dSLRs

...now browsing by tag

The new Canon 6D and Nikon D600 entry level full frame dSLRs compared to the new Sony SLT alpha A99

Tuesday, September 18th, 2012

It has been an exciting week with the announcement of of new cameras from all the major manufacturers.

I am sure all of the cameras for which I have posted blogs this week will be fantastic cameras capable of brilliant image quality.

As excited as I am about the new Micro Four Thirds gear, such as the new lenses on their road map, the new PEN cameras with their important image quality upgrade, and the awesome videographer’s camera, the Panasonic GH-3, it is the raft if entry-level full frame dSLRs that have been announced which finally bring full frame dSLR photography to the enthusiasts for around the $2000 mark which may be the most significant of all the announcements.

Why is this such a significant event?

If you can buy a full frame dSLR for about $2000, why bother with a cropped sensor dSLR unless you are primarily doing sports or wildlife photography where you need all the telephoto reach you can get?
After all, unlike Olympus, neither Canon nor Nikon really have committed to making great lenses for their cropped sensor cameras – all the really good lenses are designed for full frame sensors, so you may as well buy a full frame dSLR rather than a $1,000+ Canon or Nikon cropped sensor dSLR.

Let’s compare the new full frame cameras.

The most exciting of them in my mind is the Sony SLT alpha A99 as it is the only one truly optimised for Live View and thus videography and accurate manual focus using magnified view assist, as it is the only one with full time electronic viewfinder and fulltime phase contrast AF system (although we do need to wait and see how well it really does perform given past SLT cameras have not quite matched their hype in this regard).

Not only these features, but of critical importance to those using prime lenses for still photography is that the Sony SLT has sensor-based IS built-in – something that neither Canon nor Nikon have in any of their cameras.

The Canon 6D and Nikon D600 are both good cameras missing some features of their more expensive counterparts.

Their AF system has been scaled down – in the Canon 6D it only has 11 AF points instead of 61 points on the 5D Mark III, while the Nikon D600 has 39 points instead of 51 on the Nikon D800. This means gaining AF outside the central area requires AF then recompose techniques – this also applies to the Sony SLT A99.

Presumably, the 6D will have the same deficiency as its expensive cousins, the 5D Mark III and 1D X – inability to AF when using a lens with aperture smaller than f/5.6 such as an f/4 lens with 2x tele-extender – this will limit the utility of these cameras for wildlife photographers!

The burst rates are modest ranging from 4.5fps for the 6D, 5.5fps for the D600 and 6fps for the Sony SLT.

In particular, their shutter system is lower end with a fastest shutter reduced to a consumer level of 1/4000th sec and a flash sync reduced to 1/200th on the D600 and only 1/180th sec on the 6D – heck even the new Olympus PEN cameras have a flash sync of 1/250th sec!

This is VERY important for fashion and outdoor portrait photographers using lenses such as the 135mm f/2.0 and fill-in flash. Without image stabilisation, a shutter speed of only 1/180th second is really pushing your luck in allowing sharp hand held photos consistently.

In this regard, the Olympus OM-D E-M5 Micro Four Thirds camera with its built-in 5 stop image stabilisation system, matched with the superb Olympus 75mm f/1.8 lens and Olympus FL-600R flash which can sync at 1/250th sec, accurate closest eye, face detection AF anywhere in the frame (no need to AF and recompose and worry about AF microadjustments) will most likely give you far more accurately focused and sharper photos whilst still having a similar perspective and a shallow enough depth of field to make your subject really pop.

On this same matter, if you need even shallower DOF at 35mm focal length and you are doing flash photography outdoors, then the new Sony RX-1 full frame fixed lens compact with its silent leaf shutter and flash sync to 1/2000th second would be ideal although at $2,800 it is not cheap!

Of note, the Sony SLT A99 gives you the best of all worlds in this regard – sensor-based IS plus flash sync of 1/250th sec, and a fastest shutter of 1/8000th sec.

For video work, the 6D and D600 only have mono mics, and 30p/25p/24p frame rates and thus no option for slo-mo work whereas the Sony has a more usable 60p/24p plus stereo mics, but none will really compete in functionality and image quality with the new Panasonic GH-3, although the D600 and the A99 both allow the option of uncompressed video output.

For a detailed table of the main differences between all the current full frame dSLRs, see here.

Posted in cameras | Comments Off
Tags: Canon, dSLRs, full frame, Nikon, Sony

Mirrorless cameras overtaking entry-level dSLRs in Asia – how will Canon and Nikon react?

Friday, September 9th, 2011

I bought a Panasonic GH-1 Micro Four Thirds mirrorless camera in 2009 when it first came out because I could see it had many significant advantages over entry-level dSLRs whilst still having adequate image quality.

Panasonic decided very early that their was limited future in the consumer level dSLR and decided to cease production of them and instead, embarked upon developing the revolutionary Micro Four Thirds system and introduced their 1st of these mirrorless cameras in 2008.

Olympus in 2010 re-affirmed this by apparently deciding that the future of entry-level dSLRs is limited and will most likely be replaced by mirrorless cameras, they have not produced a new entry-level dSLR since and instead have concentrated on creating super fast autofocus for their mirrorless Olympus Pen cameras – the E-P3, E-PL3 and their new mini Pen. Olympus have not abandoned the dSLR market but will concentrate on producing mid-level and semi-pro dSLRs.

