valliesto

The simple answer is no one that really knows can or will tell you, and anyone that claims to know something now is only guessing.

 

The other poster is right, if the 1D meets your needs and is up to the quality you want, now is the time to buy. It is a great tool. On the other hand something new will be released soon (well that is the common wisdom).

 

If I were going to bet on a date when we get more information on a replacement, I would say not until PMA in Feb. You can pretty much bank on a new camera before the Summer Olympics.

 

(of course I am only guessing as well)

Visit the link provided above, you will find some very good information there regarding the proper way to read a histogram. The information provided by VS is much too simplistic and misleading.

Full frame prices will not be reduced at the same rate as the 1.6x DSLRs. The smaller sensors have come down in price because so many units have been sold. Full frame sensors may never sell in the same unit quantities, so most likely they will come down in price only with higher chip yields and reduced fabrication costs. This will result in a much more gradual reduction in price, and one that may not (will not?) reach the same price floor as the smaller sensors.

 

Using the current full frame cameras (the Canon 1Ds & Kodak 14n) as a guide, a full frame sensor appears to cost between 3 and 4 thousand dollars. Even if we assume that the prices on these sensors will drop at the rate people like to call "Moore's Law" (They won't drop that fast but let's pretend). The camera you suggest will be available in 4.5 years. That is how long it would take for the sensor to be priced at $375 and assuming (lots of assumptions, I know) the other components needed drop at about the same rate.

 

Of course I have no better ability to predict the future than anyone else, so I may be off by a large margin, but I feel pretty confident that you can use 4 years as the minimum you will have to wait for this to become reality.

I would go for the 10D. The ability to shoot as much as you want without worrying about film costs will help you greatly.

Thanks for the chuckle. But unless you want your post (and yourself by association) to be taken as a joke, please post some information backing up your statement.

 

Canon lenses are indeed made of glass and are some of the highest quality optics made. Now on some EF lenses(mostly on the lower end models) there have been trade offs made to reduce the weight of the elements and thereby the weight of the lens. But plastic lens elements just are not one of them, now plastic mounts are another issue all together.

I have always thought that when you had a veiwfinder with less than 100% coverage, you could not be certain that the viewfinder image would be centered in the crop (my D30 was like this, its viewfinder image was off center in the vertical). Is that the problem here or am I thinking of a different issue?

This price drop is great for those looking for a 1D and bad for Nikon and their D2h.

 

I wonder why so many people think that the 3D (if it ever shows up), will be a replacement for the 1D? The 3D would most likely have a lower FPS, smaller buffer and CF interface speed. If there is a 3D (I think there will be), it will be in additon to a 1D type model. The more interesting question is when or will the 1D and 1Ds merge in to one model.

Jose,

 

As I understand it, when set to AWB the camera sets the white balance according to the image data (and any external WB sensor if present). It is not picking from one of the presets.

BTW this is not the embedded JPEG in the D60/10D/300D RAW files but the dual file system as used in the 1D and 1Ds.

 

Once you shoot like this it is impossible to go back to either just RAW or JPEG alone. You get all the pluses of both formats and the only thing it ends up costing is space on the CF card.

Canon could very well sell a 4IS lens at around a $1000 and a non IS 2.8 lens at the same price.

 

Having a line up that looks like this:

~$550 70-200/4,

~$1000 70-200/2.8 & 70-200/4IS,

~$1600 70-200/2.8IS,

makes a lot of sense. There is something for every budget and every need. You pay your money and take your choice at the $1k mark. Each lens would be able to do something the other lens could not.

 

That said I am not sure that there would be a big enough market to justify the R&D costs of developing a 4IS version. But if Canon plans to discontinue the non-IS versions, an IS version of the F/4 is certain.

I am with you on the lower prices, but with the way the cameras are flying off the shelves at current prices, it will be awhile before we get to the levels you suggest. Especially for the fullframe sensor models.

If you look at the Canon DSLR line up right now you can see that there is room for a $2500-3000 camera. This would place this imaginary camera pretty well between the 1D (or its replacement) on the high end and the 10D on the low end.

<p>

As for specs I would think it would look something like this:<br>

- 45 point AF and metering system from the 1D/1V/3 series<br>

- 1.3x CMOS sensor with 6 to 8Mp<br>

- buffer in the neighborhood of 12 frames<br>

- 5FPS max<br>

- Build quality more similar to the 10D than the 1D, with the ability to remove the battery grip like the 10D<p>

 

Full frame would make the camera either too expensive or cause it to steal sales from the 1Ds.

If you bought it last weekend it would be an easier matter to return it than to have it serviced.

 

I've never had hot pixels on my CMOS Canon DSLRs (or my CCD Canon for that matter) so I am not sure about remapping, but I bet you have to send it to the CA or NJ service center for repair.

