Is this wishful thinking, Canon people?

Discussion in 'Canon' started by Patrick L., Nov 5, 2003.

  1. Patrick L.

    Patrick L. Guest

    How about a Canon 10D redesigned without the focusing problems, and how
    about a high end digital lens system to go with it like Oly is doing with
    its E-1.

    Also, how about addressing the issue of dust on the sensor. Oly, as far as I
    know, is the only one doing something about it with the E-1.

    Okay, Canon? How about it?

    Patrick L.
    Patrick L., Nov 5, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. I'm sure that much of this is coming in a future version (20D ???), but
    right now it looks like folks are pretty happy with the 10D. Even now, nine
    months after it's introduction, it is often sold out at many of the stores
    here in the NYC area. By the way, I don't think the verdict is in yet on
    the Oly E-1 and dust resolution, although what you say is correct, at least
    Oly has taken a proactive position on this issue.
    gilbert grape, Nov 5, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Patrick L.

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    Yeah - like the world is going to rush out and buy a camera that doesn't
    take any lens currently on the market and which has a promised 8 thousand
    dollar 300mm (are they kidding or joking or stupid folks?) because you think
    they are maybe going to have a better camera than the 10D which is already
    on the market and selling out to a lot of extremely satisfied customers.
    You must be an OM owner -- they are the most naive of all the wishful
    Tony Spadaro, Nov 5, 2003
  4. Patrick L.

    Todd Walker Guest

    My 10D focuses perfectly. The vast majority of focusing problems are
    because of inexperienced users.

    As for the E1 lens system, I would much rather have the vast repertoire
    of Canon EF mount lenses at my disposal than be limited to what Oly
    decides to produce for the E1, as well as being at their mercy on
    The concept of the dust removal system on the E1 is a good one -- I'm
    interested to see how well it works in practice. Removing dust from the
    sensor of a DSLR isn't as bad as many people think once you get the hang
    of it.
    Canon is handily kicking everyone's butt in the DSLR market so I don't
    think they are going to be making any changes in the near future.

    Todd Walker
    Canon 10D:
    My Digital Photography Weblog:
    Todd Walker, Nov 5, 2003
  5. Patrick L.

    AT Guest

    Please explain for a not understanding photographer.
    What the heck is a "digital lens system"???

    AT, Nov 5, 2003
  6. Patrick L.

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    You have to put it on with your fingers.
    Tony Spadaro, Nov 5, 2003
  7. Patrick L.

    MarkH Guest

    Done, and I have one.
    Like the EOS lens system?
    What about really scratch resistant glass for the AA filter that you can
    clean and never scratch. This is a good suggestion.

    I rate you post 1 out of 3
    MarkH, Nov 5, 2003
  8. Troll post. What does this have to do with
    Joseph Meehan, Nov 5, 2003
  9. Patrick L.

    Deathwalker Guest

    due to the size of current sensors being half that of 35mm it has the effect
    of increasing the focal length of your lens by 1.6 So in order to get a
    wide angle of 28mm you actually need an 18 (rough guess i didn't use a
    calculator). Anyway 18mm glass without distortion and maintaining quality
    of 28mm sounds difficult and expensive to me. Its why i haven't joined the
    dslr revolution. I'm waiting for an affordable 35mm sensor.
    Deathwalker, Nov 5, 2003
  10. Patrick L.

    BoodieMan Guest

    Canon's 1D has a 1.3x factor and the 1Ds is a full frame sensor.
    Technicaly, a 28mm lens is marked as that if on a 35mm body. So they
    could just change the numbers on the lens.
    BoodieMan, Nov 5, 2003
  11. Patrick L.

    Mark Herring Guest

    Waiting for full-frame digital sensors to be cheap may keep you out of
    digital for a very long time.

    Why do we care about matching the 35mm format? The only reason we
    have it in the first place is from the old movie days. Lots of 35mm
    movie film running around, so let's make still cameras in that format.
    Now, where did 35mm movie film come from????

    The point is that a new technology needs to establish its own norms.
    The optimal trade of sensor size, performance, and cost has nothing to
    do with the traditions of film photography. the only reaon to make a
    "full-frame" digital body is to tap into everyone's lens collections
    without forcing them to do the focal length conversions.

    Problems in lens design scale with field of view and f/number, not
    focal length. Thus there is no fundamental reason we cant have a wide
    angle lens to fit a standard 35mm mount, but to work with a samller
    sensor. (My Canon A40 has a 5.4 mm lens, and it does not have
    horrible distortion, etc.)

    Slightly off the subject: For wide angle, try turning the camera
    vertical, and then taking 2-4 pictures and stitching them. I have
    made very good wide angle shots (not panoramas) with no noticeable
    distortion. Depending on how careful you are when taking, there are
    numerous choices of easy to use stitching SW. I have done some wide
    angle shots that did not add any significant time to my normal
    cropping, level adjustment, and printing process


    Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
    Mark Herring, Nov 5, 2003
  12. Patrick L.

