Canon 5D announced !

Annika1980 wrote:

It usually takes Nikon a year or two to catch up to Canon's latest
offerings. Once the new Nikon hits the market it takes Canon about 30
minutes to go back in front.

Yes, this is true. Nikon struggles to catch up, and then within a few
weeks Canon blows them out of the water. I'm certain that Canon does
this intentionally, and holds back on their new product introductions so
they can upstage Nikon. Yet sometimes there are surprises that Canon
can't quickly match, i.e. the audio/video in the D90, which can't be
added to the XSi since there is no microphone.

In article ,
Alan Browne wrote:

Pete D wrote:

sister sent on his way after being partners for many years, he never let
anyone else have an opinion.


Shiver me timbers, that's _your_ opinion. g

Opinions Arr like hemmoroids every butt pirate hass wun

--
Reality is a picture perfected and never looking back.

David J. Littleboy wrote:

The 1Ds series have always been _loss leaders_. Their market is tiny. A few
studios (the ones too cheap to go MF digital), camera pools, and Hollywood
plastic surgeons with too much spare cash. The point is to sucker customers
to buy into the Canon system on the hope that the technology might trickle
down to affordable cameras later. This time, that hope wasn't misplaced.
(The first 5D, we only got 12MP. Grumble.)

So much of the R&D is shared between models that it's impossible to
really say that it's a loss leader. Certainly if it was the only product
that took advantage of their full-frame sensor development, and their
firmware development, then it'd be considered a loss leader, but much of
the technology ends up in the high-volume models.

SMS wrote:

Yes, this is true. Nikon struggles to catch up, and then within a few
weeks Canon blows them out of the water. I'm certain that Canon does
this intentionally, and holds back on their new product introductions so
they can upstage Nikon. Yet sometimes there are surprises that Canon
can't quickly match, i.e. the audio/video in the D90, which can't be
added to the XSi since there is no microphone.

So the 5D Mk II (which does video *right*[1]) is just my
imagination? It didn't come out within a few days after the D90?

-Wolfgang

[1] I'm not sure if video has a meaningful place in DSLRs,
but if you include it, do it right. Including HD.

Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
SMS wrote:

Yes, this is true. Nikon struggles to catch up, and then within a few
weeks Canon blows them out of the water. I'm certain that Canon does
this intentionally, and holds back on their new product introductions so
they can upstage Nikon. Yet sometimes there are surprises that Canon
can't quickly match, i.e. the audio/video in the D90, which can't be
added to the XSi since there is no microphone.

So the 5D Mk II (which does video *right*[1]) is just my
imagination? It didn't come out within a few days after the D90?

It did, but you can hardly consider the 5D Mk II a competitor to the D90.

"Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message
...
SMS wrote:

Yes, this is true. Nikon struggles to catch up, and then within a few
weeks Canon blows them out of the water. I'm certain that Canon does
this intentionally, and holds back on their new product introductions so
they can upstage Nikon. Yet sometimes there are surprises that Canon
can't quickly match, i.e. the audio/video in the D90, which can't be
added to the XSi since there is no microphone.

So the 5D Mk II (which does video *right*[1]) is just my
imagination? It didn't come out within a few days after the D90?

-Wolfgang

[1] I'm not sure if video has a meaningful place in DSLRs,
but if you include it, do it right. Including HD.

I am curious.....Is the "video" that is included on some of the modern
DSLR's of high quality resolution, like the individual photos the DSLR can
normally take, or is it of lessor resolution like the video in a normal
videocam? IOW, if one were to take a sequence in "video cam" mode, does
each frame have the same quality resolution as it would have were one to
take individual photos with the camera, or is the resolution of lessor
quality in order to accomodate the 30 odd frames a second?

"William E. Graham" wrote in message
...

"Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message
...
SMS wrote:

Yes, this is true. Nikon struggles to catch up, and then within a few
weeks Canon blows them out of the water. I'm certain that Canon does
this intentionally, and holds back on their new product introductions so
they can upstage Nikon. Yet sometimes there are surprises that Canon
can't quickly match, i.e. the audio/video in the D90, which can't be
added to the XSi since there is no microphone.

So the 5D Mk II (which does video *right*[1]) is just my
imagination? It didn't come out within a few days after the D90?

-Wolfgang

[1] I'm not sure if video has a meaningful place in DSLRs,
but if you include it, do it right. Including HD.

