RUMORS OF AN EOS 8 MEGAPIXEL TRUE???

HEY you all...
i'm in the midst of purchasing a canon d60, but i've been hearing scattered rumors of a canon eos 1D / 8 megapixel camera coming out by 2003...any truth in this bitty?

please let me know so i can hold off on buying the d60....
thanks

Hello mushedroom


I haven’t consider my D30 as a problem in any way, the limit is me and only me.

I have 50 prints at 30x45 cm from the D30 on photo paper from a Swedish supplier (apport) and these is perfect.

So, why bother.

Roine

What on earth would you do with 8mp? I always talk about working at ritz camera and I tell them they don't even need 4mp! Most people are ONLY printing 4x6. When was the last time you made an 8x10? REALLY.

In 2003 or 2010 people will be buying higher mega pixels cameras but not for the res. They will buy it for the features.

When the CoolPix 950 came out, it was GREAT! 2.1 mp full manual features. Now you can't find fully manual features on a 2 mp. In fact no 3MP camera has manual features except the Canon S30, (i believe). This means people aren't always buying for the pixel, they want the control that only 4 -5 mp cameras have.

I've made really good 12X18'' prints from my D30. Where can you print larger? And why would you want to go without a D-SLR for over a year?????

Also, the EOS 1-D 8mp will prob be about $4000. That's double what you'd pay for a D60 that's for the most part, the most MP camera on the market right now. yeah, a tad higher than the D100 nikon.

BUY THE D60, mines on order. I sold my D30 on ebay on march 18 and i should get my D60 on the 5th of april. TRUST ME, THE WAIT IS KILLING ME! ahhh!!!!!


Dave

hey thanks for the info...
the only caution flags i have about the d60 are the shutter lag times, as well as the focusing....

i've shot the 1d and it basically handles like a film camera which i like also it uses eos components like the battery pack, etc., of which i already have from my eos 3 kit....

i dunno i've really got to have the d60 in my hands before i make a decision...i too have one on non-obligating order with a shop at the moment.....

2199 is a great price we'll have to see though....

also i do a lot of art/portfolio/print work, so i do need to be shooting with a higher MP for sake of picture crisp and clarity....

HI:

I have a D30 and while I am tempted to jump to a D60 for the extra megapixels (which I don't really need), I am not tempted enough to take the loss on my camera. 8 megapixels won't make me jump either. However, if canon were to come out with a 3 megapixel camera with a Foveon chip, I would take a hard look at the price. It's about picture quality.

Are you serious? I print 8x10 all the time and want to go much higher. Problem is the D30 and D60 are really 8x10 only cameras. I know people keep saying they print much larger, but they are NOT film quality and FAR from medium format quality. And before someone tells me the are, take one of your large prints down to your local Landscape Gallery and compare. There is none.

Problem is 8MP is not near Medium format. 20MP? Getting there.

Med-format is much more than 20mp, but it's hard to compair the two.

As far as 8x10 prints from a d30, i have some really good 8x10 prints from a point & shoot 2mp! it's all in the printer. If you're printing your digital pics on a $200 printer, and haveing your negs printed on a $200,000 printer, (which is mostly the case) then yeah there will be a HUGE difference. I work at ritz camera and we have 1300 stores, and only THREE of our stores has a FUJI 390. I happen to work at one of the stores. It doesn't use gases, dyes, or ink. It's exposed.

I don't think anyone that owns a D30 will ever complain about pixelation.

Pixels won't solve the lack of tonal range found in film YET. That's the biggest difference, read any review site.

And sooner or later, people will stop printing. I mean, why print now? You can have a photo album that holds 200 pics, or a CD that holds 1000. And no negs. Your computer is going to be your photo album.

But of course, there are times you'll want to frame a few.

To sum it up, the D30 does NOT pixelate at 8x12 (full frame) and 6MP will not solve the tonal range, if anything it will lose a bit. Detail will increase a bit, that's why my D60 is on order, but if they fixed the tonal range, i would be happy with a 3mp.


Dave

Romeozulu,

I dont know who you have been talking to, but I have printed up to 24x36 with my D30 and it is film quality. I have even read other forums where professional have gone up to 30x40s. Yes, your definition of "quality" and someone else's may be different, but I am a wedding and portrait professional (10 years) and can testify first hand. I can hold a 24x30 from my Bronica 645 up against a 24x36 from my D30 and I like the quality/rez/etc.. of the D30 image better. I have had many clients say the same thing and they are my boss. I do what they like and they like it. Have you ever sent amy images to a pro lab to get enlarged ? I will also be buying a D60 when I can get one, because if I can do a 24x36 with the D30, the D60 will be right on the money. No, you dont need an 8MP file ... just a great file to start with (whatever the MP) - JUST LIKE FILM.

