If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
21MP 1Ds Mark III Announced
Hi All,
The 1Ds Mark III officially announced: http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=1071 Cheers, Wayne -- Wayne J. Cosshall Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/ Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/ Photography and Art Forums http://www.dimagemaker.com/forums/index.php Personal art site http://www.cosshall.com/ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
21MP 1Ds Mark III Announced
"Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote in news:46c957eb$0$6925
: http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=1071 Good news for Hard rive manufacturers LOL Mick Brown |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
21MP 1Ds Mark III Announced
Ain't that the truth
Wayne J. Cosshall Publisher, The Digital ImageMaker, http://www.dimagemaker.com/ Blog http://www.digitalimagemakerworld.com/ Photography and Art Forums http://www.dimagemaker.com/forums/index.php Personal art site http://www.cosshall.com/ Mick Brown wrote: "Wayne J. Cosshall" wrote in news:46c957eb$0$6925 : http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=1071 Good news for Hard rive manufacturers LOL Mick Brown |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
21MP 1Ds Mark III Announced
Wayne J. Cosshall wrote:
Hi All, The 1Ds Mark III officially announced: http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=1071 Cheers, Wayne Pretty impressive, but you can get a medium format Mamiya ZD for $1,000 less. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
21MP 1Ds Mark III Announced
"frederick" wrote: Wayne J. Cosshall wrote: Hi All, The 1Ds Mark III officially announced: http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=1071 Pretty impressive, but you can get a medium format Mamiya ZD for $1,000 less. Mamiya says US$9,999. Where are you seeing it for US$7,000??? http://www.mamiya.com/cameras.asp?id=1&id2=2281 David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
21MP 1Ds Mark III Announced
On Aug 20, 1:21 pm, "David J. Littleboy" wrote:
"frederick" wrote: Wayne J. Cosshall wrote: Hi All, The 1Ds Mark III officially announced: http://www.dimagemaker.com/article.php?articleID=1071 Pretty impressive, but you can get a medium format Mamiya ZD for $1,000 less. Mamiya says US$9,999. Where are you seeing it for US$7,000??? http://www.mamiya.com/cameras.asp?id=1&id2=2281 David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan Hey David, did you notice the 1ds mkiii's pixel pitch? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
21MP 1Ds Mark III Announced
"acl" wrote: Hey David, did you notice the 1ds mkiii's pixel pitch? Nope. Haven't computed it yet. Sheesh. I must be getting old. (Or fried by the heat.) Let's see. 21.1 MP implies that'd be 8.2MP in a 1.6x camera or 9.4MP in a 1.5x camera. 5616 x 3744 = 3744/24 = 156 pixels per mm, or 6.4 microns. That's a Nyquist frequency of 78 lp/mm, and you'd like 50% MTF at around 75% of that, so that's 58 lp/mm. 800/58 = 13.8, so the beast will probably be, like the D2x, a tad soft at f/16. (Has the heat fried my math???) So for max sharpness, you're going to be shooting at f/8 and f/11 a lot with lenses under 100mm. Of course, my reading of figure 5 on this page indicates that there's no point to bothering with a 14-bit A/D converter on either this or the 40D. (Note that the 10MP D200 is a straight line down from its ISO 100 performance, which means that the ADC + electronics are adequate to pull out all the sensor is giving at ISO 100.) It sure looks to me that 14 bits only will be making sense on the 1DIII and 5DII (if such a creature appears at 16MP). http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...ary/index.html David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
21MP 1Ds Mark III Announced
On Aug 20, 2:14 pm, "David J. Littleboy" wrote:
"acl" wrote: Hey David, did you notice the 1ds mkiii's pixel pitch? Nope. Haven't computed it yet. Sheesh. I must be getting old. (Or fried by the heat.) Let's see. 21.1 MP implies that'd be 8.2MP in a 1.6x camera or 9.4MP in a 1.5x camera. 5616 x 3744 = 3744/24 = 156 pixels per mm, or 6.4 microns. That's a Nyquist frequency of 78 lp/mm, and you'd like 50% MTF at around 75% of that, so that's 58 lp/mm. 800/58 = 13.8, so the beast will probably be, like the D2x, a tad soft at f/16. (Has the heat fried my math???) No calculator, no idea 6 microns seems right. Right about as big as the d200's pixels So for max sharpness, you're going to be shooting at f/8 and f/11 a lot with lenses under 100mm. lateral CA can be a serious problem on the d200. I think it'll be a nightmare to find lenses to use on the 1dsmkiii (if you look at pixels). Of course, my reading of figure 5 on this page indicates that there's no point to bothering with a 14-bit A/D converter on either this or the 40D. (Note that the 10MP