speculation -- will Canon announce R1 contender?

[twalker294]

Speculation is so much fun around this time of year so let's do some. I would LOVE to see Canon announce a contender to the Sony R1 -- APS-C sized sensor, fast lens, 5-7x zoom range, excellent high ISO performance, etc. Maybe the Pro2? I came within a hair's width of buying an R1; actually I had ordered one from Sony Style and they were out of stock and a few days later cancelled the order. I think that this is the new class of prosumer digitals and I would love to see Canon take on the R1 head to head.

Thoughts???

[digidog]

I gave up waiting for Canon and bought the R1 last week. What a beauty!
It will be interesting to see how things develop and what Canon (and others) do in response to the R1 but I tend to agree with you that this is the way forward. I can't help thinking that the obsession with SLRs is a historical hangover that we'll eventually find a remedy for.

[sharksbite]

wow that camera looks akward for the hands. the flash isn't above the lens? and the focus button is on the SIDE? wtf
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/SonyDSCR1/Images/allroundview.jpg

[neil_r]

Canon in competition with Yamaha.... way to go.... (sorry bike joke)

sharksbite it comes down to what you are used to, my brother has some very strange shaped Sony cameras and he is more than happy with them. (deluded fool that he is ;) )

[sdommin]

First, the R1 is an excellent camera, and ergonomically, its the best camera I've ever used. Everything is arranged logically and is easy to use.

However, I seriously doubt if Canon is going to launch something like the R1 - they make too much money on lenses! Right now I'm not even sure if they'll come up with a successor to the G6 or Pro-1. I SURE HOPE THEY DO, but Canon seems to be trying to get "middle spenders" to buy DSLRs like the Rebel or 20D, who will then spend $$$ on bunches of expensive lenses. People who don't want to spend money on cameras can buy an A-Series or S-Series Canon. I hope I'm wrong and maybe we'll see something at next month's PMA show.

[twalker294]

However, I seriously doubt if Canon is going to launch something like the R1 - they make too much money on lenses!

Good point but there is definitely a segment of the market that doesn't want an SLR but does want the image quality that they produce. The R1 comes pretty close and I can't imagine that Canon is going to ignore that market.

Or maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part. I sure would like a Canon version of the R1 to supplement my 10D...

[chris clements]

The bridge market is shrinking rapidly, as they lose both size and price advantages over DSLR's. Put a sensor of this surface area into a bridge body and you've lost ALL the size advantage.

Canon's answer to the Sony 10mp APS sensor will be used in the 20D replacement, not in a bridge camera. Canon have already been badly burnt in the bridge class, ironically chiefly because of the suspect Sony chip that all of the first-gen bridge cams share.
Prices don't lie - in the UK the Pro1 launched at £1000 but is now £400, only £20 more than the current G6 price.

Sony have principally released the R1 as a dry run for Sony's first DSLR (later in 2006)
and to milk their technical advantage before they sell the sensor to all Canon's rivals . At PMA watch for all the 10mp DSLR launches using this Sony chip.

[twalker294]

Canon's answer to the Sony 10mp APS sensor will be used in the 20D replacement, not in a bridge camera.

Also interesting, especially since my 10D is due for an upgrade ;-)

Thanks for your thoughts Chris. We shall see...

[chris clements]

I'd bet the 20D replacement will be announced at PMA even if it's not showroom ready*, to spoil the glut of 10mp Sony-based DSLR announcements.

* after all, Noink always announce 6-9 months before they can ship !

[Belmondo]

If Canon suspects Sony is making money with it, they'll be there.

[Bryan Bedell]

Saw the CES press release today, no new cameras, just a new printer and a couple video cameras. Maybe the photo show in February?

[CyberDyneSystems]

It's interesting that suddenly there is so much talk about these EVF Superzooms or "bridge" cameras rolling into town and grabbing market share.

If you look at the Digital camera trends in the years where it's mattered (ie: only about five years) ... the trend has continously been in the opposite direction.

Five years ago all Digitals were small compacts or EVF Superzooms. Only a few select DSLRs were on the market,. and only Pros owned them.

At that point in time it's fair to say that EVFs out sold DSLRs by hundreds to one..

The D30 was the beginning of our current trend,. with the first sub $5K DSLR.
Since then the market has been increasingly DSLR,..
In the last two or three years,. all Vomapct digital sales growth has tapered,. including EVF Superzooms,. while DSLRs have continued to see increases in sales.

We know Canon sales would reflect that DSLRs out sell there EVF Superzooms.. (and I'm talking units,. not just profits) and I would not be at all surprised if DSLR sales in general do not out strip these units as well...

The Compact and mid sized markets are over saturated.. How many "elphs" are there?

The "I want to get a Digital for family snapshots because there nifty" market has been filled to cpacity in the last few years. In fact it happened so fast it was remarkable. Whereas DSLRs come down in cost,. the market for them can continue to grow fro some time.

[RossW]

Saw the CES press release today, no new cameras, just a new printer and a couple video cameras. Maybe the photo show in February?

I did see a blurb that said there were a number of new cameras and related items shown in private sessions, but non-disclosure agreements forbid revealing anything until the photo industry show next month.

[Bryan Bedell]

We know Canon sales would reflect that DSLRs out sell there EVF Superzooms.. (and I'm talking units,. not just profits) and I would not be at all surprised if DSLR sales in general do not out strip these units as well...

The Compact and mid sized markets are over saturated.. How many "elphs" are there?

The "I want to get a Digital for family snapshots because there nifty" market has been filled to cpacity in the last few years. In fact it happened so fast it was remarkable. Whereas DSLRs come down in cost,. the market for them can continue to grow fro some time.

Yeah, I think you're mostly right, there are way too many cameras in canon's p+s range and they're all too similar, and dSLRs are definitely grabbing share.

Probably the p+s boom has led to more and more people getting interested in photography. In the 90s, i'd always have a couple friends who carried an SLR everywhere, and a couple friends who would buy a disposable camera if an event was coming up. These days, everyone I know, even my mother, carries a pocket camera with them everywhere they go, which is kind of cool. I suspect more people own cameras then ever before, but better yet, freed from the trouble and cost of getting film developed and the ease of sharing digital photos, it seems WAY more people are using them.

since all these people are now 'photographers, they're looking to upgrade, and many get SLRs because that's what they've grown up seeing as a 'serious' camera.

