1Ds MkIII revelations at pre-PMA

[Juan Zas]

From Northlight:

In preparation for PMA I'm told there was a conference at the MGM Grand hotel in Las Vegas. The conference was on new chip technology, hosted by the association of photography engineers. The main sponsor of the show was Canon (they had 50 of the new 1D Mark III cameras there for testing by the group).

"Canon senior engineer, Taki Somoishe, stated today in Las Vegas that the new Mark III Ds will ship in November in time for Christmas season. A 22mp full frame sensor with a new high speed chip coded Digic IV model. The camera will have a burst rate of 7 frames per second. The camera will not have a view screen similar to the 10 frame D model. The Mark III Ds will capture images in Jpeg, Raw and now tiff. More info to be announced in March"

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/Canon_1DS_MkIII.html

[circa]

what exactly would be the point of capturing in tiff? and digic 4? didn't digic 3 just come out?

[silverhalide]

what exactly would be the point of capturing in tiff? and digic 4? didn't digic 3 just come out?

TIFF would give you the convenience of JPG without the lossy compression.

Since it is a "tagged image file format" you could also include as much of the EXIF data as you wanted. This could make some operations that were previously only possible with RAW available in TIFF.

(If I recall correctly, TIFF also has a 12-bit pixel mode while JPG doesn't.)

E.

[mogearnotalent]

howabout sooner than xmas

[-MasterChief-]

WHOA! you think Nikon is catching up now, wait till November!! they have to come up with something quick or else Canon is gonna run with this boat and never come back! introducing two chip technologies (Digic III and IV) within 2 years, WOW! GO CANON!

[Longwatcher]

(If I recall correctly, TIFF also has a 12-bit pixel mode while JPG doesn't.)

E.

TIF actually has a 16-bit and an extension to give you 32-bit images, however Jpeg 2000, which has yet to take off is also supposed to have a 16-bit variant ifn I remembered it right.

And the one thing they left out of the statment (or rumor ) was if the 1DSMkIII will have 14 or 16-bit. With a Digic-IV and 14-bit even at 22MP it should easily make 8FPS, so wondering if they will make it to 16-bit and thus satisfy my every wish for the new camera (in other words at least 16MP, 6.5 FPS or faster and higher dynamic range equaling B+W film at a price I can afford. Sounds like the first two are covered and the third is already at an improved level with the 1DM3, so just leaves the final amount of money I have to save up or aquire by November.

[SuzyView]

Boy, I need more RAM. :(

[R_Metzel]

Just one more thing I would want but couldn't afford. I don't see the point in shooting tiffs though. Unless the file sizes would be smaller. Raw is like 8mb or so on my XT. Coverted to tiff they are 20+mb. So a raw at 22mp would be around 22mb right. What is that size go to if it is a tiff? Unless they introduce a super buffer and new super speed memory cards come out, I don't see the point.

[Longwatcher]

I am thinking it is a good thing I bought the 8GB Extreme IV cards (which are on the way ), they should hold about a 36 roll of images at full resolution, bit depth and TIF format. And for that I am going to need the card to computer speed. And a larger hardrive say in the multiple-terabytes. I really won't need that much more RAM then I am planning on getting anyway, since in practice PS CS2 has the images in basically a TIF format when working with them already.

Actually I doubt I would shoot TIF if raw was available unless there was a significant advantage to quality.

This is all of course presuming what was heard was true. So far only one usually reliable source with no secondary reporting.

[cosworth]

It's about god damn time. Let's rock already Canon.

[mogearnotalent]

I just dont want to wait I want it now!

[Canuck]

Just one more thing I would want but couldn't afford. I don't see the point in shooting tiffs though. Unless the file sizes would be smaller. Raw is like 8mb or so on my XT. Coverted to tiff they are 20+mb. So a raw at 22mp would be around 22mb right. What is that size go to if it is a tiff? Unless they introduce a super buffer and new super speed memory cards come out, I don't see the point.

Hmm...the 10D shooting RAW are 6-8MB each, and as a 16 bit TIFF they are about 36MB a pop; 8 bit gives you about 16MB if I recall correctly. I just go 16 bit. Why not, so long as the pic is worth saving?

