The Killer Camera Canon won't make.

[davidfig]

I know most people would not agree, but here goes.

Here is what I think would make the most awesome killer camera, which Canon will never make.

1. 5D like body with FF
2. 7D like AF, Flash control, and Exposure system
3. Make it 8.3M Pixels ( 3840x2160 (16x9) [This is essentially HDx2] )
4. Allow 1:1 (4MP=2160x2160), 3:2 (6.9MP=3240x2160), 4:3 (6.1MP=2880x2160) and 16:9
5. Of course it would have super low light abilities because of the Gianormous pixels.
6. Video with 1920x1080, 1280x720, Movie Crop 1920x1080(2x) and 1280x720 (~3.2x).
7. Give it 6fps.

Here's why I think this works. No need to explain FF. The 7D AF, Flash control, Exposure system will give most people what they need for landscapes as well as sports. Although you might complain about 4MP for square ratio, this would mostly be used by wedding photographers and its plenty for a wedding album. More and more HDTV's are in the home so 16x9 is a good format to shoot in, but you still have 4:3 and 3:2. Since the pixels are like a acre large it would do great at ISO25,600. Since it has HD Video and canon seems to excel at that, this would be a natural evolution.

Can you come up with a better killer camera, It does have to be somewhat affordable. Say less than $3000. No bubble gum machine or dishwasher like feature, OK!

-------------------------Using Cashoo suggestion of 3:2 format--------------------------------------
3840x2880 (4:3-11MP)
3840x2560 (3:2-9.8MP)
3840x2160 (16:9-8.3MP)

To make this happen it may have to be a 14MP sensor because of the unused area. Still sounds like a great way to go to me.

[Cashoo]

6.9MP for 3:2 is quite low, there would be no room for cropping at all.

[photoPanda]

6.9mp in the normal 2:3 format probably won't appeal to people... despite it being enough for many applications! You double those figures and you might have a winner though ;)

[Cashoo]

I think the sensor should be 3:2 not 16:9 and double the resolution.

[HKGuns]

What exactly is "killer" about that rig?

[booja]

i would like 7d AF in my 5d2... but thats pretty much the 1ds series.

i kinda like the large megapixel because i can crop the hell out of my pics. so 8mp is a but on the low end... i dont think anyone even makes anything under 10mp anymore.

i dont care for certain aspect ratios either... i can just crop it to what i need.

i pretty much want a 1ds series with video... im sure thats what the 1ds4 is gonna be. i dont like the price though... but its aimed at the high end and for pros.

[richwig83]

nah. do not want!

FF
40MP
10FPS
51 point AF
Zero noise at 3200ISO

WANT!

[fiebru1119]

sounds like the D700 minus video

[Cashoo]

nah. do not want!

FF
40MP
10FPS
51 point AF
Zero noise at 3200ISO

WANT!

Price: arm and a leg

[mmahoney]

sounds like the D700 minus video

Yep .. solid build, great AF, full frame sensor, and no built in grip. Basically all the 1 series qualities minus the extra weight & bulk.

It's the perfect camera .. if Canon ever makes it I'll buy a half-dozen of 'em. They had no problem making them in film format :rolleyes:

[dave kadolph]

Pass--Nothing than interests me here

[Canis_Majoris]

A half price 5DII would do me fine :)

[k-lo]

FF
1D body
80MP
24 FPS (not movie mode but shutter speed)
Unlimited buffer
102 center point accurate focus points
100% VF + 20% peripheral views
Clean 25,600 ISO native
built in Wifi
built in secondary IS (additional 3 stops to your IS lens)
close to zero shutterlag
close to zero startup time
close to zero VF blackout
iphone type screen
water resistant to 10ft or 2 mins.
GPS tagging
All photo format export + automatic flickr, photobucket, pbase etc.. upload
All video format export + automatic facebook, vimeo and youtube upload

and of course.... automatic back up siren (for when the photographer is backing away from the subject)

[Viva-photography]

A half price 5DII would do me fine

hahaha. AMEN!!! :lol:

[Alex_Venom]

http://www.dphotojournal.com/wp-content/canon_xxx.jpg

FTW ;)

[nicksan]

It's non an official year until someone posts that photo...