But again, i think there's a real market for innovation and Sony's way ahead of Canon on that. Canon can probably make money for the rest of time making digital SLRs, but Sony's going to make money for the rest of time coming out with innovative whiz-bang stuff. I'd really like to see Canon focus more on innovation. Sooner or later someone's going to nail whatever the "new generation" camera is (dSLR flexibilty/quality and P+S useability in a whole new style of body, priced in the $800 range), and it's not going to be Canon. They'll make their own version of it once it's established, of course, and we'll all talk about how it's the best one. : )

B.

[lefturn99]

CyberDyne, here are a few of the drivers that will influence purchases.

1. What consumers need
2. What consumers want
3. What manufacturers want to sell us.

2 and 3 are tied together.

As far as need, are we tied to a form factor? IMHO, we NEED a beautiful picture that we can output many different ways (plenty of pixels). We don't need blown highlights, purple fringing, excessive noise. We need a camera that can be easily used at it's maximum capabilities.

Does that require interchangable lenses? No.

Does that require a 1950's era workaround (swinging mirror)? No.

Does that require a larger sensor? Well, yes, at least until technology improves.

The R1 may be somewhat flawed. No IS, poor performance, some other things that are clunky. But it does make beautiful pictures. Looks like it has a little more noise than Canon dSLRs but way less than other dSLRs. But it is the first in the form factor. Until now, comparing a dSLR with a P&S was a joke because of the sensor size. I've always thought a good P&S with a good sensor would fit many peoples needs (if not their egos). The R1 may not be the answer, but it's a great first shot.

What does Canon want to sell us? A never ending revenue stream. There is always a new lens to buy. "Oh, you only have a kit lens? I'm sorry". "You don't have L lenses? Too bad". "I just paid $1000 for a lens and thankfully, I got a good copy."

Then, after you buy all the lenses, you are stuck. What if Nikon comes out with a better camera (unlikely, but just for argument)? You can't buy one because you've got many thousands tied up in glass. That's just what Canon wanted you to do. And they've got you guys brainwashed into thinking it's the only way to take a decent picture.

Then there's the IS in the lens problem. Isn't it insane to pay all that money for IS, then have to buy it all over again when you want a different focal length lens? K/M has it made in that area with the IS in camera. Too bad the rest of the camera doesn't measure up.

Howz that for a rant? I feel better. The next few months will tell whether Canon is interested in the high end P&S market. I fear they are not. Hope I'm wrong.

[twalker294]

I think that there is definitely a market for a non-interchangeable lens camera with a large sensor and low noise. There are plenty of people who want the creative qualities of a DSLR (shallow DOF, available light photography, etc.) but who don't want to cart around a bag full of lenses. I can tell you, if someone came out with a camera like the R1 but with even less noise, a longer zoom range, faster lens (f/2.0-2.8 would be excellent,) and IS that gave me the picture quality that I get from my 10D and L lenses, I'd buy one in a second and hope that I could replace my 10D with it...

[Bryan Bedell]

People who consider themselves SERIOUS photographers refuse to accept anything that doesn't conform to the arbitrary standards of the film world. That's too bad because there are infinite directions digital photography could take, but so far, the main two that have been explored by manufacturers are:

1. How can we make a cheap digital camera that looks like an instamatic for people that are afraid of technology?

2. How can we make an expensive digital camera that looks like an SLR for people that are afraid of technology?

It's nice to hear you say you'd consider dumping your dSLR for an equally flexible, 'serious' camera that broke that mold. Few people would, and that's why no one's making them.

[lakiluno]

ok, then find me a high resolution, large sensor camera with at least 300mm of focal length please...

[Bryan Bedell]

Don't ask me, ask Canon.

It makes sense that Canon would design around the lens system they've been using for years, I'm just saying the camera that attaches to that lens doesn't *have* to be a black rectangle with a pointy top and a mirror. I don't know why people freak out when you suggest that a flipscreen or a movie mode might be handy on a 'serious' camera with interchangeable lenses. If it's their goal to introduce people to photography with a cheap p+s and then upsell them to an SLR, you'd think it would be in their best interests to make more consumer-friendly SLRs.

[dbump]

Interesting thoughts, all.
I have to agree, there is pressure for Canon not to release a bridge camera that would fit the needs of many frustrated P&S owners, since that could threaten its sales of lenses for DSLRs, but I have to think it's not that simple either. They want to entice people to the Canon brand, since current owners are more likely to stay with a brand they're comfortable with. If they're not producing competitive products across the range from casual to advanced P&S, they know they're losing current and future sales to other brands. That's the only thing that makes me think they might answer the R1.

I feel like there is a serious gap between high-end P&S and low-end DSLR ranges in terms of a combination of physcial size and capabilities. In discussions like this, I often see folks arguing that it doesn't make sense to buy xyz bridge camera when abc DSLR is only $x more. Price is certainly a valid concern, but when you're comparing very different designs, it's like suggesting that a car shopper buy an SUV instead of a Mini Cooper, because the price diffential isn't that much. Or, maybe more appropriate for a bridge camera, an SUV instead of a Subaru Outback. In the camera world, there don't seem to be many Outbacks, but a glut of monster trucks and clown cars.

I'm guessing that most people who own a G, an R1, or a Pro1 are looking for a camera that's a bit smaller than what they have, yet has low-light performance, and zero shutter/focus lag. And I'll really go out on a limb and predict that if (when) someone made a camera like that, the vast majority of consumers (non-pro's) who would otherwise be forced to a DSLR for those three capabilites wouldn't even think twice about one.

[Terrywoodenpic]

I think that there is definitely a market for a non-interchangeable lens camera with a large sensor and low noise. There are plenty of people who want the creative qualities of a DSLR (shallow DOF, available light photography, etc.) but who don't want to cart around a bag full of lenses. I can tell you, if someone came out with a camera like the R1 but with even less noise, a longer zoom range, faster lens (f/2.0-2.8 would be excellent,) and IS that gave me the picture quality that I get from my 10D and L lenses, I'd buy one in a second and hope that I could replace my 10D with it...

