# uh oh, new dSLR rumors!



## thebeginning (Aug 2, 2006)

found this posted on a few other forums...

http://www.camerawest.com/

*New this                        Fall! 
                      Canon 1DS 22mp
                      Leica M8 Digital
                      Nikon D80 10mp* 

hmm.  that would be pretty incredible.  i found another place that said the m8 was going to run at about 5000 USD, and is going to be similar to an m7 body, but digital.  wowza.  who knows what the 22mpx 1ds is, probably a 1dsIII or something. No doubt it will be very good, but I'm more interested in the 3d mentioned here:

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


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 2, 2006)

:roll:  I love rumor season.

Every 6 months (for Canon anyway) the rumor mill starts cranking out all sorts of things.  The reality is that those who do know what is coming, probably won't tell anyone...and anyone (or site) that claims to know something...probably doesn't.


----------



## thebeginning (Aug 2, 2006)

i'm afraid so...although there was a rumor about sony coming out with a camera a while back, and the same about the new 10mp nikon, and both of those happened...i suppose we shall just see.  i'm thinking there will be a couple things announced at photokina this year, so perhaps then.


----------



## darin3200 (Aug 2, 2006)

I'm most interested in seeing the M8 and how leica is going to make the switch to digital.


----------



## Digital Matt (Aug 2, 2006)

I've been wondering for a while now about 35mm based DSLRs.  How much larger can they go in megapixels before there is no room on the sensor?  17.6 is already a lot.  If they do indeed reach 22mp, I would think that the next step is increasing the size of the sensor, which brings you into medium format digital.  All new bodies, all new lenses.

Will Canon and Nikon eventually end up with MF dSLRs?


----------



## thebeginning (Aug 2, 2006)

darin3200 said:
			
		

> I'm most interested in seeing the M8 and how leica is going to make the switch to digital.



i believe they already have...i dont know the names of them, but i'm almost sure there is an R9 or DMR or something like that that's already out there


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 2, 2006)

It's hard to say if they will expand the sensors.  They haven't really been in the MF film business, unless they own one of the brands in that market.  I don't think they will...after all, their current '35mm' DLSR cameras are rivaling or beating 35mm film...which was the biggest market before digital.  The question is "What would you be able to do with MF digital that you can't do with '35mm' digital?"  There will obviously still be some applications for large sensor MF cameras...but I think it will still remain a niche at the top end of the market.

I think that other improvements would be more worth while...like a wider exposure latitude and less noise at higher ISO.  Imagine being able to shoot at ISO 6400 without worrying about noise...or having 7 or 9 stops of latitude in a single exposure?


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 2, 2006)

thebeginning said:
			
		

> i believe they already have...i dont know the names of them, but i'm almost sure there is an R9 or DMR or something like that that's already out there



Ya, don't they make a 'Digilux' or something?  ...........yes they do.

Leica Digital models


----------



## Tiberius (Aug 2, 2006)

> I think that other improvements would be more worth while...like a wider exposure latitude and less noise at higher ISO. Imagine being able to shoot at ISO 6400 without worrying about noise...or having 7 or 9 stops of latitude in a single exposure?


Amen to that.  99% of people rarely need the full quality given by 10MP, and 98% of people never need more than 6MP.  22MP would just mean larger file sizes that really aren't needed.  But high noiseless ISOs would be a gift from the gods, and increased dynamic range is always a good thing.


----------



## Digital Matt (Aug 2, 2006)

Big Mike said:
			
		

> It's hard to say if they will expand the sensors.  They haven't really been in the MF film business, unless they own one of the brands in that market.  I don't think they will...after all, their current '35mm' DLSR cameras are rivaling or beating 35mm film...which was the biggest market before digital.  The question is "What would you be able to do with MF digital that you can't do with '35mm' digital?"  There will obviously still be some applications for large sensor MF cameras...but I think it will still remain a niche at the top end of the market.



I don't think they are going to just stop cranking up the megapixels.  I seriously doubt that Canon will get to a point, say 22mp for instance, and never make a digital camera with more megapixels.  There is a finite limit to the number of photo sites you can fit on a 24x36mm sensor.