[Canonswhitelensesrule]

http://www.dphotojournal.com/wp-content/canon_xxx.jpg

FTW ;)

Now that I like. As long as it shoots 10 FPS, has the 920,000pix LCD, 1.3x crop and oh yeah, I don't drink, so instead of "Wine", "Beer" and "Gin" option buttons, can I have, "Blonde", "Brunette" and "Redhead"? Please.:D

[peterbj7]

Being serious for a moment, Canon are learning fast how to make hi-res cameras that are also good in low light, and Nikon are about to follow suit. There is no way either is going to make a DSLR with such low resolution, nor any need either. The replacement for the D700 will probably have at least 16mp (Nikon have said it will have significantly more than at present) and assuming they manage to retain their superb low light performance that size will become the new standard. Meantime the Canon 5D3 will probably have 27mp or thereabouts but they will have found how to make it perform well in low light. Whether they also have the killer focussing and metering facilities of the D700 will I think be crucial to them retaining their presence at this market level. They have lagged seriously behind for the past few years, even though before then they were way ahead. The 7D is a big step towards catching up, but they're not quite there yet at most levels.

Mostly MHO of course.

[DarthVader]

Easy....put a 18 MP FF sensor on 7D body, provide ability for 1.3x crop, fix half baked Auto ISO (should allow compensation), and sell it $3,000. I'll buy two of them.

[overclock]

I wish they would make an off topic or rumors forum on POTN.

This is the:
'Equipment Talk' section > Canon EOS Digital Cameras
Everything about digital EOS cameras.

Many of the threads in this forum aren't about "Everything about digital EOS cameras."

[Canonswhitelensesrule]

Easy....put a 18 MP FF sensor on 7D body, provide ability for 1.3x crop, fix half baked Auto ISO (should allow compensation), and sell it $3,000. I'll buy two of them.

Now that I like. The only things I would add are the 1D series AF, and a built in grip. They look and feel so great.

[alpha_1976]

and probably an extended viewfinder :p

[fWord]

No, thanks. A 7-year-old Canon camera serves me just fine, thank you very much.

[themadman]

Easy....put a 18 MP FF sensor on 7D body, provide ability for 1.3x crop, fix half baked Auto ISO (should allow compensation), and sell it $3,000. I'll buy two of them.

+1 I'd get myself a couple as well =)

[peterbj7]

I wonder whether sorting out the AF and making it as good as Nikon's is in fact just a question of changing the firmware? Or whether there are significant hardware differences as well? If it's just software, why on earth don't they do it NOW? The same applies to auto-ISO.

[DarthVader]

AF is hardware change but if Canon puts in 7D body no additional work needed. Auto ISO 2 lines of code.

I wonder whether sorting out the AF and making it as good as Nikon's is in fact just a question of changing the firmware? Or whether there are significant hardware differences as well? If it's just software, why on earth don't they do it NOW? The same applies to auto-ISO.

[DarthVader]

Having a 1D series AF on this mythical body will certainly kill 1Ds series. The differences should be in size, weight and of course price.

Now that I like. The only things I would add are the 1D series AF, and a built in grip. They look and feel so great.

[SkedAddled]

I wish they would make an off topic or rumors forum on POTN. It's been here for a long time, right HERE (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=82).

[davidfig]

I think the sensor should be 3:2 not 16:9 and double the resolution.

This could work even better.

3840x2880 (4:3-11MP)
3840x2560 (3:2-9.8MP)
3840x2160 (16:9-8.2MP)

To make this happen it may have to be a 14MP sensor because of the unused area. Still sounds like a great way to go to me.

[davidfig]

No, thanks. A 7-year-old Canon camera serves me just fine, thank you very much.

Uh! 11MP. Pretty much what I'm saying. But with video and latest hardware.

[gotak]

What exactly is "killer" about that rig?

He forgot the frigging laser cannons...

[gotak]

Find it funny how many still believe the lower pixel density myth. Like eating too much bacon, there's a point of diminishing returns on sensor pixel size.

6mp? I'll just down sample my 7D to that if I so wish :P

[mikekelley]

just put a canon logo and a thumb wheel on a d700 and i'd buy it, that simple.