That hits the nail on the head for me.

a better G6 ? rather than R1
Less noise ( noise free at A3 @ 800..ISO )
better brightline viewfinder
Better screen in bright light.
Faster focus
Faster start up
faster write
Wider Zoom
Anti shake.

I have used all size cameras from 10x8 to 16mm, horses for courses.
I don't need loads of lenses.

I would rather have two cameras as above one with a 24mm to 140mm F2.0
and the other with 75 to 300mm F2.8

I am sure they could offer the same camera with a choice of zoom range.

I would prefer lenses to be smaller with corrections for distortion made with software. (Pincushion etc)



Terry

[dbump]

I would rather have two cameras as above one with a 24mm to 140mm F2.0
and the other with 75 to 300mm F2.8


I hadn't thought about it that way, but it makes sense! I'd much rather spend, say, $1K each on two cameras as mentioned than $2K (or even $1500) on one body and the lenses to fit that range. The total bulk would be roughly the same, but more modular, if needed.

[chris clements]

.. who don't want to cart around a bag full of lenses. I can tell you, if someone came out with a camera like the R1 but with even less noise, a longer zoom range, faster lens (f/2.0-2.8 would be excellent,)

Something 300~400 at the long end, with an aperture of 2.0, onto an APS-sized chip will have to come complete with its own gym club membership.

I thought 'bridge' cameras got the name because they closed the gap between compacts and DSLRS. From your wish list, I now see it's because they weigh more than the Golden Gate. And cost more.

[lefturn99]

Chris, I must admit I was in the same queue. I was moaning and groaning about how they need to stick an APS sized sensor in a P&S and all our problems would be solved. Then the R1 came out and I saw the 5x glass that is big as a bread box and realized it isn't quite that simple. Bigger sensor = big glass.

[chris clements]

I just think some wishlists are only lacking "world peace" and "Dorothy's red shoes" .

What cannot be wished-away are the laws of optics. None of us are really prepared to pay the weight/size penalty of a long f2.0 lens permanently hanging round our necks. That's the beauty of interchangeable lenses.

The future here lies not in 77mm filters, but in greater pixel density, better noise control at high ISO, and anti-shake systems. Certainly for compacts/bridges, but I suspect to a large degree for DSLR's as well.

[twalker294]

Something 300~400 at the long end, with an aperture of 2.0, onto an APS-sized chip will have to come complete with its own gym club membership.

I didn't ask for 300-400mm -- I know that isn't feasible. I just asked for a little more zoom than the R1 has.

[dbump]

Has anyone looked at the Olympus E-330 that was announced recently? Looks like they've developed a MOS sensor that can do the same thing as Sony's: live preview. They also added what many folks have suggested in the past, a mini CCD for live preview--you can choose either mode. Best yet, the LCD flips out!

Yup. live preview, flip-out LCD DSLR. Nice! Maybe they do listen...
All that remains is for small sensor efficiency to improve.

[Bryan Bedell]

Has anyone looked at the Olympus E-330 that was announced recently?

Wow, that's pretty much EXACTLY what i had in mind. Good to see, hopefully it becomes popular enough for Canon to steal the design.

and it doesn't look as big or clunky as the R1 (of course it depends on the lens).

B.

[lefturn99]

I dunno. Read up on the A mode and the B mode and I think you will find it has everything we've always wanted. Except not all at the same time. As Sharksbite would say, wtf?

I thought Sony did a nice job of simplifying the form. Oly just made it more complicated. Look and the diagrams they've posted. Looks like a maze.

Maybe someday..............

[cmM]

I gave up waiting for Canon and bought the R1 last week. What a beauty!
It will be interesting to see how things develop and what Canon (and others) do in response to the R1 but I tend to agree with you that this is the way forward. I can't help thinking that the obsession with SLRs is a historical hangover that we'll eventually find a remedy for.

Never.

[chris clements]

Never.
In spades !!!

1. The biggest UK photo chain recorded a DOUBLING of DSLR sales in 2005.

2. We have all have read Canon's recent landmark of a trillion (whatever) EF lenses sold to date . With film dying, where are all these lenses going??

3. Why have all the big electronic companies (already huge players in digicams) joined with their traditional camera counterparts in the last 12 months?
To get a foot in BY FAR the biggest growing sector: the DSLR. Sony will now kill every Minolta bridge and compact and throw everything into their (Minolta) DSLR. The Samsung/Pentax story will go down the same route.

4. Let's reasess after PMA. I predict there'll be a hatful more DSLR's announced over every top-end bridge launch. The most interesting being the Panasonic fourthirds DSLR.

[dbump]

Never.

Isn't saying that a technological format will never be replaced something like saying "nobody will ever need more than 640K RAM"? Or like claiming that Super-8 will never be replaced, or 10 years later, that Beta will never be replaced, then VHS? Laser Disk? Anyone think DVDs will never be replaced? All of those had an extensive established investment of legacy equipment, but regardless, they were replaced. I think the wide investment in lens systems has been keeping the SLR format alive in digital, but that's not going to keep it alive on its own.

Sensors will get better and smaller. Super lenses (Super lenses (http://www.newscientist.com/channel/mech-tech/nanotechnology/mg18624975.400)) will make their way from industrial use to consumer cameras. Combine the two, and there's no reason to retain the legacy SLR format--and you can bet someone like Sony won't.

Not today, or even this year, but in the next 5? I'd bet my next camera on it :)

[cmM]

dbump, you can't make the analody between SLR vs. P&S and Bill Gates' statement in the 80s, it's like comparing apples to oranges. Technolody is bound to improve, no doubt about it. SLR's have been around for many many years, and I bet my bottom dollar, they'll be around for many more to come. Why, because of what they are. Single Lens Reflex cameras with interchangeable lenses. I can see in the viewfinder what I see through the lens that I choose to mount on the camera. No P&S will take that away.

[dbump]

The comparison I'm making is not to the changes in PC hardware vs. camera hardware, but to absolute statements about current technology being future-proof, which seems perilous.

