New Canon EIS mirrorless system - Four Thirds, but not Four Thirds!

On 9/13/2010 4:49 AM, Bruce wrote:
There are strong rumours that Canon's EIS mirrorless camera system
will be announced at Photokina later this month. The sensor size is
very, very close to Four Thirds.

Basic specs:

22 MP sensor , size 18 x 12 mm (Four Thirds is 17.3 x 13 mm)
1080P video at up to 30 fps
ISO 100-6400 native
Dual SD card slots

Rumored EIS-format lenses include the following (remember to consider
the 2x crop factor):

12-75mm f/2.8-4 IS Macro (kit lens)
75-300mm f/3.5-5.6 IS
5mm f/4 Fisheye
8-25mm f/4
14mm f/2 Pancake
25mm f/1.2 Pancake
45mm f/1.5 Pancake
65mm f/2 Macro

Also they've announced an EF lens adapter, though it's hard to imagine
using some of the large EF lenses on such a small body.

22 mpixels on an 18 x 12mm sensor huh? Are they trying to take on
Panasonic for the noisiest cameras? Maybe they've come up with some new
way to deal with noise.

The other big question is about the AF speed. One of the biggest reasons
people buy D-SLRs is for the phase-detect focusing which is so much
faster than contrast detect, but that thus far has required a mirror.

On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:18:31 -0700, SMS wrote:


One of the biggest reasons
people buy D-SLRs is for the phase-detect focusing which is so much
faster than contrast detect, but that thus far has required a mirror.

One of the biggest reasons people avoid D-SLRs is for their phase-detect
focusing which is so much less accurate than contrast detect, causing you
to lose out on 90% of the images you had attempted, finding out after you
can't reproduce that shot ever again. Reducing them all to 5"x3" print
capability. And doesn't require that noisy and image jarring slapping
mirror and shutter designed last century which prevents any expensive lens
attached to it having its resolution reduced by half. Not to mention the
crippled flash-sync speed that hasn't changed much in 70 years. The optical
viewfinder that becomes useless in low light levels and can't be used for
precision manual focusing in any light levels, etc., etc., etc. ....

On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:18:31 -0700, SMS wrote:


One of the biggest reasons
people buy D-SLRs is for the phase-detect focusing which is so much
faster than contrast detect, but that thus far has required a mirror.

One of the biggest reasons people avoid D-SLRs is for their phase-detect
focusing which is so much less accurate than contrast detect, causing you
to lose out on 90% of the images you had attempted, finding out after you
can't reproduce that shot ever again. Reducing them all to 5"x3" print
capability. Or that noisy and image jarring slapping mirror and shutter
designed last century causing any expensive lens attached to it having its
resolution reduced by half. Not to mention the crippled flash-sync speed
that hasn't changed much in 70 years. The optical viewfinder that becomes
useless in low light levels and can't be used for precision manual focusing
in any light levels, etc., etc., etc. ....

On 14/09/2010 01:08, Outing Pretend-PhotographerTrolls is FUN! wrote:
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:18:31 -0700, wrote:


One of the biggest reasons
people buy D-SLRs is for the phase-detect focusing which is so much
faster than contrast detect, but that thus far has required a mirror.

One of the biggest reasons people avoid D-SLRs is for their phase-detect
focusing which is so much less accurate than contrast detect,

99.99% of the people not using DSLRs don't even know phase-focusing
exists (and they don't know about contrast focusing, either).

And, er, "slapping mirror and shutter designed last century which
prevents any expensive lens attached to it having its resolution reduced
by half", that reads that the DSLR shutter allows the lens to be used at
full resolution, right?

--
Bertrand

["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems.]
Ofnuts wrote:
On 14/09/2010 01:08, Outing Pretend-PhotographerTrolls is FUN! wrote:
On Mon, 13 Sep 2010 09:18:31 -0700, wrote:


One of the biggest reasons
people buy D-SLRs is for the phase-detect focusing which is so much
faster than contrast detect, but that thus far has required a mirror.

One of the biggest reasons people avoid D-SLRs is for their phase-detect
focusing which is so much less accurate than contrast detect,

99.99% of the people not using DSLRs don't even know phase-focusing
exists (and they don't know about contrast focusing, either).

They just wonder why everything takes ages to focus.

And, er, "slapping mirror and shutter designed last century which
prevents any expensive lens attached to it having its resolution reduced
by half", that reads that the DSLR shutter allows the lens to be used at
full resolution, right?

Obviously. Contrary to P&S cameras with contrast focus designed
last century which allows even slow spiders to escape from being
photographed. Of course there is one exception, P&S cameras with
fixed focus, a design from 2 centuries ago, which allows one to
snapshot without waiting for the camera.

-Wolfgang

On 15/09/2010 00:37, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:

One of the biggest reasons people avoid D-SLRs is for their phase-detect
focusing which is so much less accurate than contrast detect,

99.99% of the people not using DSLRs don't even know phase-focusing
exists (and they don't know about contrast focusing, either).

They just wonder why everything takes ages to focus.

They just wonder why everything takes ages, period. Most of them haven't
even got the concept of "focus".

