Will there be a S3?

If you down sized this to 24 x 36 mm full frame 35mm size you have a 15 MP sensor (30 MP interpolated).

Not by my math. The full frame is less than half the area of the MF back. I figured it at 9mp. I wonder what size the photosites are.

Do you see value in bracketing TTL strobe with macro and digital? I understand your thinking for film. Perhaps it allows you to get a little closer to full exposure without worrying about blowout.

I have very little experience shooting film underwater. But my buddy uses an F5 in Subal housing, and I'm impressed by the accuracy of his exposures. I had basically convinced myself that we don't need TTL with our dSLRs, but it sure would be nice to be able to concentrate on composition first. I can see why someone with film experience would see this as a huge drawback.

I feel that most of my exposures are close (or close enough to correct in software_ on the first try, but setting up each shot certainly takes more time than with TTL. And shooting swimming fish is MUCH more difficult because the strobe-subject distance is constantly changing. Finally, a reliable TTL system (and there is debate whether the S2 TTL is reliable) might allow me to shoot in less forgiving modes - JPEG or TIF, thus dramatically reducing my post processing time.

I believe that the convenience of digital outweighs all of its drawbacks, but unless we clamor for these improvements they will never come. The camera manufacturers have focused on one thing to sell their cameras - Megapixels. Hopefully as this war draws to a close, the importance of camera features (and I don't mean MPEG record) will emerge as the differentiating factor.

If you down sized this to 24 x 36 mm full frame 35mm size you have a 15 MP sensor (30 MP interpolated).

 

Not by my math. The full frame is less than half the area of the MF back. I figured it at 9mp. I wonder what size the photosites are.

Assuming the pixels cells are square on the Fuji sensor, I also get 9MP and a cell width of 9.65 microns. Note that this sensor is 4:3, not 3:2.

One advantage if the S3 was made on the same F80 chassis as the S2 is that it might fit in existing S2 housings?

Just for fun, what would people prefer? A camera that meant they wouldn't have to fork out for a new housing? Or a camera with better AF, viewfinder and batteries?

Interesting conundrum. Not that we get to choose.

Alex

That's a great question Alex. That's why I'm hoping that the theoretical 1D replacement from Canon maintains the same body. That way, there's at least 1 or 2 housings that could take it right away if I got the body and if I decided to house it. That's a slightly different problem than with the S2 though, as it sounds like the 1D / 1Ds body is more full featured than the S2.

Just for fun, what would people prefer? A camera that meant they wouldn't have to fork out for a new housing? Or a camera with better AF, viewfinder and batteries?

I would go for better AF/Batteries/Body

Like many many people on the 'net, you could sum up my desire as "A fuji imaging chip in my F100".

Not owning a current S2 or housing for same, I would have no concerns with a significant change in form factor.

It is possible for the S3 to get a better battery by virtue of using the D100 chassis. There is the possibility that the S3 could be built on the D100, rather than the S2, and be able to use those housings. I don't think that makes a better camera than a F100 base would, but it's a third option.

Scorpiofish and Craig are right. 9.29 MP, guess my brain and calculator were not in sync. James' 11 MP sensor sounds better already.

Doug