D200 is a straight line down from its ISO 100 performance, which means that the ADC + electronics are adequate to pull out all the sensor is giving at ISO 100.) It sure looks to me that 14 bits only will be making sense on the 1DIII and 5DII (if such a creature appears at 16MP). http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...erformance.sum... Yes, that's what one would conclude from that page. Probaly the case. Let's see what the advantage of 14 bit ADCs are for the 10mp camera (the 1dmkiii or whatever the right name is), I am curious. Do you know of any test or practical demonstration? A few days ago, I attempted to go to dpreview to check if anybody had done it; instead, I ended up having an argument in the nikon forum with some pompous idiot who claimed that the size of the diffraction spot depends on the focal length (he also claimed that photons have a length equal to their wavelength, and other things of this sort...). So if there's a test somewhere there about the 14-bit ADCs, I missed it Any links? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
21MP 1Ds Mark III Announced
On Aug 20, 8:14 am, "David J. Littleboy" wrote:
"acl" wrote: Hey David, did you notice the 1ds mkiii's pixel pitch? Nope. Haven't computed it yet. Sheesh. I must be getting old. (Or fried by the heat.) Let's see. 21.1 MP implies that'd be 8.2MP in a 1.6x camera or 9.4MP in a 1.5x camera. 5616 x 3744 = 3744/24 = 156 pixels per mm, or 6.4 microns. That's a Nyquist frequency of 78 lp/mm, and you'd like 50% MTF at around 75% of that, so that's 58 lp/mm. 800/58 = 13.8, so the beast will probably be, like the D2x, a tad soft at f/16. (Has the heat fried my math???) So for max sharpness, you're going to be shooting at f/8 and f/11 a lot with lenses under 100mm. Of course, my reading of figure 5 on this page indicates that there's no point to bothering with a 14-bit A/D converter on either this or the 40D. (Note that the 10MP D200 is a straight line down from its ISO 100 performance, which means that the ADC + electronics are adequate to pull out all the sensor is giving at ISO 100.) It sure looks to me that 14 bits only will be making sense on the 1DIII and 5DII (if such a creature appears at 16MP). http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...erformance.sum... David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan Expect Leica, Zeiss and Olympus OM WAs to get even more expensive on Ebay. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
21MP 1Ds Mark III Announced
David,
I've always enjoyed your posts here. Can you help me understand the mathematics of: Let's see. 21.1 MP implies that'd be 8.2MP in a 1.6x camera or 9.4MP in a 1.5x camera. 5616 x 3744 = 3744/24 = 156 pixels per mm, or 6.4 microns. This is NOT a criticism of your post. On the contrary, it's a sincere attempt on my part to understand the mathematics of sensor size, pixel size, and overall image quality. In particular, I'd love to hear your thoughts on how the 1Ds Mark III would compare to my D2Xs. I've thought of swapping systems when the 1Ds Mark III was released, but I'm not so sure now. Thanks in advance, John "David J. Littleboy" wrote in message ... "acl" wrote: Hey David, did you notice the 1ds mkiii's pixel pitch? Nope. Haven't computed it yet. Sheesh. I must be getting old. (Or fried by the heat.) Let's see. 21.1 MP implies that'd be 8.2MP in a 1.6x camera or 9.4MP in a 1.5x camera. 5616 x 3744 = 3744/24 = 156 pixels per mm, or 6.4 microns. That's a Nyquist frequency of 78 lp/mm, and you'd like 50% MTF at around 75% of that, so that's 58 lp/mm. 800/58 = 13.8, so the beast will probably be, like the D2x, a tad soft at f/16. (Has the heat fried my math???) So for max sharpness, you're going to be shooting at f/8 and f/11 a lot with lenses under 100mm. Of course, my reading of figure 5 on this page indicates that there's no point to bothering with a 14-bit A/D converter on either this or the 40D. (Note that the 10MP D200 is a straight line down from its ISO 100 performance, which means that the ADC + electronics are adequate to pull out all the sensor is giving at ISO 100.) It sure looks to me that 14 bits only will be making sense on the 1DIII and 5DII (if such a creature appears at 16MP). http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...ary/index.html David J. Littleboy Tokyo, Japan |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
21MP 1Ds Mark III Announced | Wayne J. Cosshall | Digital Photography | 164 | August 30th 07 07:59 AM |
Canon Just announced the EOS-1D Mark III | Wayne J. Cosshall | Digital Photography | 132 | March 2nd 07 06:22 PM |
Canon Just announced the EOS-1D Mark III | Wayne J. Cosshall | Digital SLR Cameras | 121 | March 2nd 07 06:22 PM |
A $1200 21MP Digital Camera | kz8rt3 | Digital SLR Cameras | 21 | September 4th 05 01:17 AM |
Mark Morgan (MarkČ) | [email protected] | 35mm Photo Equipment | 13 | February 4th 05 09:39 PM |