--
Bertrand

On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 08:30:09 +0200, Ofnuts
wrote:

On 15/09/2010 00:37, Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:

One of the biggest reasons people avoid D-SLRs is for their phase-detect
focusing which is so much less accurate than contrast detect,

99.99% of the people not using DSLRs don't even know phase-focusing
exists (and they don't know about contrast focusing, either).

They just wonder why everything takes ages to focus.

They just wonder why everything takes ages, period. Most of them haven't
even got the concept of "focus".

Proving that you know nothing about any cameras. Compact and superzoom
cameras have shutter lags of around 40-45ms today, and less. One tested
last year has a shutter lag of only 32ms. Compare to 55-150ms (90ms
typical) for all non-pellicle-mirror DSLRs having to take all that time to
move that loudly slapping mirror and shutter out of the way, while they jar
the camera and thereby reducing that pricey lens to 1/2 its bench-tested
600%-1000% markup-priced resolution.

Not too bright? Are you. But then that's typical for any of you
role-playing pretend-photographer trolls who have never touched even one
real camera in your lifetimes.

..

On 15/09/2010 11:18, Outing Trolls is FUN! wrote:
99.99% of the people not using DSLRs don't even know phase-focusing
exists (and they don't know about contrast focusing, either).

They just wonder why everything takes ages to focus.

They just wonder why everything takes ages, period. Most of them haven't
even got the concept of "focus".

Proving that you know nothing about any cameras. Compact and superzoom
cameras have shutter lags of around 40-45ms today, and less. One tested
last year has a shutter lag of only 32ms.

Focus time included, of course, since it's what we are talking about...

--
Bertrand

On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 11:42:21 +0200, Ofnuts
wrote:

On 15/09/2010 11:18, Outing Trolls is FUN! wrote:
99.99% of the people not using DSLRs don't even know phase-focusing
exists (and they don't know about contrast focusing, either).

They just wonder why everything takes ages to focus.

They just wonder why everything takes ages, period. Most of them haven't
even got the concept of "focus".

Proving that you know nothing about any cameras. Compact and superzoom
cameras have shutter lags of around 40-45ms today, and less. One tested
last year has a shutter lag of only 32ms.

Focus time included, of course, since it's what we are talking about...

What? Are you one of those lame crapshooter snapshooters that can only take
photos with an auto-everything camera? That is what you are saying, you do
realize that don't you. I generally use manual focus. And I pre-focus for
action shots. So there's no lag for anything that I shoot due to focus
issues. But since you insist on bringing this up. Then for auto-focus
preferences I would MUCH rather have a slightly longer and MUCH MORE
ACCURATE contrast-focusing where 100 out of 100 shots I intend to take are
IN PERFECT FOCUS. Compared to the HIGHLY INACCURATE phase focusing where 95
out of 100 shots are OUT OF FOCUS. Making them all but useless for anything
more than 5"x3" prints, or less. Plus you can't even go back to try to
correct for the error the majority of the time. It's far to late for that.
You forget, we've seen that ratio already depicted in all the shots from
DSLRs posted to these newsgroups. You can't deny it even if you wanted to.

Perhaps you should try to pretend having some other interest or profession
with your imaginary equipment and imaginary knowledge in some other
newsgroup. Then you wouldn't be so clearly outted so often for the
KNOW-NOTHING troll that you are.

On 15/09/2010 12:12, Outing Trolls is FUN! wrote:
On Wed, 15 Sep 2010 11:42:21 +0200,
wrote:

On 15/09/2010 11:18, Outing Trolls is FUN! wrote:
99.99% of the people not using DSLRs don't even know phase-focusing
exists (and they don't know about contrast focusing, either).

They just wonder why everything takes ages to focus.

They just wonder why everything takes ages, period. Most of them haven't
even got the concept of "focus".

Proving that you know nothing about any cameras. Compact and superzoom
cameras have shutter lags of around 40-45ms today, and less. One tested
last year has a shutter lag of only 32ms.

Focus time included, of course, since it's what we are talking about...

What? Are you one of those lame crapshooter snapshooters that can only take
photos with an auto-everything camera? That is what you are saying, you do
realize that don't you.

Well, yes, I purchase a camera with automatic bits, so I use them,
especially when they work well. Isn't CHDK, that you created almost
single-handed if I believe your declarations here and there, a bag of
additional automation? Should the people who use CHDK motion detection
to shoot lightnings spends hours instead with their finger tensed on the
shutter button waiting for a strike?

I generally use manual focus.

But the general public doesn't.

And I pre-focus for action shots.

If you can pre-focus, it's not really action. Unless you count a hamster
in its wheel as action. How do you prefocus on birds in flight?

So there's no lag for anything that I shoot due to focus
issues. But since you insist on bringing this up. Then for auto-focus
preferences I would MUCH rather have a slightly longer and MUCH MORE
ACCURATE contrast-focusing where 100 out of 100 shots I intend to take are
IN PERFECT FOCUS.

If your automatic contrast focus is 100% perfect, why do you use manual
focus? Shot yourself in the foot here, didn't you?

--
Bertrand