Please correct any of the mistakes that are likely in the following:
My understanding is that the current SLR format is fundamentally two things:
1) A movable mirror that alternates between redirecting the light path to the viewfinder, and allowing it to directly hit the sensor/film
2) Interchangeable lens mount with a diameter (thus total size) dictated by sensor/film size

I suppose you could argue that SLR really only requires the first--you could have a fixed-lens SLR.

The only reason that format would never be replaced (let alone substantially altered) is if there are never any advances that allow you to view the light path (at a resolution of at least the human eye's maximum) without a mirror, and if lens/sensor technology never progresses to the point where a fixed lens incorporates (in a manageable size) the entire range you would ever buy interchangeable lenses for.
I think it's pretty likely that both of those will happen within the next few years. If not, what about the next five years? Ten? Twenty? At the pace optics and sensors are being improved, is there even a remote chance there won't be a better way to take pictures than a format that was developed around the capabilites of optics and film that were current 50-70 years ago?

You could argue that a larger sensor will always have more light gathering capability than a smaller one, but at what point is the trade-off between size and preformance acceptable? That is, how much light do you need? If you can choose between two cameras, one half the size, the other with 2-4x more light gathering, at what point do you have more light than you need? Say the smaller camera gives you ISO 3200, and the larger gives you ISO 12800? Is there a reason at that point to go with the larger sensor? Double the numbers for both. Does it still make sense? When does it not make sense? Right now I have enough pixels--I don't want a 50MP camera. We should reach the saturation point in light efficiency also.

Interchangeable lenses may well persist--they do have an advantage. If you only want a prime lens, for any given optic tech, it will be possible to produce a smaller prime than a zoom, and who doesn't want a smaller lens? However, I think the consumer field will lean by preference towards a fixed lens, no-hassle format. Build it, and they will come.

[Bryan Bedell]

SLRs are the ultimate incarnation of photographic technology, and we're fools for even talking about new technology that might make high-end photography more accessible to amateurs. Whatever.

Specialization of skills in the creative industry is going fast. Just 15 years ago, it would have taken a couple dozen highly-trained specialists to design, illustrate, write, photograph, develop, scan, typeset, compose, prepare film, prepare plates, and run the press to produce (for instance) a sales brochure. Now, thanks to computers and automation and software, it pretty much takes a writer and/or designer, and a guy to turn the printing press on. Yes, you lose a lot of the quality and craftsmanship along the way, and an administrative assistant doesn't become JD Salinger when she installs Microsoft Word, but that's the way the world's headed. You're right, in 2020, professional photographers WILL still be using Canon SLRs, but the other 99.99 percent of the world will be using idiotproof Sony cameras and professional photographers will be as important to publishing and advertising as letterpress typesetters are today: They'll still be better, and we'll recognize and marvel at their old-timey skills, but only the highest-end projects will budget for them.

Look at iStockPhoto vs. Corbis, I can and do buy stock art from ISP for a few bucks that rivals the quality of a photo i might have paid hundreds or even thousands of dollars for several years ago from Corbis. And I've taken photos on my G6 for magazine covers and national advertising campaigns using only the skills I've picked up on this list and about two semesters worth of photography classes, 15 years ago.

8 years ago, my company paid a stylist and photographer several thousand dollars to shoot 30 or so items for a catalog I worked on, and a couple thousand more for high-end drum scans and retouching and silhouetting. This year, we re-did the catalog, and I shot all the photos myself and retouched and drew clipping paths in photoshop.. It took me 1/3 of the time and I billed the client half of what the photographer charged, all profit for us. My photos weren't quite as good, of course, but they were fine, and well above the client's expectations.

II don't have anything against photographers, I respect their education, skills, and talent, and i don't think it's good that they're losing business, just like i feel when I find out a job i normally do is being done by a marketing writer who bought InDesign. I know her brochure will not come close to what I can do, but I know it will serve its purpose and save the client money. I love to work with photographers, and budget for them when I can. There are certainly things I can't do photography wise, but as the technology improves, the work for professional photographers will become more and more specialized. And news photographers will lose more and more work to people that happened to be in the right place at the right time with their point-and-shoot and are willing to sell their photos for a third of the price.

All I'm saying is i've been in the creative industry for 15 years, and from day one, i've seen people who thought their job was secure for life be replaced at a third of the salary by college kids who understood the new technology better. I'm never for one second going to think anything is stable, or take a technology for granted, because I don't want to end up unemployable at age 45 like all the people I've replaced over the years. You can talk all you want about quality, but the reality is that photography is being co-opted by teenagers and amateurs in the same way design was in the 90s. Many of these new semi-pro photographers, and people in related fields, are using SLRS now because they're the best thing out there, but they have no loyalty to the format, they'll use whatever allows them to take good pictures, and when plenoptic photography and color night photography and all those 'gimmicks' get incorporated into cameras, they're gonna buy 'em up if it means they can get a better photo without paying a photographer a few thousand bucks to do it 'right.'

Bryan.

[lefturn99]

You go, guys. The swinging prism/mirror is a workaround. Nothing more, nothing less. It's lasted a long time. The key to it's replacement is the size and quality of the LCD. Anyone out there who thinks LCD quality won't take a quantum leap in the near future? When LCD quality reaches a certain level, the swinging mirror is dead - except for the old curmudgeons who care more for form than function.

That's one reason I'm not too impressed with the new Oly. It's more complicated, not less.

The other problem, current draw using a large sensor for preview, has apparently been solved by Sony.

One major advantage for the LCD is that it applies the exposure compensation for the given aperture and shutter speed. Live histograms can help take the shot right the first time. A mirror will never do that. A histogram on a picture I've already taken isn't the same thing. Some (many) pictures just can't be reshot.

Interchangeable lenses are another story. Barring new developements in optics, a superzoom for an APS sensor camera is unlikely. Also, the manufacturers have too much vested interest in their lens "cash cow" to be interested in killing it. The swinging mirror doesn't exactly make them money, so they are much more likely to switch.

[justchris]

I suppose you could argue that SLR really only requires the first--you could have a fixed-lens SLR.