[S2000]

From Northlight:

In preparation for PMA I'm told there was a conference at the MGM Grand hotel in Las Vegas. The conference was on new chip technology, hosted by the association of photography engineers. The main sponsor of the show was Canon (they had 50 of the new 1D Mark III cameras there for testing by the group).

"Canon senior engineer, Taki Somoishe, stated today in Las Vegas that the new Mark III Ds will ship in November in time for Christmas season. A 22mp full frame sensor with a new high speed chip coded Digic IV model. The camera will have a burst rate of 7 frames per second. The camera will not have a view screen similar to the 10 frame D model. The Mark III Ds will capture images in Jpeg, Raw and now tiff. Prices will start @ used Honda Accord with package specials drifing in to new KIA range. More info to be announced in March".



-jm2c

[corny]

Dont tell me this now I've preordered the 1d mkIII!!

Do you think Canon have shares in computer makers as this is likely to obsolete mine!!!;)

[JohnnyG]

My day would be complete if I heard something concrete about the 5D and the 40D. I'm so sick of waiting for some kind of official word regarding them.

Something?

[CyberDyneSystems]

TIFF would give you the convenience of JPG without the lossy compression.

Since it is a "tagged image file format" you could also include as much of the EXIF data as you wanted. This could make some operations that were previously only possible with RAW available in TIFF.

(If I recall correctly, TIFF also has a 12-bit pixel mode while JPG doesn't.)

E.

And a Tiff @ 22MP 16 bit would be about .. what ? 132 MB? At least?
No thanks. The RAW file would be only about 24-30MB.. I'd much rather have that on a CF card.

[CyberDyneSystems]

And the one thing they left out of the statment (or rumor ) was if the 1DSMkIII will have 14 or 16-bit. With a Digic-IV and 14-bit even at 22MP it should easily make 8FPS,

I don't get your math here?

The latest and greatest and fastest camera can only cram 10MP @ 14bit into 10FPS.. so doubling that MP we could only expect to see 5fps no? Increase the Bit depth to 16 and things get slower.

[R_Metzel]

Hmm...the 10D shooting RAW are 6-8MB each, and as a 16 bit TIFF they are about 36MB a pop; 8 bit gives you about 16MB if I recall correctly. I just go 16 bit. Why not, so long as the pic is worth saving?

So 16 bit TIFF is around 36mb on a 6.3 mp camera. This really rough math, but that makes at 16 bit TIFF 6 times larger then a 6mb raw on your 10D. So a 22mp raw, at roughly 22mb, would be roughly 132mb per shot as a TIFF. That is is camera, not PP in PS. Using a 4 gb card, you would get roughly 30 shots per card, or you could shot raw and get roughly 180 shots per 4 gig card. This is my point. Why wouldn't you just shot raw and convert later. It may take more time, but I think it would be worth the cost in memory cards. Not to mention how long it would take to write 132mb per shot at current write speeds. I know this is still rumor, but I don't see them doing that unless they greatly up buffer speed and size, and new cards come out, as I stated before.

[S2000]

^unless the camera has a micro 40-80 gb hard drive in it. iCamera by Canon.

[DenZ]

Year 2009: Intel unveils Core4Quad chips in Canon professional DSLRs

[lostdoggy]

I would speculate that these new 1D series will need UDMA CF card to achieve the annouced FPS rate possibly alternating between two card. Since they are using to DIGIC 3, it would be logical for one digic to write to one CF while the other is recording the next frame and then writing to its own CF. The only problem is that each other frame will be in the other CF which require them to be resorted during down load which would be an issue issue if the data is dump teathered or WIFIed over.

[lostdoggy]

This announcement of ane 1DsMKIII doesnt surprise me at all. I believe Canon is just waiting for Nikon to announce their intention to release the D2x replacement/upgrade. How man more ACEs does Canon have up their sleeve? Only time will tell.

[Longwatcher]

I don't get your math here?

The latest and greatest and fastest camera can only cram 10MP @ 14bit into 10FPS.. so doubling that MP we could only expect to see 5fps no? Increase the Bit depth to 16 and things get slower.

