Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 26, 2007, 2:01 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 574
Default

JohnG wrote:
Quote:
DRGSin wrote:
Quote:
And while Im throwing dumb ones out there, heres another. At what point or # will we see diminishing returns on the MP increases?
We're getting there - the lenses are becoming a limiting factor. There are better tech-savy people here than me, but I seem to recall 22mp as being the limit of the resolving power of the Canon/Nikon lenses.

Kind of scary to think about - given the pricess of the lenses of today what a new breed of pro series lenses would cost - guess then we're into large format territory.
Thanks for clearing that up for me. It makes sense to me now. I guess with the difference in price, Resolution is more difficult to come by than speed. One other question, when youre talking about10MP vs 16MP- there has to be a pretty noticable difference in sharpness/clarity, right? I understandthere would be at the larger print sizes but how aboutat 8 1/2 x 11 or 11x 14?
DRGSin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2007, 2:07 PM   #12
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

DRGSin wrote:
Quote:
One other question, when youre talking about10MP vs 16MP- there has to be a pretty noticable difference in sharpness/clarity, right? I understandthere would be at the larger print sizes but how aboutat 8 1/2 x 11 or 11x 14?
No not really - not without cropping. The human eye just doesn't see the difference and most printing can't handle it anyway - I don't think it's recognizable to see the difference between say a 270 dpi print and a 400 dpi print. I think you're looking at 16x20 or largeer before you see a difference from an uncropped photo. Of course 16mp would allow you to crop more.

But remember - more MP = more noise. Canon's 1ds and 5d are full frame so you still maintain pixel quality. Cramming more MP on a aps-c sensor requires advancements to deal with the noise and other problems that occur when you cram more data into the same size sensor.

JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2007, 10:05 PM   #13
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

To add to JohnG's excellent comments it's not just higher resolution, but IMO the dynamic range is also quite critical when one looks @ higher Mp with larger frame sensors (or especially larger format) - The MrkIII also tries to address this by capturing 14_bit (instead of 12), but we'll have to wait and see...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2007, 10:12 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 574
Default

As usual, great info guys! Does PSCS2 or the up coming CS3 handle 14 bit data?
DRGSin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2007, 2:08 AM   #15
Super Moderator
 
peripatetic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,599
Default

CS2 handles 32-bit data, so no need to worry there.

Currently the Canon DSLRs use 12 bits of real data in a 16-bit address space. The increase to 14 bits will not make any difference to image editors or file sizes.

Nor as I understand it does bit-depth have anything to do with dynamic range. But it is a very welcome feature nontheless, which should provide more subtle rendition of colour detail.
peripatetic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2007, 11:05 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

The 1Ds MkII already out-resolves detail in the cheaper Canon lenses. So it could be said that we are already reaching the point where more MP doesn't matter. I didn't know it was around 22MP where the limit would be reached. Very interesting.

I had a thought about manual focus in Live View. Does anyone know if the mirror *has* to be in place to have auto-focus work? My guess is yes. If so, then it only makes sense that Live View would not allow AF.

I'm not saying I don't want AF (I do) but that they would have had to do a lot more (which would raise the price of the camera) to get AF to work in Live View.

Still, being able to see what I'm shooting with the mirror locked up would be really nice. I often shoot wildlife (stationary wildlife like a perched owl) with mirror lockup, but it's a gamble because I can't see what I'm shooting. So I use it as a way to get sharper images in low light, not as a way to capture that critical moment.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2007, 11:19 AM   #17
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

eric s wrote:
Quote:
I didn't know it was around 22MP where the limit would be reached. Very interesting.
I wouldn't put too much credence in my statement of that figure - again, I can't recall the specifics of the thread on another forum a while back where some of the more tech-savy folks were discussing this. So for now - I'll frankly admit this is complete heresay. But I'm fairly confident the number discussed was in the 20s - it just might not be 22.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2007, 1:17 PM   #18
djb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,289
Default

I think Canon could have put a second AF sensor or have the image sensor do the AF like p&s cameras. A little hardware and a little software would allow AF. If the mirror is locked up then the camera can go to the other sensor for live view. my 2 cents. How does one hold a camera up over one's head to get a picture from a inn a croud and manually focus?? doesn't seem practical to me. never the less, I want one!

dennis
djb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 27, 2007, 1:38 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 774
Default

djb wrote:
Quote:
I think Canon could have put a second AF sensor or have the image sensor do the AF like p&s cameras. A little hardware and a little software would allow AF. If the mirror is locked up then the camera can go to the other sensor for live view. my 2 cents. How does one hold a camera up over one's head to get a picture from a inn a croud and manually focus?? doesn't seem practical to me. never the less, I want one!

dennis
Hey dennis,

How? Very skillfully?? :-)At least you still can manually focus while looking through the LCD or remotely using a computer. Though, obviously being able to AF while in LiveView mode would be that much better IMHO.

A 2nd AF sensor? Heh!! Sure why not? It already has 2 DIGIC III sensorsso why not2 AF sensors (shrugs). Could it work?Or how about a firmware tweak? Or does it have to be a hardware fix? Of course I'm nota professional electrical engineer so those are just guesses. But, how ever Canon makes it work...if they are even considering it...I hope they implement it before they start rolling out the 1DM3s. Because I'd love one too!!Not that this would be a deal breaker if they didn't make this change. :-)
DarkDTSHD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 3, 2007, 5:48 AM   #20
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

There's a video of LiveView over here: http://photo-i.co.uk/News/Feb_07/Canon_spring.html

-> The new operation with the 4-way 'joystick' is also much improved over the double key pressed of the older series...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:38 AM.