Maybe by strict definition, but wouldn't you agree that this would represent an SLR with severely truncated capabilities?

and if lens/sensor technology never progresses to the point where a fixed lens incorporates (in a manageable size) the entire range you would ever buy interchangeable lenses for.

Imagine P&S photography has advanced to the point that, in a single fixed lens, it capably covers the entire spectrum of all existing DSLR lenses?

Sounds like a great tool for a DSLR hater, but not once you place it in any kind of technological context. There are two possibilities: first, the uber-lens in question is the final-end pinnacle of lens technology and every decent digital camera, from entry level P&S all the way up to the top rung on the pro ladder, uses it. It's the lens God gave us, and it can do anything that any lens ever possibly could, so it gets mounted on every camera in the world, as no one has any reason to desire any other lens. The second, and more practical, is that, even if a P&S in 2015 sports a lens that does the work of all existing DSLR lenses today, wouldn't higher-end lenses at that time scale up at a comparable degree? Because, if they figure out how to make that uber-lens, they're probably gonna use that same uber-technology to make a whole bunch of different lenses. Time won't change the basic principle that one lens will never be able to replace a large selection of lenses of similar, and often better, quality, whether we label it "SLR" or not.

[Terrywoodenpic]

There is another way of thinking of this...
Have you ever seen a sports photographer wit his tiny camera on the end of a vast lens.

Why not have specialist lenses with cameras attached.
A 200to 500 mm Zoom only has a few specialist uses, and the camera attached to it could be tailored to those uses, rather than trying to be a Jack of all trades.

Like wise a wide zoom of 16 to 50mm could have a camera tailored to landscape architectural work with say perspective control.

A general purpose camera needs to cover a range, as many people do now with a range of about 24 to 120mm with a fairly wide aperture.

The F1.4 specialist would love a 2.8 to 80 mm range and could be supplied with the General purpose body.

If cameras were designed with this in mind most photographers could get away with two cameras to cover their interests; they would also have no greater bulk or weight than we all carry around now.

The latest invented chips that are propose first for use in security cameras could be used; these combine low battery usage, high sensitivity range and brightness range, with very low noise and low amplification requirements.
These would be ideal in the four thirds format, and allow much smaller lenses.

Get rid of the mirror box and you would have truly small and useful cameras.

Terry

[Curtis N]

The Sony R1 is really an amazing combination of technology.
You have all the disadvantages of a DSLR:
Expensive
Big, heavy
Complicated
And some of the disadvantages of a P&S:
EVF
No interchangable lenses

From what I can tell, you can buy a RebelXT and a lens with a similar zoom range for about the same money. And you can stick with that. Or grow with it.

A contender for the R1? I think Canon released it about a year ago.

[dbump]

Maybe by strict definition, but wouldn't you agree that this would represent an SLR with severely truncated capabilities?

Depends quite a bit on the fixed lens in question, doesn't it? Or perhaps, it depends more on the needs of the photographer. But yes, it's quite possible! I just wanted to point out that SLR and interchangeable lenses are not necessarily synonymous--you can have either without the other. I think a non-slr with interchangeable lenses could be very useful.

And your point, re: using the same uber-tech from a wide-range fixed lens to produce interchangeable lenses covering an even wider range, is very good--no disagreement there. However, how much range do you want/need? Or, put another way, at what point is the trade-off between range and inconvenience acceptable? Do you use a 500mm or 12mm often enough to justify carrying multiple lenses (and a tripod, obviously, with the 500), dealing with dust, etc.?

Obviously, one solution would be an interchangeable format camera, that 90% of us would buy with the kit uber-lens, never remove it, and never buy/haul other lenses around. That would allow those with extreme needs to buy/swap lenses. But from a cost perspective, I suspect it would make more sense to just go with a fixed lens model for the masses, if/when we get there.

[chris clements]

I just wanted to point out that SLR and interchangeable lenses are not necessarily synonymous
I'll confess to using 'SLR' as shorthand for 'interchangeable lens system'.
A mechanical mirror and a prism certainly are anachronistic amongst the electronics we have inside digital cameras today. But that's currently the best mix around, as the rocketing DSLR sales confirm.

Anyone else intrigued by the Epson, or actually used one? Something like this could be the way forward if a manufacturer were to be brave enough to break it out of the " make them pay silly Leica rangefinder prices" segment.

* Remember that Kwanon started with rangefinders!

[Bryan Bedell]

Anyone else intrigued by the Epson, or actually used one? Something like this could be the way forward if a manufacturer were to be brave enough to break it out of the " make them pay silly Leica rangefinder prices" segment.

Yeah, very much so, but the price is ridiculous

Again, it seems many of the SLR fans on this list (not you, chris) think dbump and I are somehow anti-exchangable lenses, where as I am saying that's exactly what I want: a camera that uses standard canon lenses, but includes added digital features such as a EVF and movie modes and such. And my further point is, that as long as they're finding a way to have a TTL viewfinder AND an EVF, they might as well not feel confined by the basic design of an SLR, just for the sake of making it look like an SLR. Sure, by the laws of optics, the space between the lens and the sensor is going to have to be the same dimensions as a current SLR, but it doesn't have to be a rectangle with a pyramid on top, is what I'm saying.

Bb.

[chris clements]

but includes ... movie modes and such.
I was with you all the way until you uttered the "m" word, then I retreated rapidly back into the traditionalist camp.
Please tell me that the "and such" in your wish list doesn't include a built-in cellphone!

[dbump]

Heh! If you're headed back to the traditionalist camp, what about "P" mode? Shouldn't that go too? :)
Seriously, as long as it's just a firmware change, who cares if a camera comes with any mode you don't use? I shot a movie on my G once, grinned, and haven't ever used it again. Likewise, I don't use any of the scene modes, or for that matter, the built-in B&W mode. But I wouldn't ignore a camera just because it included those functions, any more than I'd ignore a camera that was--and I'm going out on a limb here--any color but black.

Personally, I'd far prefer if all those scene modes could be used as custom settings instead, but I guess that's far too practical to market.