[spiralspirit]

just put a canon logo and a thumb wheel on a d700 and i'd buy it, that simple.

don't forget the ef mount.

[davidfig]

Find it funny how many still believe the lower pixel density myth. Like eating too much bacon, there's a point of diminishing returns on sensor pixel size.

6mp? I'll just down sample my 7D to that if I so wish :P

Sure down sampling is one way to improve the noise. That's hit and miss. Better to have larger pixels so that noise is not in the original data. Can you tell me what camera is using this technique to lower noise?

Problem with smaller pixels is that you see shadow noise in the low ISO's that are not there in the larger pixels.

[rogazilla]

+1 I'd get myself a couple as well =)

you mean ur wife would :lol:

[CanonGarcon]

I know most people would not agree, but here goes.

Here is what I think would make the most awesome killer camera, which Canon will never make.

1. 5D like body with FF
2. 7D like AF, Flash control, and Exposure system
3. Make it 8.3M Pixels ( 3840x2160 (16x9) [This is essentially HDx2] )
4. Allow 1:1 (4MP=2160x2160), 3:2 (6.9MP=3240x2160), 4:3 (6.1MP=2880x2160) and 16:9
5. Of course it would have super low light abilities because of the Gianormous pixels.
6. Video with 1920x1080, 1280x720, Movie Crop 1920x1080(2x) and 1280x720 (~3.2x).
7. Give it 6fps.

Here's why I think this works. No need to explain FF. The 7D AF, Flash control, Exposure system will give most people what they need for landscapes as well as sports. Although you might complain about 4MP for square ratio, this would mostly be used by wedding photographers and its plenty for a wedding album. More and more HDTV's are in the home so 16x9 is a good format to shoot in, but you still have 4:3 and 3:2. Since the pixels are like a acre large it would do great at ISO25,600. Since it has HD Video and canon seems to excel at that, this would be a natural evolution.

Can you come up with a better killer camera, It does have to be somewhat affordable. Say less than $3000. No bubble gum machine or dishwasher like feature, OK!

-------------------------Using Cashoo suggestion of 3:2 format--------------------------------------
3840x2880 (4:3-11MP)
3840x2560 (3:2-9.8MP)
3840x2160 (16:9-8.3MP)

To make this happen it may have to be a 14MP sensor because of the unused area. Still sounds like a great way to go to me.


Why doesn't Nikon make the perfect camera? Why doesn't Sony make the perfect camera? Could it be that it's not economically and engineeringly possible?

[peterbj7]

larger pixels so that noise is not in the original data

Noise is ALWAYS present. It's just a question of what type and how much. As Canon are pretty convincingly showing with the 7D, it is possible to have low noise AND high pixel density. They may not quite be in the D700 noise class with the 7D, but what they've achieved with a FF equivalent mp count of 46 (compared with Nikon's 12) is extraordinary. As I've thought for some time, Canon are pushing the frontiers, Nikon are perfecting existing technology. Not surprising really, as Canon have vastly more resources behind them than do Nikon.

[MMX]

3. Make it 8.3M Pixels ( 3840x2160 (16x9) [This is essentially HDx2] )
4. Allow 1:1 (4MP=2160x2160), 3:2 (6.9MP=3240x2160), 4:3 (6.1MP=2880x2160) and 16:9
5. Of course it would have super low light abilities because of the Gianormous pixels.


Another (crack)pipe dream.
16×9? It´s not a video camera recorder, who the hell needs this format for photos? Have you ever seen anyone cropping photos to 16×9?
6.9 MP is less than you need to print A4
Super low light abilities? Yes and no.
If you make 300dpi print from 8MP photo or 600dpi print from 16MP photo, the second one won´t look more noisy - there will be more noise, but the "grains" will be smaller so less visible. When you reed reviews, they always compare noise without resizing the photo but when you print, you use constant size no matter what resolution the camera has.

[MMX]

Easy....put a 18 MP FF sensor on 7D body, provide ability for 1.3x crop, fix half baked Auto ISO (should allow compensation), and sell it $3,000. I'll buy two of them.