    Todd Walker Guest

    Exactly. I still don't understand why people see this as a limitation.
    Who cares if the effective focal length of the lens doesn't match what
    is printed on the lens? I just bought a 70-200 f/4L for my 10D. I get a
    320mm max focal length at f/4 because of the crop factor. If I had a
    35mm film camera, I would have to spend twice what I spent on the 70-200
    to get a 300mm prime at the same aperture and it would still be 20mm
    shorter than what I have now. You also get better edge sharpness because
    the digital SLR is only using the center portion of the lens and not the
    edges where there is the most distortion. I guess if I needed wide angle
    lenses it would be different but personally I don't see the crop factor
    as a negative thing.

    Todd Walker
    Canon 10D:
    My Digital Photography Weblog:
    Todd Walker, Nov 5, 2003
  13. Patrick L.

    Deathwalker Guest

    In order to get a quality 28mm you have to buy super quality 18mm. The long
    end isn't a problem may even be an advantage. Whats the point of the
    lastest and greatest digital sensor if on the front you have a cheap kit
    Deathwalker, Nov 5, 2003
  14. Patrick L.

    Deathwalker Guest

    nah been digital for a year already. got a dedicated film scanner. and a
    fuji 2800.
    Matching the format means i will get a wider angles cheaper. Not a problem
    if you shoot wildlife and now have a free 1x5 teleconverter built into your
    its not just the printed numbers all your lenses suddenly become telephoto.
    The sensors in the digicam compacts are nowhere the size of current dslr
    sizes. Do they have the resolution to pick upt the imperfections of the

    Yuck. I want to cut down the amount of time spent in front of the camera.
    My fuji pictures are 1st generation on my screen. and are sharp compared to
    my scanned ones 2nd gen. From that i can deduce a dslr will perform better
    than current slide to scan combo. By removing the scanning time, currently
    5 mins per frame with all the auto dust removal, grain removal and colour
    correction, i can produce images in less time and without having to become a
    scanning professional. but if then have to stich everything together then
    it defeats the object. Canon are currently rendering their digital stuff
    obsolete every 6-9months. i'm gonna wait to they settle down. After a
    while it will just be extra gimmicks added where as all i want is a quality
    sensor, av, tv manual, and choice of metering modes. The 300d is almost

    I want to spend more time behind the camera than i do in front of the
    computer. i also want the instant assessment possible with digital. So far
    doing that with a seperate digicam.
    Deathwalker, Nov 5, 2003
  15. Patrick L.

    fruitbat Guest

    I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say... Technically, a 28mm
    lens always has an actual focal length of 28mm no matter what body
    it's on, so changing the focal length the lens is labeled with would
    be misrepresenting the facts, and it would also screw up DOF and
    aperture numbers... It's the angle of view that actually changes. 35mm
    equivalents are only commonly used because 35mm film angles of view
    are what most shooters are familiar with. It might be easier if the
    "focal length multiplier" were replaced with an "angle of view
    multiplier", except unfortunately there isn't any such thing, since
    deriving the angle from the focal length involves arctan, which is
    nonlinear (although it approaches linearity for large values)...

    fruitbat, Nov 5, 2003
  16. Patrick L.

    JackD Guest

    I think that it is unfortunate that we talk about lenses in terms of
    effective focal length.
    I have cameras which have 6", 110mm, 80mm and 50mm "normal" lenses. I don't
    really care about what the "effective focal length" is. Effective focal
    length compared to what? What I care about is the field of view for each
    lens. But I guess people are so fixated on 35mm that they end up comparing
    only to it.

    JackD, Nov 5, 2003
  17. Patrick L.

    Tom Guest

    Neither is he... however, being wrong has not prevented him from saying it
    (a quite common condition).

    A 28mm focal length lens is a 28mm focal length lens is a 28mm focal length
    lens no matter what camera it is on.

    Tom, Nov 5, 2003
  18. I would suggest the 10D is already there. I honestly believe the 10D
    will be seen as the first benchmark camera of the digital revolution.

    street shooter, Nov 5, 2003
  19. Patrick L.

    Alan Browne Guest

    The literature suggests that the Canon 10D focusing problem is not part
    of the camera.
    Alan Browne, Nov 6, 2003
  20. Patrick L.

    JPS Guest

    In message <>,
    I believed they were all imaginary, until I bought a Canon 24mm f1.4L
    that quickly, quietly, and consistently backfocuses on my 10D. Whether
    the subject is 10 inches or 300 feet from the lens, the focusing ring is
    always a fixed amount of rotation (in degrees) off from perfect focus.
    After using the lens for a few shots, I don't even have to look, to
    manually focus. After the camera does its focus, I turn the ring "that
    amount" and it's in focus. Even the flashing red square in the
    viewfinder, when manually focusing, is off. When it flashes red, the
    subject is clearly not in focus. When you focus manually, there is no
    flash of red when the subject is in focus.

    My Canon 28-105 f3.5-4.5 lens focuses correctly, as does my Sigma
    15-30mm, my Canon 300mm f4L IS, and my 75-300mm IS (when it focuses at

    Common sense would dictate that it is the lens, but some people say it
    may be the camera, regardless. I am not ready to give them up yet, to
    find out.
    JPS, Nov 6, 2003
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.