> I think that other improvements would be more worth while...like a wider exposure latitude and less noise at higher ISO.  Imagine being able to shoot at ISO 6400 without worrying about noise...or having 7 or 9 stops of latitude in a single exposure?



To a certain degree, those improvements you mentioned are advantages of a larger sensor.  That's why most images from a Rebel XT or D50 look better than a comparable point and shoot, even with the same amount of megapixels.  The same is true of APS-C sized sensors compared to MF sized sensors.


----------



## darin3200 (Aug 2, 2006)

thebeginning said:
			
		

> i believe they already have...i dont know the names of them, but i'm almost sure there is an R9 or DMR or something like that that's already out there


Yeah, but the M series has a lot of reputation. I also read that they are using vertical metal shutters in the M8 which will probably be louder than the horizontal clothe ones in the M7.


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 2, 2006)

I'm sure they will continue to try to crank up the mega pixels...that's the number they love to put on the box or right on the front of most cameras.  It sells...and if they keep upping it, people will keep buying new cameras...weather they need it or not.

Aren't they making the photo-sites smaller and smaller?  Isn't that how they went from 1MP to 7MP on those tiny little P&S sensors?  I'm sure there is a limit...but are they there yet?

Of course bigger sensors make those things better...but as technology improves, they should be able to get more out of smaller sensors.  I'm sure they would actually love to go with MF sized sensors...just so they could sell everybody a whole new set of lenses.


----------



## Digital Matt (Aug 2, 2006)

I'm not saying that they are there yet, or anywhere close.  It may be 5, or 10 years, but I do wonder if they will go MF.


----------



## Big Mike (Aug 2, 2006)

I hear ya...

I'm guessing that they (Canon & Nikon) would already have gone with some MF sensors & cameras...but there is the issue of lenses.  They would have to develop and make their own MF lenses (which they just might do)...or they could make their cameras to accept other brands of lenses...but I can't see them wanting to do that.


----------



## thebeginning (Aug 2, 2006)

who knows...i kinda doubt it, as the prices would be quite high and the percentage of photographers that would require one would be quite small.  if there were photographers that would look into them, they probably would have already looked into the current MF digital models.

i would love lower noise at high iso's, but that's always a factor.  the foveon chips are mentioned to be very good at that, so that is a possibility.  dynamic range is a problem, but only in the highlight end IMO.  from measurements done through tests, most popular dSLRs (d200, d2x, 30d, 5d, 1ds2, etc.) have a range of about 8 or so stops....they handle shadow details better than film, but film handles highlights a good bit better.  with raw you can pull back both ends pretty far, too.  it would be nice to have better highlight capabilities...

here's an example of that process i found at dpreview:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5d/page22.asp


----------



## Digital Matt (Aug 2, 2006)

thebeginning said:
			
		

> who knows...i kinda doubt it, as the prices would be quite high and the percentage of photographers that would require one would be quite small.  if there were photographers that would look into them, they probably would have already looked into the current MF digital models.



I don't think the prices would be that high, given that as technology advances, prices come down.  Digital backs get cheaper and cheaper, and if a company like Canon or Nikon got into MF digital, they would have to be competitive pricewise to even dream of it.

To say that the percentage of photographers that would require one would be quite small is really not true.  Do you think there is a small percentage of photographers using digital backs with MF bodies now?  Hardly.  The fashion/advertising market is headed that way big time.  As film dies off, MF digital will completely take over that arena, for the same reasons that MF film is used over 35mm now.  I know that megapixels aren't everything, but higher resolution does make a better print.


----------



## usayit (Aug 2, 2006)

thebeginning said:
			
		

> i believe they already have...i dont know the names of them, but i'm almost sure there is an R9 or DMR or something like that that's already out there



yes... Leica has an R9 (SLR not Rangefinder) with an available digital back.  Its not cheap and neither is there glass.  I had the opportunity to handle one a while back.  I wasn't impressed and I can see why they really don't have a strong market share.  I do like how Leica went digital with a back rather than a body.  I think its a big advantage to have both 35mm and digital without the trouble of carrying two camera bodies.  Now the M-series rangefinders, those are some nice cameras! The old saying is that the problem with Leica is that they perfected the rangefinder back in the late 50s with the M3.

