Canon 1dmk3 and reasonable expectations

I've noticed how many Canonophiles have lit up the boards whining about the new camera. Granted, most of the whining had to do with the lack of anouncement for a 40d or 1dsmk3, but my goodness how people expect so much more these days.

I finally got around to reading the full review. The engineering done to improve performance had a big WOW factor.

While the early comments were like, "There's too much noise at ISO 12800. This camera isn't usable!" OTOH my first reaction was, "I'd hate to be the Nikon D3H product manager. Quick, somebody grab his sword."

I think too many people have come to expect way too much and don't realize how far we have come.

I had an epiphany. The leap from film to a digital sensor wasn't just a change in recording medium, but the opening of a door to new technological enhancements. Think about this, if we were still shooting film cameras, would we have a 10fps camera? Would ISO1600 or 3200 ever be part of our discussion? Once the concept of a chip being the engine for the camera and not just a film replacement, barriers to other innovations were removed.

I don't shoot Canon. Even if I did, this isn't necessarily the camera for me, but I'd be excited about what this portends for future models.

"I'd hate to be the Nikon D3H product manager. Quick, somebody grab his sword."

In the end you can make better, more accurate, efficient and effective cameras, but what good does it do if the lens products don't keep up? Both Canon and Nikon are past that point already and need to play catch-up with their optical offerings.

Why?

The 1dmk2 already outperformed the D2Hs. It's quite possible somebody has been working on a D3H for the last 2 years that now can't match the new 1dmk3. The new mk3 has 3x the pixels, 25% higher frame rate and far superior noise performance. Now what if your new model can't match it?

I don't think the mkIII represents advancements that most other manufacturers, and certainly Nikon, don't already have in the bag too.

This is hard to predict, but I don't think this is the case. First, it wouldn't be Nikon, it would be Sony. Second, no one has yet touched Canon in regards to noise performance. Third, Canon uses CMOS, while Nikon may or may not be using this type of chip, either CCD or JFET. Many of the chip enhancements are specific to CMOS (and possibly JFET) technology. Will Nikon's next product have 14 bit digitization?

The bar just got raised pretty high and Nikon hadn't reached it at its lower setting. I can see a future of white lenses only at sporting events. It almost that way already.

Think about this, if we were still shooting film cameras, would we have a 10fps camera?

I can't imagine wanting to go through an entire roll of film in 3.6 seconds, however .

...the Canon EOS-1V, released in March 2000, is a 10fps film camera.

 

I can't imagine wanting to go through an entire roll of film in 3.6 seconds, however .

If digital hadn't taken hold, someone would probably have had to develop a Gatling gun-style film feeder by now!

I can see a future of white lenses only at sporting events. It almost that way already.

I can't imagine wanting to go through an entire roll of film in 3.6 seconds, however .

No need to look elsewhere for examples of putting high frame rates to good use. Here's one of the best examples very close to home:

http://www.echeng.com/journal/2006/07/12/g...each-false-bay/

More frames = better chances of catching that shark in the perfect pose. There is no substitute.

The 1dmk2 already outperformed the D2Hs. It's quite possible somebody has been working on a D3H for the last 2 years that now can't match the new 1dmk3. The new mk3 has 3x the pixels, 25% higher frame rate and far superior noise performance. Now what if your new model can't match it?

This is hard to predict, but I don't think this is the case. First, it wouldn't be Nikon, it would be Sony. Second, no one has yet touched Canon in regards to noise performance. Third, Canon uses CMOS, while Nikon may or may not be using this type of chip, either CCD or JFET. Many of the chip enhancements are specific to CMOS (and possibly JFET) technology. Will Nikon's next product have 14 bit digitization?

 

The bar just got raised pretty high and Nikon hadn't reached it at its lower setting. I can see a future of white lenses only at sporting events. It almost that way already.

All of that, including the inaccuracies, is irrelevant to my comment. Well, I guess asking a question about 14-bit processing after I had already made an unprompted answer could be considered relative

Again, what a company puts on the market is not limited by what they are capable of putting on the market. If I look at Canon and Nikon's respective lineups, it all makes sense......except where Canon has incorporated higher processing without greater dr sensor. I suspect this was done entirely for speed to service their long, fast, glass customer base. MkIII meets that niche quite nicely I think.

People on both sides of this fence seem to drink the Kool-Aid in gallons

Again, what a company puts on the market is not limited by what they are capable of putting on the market.

Um through all that dribble are you suggesting that Nikon 'may' have technology that is equal to Canon but choose to not release it in a public product to make their advances seem .. realistic ?