[Terrywoodenpic]

Sure, by the laws of optics, the space between the lens and the sensor is going to have to be the same dimensions as a current SLR, but it doesn't have to be a rectangle with a pyramid on top, is what I'm saying.

Bb.

Not so.
The mirror on a SLR means lenses for it have to have a specially long back focus to allow the mirror to swing.
Lenses can be much smaller especially short focal lenghts, if there is no mirror.
You only have to see range finder lenses to notice that.
They can also be of less complex design and higher quality for their cost.

A mirror is more of a problem than a solution for digital cameras.

Have you ever thought that each lens could have its own sensor/ processor ( both very small optomised for it, actually as part of the lens. the rest of the camera would have the main processor batteries and viewing system.
This could sort the dust and distort prblems in a very simple way.


Terry

[dbump]

I think Bryan meant that in order to use existing (legacy) lenses from D/SLRs, you'd need to leave that spacing, just with no mirror. Since I have no investment in lenses, I'd be much happier with a smaller lens like you mention.

Very interesting idea! If the sensor cost can be reduced (both by miniaturization, and by economy of scale), that would be great!

[Bryan Bedell]

Have you ever thought that each lens could have its own sensor/ processor ( both very small optomised for it, actually as part of the lens. the rest of the camera would have the main processor batteries and viewing system.
This could sort the dust and distort prblems in a very simple way.

Yes, I love that idea. You could attach the box to the lens, or set the lens on a table and use the box in your hand to control it... that would do wonders for camera shake!

That wouldn't work with the current lenses, though, and I think using the current lens system is the key to making a product that would take hold in the market. Maybe there could be an adaptor (with a sensor) that clips on the back of existing Canon lenses and connects to the control unit. but the idea of eventually having lenses with built-in customized, perfectly-matched sensors is attractive.

It's more obvious when you think of huge lenses, but it could work with tiny lenses, too... having a little webcam-like ball that included the lens, that could work with the same controller. It wouldn't be for everyone, but it's neat to think about and it just might find a market. The modularness of it is nice, you can upgrade small pieces of they system for less than buying a new camera... add lenses, maybe switch the card reader modularly to give you options there, you could upgrade software and processors without buying a whole new camera... for that matter, maybe software will turn out to be the real moneymaker in the future: Canon will charge for firmware upgrades and features could be added or taken away a-la carte? You could buy custom configurations and modes! If you don't like the 'box on a string idea,' it all snaps together to look like a regular camera.

Wait, no, SLRs are perfect in every way. nevermind. sorry.

[dbump]

I hadn't gone as far as imagining a modular lens-on-a-leash system. That would be wonderful, especially when the hack-a-day and Make folks decided to make their own controllers for the lenses.
Even without that, you could have a light-weight frame acting just as a grip, with buttons, that you could attach the lenses to directly, and a cable (or wifi/BT/IR) running to the circuitry module that lives in your camera bag. If you want, you could mount that module on the frame when needed.
Basically a Lego camera.

[chris clements]

Will this new system fit on my utility belt, and be controlled by my decoder ring?
Toto, I've got a feeling we're not in Kansas any more.

[dbump]

Well, the title of the thread is 'Speculation...' ;)
Would it be better if we were discussing what we could do with 8 stops of dynamic range and 16 bit color depth on the sensor? That's also out of Kansas, but I do hope it's coming too.

[chris clements]

This thread is just supposed to be encouraging Canon to see off a lumpy Sony, not help NASA build a StarGate!

[dbump]

True enough--but if you're optimistic enough to hope that decision makers in Canon are not only reading this thread, but influenced by it, why not aim high?

Seriously though, I think it is productive to think outside the mirror box, and explore the possibilities of a camera that's not just another brick with a grip. But I do take your point; baseless dreaming is not productive, even if it can be fun. Where you draw that line is pretty subjective. I'd say Terry's and Bryan's ideas are feasible--whether they are marketable is entirely another question.

[Terrywoodenpic]

Terry's and Bryan's ideas are feasible--whether they are marketable is entirely another question.
The / Terry/ Bryans / dbump/ composit camera , could be taken still further with wifi/be technology . More than one lens could be feeding the controller at once. and the view finder/s could be mounted wherever was most convienient. You could also have specialised controllers to handle video.
we need a generic name for the this sort of camera .
( a Tebud Composite )


Terry___________________

[Bryan Bedell]

Yeah, i was thinking maybe a heads up display built into sunglasses, with a clip-on controller. The lens would need power to zoom and change apertures, so i was thinking it needed to be connected to the controller/battery/viewfinder for that, but i suppose you could just plug it into the optional Tebud LPS-3M mini lens power supply and control it via bluetooth.

I'm gonna draw up a diagram of our product line.

B.

[lefturn99]

dbump, ask him why the Te is first.

[Bryan Bedell]

You saw it here first! It's on graph paper, so it's as good as real:

http://2strokebuzz.com/potn/tebud.jpg

Oops, i forgot the power supplies and AC cord and car adaptor. But we make 'em:
TNPS1-10 hour rechargable battery pack
TNPS2-Double-life (20 hours) battery pack
TNPSAA-AA battery adaptor
TNPSC1-Single charger
TNPSC2-Dual charger, includes AC adaptor
TNPSAC-AC adaptor
TNPSAU-car adaptor
TSPSPSL: remote lens power source

"T is the new L… Tebud"®

[chris clements]

There must be medication you could all take.

[lefturn99]

Oh, man. Those are primes. I wanna see zooms with remote belt drives.

Pretty cool.

[Bryan Bedell]

Oh, man. Those are primes. I wanna see zooms with remote belt drives.

Pretty cool.

If anyone is our target market, it's a dude with a IR-rigged G6 on a 40' pole.

Note the TNCL 500A and the TNCL 500A are both zooms, as well as the TNCL70-200.

Also take note that our infrared transmitter has a range of 50', so you could just put the lens atop your pole and drive it all from the monitor (I recommend the 8" hi-res touch-screen) and controller in your car (surely plugged into the TSNPAU)

B.

[chris clements]

The Taiwanese version has a 50' telescopic pole.
Cuts out the requirements for both the transmitter and the zoom lens.

[lefturn99]

Well, looks like I'm your beta tester.