Then put a 16MP APS-H sensor to 1D Mk. IV body, make it default 1.3× crop, sell it for $5000 and nobody will buy it.

Now that I like. The only things I would add are the 1D series AF, and a built in grip. They look and feel so great.

Umm... and what would be the difference between this one and 1Ds? Just say that you want the 1Ds Mk. IV for $3000 and that´s it.

[CanonGarcon]

Easy....put a 18 MP FF sensor on 7D body, provide ability for 1.3x crop, fix half baked Auto ISO (should allow compensation), and sell it $3,000. I'll buy two of them.

That camera only exist in Rainbowland, not in the world most of us know as reality.

[DStanic]

1Ds body (to accomidate..) articulating 3.5" widescreen LCD
8-10fps
30MP FF sensor with EF-S crop mode (10-15MP?)
ISO6400 as clean as ISO800 on current bodies.
12-200mm f/2.0L kit lens in black :lol:

[MMX]

1Ds body (to accomidate..) articulating 3.5" widescreen LCD
8-10fps
30MP FF sensor with EF-S crop mode (10-15MP?)
ISO6400 as clean as ISO800 on current bodies.
12-200mm f/2.0L kit lens in black :lol:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2304/2455272105_3a73810f4e.jpg

[bustarhymes_indahaus]

canon will never make a camera with all in one of the ffg features

FF sensor
high fps like 9 and up
good AF
small megapixel like 12 but high 300 dpi resolution--for high iso low light performance (which you can get in Nikon cameras esp D3 and D700)


because if so, it will definitely jeopardize their sales of the 1Ds Mark IV, 1D Mark IV, 7D, and the 5D Mark II.

that has been canon's marketing strategy... jacking up Megapixels (but low resolution dpi of only 72) and focusing on Video....

[toxic]

The smaller pixels = more noise myth has been thoroughly debunked.

Pushing for an aspect ratio as useless as 16:9 is a waste of time - why would you want a still in 16:9? Ever try shooting portraits with such narrow aspect ratios? 3:2 is already starting to push it in terms of directionality.

canon will never make a camera with all in one of the ffg features

FF sensor
high fps like 9 and up
good AF
small megapixel like 12 but high 300 dpi resolution--for high iso low light performance (which you can get in Nikon cameras esp D3 and D700)


because if so, it will definitely jeopardize their sales of the 1Ds Mark IV, 1D Mark IV, 7D, and the 5D Mark II.

that has been canon's marketing strategy... jacking up Megapixels (but low resolution dpi of only 72) and focusing on Video....

You obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about. DPI means absolutely nothing in a digital image.

[bustarhymes_indahaus]

You obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about. DPI means absolutely nothing in a digital image.

check your image file sizes from canon cameras...

image size is probably around 39x54 inches..but the resolution is only 72

with nikon.. size is around 9 x 16 inches i think..but resolution is 300

canon has a 21 megapixel image at resolution 72...and nikon has 12 megapixel image at resolution 300

so basically when u compare them...they get the same image quality and pixel quality....it's just that both companies do not want to copy or imitate each other ......

the big difference i guess when u compare both on a Full Frame Sensor for the allowance for faster fps the 12 megapixel can be shot with faster fps at full frame sensor .... notice the 1D Mark IV wasn't created with full frame sensor just to have a fast fps at 10, because the megapixel is too big at 18 or 16? that cannot be shot at 8fps or higher on a full frame sensor...
and with regards to high iso low light performance..it is safer for a lower megapixel to handle noise than a large megapixel...especially on a full frame sensor....

with the 5D Mark 2 it was safe to shoot at 3200 iso..but higher than that...there were noise already..and notice that your fps is only at 3.9 so it's too slow for fast action sports.....
but with the d700..noise is still handled very well even at ISO 5000..and the fps is higher, so it's usable for fast action sports.....


dpi resolution does matter especially when u crop or print large size photos.

im into a photo finishing business.. so please don't tell me that i don't know what i am talking about....