I am curious.....Is the "video" that is included on some of the modern
DSLR's of high quality resolution, like the individual photos the DSLR can
normally take, or is it of lessor resolution like the video in a normal
videocam? IOW, if one were to take a sequence in "video cam" mode,
does each frame have the same quality resolution as it would have were one
to take individual photos with the camera, or is the resolution of lessor
quality in order to accomodate the 30 odd frames a second?

MOV (Video: H.264, Audio: Linear PCM)
Recording size: 1920x1080 (Full HD), 640x480 (SD)
Continuous movie shooting time: Full HD approx. 12 min. SD approx. 24 min

SMS wrote:
Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:
SMS wrote:

Yes, this is true. Nikon struggles to catch up, and then within a few
weeks Canon blows them out of the water. I'm certain that Canon does
this intentionally, and holds back on their new product introductions
so they can upstage Nikon. Yet sometimes there are surprises that
Canon can't quickly match, i.e. the audio/video in the D90, which
can't be added to the XSi since there is no microphone.

So the 5D Mk II (which does video *right*[1]) is just my
imagination? It didn't come out within a few days after the D90?

It did, but you can hardly consider the 5D Mk II a competitor to the D90.

Why not?

Apart from sensor size and number of megapixels - which makes a small
difference to image quality, the feature sets of the two cameras
(amateur AF systems, non pro VF, movie mode, low burst rates etc) are
quite similar.

"OldBoy" wrote in message
.. .
"William E. Graham" wrote in message
...

"Wolfgang Weisselberg" wrote in message
...
SMS wrote:

Yes, this is true. Nikon struggles to catch up, and then within a few
weeks Canon blows them out of the water. I'm certain that Canon does
this intentionally, and holds back on their new product introductions
so
they can upstage Nikon. Yet sometimes there are surprises that Canon
can't quickly match, i.e. the audio/video in the D90, which can't be
added to the XSi since there is no microphone.

So the 5D Mk II (which does video *right*[1]) is just my
imagination? It didn't come out within a few days after the D90?

-Wolfgang

[1] I'm not sure if video has a meaningful place in DSLRs,
but if you include it, do it right. Including HD.

I am curious.....Is the "video" that is included on some of the modern
DSLR's of high quality resolution, like the individual photos the DSLR
can normally take, or is it of lessor resolution like the video in a
normal videocam? IOW, if one were to take a sequence in "video cam"
mode, does each frame have the same quality resolution as it would have
were one to take individual photos with the camera, or is the resolution
of lessor quality in order to accomodate the 30 odd frames a second?

MOV (Video: H.264, Audio: Linear PCM)
Recording size: 1920x1080 (Full HD), 640x480 (SD)
Continuous movie shooting time: Full HD approx. 12 min. SD approx. 24 min
Well, 2 mpx ain't too bad.....I guess they keep the mirror locked up during
shoot time.....I still think one would be better off buying a camera
dedicated to videos, rather than expect one's SLR to do double duty....

["Followup-To:" header set to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems.]
____ wrote:

[83 lines quoted and mostly irrelevant material removed.
Please keep your quotes short. Thank you.]

So suppose I down sample a 21 mp image to 6x8.25 and make a full size
print from a 6 mp image at 6x8.5 your saying you won't be able to see a
difference. WOW.

Let's see. Let's assume that you can resolve 300 DPI.
On 6x9 inch that'd be less than 5MPix, hence a RGB 5MPix would
do fine. Bayer pattern sensor need some more pixel since they
have to interpolate; I shall assume a factor of SQRT(2).
You'd need almost 7 Bayer-MPix for 300 DPI on a 6x9 inch print,
6 Bayer-MPix end up as 280 DPI.

21 Bayer-MPix (~15 RGB-MPix) can theoretically give 500 DPI,
however, I fear, you'll bump into printer and paper and
eyesight limits.

Obviously, 21MPix allow you a better noise control and less
aliassing problems.

However, on the balance, I doubt you'd see many differences.
One guy ran a test, using the same image and print size, but
downsampled to different pix counts. End result: Almost noone
could say which was at higher and lower pix counts.

Geeze and I hope that 21 mp does separate tone better than
the 6 mp camera after all it is a lot more money.

Tone separation is a question of how good the converter and
the software is, not of the pixel count.

-Wolfgang