This year Sony has really progressed their mirrorless offerings with their NEX-7 model just beig announced, although they still offer entry-level dSLRs.

Now the share market investors of Canon and Nikon are becoming concerned as news that mirrorless cameras now account for an unprecedented 40% of the dSLR market in Japan – up from only 5% of sales in 2009!

Global sales of mirrorless cameras are up 500% in 2010 to 2 million units and account for 16% of the global dSLR market, and expected to hit 23% this year.

Sony is expecting sales to reach 13 million units in 3 years.

Canon sold 5.9 million dSLRs in 2010 and has 45% of the dSLR market with Nikon having 30% of the market in 2010.

The brilliant new mirrorless models from Panasonic, Olympus and Sony are sure to change that very soon!

Nikon is expected to announce a 2.5x crop mirrorless system perhaps this year, while Canon seems to be working on a 2x crop system similar in size to Olympus and Panasonic.

Canon and Nikon still have not entered the mirrorless market, even though mirrorless cameras are cannibalising their lucrative, formerly dominant, entry-level dSLR market.

According to this Bloomberg report (from which the above data is derived), last year, Mizuho Securities Equity Research analyst Ryosuke Katsura wrote that the mirrorless technology may be the biggest “paradigm shift” in the SLR industry in six decades.

Thanks to Rob Galbraith for the heads up on this report.

Bottom line – if a Panasonic GH-1 is good enough for me to take on my travels and leave my heavy Canon 1D Mark III home, then it is not surprising to expect mirrorless cameras to subsume the entry-level dSLR market as well as cannibalise the compact camera market.

A further example, this article on macrophotography just posted on dpreview.com shows the author using a Canon dSLR to photograph insects – but he is using it as one would use a mirrorless camera in Live View mode – he would be much better off with a mirrorless camera in the first place for this type of photography.

Canon and Nikon appear to be just playing their usual game – let the innovators spend money on R&D on “fringe technologies” and test the market, and if the new technology works, initially criticise it until they can introduce it into their own cameras.

We have seen this when Olympus introduced the sensor dust removal system, live preview LCD, flip out LCD screens, “art filters”, “scene modes”, and when Panasonic introduced HD video capabilities – these are now all pretty much standard on Canon and Nikon dSLRs.

Technologies which Canon and Nikon are yet to adopt include mirrorless cameras, EVF’s in dSLRs, built-in image stabilisation, ultra-fast contrast detect AF, etc.

This catch-up in technology has worked well for Canon and Nikon, but until now, they have really not had to compete with electronic giants such as Panasonic, Sony and Samsung, and now that cameras have become primarily electronic consumer items, Canon and Nikon may see a tough decade or two ahead.

Nevertheless they will be hoping their upgrade pathway and compatibilities will be enough to sway mirrorless users to their systems. For instance, they would focus on ability to use same flash system, and potentially the same lenses (albeit big and bulky on a mirrorless camera) throughout their range of pro dSLR, sports pro dSLR, mid-level dSLR, entry-level dSLR and smaller cropped mirrorless camera.

Their decision not to create a APS-C sized mirrorless is, to me smart – it differentiates their mirrorless from their dSLR better and maximises the compact size afforded by smaller cropped sensor lenses.

This is where Sony and Samsung have, in my opinion, chosen poorly with their APS-C sized sensors – there is little advantage to a mirrorless if you still need large heavy lenses – unless perhap if you put a full frame sensor in it and create a true Leica-like experience.

A further risk with both Canon and Nikon is that their pro dSLR market which they currently dominate in 35mm full frame size will also be increasingly cannibalised by larger format dSLRs such as Leica S2, Mamiya, Pentax, Hasselblad and Phase One, perhaps leaving them with just the pro sports market intact.

If you want to see why mirrorless cameras are taking over entry-level dSLRs- see here for a comparison between a Panasonic G3 and a similarly priced Nikon D3100 dSLR – the Nikon wins on 3 parameters only (phase AF for fast moving subjects, remote TTL flash and presumably noise at high ISO), the G3 wins on every other parameter but in particular, image quality with non-pro lenses at similar price really shows the benefits of the Micro Four Thirds system.

Posted in cameras | Comments Off
Tags: Canon, dSLRs, Four Thirds Micro, mirrorless, Nikon, Olympus, Panasonic

Christmas presents in Australia for 2010 – which camera?

Saturday, November 13th, 2010

Following on from my previous post comparing the compact mirror-less digital cameras such as the Micro Four Thirds which should be on most people’s potential list for a travel, walk-around, compact camera with high image quality, I thought I would elaborate on other potential purchases.

In general ignore how many megapixels the camera has – almost certainly it will have enough for your needs, and perhaps too many which will mean larger file sizes which impacts storage for minimal benefit in image quality unless you are using the best lenses and a tripod.

The best camera is the one you will have with you – although the very small sensors in compact digital cameras may make them almost useless for low light situations where flash is not allowed or is useless – such as art galleries, inside churches, indoor concerts, etc – the much larger sensor of Micro Four Thirds makes these situations much easier to photograph with good image quality.