[peterbj7]

check your image file sizes from canon cameras...

image size is probably around 39x54 inches..but the resolution is only 72

with nikon.. size is around 9 x 16 inches i think..but resolution is 300

canon has a 21 megapixel image at resolution 72...and nikon has 12 megapixel image at resolution 300

so basically when u compare them...they get the same image quality and pixel quality

I don't understand this

[rogazilla]

I am with Peterbj7... I didnt know Nikon makes 9x16 sensor in their dlsr camera on the market... And how do u come to that resolution? Math is fuzzy there.

I think the real news and I think for near future is SQUARE sensor. it maximize image circle and allow more "even" light capture from edge to edge. It also allow the photographer to hold the camera in upright direction and can be crop into landscape or portrait with ease. No need to redesign most of the lens line up at least for canon or nikon. I think a patent is already out there.

[mikekelley]

These last few posts have provided great entertainment

[bustarhymes_indahaus]

I am with Peterbj7... I didnt know Nikon makes 9x16 sensor in their dlsr camera on the market... And how do u come to that resolution? Math is fuzzy there.

I think the real news and I think for near future is SQUARE sensor. it maximize image circle and allow more "even" light capture from edge to edge. It also allow the photographer to hold the camera in upright direction and can be crop into landscape or portrait with ease. No need to redesign most of the lens line up at least for canon or nikon. I think a patent is already out there.

yes
it is the future of digital photography technology..something to looking forward to....

[brian00321]

My killer Canon-cam would be a digital revival or equivalent of the QL cams but with AF, Liveview, a bit smaller body, and priced at $400-$500. If that came out, I would honestly sell my m43 stuff in a heartbeat. But that'll never happen, so I'm not sweatin' it.

[Drozz119]

canon has a 21 megapixel image at resolution 72...and nikon has 12 megapixel image at resolution 300

so basically when u compare them...they get the same image quality and pixel quality....


DPI has nothing to do with the camera. It is for the final destination of the photo (monitor or print). The 5d2 file @ 300dpi is still TWICE as big as the D700 file @ 300dpi.

If you put a d700 file and a 5d2 file on a 72dpi monitor.. the 5d2 file @100% will be double the size of a d700 file @ 72dpi

DPI is useless when comparing cameras.. You can set the DPI to whatever you want and the pixel dimensions remain unchanged.

[peterbj7]

Getting closer to what I thought.....

[mosesport]

I love how defensive people get over theoretical cameras. The title of the thread clearly states "killer camera Canon wont make"


Everyone seems so butt hurt. :P This thread has been highly entertaining.

[cogliostro]

The real dot per inch is not 72 nor 300, it is just a numerical placeholder because obviously computer is dumb, and they need a numerical data as the dpi. Canon choose 72, nikon choose 300, so what? It all comes down to the resolution that each camera have, which in this case 5d2 pawn d700.

[darosk]

No toaster oven or slushee machine? Pfft.

[davidfig]

Another (crack)pipe dream.
16×9? It´s not a video camera recorder, who the hell needs this format for photos? Have you ever seen anyone cropping photos to 16×9?


Ah! Yes me, when I produce HD slideshows. Guess what, there are tons of HDTV's out there now and people are asking for that format.

[davidfig]

I love how defensive people get over theoretical cameras. The title of the thread clearly states "killer camera Canon wont make"


Everyone seems so butt hurt. :P This thread has been highly entertaining.

Butt Hurt?? I love that. Its not copyrighted is it. I want to use it. LOL

[JelleVerherstraeten]

I want a 5D2 with better AF and maybe a higher ISO-performance. That's all I'm asking Canon.

[Erik_L]

I want something with a sensor that is essentially one giant pixel, but it is broken into sub pixels electronically. Depending on the ISO, the "assist pixels" will be reduced, thus making each logical pixel larger. ISO 100? 25 MP. ISO 104,000? 6.7 MP, but nearly no noise

Give it time, some corn-ball crap like that may just happen some day :)

[MMX]

I want something with a sensor that is essentially one giant pixel, but it is broken into sub pixels electronically. Depending on the ISO, the "assist pixels" will be reduced, thus making each logical pixel larger. ISO 100? 25 MP. ISO 104,000? 6.7 MP, but nearly no noise

Give it time, some corn-ball crap like that may just happen some day :)

That sounds interesting but I can´t imagine how exactly it should work. Could you show as a blueprint?