Couple of quick thoughts:

 

Are you decoding raw files in to 16bit TIFFs with the linear option? If so this would explain your problem exactly.

 

Do the histograms look the same in Photoshop as they do on the Camera LCD?

 

What happens if you open the images with a program other than Photoshop? If they appear fine then there is a problem with your PS settings. Do other images look fine in PS?

The more interesting question is did Canon really build two versions of this lens? Or could it be that the USM is really the micro-motor USM and they just didn't want to label it as USM for the US market?

The pixel per inch measurement only makes sense when you are talking about printing an image. A digital image does not have a "real" size until you actually print it. For example either a 10D or a 300D would produce a 6.8x10.24" print at 300PPI, or a 68x102.4" print at 30PPI.

 

Both cameras produce files that are the same size, 2048x3072 pixels or 6Mp. I am not sure why Canon sets different PPI (Pixels Per Inch) defaults for the different cameras. The print quality would be the same in terms of pixels per inch, because both cameras produce the same number of pixels on their imager.

Alexander you should read this article, it will answer most of your questions.

<br>

<a href="http://photonotes.org/other/ai-servo.html">http://photonotes.org/other/ai-servo.html</a>

<p>

The short version is that AI-Servo will not always give you an accurate first shot.

I will cast another vote for using rechargeable. Not only do they provide more power and a longer life, they will save you a boat load of money.

 

When I first bought the rechargeables I did a side by side test with regular batteries and there was no comparison. The rechargeable were miles ahead in terms or recycle times.

I would bet that the output from a 300D and a 10D would be so close in quality as to make it impossible to tell them apart (if not identical). I am not 100% positive but I think that the internal guts (sensor, processing engine, AF sensor, and metering) of the 10D and 300D are the same.

 

The canon press release for the 300D states:

 

"The 6.3 Megapixel CMOS sensor is almost identical to that found in the EISA award-winning EOS 10D which remains the benchmark for image quality. ISO speeds of 100, 200, 400, 800 and 1600 are selectable, giving film users a film speed range with which they will be comfortable."

 

Most likely it is exactly identical in design, since that would make the most sense from a production stand point. Maybe the ones in the 300D scored slightly lower in the QC checks?

 

I hope someone will do a side by side test so we can know for sure, but I would be surprised if the results were vastly different.

The EFS lens has a rubber bumper and is keyed differently (I think, since there is a white dot for alignment in addition to the standard red dot on EOS cameras.) to prevent it from damaging or being mounted on a standard EOS camera.

 

Even with the rubber bumper, I would not want to see what it would do to the mirror of a regular EOS. But the mounts appear to be indentical, as the included images shows.<div></div>

Like the posters above me, I do not believe that the EFS lens signals any shift in Canons' plans the EF system. The EFS lens was designed so that the 300D kit would have a "28-90mm" kit lens, same as the 300V kit lens. EFS is only possible because of the mirror design/size of the 300D, it would not carry over to any other digital or film cameras.

 

The idea that there will be L series EFS lenses is laughable. The main consumers of the EFS lens idea are the people who buy the bundle and rarely buy another lens. They would not want to spend the money to buy an L class lens. It would be a waste of R&D to produce such a lens.

 

Now a DX style lens to give wide angle coverage to users of less than full frame Canon DSLRs is another issue all together. If Canon were to build such a lens it would most likely be an L, but the EFS is not that lens.

The problem with this lens is it is not useable on any other EOS camera, and is only available when bundled with the 300D, and is built to the level of a kit lens (I am guessing here but it seems right).

 

A DX type solution from Canon would be a good thing, but I don't think this is it.

The EF-S lens was released to make the digital Rebel kit the "same" as the film Rebel kit. Lots of first time users will be happy with the "28-90"mm range. I do not think this will be the start of a DX type line from Canon, if it were it would have been fully useable on all EF cameras.

 

Let us just hope this does not signal a fork in the Canon EF system. The EF system is too great of an asset for Canon to squander in this way.

I think by the end of this year we will see the 10D selling for just around a thousand dollars. It is a long way from $500, but it is incredible if you consider where we were just 5 years ago.

 

I too agree with the price floor idea. I think Canon will not try to build a cut cost model, but instead will keep the entry level DSLR price stable around $1000 and work to improve the features you get for your money. The $500 DSLRs will be the used models that are a generation or so old, at least for the next 5 years or so. After that who knows?

The Canon wireless system uses 3 channels (A,B,C) You can have as many flashes per channel as you want (I do not believe there is a limit).

 

You can set a ratio between channels A & B, and with a 550EX or MT-24EX as master you can also set a +/- for channel C (the ST-E2 can only ratio control 2 channels A&B, but it will trigger group C).

 

As the others have said the only real limitation is to make sure that all slaves can see the master.