Paul Alford
Lasting Impression Photography
Summerville, SC
www.lastingphotos.com

Paul , you're right, i've heard of super large prints, and they look great! Personaly i've only printed a 12x18, and MMMMMM baby, it was great.

Useing 1 soft box, 1 umb, & backlight.

Dave, again.

I was told that a color slide would be about 54mp.

Cameras with more pixels will no doubt be released, if you want to keep waiting I imagine 16 and even more megapixels will be available. For me, the D30 is easily good enough for the 11x17 prints I make.

Not that I wouldn't want more pixels, to cover up for poor framing, too short a lens, etc. It's just that whatever is wrong with my images now is usually my problem, not the camera's.

boB

54MP? Slide flim, or any kinda film can't be campaired to pixels. It doesn't work in the same way.

An image will look film quality if all the colors are right, not how many pixels you have. So if the color is right on a 1.3mp and you print a wallet, it's FILM quality.

Of course there will be higher MP but not for long. I would guess in the next 4 years they will max out a 35mm chip at around 24MP or so. It seems like 6mp is prob the max for the size chip they use, on point and shoot they can go crazy because who cares about quality, (it sucks at 5mp, way too noisy, grainy, and grey color on the nikon 5000, minolta 7, and sony 707). So lets say that you could only get 6mp on the current chip. If you double it, the chip area gets 4x bigger, so that would mean they could prob make a 24mp. 6X4=24mp.

After that 5 years, people won't ask how many MP, they won't care, they will just know it's good. The MP will be deep in the specs on the back page of the manuel. No one will care because no one could print big enough to really test it.

I've said it before, and i'll say it again, the TONAL RANGE needs to inprove.
...on 35mm film whatever color hits the neg, that's what color will be printed. whereas on digital, it has to pick the color blue, out of 256 shades of blue. same for red, and green. that's your 16million colors. (256*256*256) you divide that by something and that makes it 24bit, or 36bit or somthing like that. BUT ANYWAY... film isn't limited by 16,000,000 colors. WHATEVER the film sees, is what will come out.

Dave

I'm sure Canon is already designing the successor to the 1D, to fill out the top end of its EOS line, and it may very well be an 8 mp model. If you worry about getting the ultimate you will never get anything. Kind of like computers.
Has you considered how it is the quality of the MP more than the number of them that are the important quality?
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/counting​1.htm
Really 6 mp is really quite good and the D30 already has a reputation as "film like". Here is one visual comparison comparing a high quality scan of Provia100-400 to the D30:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/iso100-400.htm
This respected landscape photographer came to the conclusion the the D30 was better in containing a lower noise and that this provides the "film like" qulaity. The fact that the D60 seems to have lower noise than the D30 is a great sign that the output will great.
Mike K

I haven't been talking to anyone. I've been doing the tests myself. My D30 does not compare to medium format at higher than 8x10. I've seen that with my own eyes. No contest. Not even close. Again, this is all subjective. I have no doubt that for 95% of the general public, they will not be able to tell.

I've blown some D30 pics to 36x24 and my girlfriend thinks they look super and can't see anything wrong with them. I can. Compared to some stuff hanging in a local photo gallery (medium format), these are a joke.

How, the D30 compares to 35mm, that a different story. I think the D30 and 35mm at 19x11 look different, but equal in quality. 35mm film gets fuzzy and grainy when blown up, the D30 gets...well...I don't know how to describe it.

Also, if you're doing portraits, you are going to see less of a difference. I do landscapes. But then, not many people shoot landscapes on 35mm either.

I would love to get together with someone that has a D30/D60 print that they think is as good as medium format film. I would love to see it. Maybe I'm doing something wrong. My guess is that we just have different stands for "as good as film".

Romeozulu if you want to compare film and digital then you should compare a medium format film enlargement with a digital file taken with a medium format camera and digital back. The file is usually around 16+ megapixels. From what I have done in the past with makign prints from 35 mm and med format slr film I would say that the D30 can, with interpolation do better than the 35mm film. Comparing it to med format isnt a very valid comparison.