[Lowner]

http://www.dphotojournal.com/wp-content/canon_xxx.jpg

I don't see a button marked MLU, the other problem is I'd want a choice of red, white or Rose, and maybe French or New World wine.

[cccc]

I want something with a sensor that is essentially one giant pixel, but it is broken into sub pixels electronically. Depending on the ISO, the "assist pixels" will be reduced, thus making each logical pixel larger. ISO 100? 25 MP. ISO 104,000? 6.7 MP, but nearly no noise

Give it time, some corn-ball crap like that may just happen some day :)
cute idea. i'd buy it.

[davidfig]

I want a 5D2 with better AF and maybe a higher ISO-performance. That's all I'm asking Canon.

Ok so I'm asking for more than that. But maybe they will give us somewhere in between.

[RaZe42]

What about:

5D-ish body (no grip)
36x24mm sensor, native ISO 50, goes up to 12800. Dedicated ISO dial
Fully silvered mirror (Either no AF, or AF sensors up above the focusing screen together with the meter)
Large, bright viewfinder(see previous point)
Live view, Video
Mirror lock-up button
Aperture control on lens, not body. (Still auto-aperture)

No unnecessary complications.

[Erik_L]

All canon needs to make is a small adapter that goes between the body and the lens - it has a single dial on the outside that adjust the aperture. It would need an optic to maintain infinite focus, and may cause you to lose some light, but it would be great!

Also, if you're making a "purist" camera, live view and video nonsense would be kindof a bad idea.

[Erik_L]

That sounds interesting but I can´t imagine how exactly it should work. Could you show as a blueprint?

and give away my multi-million dollar idea details? I think not! :)

[Lowner]

RaZe42,

Loose video and the sky high ISO and I might agree. Control of the aperture via the body does not bother me and I could live with whatever they give me, I'm also more comfortable with a big camera so quite like the 1 series size. I would need 32mp (or more).

[RaZe42]

Well I included Live View because I actually find it quite useful, particularly when doing ground-level macro work. It helps save you from an aching back. :) And well, if it has Live View, then why not include video? It doesn't cost anything, it's just a software thing. Let's say that if you don't need live view/video then you can set the button to do something else, like eg setting a +/- 1 stop exp.bracket

The thing with on-lens aperture control is that at least for me it is easier to feel how much I've stopped down without having to look at anything. (I actually like stop-down metering :P ...even if my 5D doesn't meter consistently with it)

What's wrong with having sky-high ISO? I'd love to be able to stop down a notch for DoF even in bad lighting. I agree that one shouldn't increase high-ISO performance at the expense of low-ISO, but if it doesn't hurt low-ISO, then why not?

And also, I like having a grip attached to my 5D(for balance), so I guess that's similar to the 1 series size, but I prefer to having it as an option so I can have a smaller camera when I need to.

@ Erik_L Nah, wouldn't it be easier to make lenses with an aperture ring on them and have a "A" (as in automatic) notch in the ring?

"My" concept camera isn't a purist thing, it's what I would find geniunly useful in a camera body.

[Lowner]

I have never, ever used higher than 800 and its rare for me to use 400. So as we are talking here about our dream camera, I don't need more. I simply don't shoot many black cats in coal holes using single candles.

AP tried to measure the noise at 12800 of the 1D 4 and their instruments went off the scale, they say its the most noise they have ever seen. I see absolutely nothing of use to me in that.

Video is best left to video cameras in my opinion. I will no doubt have it forced upon me at some stage, but it will never be used and there are a number of far more important items to me that would also cost Canon next to nothing to implement but which they continue to ignore. You mentioned one of them in your own list: MLU.

[RaZe42]

So you haven't photographed in low light(without flash) at all? :)

Yes, video isn't important per se(and MLU is more important, considering the main purpose of the camera is stills), but the capability doesn't hurt, does it?

[MMX]

RaZe42,

Loose video and the sky high ISO and I might agree. Control of the aperture via the body does not bother me and I could live with whatever they give me, I'm also more comfortable with a big camera so quite like the 1 series size. I would need 32mp (or more).

NEED or WANT? ;)
But if you make A2+ prints and you really NEED 32MP camera, why don´t you buy a medium format?