The M8 has been looming around for quite sometime in the Leica and rangefinder forums.  Its definitely going to be a digital rangefinder and no question... extremely expensive.  Oh why? Epson already makes a Leica M-mount rangefinder... I want one so badly but they are rather hard to find and new ones are a bit expensive.  The reviews are good but nothing spectacular either.


----------



## Ihaveaquestion (Aug 3, 2006)

Damn, I need alot more money.


----------



## thebeginning (Aug 3, 2006)

Digital Matt said:
			
		

> I don't think the prices would be that high, given that as technology advances, prices come down.  Digital backs get cheaper and cheaper, and if a company like Canon or Nikon got into MF digital, they would have to be competitive pricewise to even dream of it.
> 
> To say that the percentage of photographers that would require one would be quite small is really not true.  Do you think there is a small percentage of photographers using digital backs with MF bodies now?  Hardly.  The fashion/advertising market is headed that way big time.  As film dies off, MF digital will completely take over that arena, for the same reasons that MF film is used over 35mm now.  I know that megapixels aren't everything, but higher resolution does make a better print.



yes, the prices would go down, but how much?  some of the nicer backs and MF digital bodies are in the 20k-30k range.  canon would be marketing for a group that is pretty small anyway. i meant the 'percentage of photographers' in canon's and nikon's terms, not in our terms.  i'm not sure if they'd think it would be worth their time and money to develop such a highly advanced body or back when they still have consumers, advanced amateurs, and pros that dont shoot commercial and fashion to please.  _eventually_ that might be the case, i just can't see that happening any time soon.  but we'll see


----------



## Digital Matt (Aug 3, 2006)

I think a large portion of Canon and Nikon's customer base is a professional portrait photographer, and there are immense benefits from MF.  The only barrier is cost, and it will come down for sure.  If you go back to the first digital camera, which probably came out, what about 15 years ago, it was barely 1mp, and super expensive.  Now adays, it seems like every 13 year old kid as at least 5mp, if not 7, or 10mp cameras.  </huge generalization>  In 15 years from now, what will it be?


----------



## usayit (Aug 3, 2006)

I really wish Pentax went through with that 645 digital.....


----------



## ksmattfish (Aug 4, 2006)

I think there is potentially a huge market for medium format digital if they can get the price down.  Plenty of amateurs shoot medium and large format film, but at 30K+ for a digital camera it's still more practical for most to continue shooting film.  Eventually someone will want to sell digital to this crowd, and will figure out a way to do it.  

When people talk about APS digital vs full frame 35mm they rarely discuss lens technology.  To some extent it doesn't matter if the smaller sensor has just as good of resolution as a larger sensor, with the smaller format, the lenses have to be much higher quality.  Sensor technology is outpacing optics technology.  Even with the best lenses on the market, APS sized digital have aperture diffraction issues at f/11 and smaller apertures.  This is no good for landscape photographers.  Unless someone comes up with better lenses, the easiest solution is bigger sensors.  With medium and large format the company making the digital back doesn't even have to make the camera body or lenses.


----------



## danalec99 (Aug 4, 2006)

Big Mike said:
			
		

> Ya, don't they make a 'Digilux' or something?  ...........yes they do.
> 
> Leica Digital models


I think he was referring to this > Leica Digital Modul R


----------



## Jeff Canes (Aug 10, 2006)

MF & full frame DSLR  

   Would love a D-back for my 500cm but numbers just do not add up to the cost? 

   See I am under the impression that the MP size is for the total sensor and not for a standard measurement like a square millimeter. So how do you compare systems like the Hasselblad H2D or V96B back to Canon&#8217;s 5D and 1Ds MII. IMO on the surface numbers seem to show that the Canons are nearly as good or maybe better that the Hasselblads.  I must be missing something.

   H2D: 36.7x49mm (1798.3mm sq) sensor @ 22mp
   V96B: 36.9x36.9mm (1361.6mm sq) sensor @ 16mp
   5D: 24x36mm (864mm sq) @ 13mp
1Ds MII: 24x36mm (864mm sq) @ 16mp


----------

