Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor?

>Johan W. Elzenga wrote:
> I'm not saying Canon will indeed, but did it occur to you that they
> could introduce a camera *and* some lenses at the same time? Suppose
> that Canon would indeed consider a new format. Do you suggest it's more
> logical that they first introduce new lenses for a system that doesn't
> exist? Or would it be more logical to introduce a complete system all at
> once...


It would be "more logical" for them to give a totally new system camera
a name other than 1Ds Mark III ...
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor? 

On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 10:50:52 +0200, nomail DeleteThis @please.invalid (Johan W.
Elzenga) wrote:

>Kinon O'cann <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote:
>
>> Yeah, no doubt about, Canon will introduce a sensor that they don't have a
>> single lens for.
>
>I'm not saying Canon will indeed, but did it occur to you that they
>could introduce a camera *and* some lenses at the same time? Suppose
>that Canon would indeed consider a new format. Do you suggest it's more
>logical that they first introduce new lenses for a system that doesn't
>exist? Or would it be more logical to introduce a complete system all at
>once...

Yes, Canon *could* introduce an entire new system.
But why would they?
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor? 

Yes, of course. We will find out in a few weeks time.


"Bill Hilton" <bhilton665.TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1155044175.135852.144190@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>
> It would be "more logical" for them to give a totally new system camera
> a name other than 1Ds Mark III ...
>
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor? 

On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 21:38:43 +0200, nomail RemoveThis @please.invalid (Johan W.
Elzenga) wrote:

>Bill Funk <BigBill RemoveThis @there.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 10:50:52 +0200, nomail RemoveThis @please.invalid (Johan W.
>> Elzenga) wrote:
>>
>> >Kinon O'cann <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Yeah, no doubt about, Canon will introduce a sensor that they don't have a
>> >> single lens for.
>> >
>> >I'm not saying Canon will indeed, but did it occur to you that they
>> >could introduce a camera *and* some lenses at the same time? Suppose
>> >that Canon would indeed consider a new format. Do you suggest it's more
>> >logical that they first introduce new lenses for a system that doesn't
>> >exist? Or would it be more logical to introduce a complete system all at
>> >once...
>>
>> Yes, Canon *could* introduce an entire new system.
>> But why would they?
>
>Because they are in business. If they think they can make it profitable
>to do so, they will. If they don't think that, they won't. Does that
>answer your question?

Sort of.
Canon isn't just about profits, believe me. They are about making sure
they don't hurt themselves in the process, because that can hurt
profits down the road. Or they certainly should be.
We've seen what happens all too often when companies expand too fast,
going for profits without considering the future.
Yes, they could come out with an entirely new system, but their
current system (speaking of DSLRs here) is currently on the top of the
heap by a wide margin. There is a new system currently testing the
waters (4/3); I believe Canon is waiting to see if a new system is
going to sell. Let some one else take the arrows in the back, so to
speak.
Bringing out a new system is expensive. Not just in design and
fabrication, but in selling the camera-buying public that this is a
good idea. And that would include those who are looking at Canon as a
DSLR maker now; does moving them to a new system steal from sales of
their current system?

One way I look at things like this is: am I the only one to think of
this? Sometimes, it seems, yes, but those times are very rare. Canon
(indeed, any business) must always be looking to the future; if they
don't, they die.
(I must point out that, sometimes they don't seem to do so well; GM is
in that position now, and in retrospect, it's fair to wonder what they
were thinking.)
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor? 

Not just that, it is common for top end manufacturers to experiment with
their flagship models and push the limits. Whether it is time for Canon to
push the boundaries or not at the moment is up to Canon.



"Johan W. Elzenga" <nomail RemoveThis @please.invalid> wrote in message
news:1hjrt8j.1ykdn8m1f6f2d4N%nomail@please.invalid...
> Bill Funk <BigBill RemoveThis @there.com> wrote:
>
> Because they are in business. If they think they can make it profitable
> to do so, they will. If they don't think that, they won't. Does that
> answer your question?
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor? 

> Yes, they could come out with an entirely new system, but their
> current system (speaking of DSLRs here) is currently on the top of the
> heap by a wide margin.

That's exactly why they would move into a different market segment - if
they've already taken most all of the 35mm-ish cameras that they can easily
take, then keeping up growth would necessitate finding a new market.
Considering that in the digital medium-format world $10,000 won't even get
you in the door, there are healthy profits to be made for someone with the
CMOS manufacturing capabilities of Canon.

Don't get me wrong, I see just as much chance (maybe even MORE) that Canon
will NOT go that route. But if they chose to, it would make a lot more
sense than a lot of people think. Certainly a lot more sense than the folks
who thought that the 30D would have a 16-megapixel full-frame sensor and
cost $1,000.

steve
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor? 

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 15:10:22 -0700, Bill Funk rhetoricked:

> (I must point out that, sometimes they don't seem to do so well; GM is
> in that position now, and in retrospect, it's fair to wonder what they
> were thinking.)

Umm . . . it may have been "What would Bill do?"


 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor? 

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 18:48:37 -0400, ASAAR <caught RemoveThis @22.com> wrote:

>On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 15:10:22 -0700, Bill Funk rhetoricked:
>
>> (I must point out that, sometimes they don't seem to do so well; GM is
>> in that position now, and in retrospect, it's fair to wonder what they
>> were thinking.)
>
> Umm . . . it may have been "What would Bill do?"
>
>

In some cases, yes.
Hindsight is wonderful!
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor? 