HD video is usually available in two main formats – AVCHD which compresses the video to a smaller size designed for TV playback but is much harder to display or edit on computers, and Motion JPEG which has much larger file size but is much easier to display and edit on computers. There is also two main sizes of HD video – 1920x1080i which takes up the most file size and tends to be not so good for moving subjects as the compression required tends to adversely impact the image (24mbps compression is much better than 17mbps for this), and LITE which is 1200x720p and this tends to be a good compromise for most of us, particularly if one wishes to shoot motion jpeg for ease of use.

If you need a 10x zoom lens for travel, then check out my previous post here which compares options for high image quality from Micro Four Thirds, NEX or dSLRs. If you want a super-zoom camera in a smaller package and are willing to give up the high image quality from larger sensors, then the current best super-zoom digital camera is the Panasonic FZ-100 which easily beats the Canon SX30 – see here.

The compact, high image quality, general purpose camera:

Panasonic GF-2 – the best of the slim designs with touch LCD but not yet in stores
Panasonic GH-2 – the best HD video capable camera of this type with swivel, touch LCD and most importantly, the fastest autofocus but not yet in stores
Panasonic GH-1 – a great HD video capable camera but latest models cannot be hacked to give the best HD video, however, at present, they are great value as the price has dropped substantially – I bought mine at $A3000 when it first came out mid 2009, but you can now buy them new at $A1189 with that 10x kit lens, and another great deal is $A1199 with the 20mm f/1.7 lens – not bad when you can only get the 20mm lens in Australia for $A749! You can even get it with the 20mm lens plus a 45-200mm lens for $A1449 – now that is quite a bit of bang for your buck – but remember, the GH-2 will offer much better AF, video and EVF than this camera, so you may prefer to wait and pay a bit more and get the better camera. Nearly all of my Europe 2010 holiday photos were taken with this camera and its fantastic 10x zoom kit lens – these are generally straight from the camera without any processing other than resizing for the web.
Panasonic G2 – if you can’t wait for the GH-2 or can’t afford it, but want touch LCD, maybe this camera will suit your needs. $A899 with kit lens.
Olympus E-P2 – a great photographer’s compact camera with built-in IS, the best EVF, and much better flash control than the Panasonics. $A1385 with kit lens and EVF.
Olympus E-PL1 – when you can’t afford the above, this is a pretty good camera, although may frustrate the advanced user. However, it allows for use of the best EVF available, and is the ONLY micro Four Thirds that currently allows wireless TTL flash – but for most of us, this feature is not of great importance. $A699 with kit lens.

A waterproof, almost indestructible compact camera for the beach, parties, kids, etc:

unfortunately, your iPhone is not waterproof, nor drop proof, so there is a great need for a camera to solve these issues.
do not take a compact camera with a moving protruding lens to the beach – you just need a little sand to get in there and you can kiss it goodbye!
Olympus started this genre with their revolutionary SW series, now called Olympus TOUGH, but have not managed to compete with models from Canon and Panasonic on image quality – nevertheless, if you can pick up 2nd hand ones on Ebay for well under $A200, they may solve your beach and kids needs.
the Canon D10 had good reviews when it came out in terms of image quality, but it is not the most pocketable design and its video capabilities are now very dated.
the preferred choice at present would seem to be the Panasonic FT2 at $A449 which is waterproof to 10m, drop proof to 2m, dust and frost proof, while offering optical image stabiliser, a 4.6x optical zoom covering 28-128mm focal length, ability to zoom even during video, AVCHD Lite video at 720p at 17Mbps quality for smaller file sizes, or 720p motion jpeg for easy use on computers.

A pocketable compact point and shoot:

there are times when even a Panasonic GF-2 is too big to take with you, and the waterproof cameras above just don’t have enough features or image quality, a 3-4x zoom pocketable point and shoot may be just what you need.
dpreview.com has just compared the enthusiast point and shoot cameras here and concluded that the winners are the Canon Powershot S95 (28-105mm lens, 100x58x30mm) and the Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 (24-90mm lens, measuring 110x66x43mm) although they didn’t get to test the Canon G12.
note that these are only marginally smaller than the far better Panasonic GF-2 which measures 113 x 68 x 33mm, but the lens is much smaller than a 3x zoom lens on the GF-2, and thus is more pocketable, but you make big sacrifices in image quality and versatility.

A cropped sensor digital SLR:

for when you need to capture fast action, but with reasonable HD video
be warned, to get the most from these cameras, you should buy the best quality lenses with the largest apertures you can afford – if you just buy the kit lens with f/5.6 aperture you may as well buy a Micro Four Thirds camera.
Canon offer 3 main new EOS dSLRs models which would be very capable and one would need to look at their budget to decide between them.
Canon 7D – the more expensive and heaviest of the three but the most features (including dual processor, more AF points, better viewfinder, 8fps burst rate, thus the best of the three for sports/action photography), more weatherproofed, longer life shutter, but unfortunately, the LCD is not articulated as on the 60D, nor is there manual audio control for videos or support for SD cards. $A2199 with the kit lens, or $A2829 with the better 17-85mm lens.
Canon 60D – $A1579 with kit lens although you may be well advised to consider $A2349 for the better 17-85mm kit lens package. A nice upgrade from the 50D as it adds HD video with manual audio control, articulated LCD, wireless TTL flash from built-in flash, electronic level (horizontal only, not both as with 7D), SD cards but you lose CF cards, AF microadjustment, PC socket, and the multi-axis controller stick (replaced by a less ergonomic Quick Control Dial). Max. burst rate is 5fps. 9 cross-type AF sensors.
Canon 550D – the budget model $A1375 with 3x kit lens, the viewfinder is no where as good as the better models with a true pentaprism and lacks the many of the features of the 60D or 7D, such as having only 1 cross-type AF sensor.
Nikon D7000 – $A2099 with kit lens
Olympus E5 – $A2199 body only, but you get a semi-pro weatherproofed body with IS, articulating LCD and reasonable video – it would be a great complimentary sports/action camera for those with Micro Four Thirds as accessories such as flash will be compatible. This is a great option with the Olympus ZD 50-200mm SWD lens – you just can’t get such a lens on the Canon 7D or a Nikon. There are a lot of excellent lenses for this Four Thirds format, and many are selling very cheaply on Ebay 2nd hand as users worry Olympus may drop the format in favor of the Micro Four Thirds format – a great time to pick up some bargains perhaps!
one should also consider older but still very good cameras such as the Nikon D90 ($A1285 with kit lens), Olympus E30 ($A999 with kit lens, no video) , Olympus E3 which have become much more affordable – the Olympus E3 for instance provides a semi-pro, weatherproofed body but no video for a very reasonable price (if you can find one new now that the E5 has replaced it)
for those who cannot afford the above, each of the manufacturers have cheaper entry level dSLRs but personally I would consider a Micro Four Thirds camera over these unless I needed it specifically for sports/action use.
I have compared the Canon 550D, 7D and the Panasonic GH-1 on my post here.

The “affordable” full frame dSLR:

to me, now that we have Micro Four Thirds to adequately fill the compact interchangeable lens digital camera niche, a full frame dSLR makes more sense than a cropped sensor dSLR such as those discussed above (unless you need it for sports/action photography, in which case a 7D will give more telephoto reach, faster AF and faster burst rates than a 5D MII).
a full frame dSLR allows full use of the pro lenses while generally giving better dynamic range, lower image noise, potentially more spatial resolution, and even more options to blur the background and make your subject pop.
full frame dSLR though does come at a price – not only monetary for the much more expensive camera body, but you will want the expensive, heavier pro lenses (average $A1500-3000 each), a much sturdier, larger, heavier, more expensive tripod and tripod head, and camera bags to carry it all in.
a 70-200mm f/2.8 lens will weigh ~1.8kg by itself and will not be discrete!
there are few affordable options
Canon 5D Mark II: gives lots of pixels (21mpixels) for your dollar ($A3049 body only) and very good video options but has slow AF and issues in the rain
Nikon D700: gives great high ISO performance and better build quality but at only 12mpixels ($A3549 body only)
Sony A850: gives the most pixels (24mpixels) for your dollar ($A2499) with built-in image stabilisation but no video and no live preview LCD and its not a Canikon and lenses, and support levels are not up to what is available around the world for either Canon or Nikon.
Sony A900: similar to the A850 but 5fps instead of 3fps and better viewfinder coverage ($A3599)
frustratingly for Nikon fans, there is no 24mp affordable Nikon FX dSLR yet – surely it must be coming soon!

Have you noticed a trend? Seems Panasonic has become THE leader in camera design for compact cameras and also for video capability!

best compact point and shoot – Panasonic LX-5
best super-zoom point and shoot – Panasonic FZ-100
best waterproof point and shoot – Panasonic FT-2
best video-optimised mirror-less dSLR – Panasonic GH-1 and GH-2
best compact mirror-less for beginners – Panasonic GF-2
best large sensor affordable HD video camcorder – Panasonic AF100/101 – see here

Oh, and just in case you haven’t heard, for $US700 you can buy a lens adapter from Birger Engineering which will allow use of Canon EF and EF-S lenses on Panasonic GH1, GH-2 and AF100/101 cameras with full control of aperture, auto-focus AND optical image stabiliser – the perfect excuse to have one of these cameras AND a Canon full frame camera or a Canon 1D.

Posted in cameras, photography | Comments Off
Tags: cameras, Canon, compact digitals, dSLRs, Four Thirds Micro, Nikon, Olympus, Panasonic

High ISO performance – which camera?

Friday, August 20th, 2010

Many people get hung up on high ISO performance as if that is the prime feature of a camera that will give them great photos.

For some types of photography, they would be right!

Astrophotographers and pro sports photographers are amongst those who really want low noise at high ISO, for the rest of us, 90% of our photos can be taken at ISO 800 or less and any modern cropped sensor dSLR or Micro Four Thirds camera will do a reasonable job of that.

High ISO performance is not the only feature useful in low light or sports photography, other features include:

ability to auto-focus – modern contrast detect AF cameras such as Micro Four Thirds can give better low light AF for stationary subjects than dSLRs, but for moving subjects, phase contrast AF with dSLRs is the way to go.
high quality, and thus usually expensive, wide aperture lenses
image stabilisation – this can be critical for hand held shots of stationary subjects – but of much less help for moving subjects
telephoto reach – this is primarily a function of pixel density of the sensor for a given focal length lens
burst rate for action shots
weatherproofing
size – the best camera is the one you are willing to take with you – size may matter!
out of camera jpeg quality

Now back to the original topic – which cameras are best for high ISO shooting?