[Lowner]

Because I cannot justify the cost. I know medium format is my natural home, but have you seen some of the prices?

So it's a compromise, get as many pixels in the image as possible, with as good a dynamic range as possible then put up with the rest. According to the latest rumour about the 1Ds mk4, Canon are coming halfway to meet me, because if its to be believed the effort is on better DR not increased NR.

[MMX]

Well, first of all, I would love to see you shooting a F1 GP with a medium format :D
Second, have you seen some of the expected prices of 1Ds Mk. IV? With lens it will probably cost the same as Mamiya DM22 or Pentax 465D.
If you need huge resolution and dynamic range, buy a film medium format and a film scanner; it should be much cheaper than digital and you will be able to edit the photos in your PC.
Or try onOne Genuine Fractals Pro, it´s really powerful software.
Or if you want completely costless solution, shoot telephoto panoramas.
Or try whatever crosses your mind, it will be always better than waiting for "The Killer Camera Canon Won´t Make"

[tkbslc]

I have never, ever used higher than 800 and its rare for me to use 400. So as we are talking here about our dream camera, I don't need more. I simply don't shoot many black cats in coal holes using single candles.
.

Black cats in coal holes? Surely you jest. How about a white kid in an average living room in the afternoon? ISO 1600 at f2.8 and barely breaking 1/100.

[Lowner]

tkbslc,

I don't shoot that sort of work is the simple answer. If forced into the situation I'd be using fill flash at normal ISO levels, with more DoF.

Yes, I know we are all different, so all want different things. I have conflicting requirements, which MMX is right to point out, I just hope that the 1Ds mk4 has sufficient mp to give me the cropping flexibility I know I'm going to need on full frame, because having tried it I now know I dont like crop frame.

[MMX]

Black cats in coal holes? Surely you jest. How about a white kid in an average living room in the afternoon? ISO 1600 at f2.8 and barely breaking 1/100.

Average living room? That must look more like Josef Fritzl´s basement :D I Just tried it with ISO 1600, f/2.8, relatively small room with one 90×90 cm (36×36 inch) window on the northwestern side and it gives me exposures from 1/200 to 1/500 s. It´s 2 PM here, I live in Ireland, it´s partly cloudy outside.

[Lowner]

Just out of curiosity, I've just done the same and at ISO 100 get 1/50s at f/2.8 here in Southern UK with similar weather conditions to MMX in Dublin. Thats an easy 3 stop difference to Utah. Granted we do have French windows rather than proper windows, which will throw more light into the room.

[alt4852]

i shoot ISO800+ indoors quite often as well. maybe you guys are just rich and can afford massive windows to light your houses. :p

[tkbslc]

Average living room? That must look more like Josef Fritzl´s basement :D I Just tried it with ISO 1600, f/2.8, relatively small room with one 90×90 cm (36×36 inch) window on the northwestern side and it gives me exposures from 1/200 to 1/500 s. It´s 2 PM here, I live in Ireland, it´s partly cloudy outside.

The windows face east, sun sets in the west. Not a lot of light in the late afternoon. Point is, it is hardly a black cat in a coal mine.

[canonboy]

nah. do not want!

FF
40MP
10FPS
51 point AF
Zero noise at 3200ISO

WANT!

40mp? okay seriously fitting that amount of pixels though the sensor is seriously screaming for the light particles to hit each other! it's a noise fest seriously. I mean look at how they lowered the MP on the G11 to that compared of the g10.

MP means sweet F.A to me, but im all down with the 10FPS :D

[CanonGarcon]

40mp? okay seriously fitting that amount of pixels though the sensor is seriously screaming for the light particles to hit each other! it's a noise fest seriously. I mean look at how they lowered the MP on the G11 to that compared of the g10.

MP means sweet F.A to me, but im all down with the 10FPS :D

Many in this section seem to have a problem with their grasp on reality.

[peterbj7]

look at how they lowered the MP on the G11 to that compared of the g10

Many people believe that was more of a marketing ploy than driven by technical requirements.

[MMX]

Many people believe that was more of a marketing ploy than driven by technical requirements.

Or they simply realized that nobody is going to make A3 prints from point and shoot camera.