On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 18:25:17 -0600, "comast.net" <anx RemoveThis @codon.com> wrote:

>> Yes, they could come out with an entirely new system, but their
>> current system (speaking of DSLRs here) is currently on the top of the
>> heap by a wide margin.
>
> That's exactly why they would move into a different market segment - if
>they've already taken most all of the 35mm-ish cameras that they can easily
>take, then keeping up growth would necessitate finding a new market.

No, but it might mean cutting the market share of Nikon, and the rest
of the pack.
>Considering that in the digital medium-format world $10,000 won't even get
>you in the door, there are healthy profits to be made for someone with the
>CMOS manufacturing capabilities of Canon.

Maybe. Let's see how 4/3 fares before we announce the room for a
competing system.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I see just as much chance (maybe even MORE) that Canon
>will NOT go that route. But if they chose to, it would make a lot more
>sense than a lot of people think. Certainly a lot more sense than the folks
>who thought that the 30D would have a 16-megapixel full-frame sensor and
>cost $1,000.

*I* never thought that. It would put the XT out of place in the
current scheme.
There's certainly time for Canon to move the XT upmarket, and the
thought has me wondering where the 5D will go. It can only be good!
>
>steve
>
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor? 

>> That's exactly why they would move into a different market segment - if
>>they've already taken most all of the 35mm-ish cameras that they can
>>easily
>>take, then keeping up growth would necessitate finding a new market.
>
> No, but it might mean cutting the market share of Nikon, and the rest
of the pack.

Like I said, it would be a lot easier for them to take a bunch of an
emerging market than to try to take yet more from Nikon and the others. Pro
photographers (who spend the most money on gear, and buy the highest-margin
gear) don't just jump ship from Nikon to Canon just because Canon introduces
a better body.

Now, the same could be said about the digital medium-format, too... would
folks dump their Mamiya or Hassy lenses just to get a Canon body? It's
tough to say.

>>Considering that in the digital medium-format world $10,000 won't even get
>>you in the door, there are healthy profits to be made for someone with the
>>CMOS manufacturing capabilities of Canon.
>
> Maybe. Let's see how 4/3 fares before we announce the room for a
> competing system.

The 4/3 system is sub-35mm, it's not a competitor to medium-format stuff.
If the rumors are true (which they certainly may NOT be), then the sensor
will have almost five times the surface area of a 4/3 sensor. That's
entirely another ball game.

I'm going to step out of the conversation, because it's mostly an exercise
in economics. If the rumor is true, then it's true, if it's not, then it's
not. =)

steve
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor? 

"Steve Wolfe" <anx.DeleteThis@codon.com> wrote:
>
> Now, the same could be said about the digital medium-format, too... would
> folks dump their Mamiya or Hassy lenses just to get a Canon body? It's
> tough to say.

My Mamiya lenses work great (and work as shift lenses) on the 5D.
Surprisingly high contrast; we all thought that our MF lenses were less
contrasty and less sharp than 35mm lenses, but it turns out they're very
sharp and contrasty by 35mm standards.

If Canon were to make a 36 x 48 sensor, the obvious thing would be to put it
in a back for existing MF cameras. Were the price right, I'd love a back for
my Mamiya 645ProTL (the recently discontinued manual focus camera), but I
don't expect to get it. I'd also like it to be full frame (42 x 56). That
would be (42 x 56)/(24 x 36) = 2.7 times the area of the 5D sensor, and at
the same pixel pitch (which is known to work great with the Mamiya lenses)
something like 34MP.

Now 34MP of 5D quality pixels with Mamiya lens sharpness would be something
to write home about.

>> Maybe. Let's see how 4/3 fares before we announce the room for a
>> competing system.
>
> The 4/3 system is sub-35mm, it's not a competitor to medium-format stuff.

Exactly.

> I'm going to step out of the conversation, because it's mostly an
> exercise
> in economics. If the rumor is true, then it's true, if it's not, then
> it's
> not. =)

I doubt it's true. Canon has never been a player in the medium format field.

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor? 

On Wed, 9 Aug 2006 14:44:42 +0900, "David J. Littleboy"
<davidjl RemoveThis @gol.com> wrote:

>>> Maybe. Let's see how 4/3 fares before we announce the room for a
>>> competing system.
>>
>> The 4/3 system is sub-35mm, it's not a competitor to medium-format stuff.
>
>Exactly.

Exactly, but it is an emerging market. MF isn't.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor? 

In article <ebbstu$q2e$1@nnrp.gol.com>, David J. Littleboy
<davidjl.RemoveThis@gol.com> writes
>"Steve Wolfe" <anx.RemoveThis@codon.com> wrote:
>>
>> Now, the same could be said about the digital medium-format, too... would
>> folks dump their Mamiya or Hassy lenses just to get a Canon body? It's
>> tough to say.
>
>My Mamiya lenses work great (and work as shift lenses) on the 5D.
>Surprisingly high contrast; we all thought that our MF lenses were less
>contrasty and less sharp than 35mm lenses, but it turns out they're very
>sharp and contrasty by 35mm standards.
>
That was my experience also. My Mamiya 6 lenses are not exceeded in
sharpness or contrast by any other lenses I own, and indeed are not
matched by many. Possible the Contax G2 lenses are on a level with them.

David
--
David Littlewood
 >> Stay informed about: Canon 1Ds Mk III Sensor?