I have grouped together results from DxO’s tests on RAW files and hopefully these groupings will provide some perspective and demonstrate that high ISO performance is related to sensor size and sensor technology.

It demonstrates the gigantic gulf in high ISO performance between point and shoots and the much larger sensor dSLRs, and this is the reason why many are choosing the size compromise of Micro Four Thirds.

It also shows that if you want substantially better high ISO performance than Micro Four Thirds can offer you, then you really need to be looking at full frame dSLRs as these would be the ideal complimentary system.

Note that the much larger sensor and much more expensive medium format cameras generally have comparatively poor high ISO performance as these sensors are optimised for high image quality at low ISO for tripod-based work.

The higher the ISO rating, the better the sensor for high ISO images in RAW mode.

ISO rating > 2000 modern full frame dSLRs with low pixel counts:

Nikon D3S 12mp 2009 – ISO rating 3253
Nikon D3 and D700 – 12mp 2007/2008 – ISO ratings ~2300

ISO rating 1500-2000 – the modern full frame dSLRs with high pixel counts:

Nikon D3X 24mp 2008 – ISO rating 1992
Canon 5D Mark II 21mp 2008 – ISO rating1815
Canon 1Ds Mark III 21mp 2007 – ISO rating 1663

ISO rating 1250-1500:

Canon 1Ds Mark II 17mp full frame 2004 – ISO rating 1480
Sony Alpha 850 and 900 24mp full frame 2009 – ISO ratings 1415 and 1431
Canon 5D 13mp full frame 2005 – ISO rating 1368
Canon 1D Mark IV 15mp 1.3x crop 2009 – ISO rating 1320
Phase One P40 40mp medium format 2009 – ISO rating 1307

ISO rating 1000-1250:

Phase One P65 Plus 60mp medium format 2008 – ISO rating 1158
Canon 1D Mark III 10mp 1.3x crop 2007 – ISO rating 1078
Canon 1D Mark II 8mp 1.3x crop 2004 – ISO rating 1003

ISO ratings 750-1000 – the modern cropped sensor cameras and old full frames:

Nikon D90 12mp 2008 – ISO rating 977
Canon 1Ds 11mp full frame 2002 – ISO rating 954
Leica M9 18mp full frame 2009 – ISO rating 884
Nikon D5000 12mp 2009 – ISO rating 868
Canon 7D 18mp 2009 – ISO rating 854
Sony NEX-3 and 5 14mp mirrorless 2010 – ISO rating 830 and 796
Pentax K-x 12mp 2009 – ISO rating 811
Sony Alpha 550 14mp 2009 – ISO rating 807
Nikon D300s 12mp 2009 – ISO rating 787
Canon 550D 18mp 2009 – ISO rating 784
Panasonic GH-1 12mp 2009 – ISO rating 772 (but early models do have excessive banding)
Sony Alpha 500 12mp 2009 – ISO rating 772
Sony Alpha 450 14mp 2010 – ISO rating 769

ISO 500-750 – the majority of cropped sensor cameras and medium format cameras:

Canon 30D 8mp 2006 – ISO rating 736
Canon 20D 8mp 2004 – ISO rating 721
Canon 1000D 10mp 2008 – ISO rating 719
Samsung GX-20 14mp mirrorless 2008 – ISO rating 714
Canon 40D 10mp 2007 – ISO rating 703
Canon 450D 12mp 2008 – ISO rating 692
Canon 50D 15mp 2008 – ISO rating 696
Canon 400D 10mp 2006 – ISO rating 664
Canon 500D 15mp 2009 – ISO rating 663
Leica M8 10mp 1.3x crop 2006 -ISO rating 663
Pentax K20D 14mp 2008 – ISO rating 639
Canon 350D 8mp 2005 – ISO rating 637
Phase One P45 Plus 39mp medium format 2007 – ISO rating 622
Sony Alpha 380 14mp 2009 – ISO rating 614
Sony Alpha 350 14mp 2008 – ISO rating 595
Nikon D200 10mp 2005 – ISO rating 583
Olympus E3 10mp 2007 – ISO rating 571
Canon 10D 6mp 2003 – ISO rating 571
Nikon D3000 10mp 2009 – ISO rating 563
Nikon D60 10mp 2008 – ISO rating 562
Pentax K200D 10mp 2008 – ISO rating 561
Nikon D40 6mp 2006 – ISO rating 561
Nikon D50 6mp 2005 – ISO rating 560
Olympus E520 10mp 2008 – ISO rating 548
Sony Alpha 300 10mp 2008 – ISO rating 538
Olympus E620 and Pen EP1 12mp 2009 – ISO rating 536
Sony Alpha 330 10mp 2009 – ISO rating 535
Hasselblad H3DII 39 39mp medium format 2007 – ISO rating 532
Olympus E30 12mp 2008 – ISO rating 530
Nikon D70 and D70s 6mp 2004/2005 – ISO rating 529
Nikon D80 10mp 2006 – ISO rating 524
Pentax K10D 10mp 2006 – ISO rating 522
Sony Alpha 200 and 230 10mp 2008/2009 – ISO rating 521 and 531
Nikon D40X 10mp 2007 – ISO rating 516
Pentax KM 10mp 2008 – ISO rating 513
Olympus Pen EP2 12mp 2009 – ISO rating 505

