canon D20
Canon just announced their new digital reflex camera : the Canon D20. (higlights in DP review and Fredmiranda.com)
This is not a revolution but a great evolution of the 10 D
- joystick for selection AF spot, and moving in the magnified images
- Digic 2 processing with better image quality
- 8 mpx image with a 1,6 crop factor
- noise level in the same range than the 10 D
- no lag time when the camera is switch on (0,2 compared to 3 s)
- improved AF, with a 9 AF diamond pattern (more accurate than the one of the 10 D on static object , according to Canon)
- better shutter speed : 1/8000 and 1/250 synchro flash
- ETT L 2
- 5 images per second
- smaller and slighty lighter body with magnesium construction inside and outside
- USB 2 link
- new features in the white balance
- enhanced built in Flash (in line with the one of the 300 D)
- compatibility with EFS lenses
- 25 frames buffer
- real raw + jpeg mode (no need of a special soft to seperate them)
I think that I am going to upgrade. It's my 10 D without it's weakness. the 8 Mpixel will allow to make greater print like A2, while the 10 D was limited to A3.
They also release two new lenses for 1,6 crop camera
the 10-22 EFS 3,5-4,5 for 1000 $
the stabilised 18-55 EFS 4,5-5,6 for 800 $
The D20 will be sell at 1500 $
This is not a revolution but a great evolution of the 10 D
- joystick for selection AF spot, and moving in the magnified images
- Digic 2 processing with better image quality
- 8 mpx image with a 1,6 crop factor
- noise level in the same range than the 10 D
- no lag time when the camera is switch on (0,2 compared to 3 s)
- improved AF, with a 9 AF diamond pattern (more accurate than the one of the 10 D on static object , according to Canon)
- better shutter speed : 1/8000 and 1/250 synchro flash
- ETT L 2
- 5 images per second
- smaller and slighty lighter body with magnesium construction inside and outside
- USB 2 link
- new features in the white balance
- enhanced built in Flash (in line with the one of the 300 D)
- compatibility with EFS lenses
- 25 frames buffer
- real raw + jpeg mode (no need of a special soft to seperate them)
I think that I am going to upgrade. It's my 10 D without it's weakness. the 8 Mpixel will allow to make greater print like A2, while the 10 D was limited to A3.
They also release two new lenses for 1,6 crop camera
the 10-22 EFS 3,5-4,5 for 1000 $
the stabilised 18-55 EFS 4,5-5,6 for 800 $
The D20 will be sell at 1500 $
Comments
Originally posted by tonton
This is nice, but I'm more interested in the PowerShot G6.
Certainly a good camera with 7 millions pixels. The problem is that when you have taken the habit, to use a DSLR camera, you do not want to use anymore compact camera (except for travelling light)
8MP and 5fps !
That's pretty damned fast, and according to early reviews, image noise is down too.
Pretty nice 17-85 lense on offer as well.
and a neat 10-22
hmmm...
Nikon's D100 replacement is rumored to be on the way, and Sony supposedly has a 10.6MP APS sensor ready to go.
At this rate it won't be long before we're shooting 20-30MP DSLRs
We're gonna need faster computers!
Originally posted by Matsu
Incredible.
8MP and 5fps !
That's pretty damned fast, and according to early reviews, image noise is down too.
If it means splotches at high ISO, I'd rather have noise than "watercolor" smooth pictures.
Originally posted by Eugene
If it means splotches at high ISO, I'd rather have noise than "watercolor" smooth pictures.
According to fred Miranda site, there is no such problems. Technically Canon manage, to allow each photosite of the new captor to recieve the same numer of photon than the older one of the 10 D. At 400 iso, noise is not an issue at all (barely noticable).
Noise is an aera where the DSLR win against APN hands down.
I have a Canon D60, which is better than the D30, but not as good as the 1Ds, replaced by the 10D, but is now blown away by the D20, which should be worse than the D30; the precursor to my D60! So that means in a couple of years, my camera will be top-of-the-line again.
HELP!
D 30 : 3 Millions pixels
D60 : 6 millions
Then they decided to change their way of naming :
- one digit : professional cameras : EOS 1 D (mark 2) and EOS 1 Ds (s for studio,)
- two digits : experts cameras : 10 D, and now 20 D (you will never see 30 D again)
- three digits : consumers line, 300 D ...
I hear ya, what I've read so far seems to suggest that blotchiness posses no problem; noise is down through sensor and microlense process and design improvements, and that the image is not overprocessed. As for noise, yeah, we make a little too much of it. I've seen some very nice prints from prosumer 8MP sensors, and they're pretty noisy everywhere above ISO50, but they print up well if it's a suitable subject, not very different from film grain at 8x10 or below.
It will be interesting to see what comes down the line.
I've been looking at the 7MP 1/1.8" consumer camera sample pics. From a noise standpoint, they look about the same as the 5MP 1/1.8" samples. (Though, annoyingly, all they have for the G6 samples are Auto ISO shots) It looks like Sony has found some process/design improvements, the G6 images don't look overprocessed (at least not more than other Canon compacts) hmmm... Is a 10MP 2/3" sensor far behind? Or better yet, a cleaner 8MP version of the 2/3"?