Either way arguing that Nikon has a product to rival is futile .. however users may prefer nikon for other reasons.

Uh-oh another Can-Nik debate?

Having been a Nik-Can owner, particularly the D2H and 1Dmk1/2, I can say that both have strong and weak points. I stuck with the Can for weather sealing in the lenses and camera bod.

The new 1D at 10fps and dust protection and removal and all the other functions make for an awesome camera. I'd still like auto-ISO and better TTL like nikon for topside. Seriously, the SB800 and Nikon's is ahead of the Canon's implementation of TTL and the 580EX.

Anyhow, why you pansies worried about a snail 10fps when you can get 1000fps with this. It's also 14bit but loses on the pixel count.

Without intending to take away from your overall statement on the remarkable progress that has been made as a result of digital (with which I agree completely)...the Canon EOS-1V, released in March 2000, is a 10fps film camera.

Yes, it existed, but it wasn't the done the same way. It used a split mirror, which cut the light to the viewfinder and your effective ISO by half.

While we are talking about white lenses at Formula One events, I should point out that Haymarket Publishing, a leading publisher of F1 magazines, installed its own E6 lab for use by its photographers!

"I think too many people have come to expect way too much and don't realize how far we have come."

Agreed, AND.... I'm fascinated to see how few photographers actually are objective enough to consider whether the current technology is actually sufficient for their requirements and whether they will actually benefit from upgrading - certainly the 1DMkIII has some really useful features and (dare I say it) might well make an exceptionally usable underwater camera, if that is, 10MPixels is considered sufficient. The brigade who are already harping on about the potential for a 1DSMkIII need to consider lens quality and for us, for underwater use, the existing optical limitations of both simple dome and thick flat ports.

We do now have exceptionally able replacements for 35mm equipment (which is what the Nikon DX and Canon cameras in actuality are), but it seems to me that many photographers seem to think that we may still see the holy grail of an all encompassing camera suitable for everything and anything - a 35mm camera sized, large format capable device - I very much doubt this personally, but I suppose you never know.

I'm also intrigued by the detailed discussions about pixels sizes, dynamic range, bit depth etc., because I cannot remember any similar discussion about the pure technical and mathematicl differences between film stocks - we all used to consider the image rather than the maths behind them. Sadly this is an area which digital has an oft misleading tendency to become technocratic in!

Not sure on the 10fps though, I wonder what Cartier-Bresson would have thought?

While we are talking about white lenses at Formula One events, I should point out that Haymarket Publishing, a leading publisher of F1 magazines, installed its own E6 lab for use by its photographers!

Really ? I hadn't heard that... very odd... especially as everyone else has gotten rid of theirs. In the F1 world if they didn't have their own E6 before how the hell did they ever get their slides processed and sorted and sent out in a timely fashion. I thought everyone when they had film cameras

did their own processing. I know the small guys did.

Maybethey did it as they picked up a cheap machine from the other companies selling it. But seriously i'd be surprised if that is their first one.

And Drew I don't think this is a Nik Can debate thread although some 'ahem' jealous Nik users are obviously trying to make it into one. I thought this thread was about Canons progress and if we thought it was satisfactory and why we always want more. Both of which are kinda rhetorical questions as it is obvious Canon's progress far exceeds mosts expectations and needs, and is therefor more than satisfactory.

Yes there are things left to improve, but they obviously know what they are doing as they are working in the right direction each time.

just for laughs... there is a ]n mpeg movie of that 10 fps shutter here, on the right, most of the way down:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E1DMK3/E1DMK3A.HTM

just for laughs... there is a ]n mpeg movie of that 10 fps shutter here, on the right, most of the way down:

 

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E1DMK3/E1DMK3A.HTM

Not 10 fps, but here is 8 fps with existing Canon 1DMKII. Originals were shot in RAW, never a problem with writing to buffer to record whole sequence. 10 fps should be fun!

Actually, the big benefit of the Canon 1D Mark III for underwater photographers is the Live View feature with the 3" diagonal LCD. We'll have to wait for housings to come out to support it of course.

With live view you have a large screen to look at, which I prefer to viewfinders.

I presume that the 1Ds Mark III, when it comes out, will also have Live View.

I like the idea of liveview - like on the Fuji S5. But I think on both cameras the AF is disenganged. So it is really just something for helping position the camera in a hole or getting it closer to a shy creature - before switching of liveview and allowing the camera to focus before pressing the shutter.

Alex

For more on live view, here is a youtube video showing how it works:

But as Alex said, it doesn't work with AF. Now, for the FPS fanatics, check this out:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8h2AMllP0Y

Luiz