ISO rating 250-500 – older or smaller cropped sensor cameras:

Panasonic GF-1 12mp 2009 – ISO rating 498
Nikon D2Xs 12mp 2006 – ISO rating 489
Olympus Pen EPL1 12mp 2010 – ISO rating 487
Nikon D2X 12mp 2004 – ISO rating 476
Panasonic G1 12mp 2008 – ISO rating 463
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro 6mp 2006 – ISO rating 448
Olympus E510 10mp 2007 – ISO rating 442
Nikon D2H 4mp 2003 – ISO rating 352
Fujifilm FinePix S3 Pro 6mp 2004 – ISO rating 346

ISO rating 200-250:

Mamiya ZD 21mp medium format back 2008 – ISO rating 245

ISO rating 150-200 – the modern 4-4.5x crop point and shoots:

Canon Powershot S90 10mp 2009 – ISO rating 185
Fujifilm FinePix S100fs 11mp 2008 – ISO rating 177
Canon G11 10mp 2009 – ISO rating 169
Canon G10 15mp 2008 – ISO rating 156

ISO rating 50-150 – compact (6x crop) or older point and shoots:

Canon G9 12mp 2007 – ISO rating 146
Panasonic LX3 10mp 2008 – ISO rating 94 (but at least it has a wide aperture lens)

Posted in cameras | Comments Off
Tags: Canon, dSLRs, ISO, low light, Nikon, Sony

new Pentax K-7 dSLR with some interesting new features

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

Although I don’t follow Pentax closely, their new K-7 dSLR has some interesting features which Olympus fans might like to see in their cameras given they are both based on similar CCD-shift IS technology and Live View technologies.

Firstly, the K-7 is a 14.6mp, APS-C sensor with weatherproofed body, CCD-shift image stabiliser of 2.5-4 stops, 100% field of view viewfinder, 5.2 fps burst rate, 11 point (9 cross-type) AF, 920,000 dot 3″ fixed LCD, face detection contrast AF in live preview and comes with the now almost standard movie mode at 1280×720 pixels at 30fps but no live AF although it does have an external mic input at least.

Now, a few rather innovative features:

continuous shooting in live view mode with mirror locked up via an innovative diaphragm-control mechanism – but have they finally made a near silent live view capture mode?
HDR (high dynamic range) function to create one composite image with an extra-wide gradation range from three images with different exposures
Digital level function for easy checking of the image’s levels as with Olympus E620 presumably
Innovative CCD-shift mechanism for ensuring sensor is level horizontally (within limits) AND the ability for minute angle adjustment (in the direction of up/down, right/left and clockwise/counterclockwise), helping to compose the image exactly the way the photographer wants.
Attachment of copyright credits on recorded images

see more at dpreview.com

Posted in cameras | Comments Off
Tags: dSLRs, Pentax

Which entry level full frame dSLR camera to buy?

Monday, February 16th, 2009

For the purposes of this blog, I am going to exclude the expensive Nikon D3x, Nikon D3 (as the D700 is almost as good) and the Canon 1DsMIII.

So that leaves use with 3 very worthy contenders but with quite different features:

Nikon D700:

12mp with live preview, 5fps, good AF tracking, great high ISO performance, some excellent, if expensive new lenses designed for digital such as the wide angle zoom and new tilt-shift lenses and built-in flash
BUT no built in image stabiliser, no movie mode and for some the 12mp may not be sufficient for landscapes or wedding photography

Canon 5DMII:

21mp with live preview and limited HD movie mode
BUT no image stabiliser, not good for action work (only 3.5fps and limited AF capability), and even the L series lenses may not be up to the task of matching the sensor resolution, particularly the zooms when used wide open, while the standard zooms are not anything to write home about although serviceable
of considerable concern is the flash sync is slower than the 1DMIII – see here and there is no built-in flash which can be very useful at times
perhaps the main concern though is its propensity to fail in moist environments when used with a vertical battery grip – see here
dpreview.com has just reviewed it and despite the above, it is an excellent camera but in my view full of compromises (and I own a Canon 1DMIII)

Sony A900:

25mp with built-in image stabiliser and comparable image quality at least up to ISO 800
BUT NO live preview, nor video mode, no built-in flash, and uses the legacy proprietary Minolta flash hot shoe which creates annoying compatibility issues when using 3rd party flash accessories
some very nice Carl Zeiss lenses designed for digital but no tilt-shift lenses as yet

The prime consideration for most is what system they already have, in which case, they will go with the same brand as they have rather than pay for changing systems.

For others, it will be a case of which suits their needs best:

the Sony really seems a good buy with its image stabiliser, high image quality and high quality lenses – an almost ideal full frame dSLR camera that I find very tempting if I had the money – but many will not want to risk not having a Canon or Nikon
for those that want high resolution in Canon or Nikon, that really only leaves the Canon 5DMII but it really concerns me that it may fail just when you need it, and not everyone can afford a backup dSLR for these scenarios. The lack of sports/action capabilities is not such a big concern – the Canon guys wanting this will probably still go for the Canon 1DMIII or wait for the MIV with its 1.3x crop which gets them that bit closer to the action and with 10fps and weather-proofing
so where does that leave the Nikon D700? For most people, 12 mp is plenty, and the greater versatility afforded with its better action capabilities, the better wide angle lenses and reliability with the option of the excellent cropped sensor Nikon D300 as an excellent telephoto back up camera may be enough to persuade them that its the way to go rather than the Canon.