Rumor has it that Sony will soon begin selling a 10.6MP APS sensor. Could it be the new D100 ?
When I first read the news, I thought that Canon may have used the 1.3X crop factor from the Mark II, but, I think sensibly, they stuck with the almost APS 1.6X size and released some lenses around it.
The 17-85 even has IS, but it is a little slow.
EOS 300D aka Digital Rebel in the US
EOS D30
EOS D60
EOS 10D (not D10 or D 10 or 10 D)
EOS 20D (not D20 or D 20 or... you get the idea)
EOS 1D (not D1, Nikon has one but Canon hasn't)
EOS 1D Mark II
EOS 1Ds
Oh yeah, I do photograph a lot. And I guess misspelling Mac models on a photography forum wouldn't be considered a crime...
reg
Originally posted by Ebby
Ironically, this painting was stolen at gunpoint yesterday :-(
Originally posted by nguyenhm16
Ironically, this painting was stolen at gunpoint yesterday :-(
Just like 10 years ago... both happened during the Olympics (back then during Winter Olympics in Lillehammer in 1994), which is quite an interesting coincidence.
Originally posted by Beige_G3
I am more than ready to get a digital SLR. This sounds like a great camera. I have used Canon film cameras doe the last several years, and will certainly stay with Canon when I go digital. The crop factor will take some getting used to though.
The crop factor is not a big issue with reflex cameras, because you shot what you see. The crop factor is fantastic for telephoto : your 300 mm is becoming a 480 and your 400 a 640 mm. For wide angles it's more problematic. my 15-30 mm act like a 24-48 mm. But luckily, for the amator of UW lenses (for me the equivalent of 24 mm is sufficiant) Canon will release a 10-22 of a 16-35.
I use to have an EOS 10 (the film body) and was happy to shot with it. Then I buyed digital cameras, but I was not that please with them. I bought a 10 D, this year and I discovered again the joy of photography.
Rumor has it that Nikon will be presenting a D100 replacement, likely to be called D90, and a D2X. Could be anywhere from 8-12MP. I know there's a 10.6MP Sony made APS sensor floating around, has been for a while -- it might start showing up in a few cams just after Photokina.
Also look for consumer DSLR models from Pentax and Olympus (though I'm not so sure 4/3rds is going anywhere), and the in camera stabilized Minolta.
On the topic of systems:
I'm really not so sure there's any point going with anything other than a Nikon or Canon based system. These have a huge catalogue of Nikkor and Canon glass, Nikkor especially has some great legacy stuff, Canon has lots of IS tele lenses.
hmmm...
Nikon or Canon, if you're just starting a collection today?
Originally posted by Speedlite
I've heard and read only good things about Olympus E-1 . It is "only" a 5 megapixel camera, but pixels aren't always the most important thing. It's a high quality system with great ergonomics and fine lenses. The only drawback is that lens selection is limited... but nevertheless it can give Canon and Nikon a run for their money. It's not for beginners, though, as the equipment is quite pricey.
Oly makes some interesting claims about their lenses. They do have the possibility of being a lot faster at a given equivalent focal length. Oly claims that they resolve twice the detail of FF lenses, and they'll need to if they stand any chance of equalling the performance of APS-C or FF cameras.
A lot of people mistake the way in which the crop factor indicates relative sensor size. A FF 35mm sensor has 4X the surface area of a 4/3rds sensor. At any given pixel pitch it will hold 4X as many pixels! Even an APS-C sensor has 2X as much surface area.
Look below:
36 x 24 = 864 mm^2
25.1 x 17.6 = 441 mm^2
18 x 13.5 = 216 mm^2
4/3rds lenses better be damned good.
Now there are other issues. A 36x24 chip is a damned big chip, and keeping noise down accross a 36mm long readout line is not easy. So it's a little harder to maintain the noise characteristics of the same pixel pitch diodes accross a 50% longer line. Look at a Kodak SLR-N, a little noiser at high ISO than some of the APS cameras. But who cares? A FF sensor camera in the right work flow can challenge a medium format back for overall resolution, and typically, they don't shoot high ISO. 20-30MP are easily achievable, and it's why most photographers predict that 35mm FF will eat a lot of the medium format market. There are two robust systems already available, so plenty of lenses, and most pros already have a 35mm system. A FF digital body will get them a digital system that's the equal of medium format, with smaller lighter lenses, and a big savings in film/processing time.
If FF 35MM replaces medium format, then APS-C digital sensors ought to replace 35mm film. We now have 6 and 8MP in a size that's not pushing any physical limits so much as production and processing limits. Both those will be solved in time, canon's digic already processes some 60+ MP per second, so more res at lower FPS is already possible provided said sensor can read out it's data fast enough. By next year entry level pro models will all be between 8-12MP, and noise won't be an issue at high iso untill we get somewhere north of 16MP. That's more than enough to compete with 35mm film -- which doesn't look tack sharp at 30" plus sizes either, it's just less aparent because the grain is less uniform (you don't see pixels, but that doesn't mean it's sharp)
And that brings us to 4/3rds. It's lenses need to be about twice as sharp to even up with APS-C, however, that doesn't get you past certain physical limits. An APS sensor will always be able to pack about 2X as many pixels of the same quality, and despite what people on web fora clamour about, there's a long way to go yet before sensors outresolve even bargain lenses.
