Revenant
Joined on
Jul 29, 2011
|
Comments
 |  |  |  |
| Green peas by OBellini from Vegetables and Mushrooms | Canon workshop by Tamer Radwan from Fashion photography | Young Red tailed hawk by APenza from A big year - birds 2018 | Antigua, Guatemala by peter826 from -Buildings by the water and their reflections- (Full Colours Only) |
LessMirrored19: Panasonic needs pdaf , cdaf is useless crap
DoF has nothing to do with sensor size. If the physical aperture, focal length and subject distance is the same, then the DoF is the same regardless of what camera the lens is attached to. m4/3 doesn't have an inherently massive DoF, any more than FF has an inherently thin DoF.
TSYYeung: Another proof that Canon has crippled the M50 😜
They crippled the price too, those bastards!
snapa: I think Canons priorities are way out of whack. Why put all this R&D and resources into something less than .05% people will actually buy. Instead, why not try to keep up with the competition in APS-C cameras that most people are interested in, or can afford?
Canon going off on tangents like this makes absolutely no sense.
I'm sure they put their R&D and resources where there's money to be earned.
mosc: I don't think we'll have an 8K revolution like we did for 4K. There is a limit of eyesight. Resolution will always have an advantage for more leeway in post for framing and other editing but 5.9K 60fps raw is still a pretty significant field of view requirement (read:close, large screen) to view any difference from 4K so there's already a good bit of wiggle room here already. This also hits the sweet spot for lenses and sensor technology. Medium Format has never challenged FF in anything but base ISO dynamic range and resolution (which I just mentioned). 15 stops of DR is not a record for stills but it's not like movie theater screens are displaying that to a large audience and certainly nobody's TV is anywhere near displaying that.
I think this Canon will hold up well even 5 years from now. I don't think it's too far from the saturation point as well when handling requirements dominate minute IQ differences. Could see this getting professional work long in the future.
The fact that Canon hasn't discontinued their Cinema EOS line likely means that they have enough customers to make it worthwhile for them. They wouldn't spend R&D money on these cameras, if a good number of professionals weren't in fact using them.
ilza: Can somebody explain it to me why it was not an attempt of CONSCIOUS scam?
Anyone with a grain of understanding of optics could see that the most this technology can do is:
(A) Provide a hyperfocal-like image with about 1Mpix resolution.
(B) RELIABLY blur it selectively based on the distance.
The point (B) IS great — comparing to what the “computational optic” can do (same — but unreliably!). But WHO would be interested in having the max resolution of 1MPix?!
So either they thought they know a segment of users who could be satisfied with 1MPix — or it was a scam. And given that they never mentioned this limit of resolution — I’m leaning in a certain direction…
"And given that they never mentioned this limit of resolution"
They did mention it. It was no secret that the output image had a lot fewer pixels than the number of photo detectors on the sensor. That's a consequence of how the technology works, and it's the reason for using a 755 MP (or "megaray") sensor in the cinema camera.
Jon Stern: It's interesting that Raytrix GmbH, who have been around for years, without any of the Silicon Valley hype, continue to quietly exist. Selling plenoptic cameras for industrial use, to customers who have a problem that it solves.
Serving industrial customers seems to be a safer bet than going for the consumer camera market or digging gold in Hollywood.
tranceliner: when the Chinese become the innovators beating the Koreans and Americans....
"China does not want to simply compete with the US. They want to destroy the US."
The US is their biggest export market, though, accounting for almost 20% of China's exports. A destroyed US would mean a weaker Chinese economy.
Paul_B Midlands UK: where is the avalanche of comment?
This is not about Canon entering the FF mirrorless market.
CosminMunteanu: Affraid of Sony you, dear Canon, are :))
To compete with Sony, Canon has to have IBIS, a good range of native lenses (Canon EF lenses work on Sonys) and all at the same prices. Seeing the featureas and the performance of the latest Canon FF, the 6d2 at 2000 usd (vs.A7 iii) I doubt Canon could adapt. Same about their EF-M system vs. Fujifilm APS-c, Sony APS-c and even m4/3.
Exactly, the companies are competing for customers in the marketplace, so if more people are buying product A than product B, it makes no sense to say that A is less competitive. But I think many gearheads are playing out some kind of imaginary battles between cameras in their heads, where spec sheets and sensor performance tests are the weapons, and it's based on this that they decide the competitiveness of cameras. That would explain the frequent talk of cameras "killing" each other.
photomedium: If the M line is any indication, the first FF MILC camera from canon will be a direct replacement for the disgraced 6D2. It will have same/similar crappy sensor, totally under-featured and targeted at US market where people still like big, dumb cameras.
First and foremost, they don't have the tech to do an A9-like camera and they are not going to spend a fortune in silicon development to get there just to marginally improve their prestige in the US market. This is Canon we are talking about, there is simply no way.
"Just watch. Canon will release two or three different bodies, and each will be missing features the other has. So you are again stuck with deciding on one camera. Unless of course you can afford to buy all 3 bodies."
That's exactly what Sony and everyone else is also doing. The Sony A7, A7R, A7S and A9 is an example of this, and so is the Fujifilm X-Pro, X-T and X-H.