I suspect the pro photographers will go for the Nikon D3x over the D700/D3 or Canon 5DMII/1DsMIII even though it’s price tag seems a bit excessive, at the end of the day, it will be reliability, usability and high optical quality and sensor quality that counts for them.

Posted in cameras, photography | 1 Response »
Tags: 35mm full frame, Canon, Canon 5D MII, dSLRs, Nikon, Nikon D700, Sony, Sony A900

A pro camera system to supercede most others? The new Red still and video camera system.

Sunday, November 16th, 2008

We have been anticipating increasing convergence of the still photography and video worlds, and up til now, the still cameras have had rather rudimentary video modes, while the video cameras have a still image capture that is not quite there when compared to dSLRs.

But this may soon change for those with the money and don’t mind carrying around rather large and modular camera systems.

RED Scarlet

Red has announced the forth-coming Scarlet and Epic modular camera systems, and here are just a few features that these cameras are purported to be able to achieve:

1 to 120 fps image capture – ie. single photos or high speed video for slo-motion effects

all cameras will be able to do 1-25fps but some bodies can go up to 50fps whilst others can go to 120fps – at a price

large sensor sizes for improved image quality and shallow depth of field not possible with most current video cameras

smallest sensor is a 120fps 4.9 megapixel 12bit 2/3″ (I think this is the size of the old Olympus C8080 digital camera)
a panoramic cropped 13.8 megapixel 12bit “S35″ 35mm sensor having 30x15mm (1.2x crop horizontally and 1.6x crop vertically) available as 30fps or 100fps models
a full frame 24megapixel 16bit 35mm sensor with 6 micron photosites available as 30fps or 100fps models
a full frame 50fps 65megapixel 16bit 6×4.5 medium format sensor with 6 micron photosites

this resolution is similar to current medium format dSLRs such as Hasselblad, but these usually only allow 1 photo per second

an incredible super panoramic 25fps 261megapixel 16bit 6×17 medium format sensor with 6 micron photosites

ability to use a variety of lenses via interchangeable mounts

2/3rd sensor bodies can either have a fixed RED lens or a Mini-RED mount, B4 mount, or C-mount
S35 and FF35 sensor bodies can have mounts for either RED, PL, Canon or Nikon lenses
645 sensor bodies can have mounts for either RED, medium format, or Mamiya lenses
617 sensor body can have mounts for either RED 617, Linhof, Alpa lenses

fully modular system to minimise risk of obsolescence
shoot video in digital RAW image files for optimal post-processing
3D video capability by mounting two bodies side by side

Red 3D

Thus for example, potentially, a single Epic FF35 camera body with associated modules and lenses in theory should be able to do most of what a Canon or Nikon full frame dSLR can do (even the Canon 1DsMIII, 1DMIII, Canon 5D MII or Nikon D3) PLUS do it at up to 100fps at 24 megapixels per frame in RAW mode if need be, and still use the Canon or Nikon lenses.

Of course there will be many questions to be asked in its features such as AF capability for action shots, and it will have a live LCD, EVF or video out instead of an optical viewfinder as with dSLRs, and it will be bigger and heavier and a touch more expensive.

What I think is exciting about this though is that perhaps many of these features could be incorporated in the forthcoming Four Thirds Micro camera bodies which would allow a lower end, more compact system to be available to the less well heeled amateurs.

This degree of video capability would not be possible with current optical viewfinder technology in dSLRs but as the Micro Four Thirds system does not use these mirrors, it should be ideally placed to create similar video features whilst retaining continuous AF and creating even more compact lenses especially designed for contrast-detect AF systems.

Of course video is possible with optical dLRS (eg. Nikon D90) by disabling the optical viewfinder by placing the mirror up, and then using the live preview LCD – but current dSLRs would have difficult with continuous AF, although this is not insurmountable.

I am guessing the videographers and photojournalists might be drooling over the prospects of these new technology advances.

Posted in cameras | 4 Responses »
Tags: dSLRs, Four Thirds Micro, RED, video

Has Canon lost the plot? Sensors, megapixels, optics

Saturday, September 20th, 2008

Canon’s latest releases include:

APS-C size 50D with 15mp = 38mp spatial resolution on a full frame
full frame 5DMII with 21mp
1/1.7″ 5.7×7.6mm sensor (1/20th area of a full frame) G10 with 14.7mp = 292mp spatial resolution on a full frame!!

Is this megapixel madness or will these sensors really provide the resolution suggested by the number of megapixels and at what cost to image quality?

In analyzing this rather complicated issue, one should perhaps do a little bit of reading – check out the conclusions on Emil Martinec’s paper on noise, dynamic range, and bit depth of sensors.