A similar story. I work for AAA. AAA National has signed on to sponsor Mark Martin in NASCAR and is getting back in motorsports. I told my boss the other day that, to further the motorsports initiave, I would graciously come out of retirement and drive the local entry. He said he was thinking more like a Danica Patrick look-alike than a 59 year old has been. (of course, there is no local entry - just wishfull thinking)

[dbump]

There must be medication you could all take.

Now you've got me humming Morphine's Cure for Pain...

[Bryan Bedell]

Well, looks like I'm your beta tester.

He said he was thinking more like a Danica Patrick look-alike than a 59 year old has been. (of course, there is no local entry - just wishfull thinking)

Danica is doing a public appearance at our client's booth at the NADA show, I could work out some sort of deal with her if you'd like. Maybe she could be the Tebud spokesperson, like John MacEnroe with the Rebel.

B.

[lefturn99]

Tell her Mario Spaghetti (my nom de carrera) said "HEY". And tell her I still remember that night in Santa Barbara.

[Terrywoodenpic]

dbump, ask him why the Te is first.

Cause te started it then it grew like topsy

Terry

[dbump]

We're not the only ones speculating and devising our own camera designs:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/DMD.shtml

Some of it sounds pretty familiar. Some interesting thoughts not just about cameras, but about wishing about cameras. Good read.

[Terrywoodenpic]

We're not the only ones speculating and devising our own camera designs:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/DMD.shtml

Some of it sounds pretty familiar. Some interesting thoughts not just about cameras, but about wishing about cameras. Good read.

Thats what I like about the "Tebud" You could configure it his way on Cartier Bresson days.

Terry

[Bryan Bedell]

I have a meeting with some venture capitalists this afternoon. How do you pronounce "Tebud?" is it

TEE, TAY, or TEH?
UD, OOD, or YOOD (umlaut?)
teb-ud, or te-bud?
where's the accent?

B.

[chris clements]

I have a meeting with some venture capitalists this afternoon.
B.
From Milwaukee?

[Bryan Bedell]

From Milwaukee?

Sure, why not!

Bb.

[lefturn99]

Pronounce however the man with the money likes it. Name it after his daughter (ala Mercedes) if necessary. BTW, pencil me in as a consultant. About $250K a year sounds right.

[Terrywoodenpic]

I would Say TI have a meeting with some venture capitalists this afternoon. How do you pronounce "Tebud?" is it

TEE, TAY, or TEH?
UD, OOD, or YOOD (umlaut?)
teb-ud, or te-bud?
where's the accent?

B.

I woud Say T,BUD
But for enough millions any which way

Terry

[superkully]

Also take note that our infrared transmitter has a range of 50', so you could just put the lens atop your pole and drive it all from the monitor (I recommend the 8" hi-res touch-screen) and controller in your car (surely plugged into the TSNPAU)
B.

If only my G5 had a IR sensor on its arse I'd gladly put it on a 50' pole, however this dream is scuppered as I'd have to be in front of it or to the (right hand) side.

Ah well, back to carving those 50' stilts...

[Bryan Bedell]

If only my G5 had a IR sensor on its arse I'd gladly put it on a 50' pole, however this dream is scuppered as I'd have to be in front of it or to the (right hand) side.

Ah well, back to carving those 50' stilts...

I don't know what the range is on the Canon ir sensor, probably not 50' (though maybe), I was talking about the Tebud. Its sensor isn't built-in, it's an optional attachment that can be rotated in any direction. It also runs on unicorn power.

lefturn, I know you have that fancy IR thingy, but did you ever try using a mirror taped above the IR sensor, angled down? I wonder if that'd work, maybe for shorter heights...

Bb.

[superkully]

Ah...The Tebud(tm) with its Unicorn powered, multi-directional IR reciever. Sorry, I was confusing reality with near-future reality.

If you three are designing this as a device for the future from a blank slate, dispense with the IR comms. that's very 20th century. Why have a unicorn only supplying power when they're very apt at lip-reading, have excellent vision and make exceptional photographers.

A Unicorn powered and operated attachment I say. Stick your G7 on a pole, mouth "take a photo then" and the rest is taken care of.

[andrewaaa5]

shouldn't be too hard to have canon develop a built in 'shadow highlight' filter to their camera's to save using graduated filters and the PS tool

[Bryan Bedell]

A Unicorn powered and operated attachment I say. Stick your G7 on a pole, mouth "take a photo then" and the rest is taken care of.

That's the TNCU1, the optional unicorn attachment.

"Oi! Unicorn! zoom in and use slow-sync flash!"

Anyone else here watch Blade Runner recently? Photoshop is now officially cooler than Harrison Ford's image editing software of the future. Would you have believed when you first saw that in 1982 or whenever that any housewife could voice-dictate to their image editing software? In 2030, the Tebud system will seem quaint and retro.

Bb.

[dbump]

It's no Tebud, but did you see the info on the P-1 from Olympus?
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0703/07030507olympusp1pictures.asp

Articulated, live-preview LCD on a DSLR. I'm sure the purists will burn it in effigy, since they would never own a camera with a feature they don't think they'd use, but I think it's a wonderful direction, especially following up on the other two live-preview DSLRs from Oly, and obviously, the live-preview EOS-1D Mk III.

Maybe G users' comments haven't been ignored after all?

Maybe we'll see a G8 with raw and an articulated LCD yet. Or a lightweight 40D with an articulated LCD. I'd rather have the lighter one :)

[lefturn99]

Wow, what a blast frm the past. What a difference a year makes. It's kinda embarassing, tho. I used to rant about dSLR's slapping mirrors and stuff. I bought a 30d in April and have never looked back. I got out the G6 the other day and actually looked through the optical viewfinder. Of course, I was wrong. But hey.........

[chris clements]

Time we filed this thread along with "Will Boeing announce a Zeppelin contender?"

[lefturn99]

Yup

[dbump]

Heh! Being willing to admit you were wrong is an excellent trait--unfortunately those who lack it don't think they lack it. Glad the 30D is working out for you! Certainly a lot of G and ex-G users feel that way too. I certainly think compacts still have a long way to go, but I think some of the convergence features can add strongly to DSLRs too, and I'm excited to see the improvements. I know a lot of G users who'd be sorely tempted by a DSLR with an articulated LCD, and a lot of ex-G users who know exactly how & when they'd use it (and when they wouldn't).