Chris Dodkin: This 'leak' smells a whole lot like Canon doing some damage control after that interview...
Got to stop those folks from jumping ship!
Give them the old 'maybe coming soon' to hold on to
That interview pretty much told us the same thing as this rumour is telling us, though. The "wouldn't that be nice?" reply means that they have something up their sleeves, and the part about not having decided on the lens mount yet, that was just intentionally vague marketing speak.
keeponkeepingon: Probably not true or dpreview would be under their normal pre-release NDA and you would not be seeing this here.
"I’m very confident we’re going to see something announced before the end of Q1 in 2019."
lol . Crazy that they would release this right after photokina? But gosh still a year away from anything tangible?
I'm guessing a lot of the groundless predictions will be probably be true as it's the easiest route for canon to take:
EF-M adapter will be required for legacy lenses but like the original EOS-M they'll throw one in for "free" to lure in early adapters.
Like the latest onslaught of M bodies with almost no glass I'm guessing maybe one token full frame capable EF-M mount lens will be released with the body. I'm guessing a 50mm as it's lacking on the EF-M mount and by now canon can design those in it's sleep. It'll be small cute and "Tack sharp" and appeal to both APS-C and full frame EOS-M owners.
Many of the rumours published by DPR in the past has turned out to be true, though. They seem to be very selective regarding the rumours they choose to publish, almost as if they know something we don't. I don't think publishing a rumour would violate an NDA, rather it's a way to circumvent it.
Roland Karlsson: Main question: is the Canon EF-M mount suitable for full frame?
If the answer is yes, we might see a FF mirrorless any day now. It is just to make one plus some lenses. Of course, then it is not likely that it is a competitor to their DSLR FF cameras. Rather a prosumer camera.
If the answer is no, then we are out in deep water. Then it is anyone's guess what will happen.
I also think that, when Canon developed the EF-M mount, they still regarded mirrorless only as a beginner's camera or a portable second camera for DSLR users. They didn't yet believe that the high-end market would eventually be shifting to mirrorless too.
dansclic: I do not understand this message : how can someone use a so called full frame body if canon has no clue about which mount they will,use for their mirrorrless lenses ? Is this a joke ?
Why do you think that Canon has no clue about which mount to use? When executives say things like "we are still discussing this", it usually means that the decision has already been made, but they don't want to reveal anything to the public just yet. It's also a possibility that Canon has developed working prototypes of both kinds (EF-mount and new mount), but haven't yet decided on which they will go forward with.
noflashplease: What exactly does GoPro have to license? Sensor modules? What? Did GoPro sudden buy their own chip fab? Camera lenses? You mean those little fisheyes that cover only a tiny image circle? How is that something that needs to be licensed?
The real value to GoPro as a company is the name. Modern action cams themselves could be put together out of readily available, off the shelf parts and operate with simple firmware. These days cheap GoPro knockoffs give broadly equivalent performance, and often are more innovative than the contemporary GoPro products.
I can see the GoPro name going on for decades, but under licensing. GoPro is a brand and the hardware itself just doesn't matter. Actually, I still can't figure out why GoPro has such a large engineering staff before all of the downsizing?
There's no doubt that GoPro doesn't manufacture their own camera modules, but do we know for sure that they aren't involved in the design and development?
For example, there are several fabless companies that design sensors, but are outsourcing the production to other companies. OmniVision is fabless, and so was Aptina. Nikon has designed a few sensors, which were fabbed by Renesas and even by Sony; those sensors are still the intellectual property of Nikon, not of the manufacturer. What if GoPro has designed some tech (sensor, optics or whatever) that is used in their camera modules?
"and a promise that you might be considered for a permanent position in the future."
They could at least promise to consider you for a permanent position, even if you won't actually end up getting it, but to promise that they might consider you? If that's not an empty promise, I don't know what is.
junk1: It could hover for 10,000 years and not be hit. 3D volume is huge. Weather balloons with various equipment onboard and nobody controlling them go that high....
Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's illegal everywhere to launch weather balloons without permission from the relevant authorities.
MrBrightSide: Current cameras at all price points are so amazing—they far outperform professional cameras from even 10 years ago—is it accurate to call anything “entry level” anymore?
"is it accurate to call anything “entry level” anymore?"
Yes, if you look at other performance factors besides IQ, not to mention features, ergonomics, customizability and build quality, then there are certainly models that deserve to be called "entry-level".
SimenO1: Why did this SSD get coverage at DPR? Where is the relevance?
I don't think it has to be directly relevant right now to the readership as consumers and photographers in order to deserve space at DPR. DPR has written about a lot of such things: super expensive cinema gear, advancements in sensor, processor, battery or storage technology that won't be seen in consumer products for many years. But it's interesting nevertheless, because it tells us about what might be coming our way in the future.
fmian: Still not as much detail, clarity and depth as the Sigma Foveons at native ISO.
Not much improvement with Bayer sensors over the years. *yawn*
Not much improvement with Foveon sensors, either. Many people even seem to think that the latest generation was a step back in IQ.
Bayer sensors have improved a lot over the years, though, but of course can never overcome the drawbacks of the interpolation that's necessitated by their design.