Now, I’m not a mathematical expert, but his conclusions suggest:

at high ISO, bigger sensors (not just bigger photosites), yield better image quality in terms of signal:noise ratio, and dynamic range
at low ISO, small sensors and small photosites MAY perform better than large sensors in terms of signal:noise ratio – this is a little surprising to me but I must admit not being able to tell much difference at ISO 100 between my small sensor E510 images and my larger sensor Canon 1DMIII, so maybe there is some truth to this
resolution is independent of sensor size but relates to number of megapixels BUT limited by the limits of the optical system used

Thus, on the surface then, at low ISO, there is not a problem with using lots of megapixels in a small sensor, HOWEVER, the real issue then becomes the optical resolution, and there are several features of this that come into play:

diffraction limits – no matter how good a lens is, the laws of physics mandate that for a given wavelength of light, the best possible resolution is dependent on the aperture

Airy disc diffraction spot size in microns for green light = 1.3 x aperture f/ratio (approx) – see Roger Clarke.
your camera resolving power becomes limited by diffraction when your circle of confusion of your sensor (~2x pixel size in microns) becomes smaller than the Airy disc size
thus on a 50D with 4.7micron pixels, diffraction limitation occurs at (4.7×2/1.3) = f/7, ie. at f/8 or smaller apertures you will lose your maximum resolution such that at f/11, you maximum possible resolving power is more likely to be as if your sensor pixels were 7.2microns which on this sensor size, equates to more like 8mp, and thus you save a 15mp size file to achieve only 8mp detail.
see a calculator here

in reality, this theoretical diffraction limit to resolving power is not usually reached because of other factors:

camera shake – this is often THE NUMBER ONE issue that impairs resolution, making your $10,000 lens look like a $100 lens!

this is why I believe all cameras should have a built-in IS like most Olympus dSLRs – you can always turn it off if you don’t need it!

optical quality of the lens:

lenses usually are sharpest when stopped down 1-2 stops from maximum aperture
it is easier to make higher quality lenses at a similar price if they don’t need to cover as big an image circle – hence the very high resolution of lenses designed for Olympus Four Thirds which have resolutions some 3-5 times that made for 35mm film cameras
lenses designed for 35mm film cameras generally allow resolution of 10-16mp on a full frame dSLR and tend to be quite soft in the corners in particular

focus accuracy

Back to the original proposition:

The Canon 5D MII at 21mp is quite reasonable AS LONG as you use the highest quality lenses (the L primes and perhaps newer lenses as Canon makes them such as their new 24mm lens). Using other lenses are likely to only give 12-16mp detail in a file size of a 21mp image. I would have preferred the 5DMII to be 16mp which would be more optimised for current L lenses while giving better dynamic range and lower noise. In addition, at 16mp, it would have placed it nicely between the 10mp 1DMIII and the 21mp 1DsMIII.

If I had the money, I would still consider buying the 5D MII as it would complement my 1D MIII very nicely indeed, as being full frame, it would give me access to ultra wide which the 1D MIII can’t do, a different angle of view with my tilt shift lenses, and the increased resolution MAY be of use for landscape work, etc where very large highly detailed prints may be more readily possible – although I probably really only need 10mp.

The Canon 50D MAY prove to be OK BUT only with high quality lenses designed for digital, otherwise you are probably only going to get 10mp detail but in a file size of a 15mp image. Unfortunately at this pixel size (the same as for Olympus dSLRs), only Olympus have an adequate range of dedicated lenses to match this spatial resolution in dSLRs. I would probably choose a 40D over a 50D unless tests prove otherwise, and the Olympus E3 or the Nikon D300 over either.

since writing this post, another blogger has posted some comparisons which seem to show that the 40D images at high ISO appear to have more detail although more noise than the 50D, but if you really want low noise at high ISO, then the Nikon D3 (and presumably the D700) is far better than either the 40D or 50D

The Canon G10, I have grave doubts about its wisdom of having almost 15mp in such a small sensor!
For a start, as a result of its 1.7micron pixels, to get 15mp details with a perfect lens you must use apertures f/2.6 (1.7×2/1.3) or wider to account for diffraction limits and this means, even if its lens was perfect optically, you won’t get 15mp details from the lens as it is f/2.8-4.5 at its widest apertures. Indeed, if the lens were optically perfect, at f/4.5, the maximum detail possible would be for (4.5×1.3/2) = 2.9 micron pixels which equates to closer to a 6mp camera on this sensor size. In the process, the megapixel race means that Canon has foregone the opportunity to use larger photosites and gain improved dynamic range and less image noise. Personally, unless tests prove otherwise, I would prefer a 5-7mp camera in a sensor this size. See 6mpixel.org.

See Table 3 on this paper at Luminous Landscapes which shows the maximum resolving power of various sensor formats as limited by diffraction, in particular, at f/5.6:

full frame 35mm maximum = 60mp (29mp at f/8, 16mp at f/11, 7mp at f/16, 4mp at f/22, BUT remember most 35mm optics struggle to do 16-22mp, thus they are lens-limited at f/8 or wider)
APS-C maximum = 27mp (13mp at f/8 and 7mp at f/11, remember most lenses struggle to do 10-12mp on this sensor crop, thus, they too are lens limited at f/5.6 and wider)
Four Thirds maximum = 1/4 of full frame = 17mp (8mp at f/8, 4mp at f/11)
Canon G10 maximum = 1/20th of full frame = 3mp (6mp at f/4 and only 1.5mp at f/8!)

hmmm… sounds like an interesting project for someone to see if this is in fact true!

Posted in cameras, photography | 7 Responses »
Tags: Canon, Canon 50D, Canon 5D MII, Canon G10, dSLRs, Olympus, resolution, sensors