Not to go too far off topic, but a Boeing airship is not that ridiculous:
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2002/q3/nr_020730m.html
They got the ultimate bad PR rap with the Hindenburg. Most people just remember the amazing images--almost nobody remembers that half the people survived, or that ALL of the people who rode it to the ground survived. The deaths were from the folks who jumped out in a panic. Can't say that of many jet crashes.
Sorry, once you've read McPhee's 'Deltoid Pumpkin Seed' you get a soft spot for super-efficient airships. That was too far off-topic, wasn't it ;)

[Andy_T]

dBump,

interesting link on the Boeing airship.
However, the bankruptcy of their partner Cargolifter AG might put a little damper on that project :wink:

Back to the issue at hand ... take a look at the Sigma DP-1 (http://www.sigma-dp1.com/) ... is that not a beauty?

Best regards,
Andy

[dbump]

Good catch, Andy. It does seem like air ship companies have trouble getting off the ground, so to speak. Probably a conspiracy by the airlines, who want to protect their lucrative line of lenses, oops, I mean first class seats.
;)

The DP-1 is a beauty! I'm afraid the price isn't going to be in the G or even consumer DSLR range though. There are rumors of a Foveon sensor in a high-end, non-Sigma camera later this year. I'm not holding my breath on that one, but I'd sure like to see Foveon sensors take off. I'd just like to see more compacts with large sensors, period. I'll definitely look forward to seeing sample pictures from the DP-1.

[chris clements]

There are rumors of a Foveon sensor in a high-end, non-Sigma camera later this year.
Did the Polariod Foveon compact announced way-back-when ever actually get off the ground?
(...notice the subtle airship reference)

[dbump]

Did the Polariod Foveon compact announced way-back-when ever actually get off the ground?
(...notice the subtle airship reference)

I hadn't seen that when it was originally announced. Looks like it had quality issues, and was recalled? However, it does look like you can buy it:
http://www.amazon.com/Polaroid-X530-4-5MP-Digital-Camera/dp/B000B640M2

Guess I'll be haunted by the air ship reference now, won't I? Maybe I should just embrace it and change my avatar image. It would be appropriate--I seem to have a knack for choosing doomed tech. Amiga, Handspring, Palm, advanced compact... I think I'm an inverse bell weather.

[Andy_T]

However, it does look like you can buy it:
http://www.amazon.com/Polaroid-X530-4-5MP-Digital-Camera/dp/B000B640M2

That is certainly a very different Foveon sensor, if it has a 7.3-21.9 mm lens :rolleyes:
Plus, it looks like ... well, the cheapest camera I've ever seen.

I think one difficulty for the Foveon sensor is that it is never really clear whether it is a 14 MP sensor or rather a 5 MP * 3 colour sensor ... In the current MP race certainly some disadvantage. I remember some tests of the 10 MP / 3 MP*3 colours Sigma SD10 that put image quality on par with 'a good 6 MP camera' ... so something in-between...

Best regards,
Andy

[lefturn99]

The new Sigma and Sony R1 (don't hear much about that model anymore) show me the biggest disadvantage of what I was looking for - a large sensor P&S - lens size. The R1 has a large lens for a 5X zoom and the Sigma has solved the lens size problem with a fixed, no-zoom lens. Ugh!

Anyway, I bought the 30D and I'm happy, even though it cost a bunch more and when the 40D comes out the 30D won't take nearly as good pictures.http://photography-on-the.net/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif

[chris clements]

I think one difficulty for the Foveon sensor is that it is never really clear whether it is a 14 MP sensor or rather a 5 MP * 3 colour sensor
Andy

The 'P' in 'MP' stands for pixel, a picture element. It does NOT stand for receptor. Sigma/Foveon and Fuji are knowingly trying to snow us on this very important difference.
By all means shout it from the rooftops that that your pixels are 'better' (however that might be defined) because each is the result of the combination of the signals from two (Fuji) or three (Foveon) receptors. But don't lie to us about the number of pixels that finally leave the camera and enter our computer.

[dbump]

Absolutely! Unfortunately, if they advertised with the actual output MP, that could relegate Foveon to buyers who understand demosaicing, which isn't going to be very lucrative. Even with the "14MP" label, there's still confusion, as Andy mentions, which is probably worse than just biting the bullet and claiming a 5MP camera with superior detail.

Now that you mention it, I wonder how exactly they get away with advertising that way?

[Andy_T]

Now that you mention it, I wonder how exactly they get away with advertising that way?

That's a good point.

Everybody who can read the specs will see that the camera will provide an output of 2640x1760 pixels ... which makes it a 4.7 MP camera.

But I assume that the target audience will not be among the pixel crazy anyway (or they might also request more than a 16.6/4.0 fixed lens)

Best regards,
Andy

[chris clements]

Now that you mention it, I wonder how exactly they get away with advertising that way?

And what about the latest advertising/sales scam?
Because IS is flavour of the month, just look at how many new compacts shout they have a stabilisation system when all they actually do is turn up the ISO !!!

[dbump]

<beating dead horse with stick>
Still not a Tebud, but the preview of the Panasonic G1 (interesting name choice...) sounds promising:
http://www.dpreview.com/Previews/PanasonicG1/
Articulated LCD, full-time live view, high-speed focus using contrast detection (rather than phase-detection), etc, all with interchangeable lenses and a small physical format.
Woo.
</beating dead horse with stick>

[ArenGh]

the very existence of these cameras puzzles me. Why would you want to lug some bulky camera around anot even have the option of changing out lenses? You may as well use a P&S

[jbuk1975]

the very existence of these cameras puzzles me. Why would you want to lug some bulky camera around anot even have the option of changing out lenses? You may as well use a P&S

I thought the point was the lenses are changeable?

[ArenGh]

I thought the point was the lenses are changeable?
oh yeah huh...
i was thinking of those older ones that had a fixed lens. i hated those things.