I think the best thing to do with 4/3rds is stick it behind a fixed lense prosumer cam and replace that 2/3rds crap that's not so hot at anything above ISO 100.
Nikon and Canon are the two big players in DLSR photo.
For me the choice was simple, I had an EOS 10 (the film camera) and the transition to the 10 D was easy (same ergonomia)
Both manufacturers make great lenses. The nikon ones are a little bit more expansive, but the choice is a little bigger in UW and wide lenses (mostly zoom). At the contrary, there is more choice in tele lenses with Canon.
The camera bodies changes each years, the later tend to be the better. The D70 is better than the 10D, and the D20 will be certainly better than the D70 until the next production of Nikon.
In the professional camera line, the canon 1Dmark 2 has clearly the egde toward the nikon D2H and his limited 4MP sensor, and the two years old EOS 1 DS has no equivalent.
The Nikon Dx2 is supposed to be released soon (why not during the photokina in september) and is supposed to be based upon the 14 MP kodak sensor. Others rumors, said that Canon have in their bags, the next version of the canon 1DS.
The battle between the two giants is hard. The best advice that you can give in this situation, is to try the camera by yourself, and see what type of ergonomia you prefer. Remember that both companies are great, and you can't do mistake in the long term with any of them.
Originally posted by Matsu
Oly makes some interesting claims about their lenses. They do have the possibility of being a lot faster at a given equivalent focal length. Oly claims that they resolve twice the detail of FF lenses, and they'll need to if they stand any chance of equalling the performance of APS-C or FF cameras.
A lot of people mistake the way in which the crop factor indicates relative sensor size. A FF 35mm sensor has 4X the surface area of a 4/3rds sensor. At any given pixel pitch it will hold 4X as many pixels! Even an APS-C sensor has 2X as much surface area.
Look below:
36 x 24 = 864 mm^2
25.1 x 17.6 = 441 mm^2
18 x 13.5 = 216 mm^2
4/3rds lenses better be damned good.
Now there are other issues. A 36x24 chip is a damned big chip, and keeping noise down accross a 36mm long readout line is not easy. So it's a little harder to maintain the noise characteristics of the same pixel pitch diodes accross a 50% longer line. Look at a Kodak SLR-N, a little noiser at high ISO than some of the APS cameras. But who cares? A FF sensor camera in the right work flow can challenge a medium format back for overall resolution, and typically, they don't shoot high ISO. 20-30MP are easily achievable, and it's why most photographers predict that 35mm FF will eat a lot of the medium format market. There are two robust systems already available, so plenty of lenses, and most pros already have a 35mm system. A FF digital body will get them a digital system that's the equal of medium format, with smaller lighter lenses, and a big savings in film/processing time.
If FF 35MM replaces medium format, then APS-C digital sensors ought to replace 35mm film. We now have 6 and 8MP in a size that's not pushing any physical limits so much as production and processing limits. Both those will be solved in time, canon's digic already processes some 60+ MP per second, so more res at lower FPS is already possible provided said sensor can read out it's data fast enough. By next year entry level pro models will all be between 8-12MP, and noise won't be an issue at high iso untill we get somewhere north of 16MP. That's more than enough to compete with 35mm film -- which doesn't look tack sharp at 30" plus sizes either, it's just less aparent because the grain is less uniform (you don't see pixels, but that doesn't mean it's sharp)
And that brings us to 4/3rds. It's lenses need to be about twice as sharp to even up with APS-C, however, that doesn't get you past certain physical limits. An APS sensor will always be able to pack about 2X as many pixels of the same quality, and despite what people on web fora clamour about, there's a long way to go yet before sensors outresolve even bargain lenses.
I think the best thing to do with 4/3rds is stick it behind a fixed lense prosumer cam and replace that 2/3rds crap that's not so hot at anything above ISO 100.
Interesting post.
I personnaly don't believe in 4/3. Nikon and Canon have choose the APS C sensor (a little bit smaller for Canon) for the prosumer DSLR cameras. Full frame will be limited for some pro and rich amateurs.
400 iso is not an issue with APS captor, but is terrible with compact digital camera. Typically (from my personal experience) 1600 iso of a 10 D is better than 400 iso of compact camera.
I wonder what will be the limit in pixels in DSLR camera, and I expect they will not go further than 12 Mpixels with APS size captors. I will prefer that they will increase the signal noise ratio, and the possibility to catch high lights (a week point of all digital cameras). 12 mpixel is good enough for huge prints like A1.
The real problems are storage and processing power. What do you do with 20-50MB image files?
For consumers we need better JPEGs in-camera. For enthusiasts we need faster procesing and cheaper storage!