My logic is based on the 1DsMkII currently at 4 FPS. By the time November roles around 36 months will have passed or about 2 iterations of Moore's Law (processors doubling every 18 months ). Thus a 12-bit, 16.7MP camera should go at 12 FPS, if only limited by processing speed. But it is limited by shutter as well, which keeps it in the 7-8 FPS range without using the setup from the earlier Canon 10+FPS camera (which I think the 1DM3 did. They could probably get 8FPS from the shutter, which is the speed of the film based one series, but I suspect trying to get higher longevity of shutter and mirror is also at least a minor factor and 7FPS may indeed be the processor limits.

I suspect the 1DM3 could do close to 16 FPS if the shutter did not get in the way. Of course I am also a bit messed up by bit versus file processing size, but I am thinking that a 12 to 14 bit would be the equivilant of one jump in technology to get the same speed with the same MP, while 16-bit would be a second. Add that you now have dual processors and that should get you about a 50% increase in speed by itself. So going to 16-bit and two processors should get us to at least 6 FPS easily and 7 FPS should not be that hard.

At least I can hope and dream, but I will settle for 14-bit at 7FPS with 22MP if that is what it is.

[Juan Zas]

Dears,

There is a guy that says he is going to get the 1st 1D MkIII in USA:

"I had placed my order for the Mark III once canon announced it. Arlington Camera told me that I could go check it out at the trade show in the Arlington Convention Center. All the technology in this camera is absolutely stunning. I was able to shoot at its 6400 iso, and let me tell you that it is very usable even with noise reduction turned off. I was expecting far more grain than what there was. We all know that it is deadly fast. The silent shutter mode is very cool, much less disrupting than the mark II n. The prints off of the 6400 iso were very impressive. They blew them up to about 16 by 20 and I was very happy with them. I can't wait to get mine in".

But there are some notes about when is coming the final price available:

"He also said the reason they were waiting until the near end of the Vegas show was to see what prices Nikon is presenting, so they can compete with them. Thursday is the date they will set the official price on it, but he told me Friday to be on the safe side.

.......

The Canon guys just kept saying I should get mine some time in April. I tried to get them to be more specific but they could not. They also would not give any final price info. They said we will all know for sure this Friday after the Vegas show. However, He did say it will be around the price of what the Mark II n was when it first came out. So I will just wait till this Friday to know for sure."

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=22308065

[AdamJL]

Think that bit of info is in the wrong thread mate... this is for the Ds, not the D.

[Juan Zas]

Think that bit of info is in the wrong thread mate... this is for the Ds, not the D.

You are wright !! Opps :o

[Visuals]

WHOA! you think Nikon is catching up now, wait till November!!


hmmp, I once owned the Mark IIN and it was only 8 Mpix's, I bought it brand new for over $3,000 after a while I couldn't justify the cost especially for only 8 mpix, yet I needed more Mpix's for the work I did at the time. I sold all my canon gear and get a D200 for for three times less and its the best decision I ever made (10 Mpix's too :D ) and it still retains weather seals and body strength.

I guess it depends on what your looking for.

[DrPablo]

hmmp, I once owned the Mark IIN and it was only 8 Mpix's, I bought it brand new for over $3,000 after a while I couldn't justify the cost especially for only 8 mpix, yet I needed more Mpix's for the work I did at the time. I sold all my canon gear and get a D200 for for three times less and its the best decision I ever made (10 Mpix's too :D ) and it still retains weather seals and body strength.

I guess it depends on what your looking for.

What work were you doing that 10 megapixels can accomplish that 8 cannot?

[JX]

[]
Posted by Visuals hmmp, I once owned the Mark IIN and it was only 8 Mpix's, I bought it brand new for over $3,000 after a while I couldn't justify the cost especially for only 8 mpix, yet I needed more Mpix's for the work I did at the time. I sold all my canon gear and get a D200 for for three times less and its the best decision I ever made (10 Mpix's too :grin: ) and it still retains weather seals and body strength.

I guess it depends on what your looking for.


I have used the d200, and unfortunately, I am forced to use the dx2 thing at work, I would not trade my 1dmk2 or 1dmk2n for either camera. I am not impressed with the autofocus on either Nikon camera.