Canon 1Ds mark 4

jdizzle wrote in post #10374025
I would say "least likely" bcoz' it still has to use the DIGIC IV technology. I wouldn't be surprised if Canon jumps the gun and uses DIGIC V.

They need to think about Nikon; in the end of this year they can come with D4. So Digic V would be something that would help them in the competition.

MMX wrote in post #10384615
They need to think about Nikon; in the end of this year they can come with D4. So Digic V would be something that would help them in the competition.

I agree. Releasing DIGIC V would put Canon on top again but, it's a never ending competition with both companies. For once I would like to see Canon put all the new tech in the 1D line over the prosumer.

Not sure I see why a different internal processor would affect sales. Now if it was fitted in order to get the camera to do "X" as well as the previous "A", "B" and "C", then yes, I'd understand.

A bit like buying a car specifically because it will do 0 to 60mph in 3 seconds, it's of no interest to me what engine management mark number the engine uses as long as it does the job.

Now here in the UK, we like our cars to be nimble around corners, because we have a lot of them (cars and corners of the leafy country lane style). So instead of the straight line performance, I go for something that's good at that. Then I might need to look at brakes, torque curves, gearing, chassis balance etc. but still don't need to know what engine management computer the car uses.

jdizzle wrote in post #10384667
I agree. Releasing DIGIC V would put Canon on top again but, it's a never ending competition with both companies. For once I would like to see Canon put all the new tech in the 1D line over the prosumer.

You mean like wireless flash control?

nphsbuckeye wrote in post #10386185
You mean like wireless flash control?

Wireless flash control isn't a big deal to me but, I'll take it.

jdizzle wrote in post #10384667
I agree. Releasing DIGIC V would put Canon on top again but, it's a never ending competition with both companies. For once I would like to see Canon put all the new tech in the 1D line over the prosumer.

They started doing that with the 1-III series with LV and other ergonomic changes, I don't see why they are gonna stop now.

Luminodio wrote in post #10387062
They started doing that with the 1-III series with LV and other ergonomic changes, I don't see why they are gonna stop now.

You're right but, the 7D got the AF expansion before the current 1D MK IV.

jdizzle wrote in post #10387285
You're right but, the 7D got the AF expansion before the current 1D MK IV.

I don't think the 1-Series is gonna be expanded in the way the 7D's was built. I honestly see the 7D falling back to the xxD original position in the lineup and the xxD series be discontinued.

jdizzle wrote in post #10384667
I agree. Releasing DIGIC V would put Canon on top again but, it's a never ending competition with both companies. For once I would like to see Canon put all the new tech in the 1D line over the prosumer.

??
Nah it won't. Especially at that segment of the market, no one cares about Digic III, IV, or V.
Remember Digic does NOTHING to image quality (unless it's a jpeg of course.. then it's everything). It is simply a CPU, and does what every other CPU in the world does. It doesn't take the image.

AdamJL wrote in post #10389763
??
Nah it won't. Especially at that segment of the market, no one cares about Digic III, IV, or V.
Remember Digic does NOTHING to image quality (unless it's a jpeg of course.. then it's everything). It is simply a CPU, and does what every other CPU in the world does. It doesn't take the image.

Thanks for the correction Adam. DIGIC is just a processor. I always thought that DIGIC had something to do with making the image. With that in mind, I want QUAD DIGIC IV!! :p

jdizzle wrote in post #10389869
Thanks for the correction Adam. DIGIC is just a processor. I always thought that DIGIC had something to do with making the image. With that in mind, I want QUAD DIGIC IV!! :p

I think I love you, but the hell am I so afraid of?

Luminodio wrote in post #10391906
I think I love you, but the hell am I so afraid of?

Haha! You've been watching too much of the Partridge Family.

jdizzle wrote in post #10392027
Haha! You've been watching too much of the Partridge Family.

I actually don't ever recall watching the show even when I was a child. That's some deeply engrained stuff if that is the result of a past case as it most certainly due to any watching presently.

AdamJL wrote in post #10389763
Remember Digic does NOTHING to image quality (unless it's a jpeg of course.. then it's everything). It is simply a CPU, and does what every other CPU in the world does. It doesn't take the image.

That's half right, but half misleading, as well. The processor does do more processing to jpegs than to RAW images, but it processes ALL of them. People, including manufacturers and the media, aren't as careful about including explanations of what RAW really means, these days, so it tends to be forgotten that RAW does not mean "raw".

The sensor only provides capture data; it really is raw, but it's not RAW, and it can't be read by any consumer hardware or software. The processor turns that "raw data" into a "RAW data" image file, which can be read by photoshop, etc. It's far less processed than a jpeg, but it is processed. And a big part of that processing is turning the greyscale sensor data into something consumer software will interpret as colors and separating image data from noise.

That's why two cameras with the same sensor (don't forget, the sensors aren't generally made by the camera makers) produce different results even in "raw" format if they use different processors. It's also why cameras with the latest processors (1D Mk IV)are able to rip off 30 + frames at 10 fps without slowing down, but older cameras can't. It's also the difference between a usable 25,600 ISO versus 800 ISO.

The extra processing power makes a real world difference. If people don't care about the processors in their cameras, they should.

DaveInAZ wrote in post #10442143
That's half right, but half misleading, as well. The processor does do more processing to jpegs than to RAW images, but it processes ALL of them. People, including manufacturers and the media, aren't as careful about including explanations of what RAW really means, these days, so it tends to be forgotten that RAW does not mean "raw".

The sensor only provides capture data; it really is raw, but it's not RAW, and it can't be read by any consumer hardware or software. The processor turns that "raw data" into a "RAW data" image file, which can be read by photoshop, etc. It's far less processed than a jpeg, but it is processed. And a big part of that processing is turning the greyscale sensor data into something consumer software will interpret as colors and separating image data from noise.

That's why two cameras with the same sensor (don't forget, the sensors aren't generally made by the camera makers) produce different results even in "raw" format if they use different processors. It's also why cameras with the latest processors (1D Mk IV)are able to rip off 30 + frames at 10 fps without slowing down, but older cameras can't. It's also the difference between a usable 25,600 ISO versus 800 ISO.

The extra processing power makes a real world difference. If people don't care about the processors in their cameras, they should.

Wow, I always just thought of the processor in terms of FPS. I never knew it had impact on image noise.

Is that why people say, for example, the 40D is better at higher ISO than a 400D - is it the processor that makes it better? I always thought it was just nonsense.