly
wouldn't be the first time that a increase in raw processing power
solved a problem like this.

Mike

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Buying those CCD's from Sony. That has to really bite into the bottom line in a company that is not used to having to put up with using outside major components.

I'll bet a Canon manufactured (by now) CMOS at FF is more cost efficient for them than a purchased SONY CCD.

Regards

GESmith

I almost took them up on the offer to pick my RS4 up from the factory with a mini tour, work didnt allow me the time off alas

Thomas Gardner said:

nick_eos said:

Lol you think canon have to make these cameras on 2 differnet lines?

If Audi can make Any body combination/colour combination/ and
interior combination they want on one line you dont think canon
cant make these near identical cameras on the same line?

Click to expand...

Then we'll have to check with Audi then, won't we

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/nick_eos/

Although the 1Ds is still a bargain at $8000 simply due to the fact that it has no rival (regardless of the fact that I can't afford it), one has to wonder if it is still justified as costing $6500 more than the 10D. Also, considering that Canon has developed a less costly procedure for making CMOS sensors, would there really be much need or justification for pricing a new 12MP camera above $3500. Plus, would putting a FF CMOS sensor in a 1D replacement really cost any more than putting the smaller CCD in the 1D at the time it came out. Probably not, I'd guess.

Sometimes (though too rarely), lower production costs result in cheaper products. I'm sure this is what happened to some extent with the 10D being released at a price $500 lower than the D60.

Plus, the 1Ds was, in many ways, the first of its kind. Which is the type of new tech that always becomes drastically cheaper in a short period of time. Look at DVD burners. For a while Pioneer refused to lower prices much because they had R&D costs to recoup. Now look at the prices. (Though there is much more competition in that arena than with high-end digital cameras.)

Mike

Mike Morbach said:

Thomas Gardner said:

Just got this as I was ordering a 85mm f/1.8.

1D replacement will be 12 mega-pixels and FF coming out at it's
current street price of $3,500.00.

He doesn't know what the frame rate will be or if it's gonna be
CMOS or CCD but I'm betting it's a CMOS like the 1Ds.

Suppose to be out about Thanksgiving time.

He'll have printed brochures in two or three weeks. I'll check
back then to see if he's able to give me any more details.

I asked how reliable the info was and he said 85%.

Woo Hoo! I'm off to the emergency room to get some heart pills

Ooooooh my gosh!

--
If you don't want to believe me, ignore me

Click to expand...

--
Mike Morbach
I'm still learning
http://www.pbase.com/spike777

Click to expand...

mike_botelho said:

I know I claimed I was going to calm down a bit, but this just
occurred to me. I was in a major photo store a couple of days ago
and was talking to the salesman, one of the resident digital
specialists, about the 1Ds, the 1D and the 10D. I didn't really
have the b*lls to come out and say 'hey, what do you know that I
don't know?', so I hinted a bit, said how it was hard to take the
plunge not knowing what might be just around the corner.

Well, this guy didn't bite, but I did mention the 3D type rumor
that's been going around for some time, and I couldn't help but
notice a fairly obvious reaction on his part. At the time, I
remember thinking to myself that I hit a nerve but he wouldn't say
anything. Not only did I seem to hit a nerve, but he also seemed
to be a little confused when I said '3D'.

Maybe that's because he knew about a 2D? If that were the case, my
mentioning a new camera and a 3D would have hit a nerve and also
caused a bit of confusion, which is exactly how he seemed to
respond.

Lol, if I had heard this rumor at that time, I would have just come
out and asked.

Mike

Click to expand...

I had the very same impression with my local shop. By the way:

1. He knew about the full color CMOS from Canon from a presentation given to all national Canon dealers (Foveon like according to him, check about the Patent granted to Canon);

2. He knows something about a coming 3D but all info dried out months ago.

I really think that from an ECONOMICS point of view the comments in this forum are a little superficial:

1. Canon, with a really complete Digital camera about 3,500$, would manage to gain such a market share to beat Nikon seriously hard and not wait to compete;

2. With such a Camera Canon would let the market grow in a way that we cannot even imagine now, not everybody went digital (yet).

3. Technology investments are very cash consuming and you must get them right and earn enough to reinvest in the next project, it's like riding a wave. If you fall once ok, if you keep on falling it is very difficult to get up again (unless you are a very big company, that can afford to retry, but not infinitely).

To conclude, the drive to innovation is incredibly strong and if today we can have the 10D for few thousand bucks it's because of the D30 and the D60, should Canon have skipped the D30 and jumped to the D60 or never produced the 1Ds (because of the obviously too high price tag) we would never have had the 1Dx... dreaming here.

Let's hope. I fear that I won't sleep much till October 30.

Maob said:

I had the very same impression with my local shop. By the way:

1. He knew about the full color CMOS from Canon from a presentation
given to all national Canon dealers (Foveon like according to him,
check about the Patent granted to Canon);

Click to expand...

Now that's an interesting twist. A Foveon-like CMOS chip from Canon?! Could that be where the 12MP figure comes from? A Foveon-style chip would theoretically produce approximately 12MP-type resolution with only 6MP worth of sensor sites. This might allow for 6MP images at quick FPS while also allowing for res comparable to 12MP with conventional CMOS sensors. It also would, techinically, not superceed the 1Ds in the sense that the 1Ds actually has 11MP of sensor sites.

I never even considered this type of option. Certainly another possible explanation for how this would be plausible.

Mike

P.S. - Claims for Foveon chips, I believe, indicate something like 3x resolution, so I suppose it's possible that this could be a 4MP Fovean style chip. Though, I believe, that would work out a little more like resolution comparable to 8MP. I think a 6MP Foveon chip would be more desirable, obviously, though it would be more of a competitor for the 1Ds once again.

Makes me wonder if the sales person that came up with this info heard about a '12MP camera' or 'resolution comparable to 12MP'?