New Camera Gear for 2005: PMA Announcements

I'm starting a thread for all the new camera gear that has been and will be announced during and ahead of PMA 2005 (Feb 20-23)

So far here are the big SLR gear announcemetns:

Sigma:
Numerous lenses.

Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC HSM
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05021404...04sigma30dc.asp

Sigma 10-20mm F4.0-5.6 EX DC HSM
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05021403...igma10-20dc.asp

DG version of ten telephoto lenses is available
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05021401...1sigma10dgs.asp

Pentax:

PENTAX Adds a Silver-Colored Version to Its Popularly Priced Compact Digital SLR Camera
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05021306...istdssilver.asp

Canon: DSLR 20Da (Japan only?)
A version of the 20D for astrophotography
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0502/05021405...anoneos20da.asp
 
Nikon has announced the D2Hs

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/nikond2hs/

he improvements appear to be split into two areas; firstly the camera's buffer has been increased and (possibly) also its method of buffering; the D2Hs can shoot continuously at eight frames per second for up to 50 JPEG frames (a 25% increase) or 40 NEF (RAW) frames (a 60% increase). The larger increase in RAW burst capability hints towards an improved buffering method and is twice the RAW buffer capability of Canon's EOS 1D Mark II. The second range of improvements appear to have been inheritited from the development of the D2X, these are things like support for sYCC color space, 3D Matrix Metering II and the higher resolution 2.5\" LCD monitor. A summary of the changes and improvements compared to the D2H can be seen in the table below.

Still 4mp

Aaron
 
One neat feature of the new D2HS is built-in GPS!

From www.dpreview.com :
GPS connectivity expands applications
The latitude, longitude, altitude and UTC (Coordinated Universal Time) at which a shot is taken can be recorded from a GPS unit to the image's metadata. GPS units that comply with the NMEA 0183 (ver.2.01) interface standard can be connected using the optional GPS cable (MC-35).

I still can't believe they'd make a semi-high caliber dSLR with only 4mpx, especially given the 20D has 8mpx and the 1 series is generally larger...

EDIT: I think I misread this originally... As I understand it now, the camera just comes with an option to connect a GPS...
 
Althought pixel count is WAY overrated, it does sound a bit odd to release a pro level camera with 'only' 4 million of them. :? I'm curious to see the final price tag Nikon slaps on this beast.

-Greg
 
Originally posted by Greg Campbell
Althought pixel count is WAY overrated, it does sound a bit odd to release a pro level camera with 'only' 4 million of them. :? I'm curious to see the final price tag Nikon slaps on this beast.

-Greg

Yes, dSLRs are out of the megapixel race since folks realize that there's MUCH more to a camera than megapixel count. That said, the MSRP on this thing is $3500! The output will probably be very clean, but you can still only do so much with 4mpx, especially for a $3500 camera! Yes, it'll prob sell closer to $3000-$3200 on the street, but that's still a hefty premium over the Canon 20D.
 
I believe the reasoning behind the 4mp sensor is the fact that this body is marketed mainly to professional news and sports photographers, where instantaneous autofocus and machine-gun frame rates are paramount. You don't a huge file size to get publication-quality for newspapers. Plus, I don't know about the Nikon, but the old Canon 1D was "only" a four MP camera and it had no problem producing gorgeous double-truck magazine spreads.
 
Pushing the megapixel limit, I've done a 16X20 print with a 2.5 MP camera. Granted, it was an exceptionally well exposed, tripoded photo, but it did turn out fine. It doesn't stand real close scrutiny (I wouldn't go look at it with a loupe), but at normal viewing distances (3 to 5 or more feet), it looks great.

I routinely make 11X14 prints with the 2.5 MP camera. NO rezzing required. In fact, the Steerman that is my icon was done on the 2.5 MP camera. I did a 10X12 print of it for the owner of the aircraft and it looked dead sharp.

Sorry folks, I don't buy into the statements about you can only get a decent 8X10 with 4 MP. It doesn't wash very well in my experience. That being said, more MP does make it easier to work with and give you better cropping options, but if you've done most of the composition correctly, you won't be cropping a whole lot anyway.

Most people won't be printing any larger than their printer can handle. For the vast majority of folks, that's 8.5X11. Yes, there are larger format printer out there, but Joe Average isn't going to blow $500 on a printer when he can have one that prints cheaper for way less than $100.

I'm my own worst critic when it comes to photography. I do portraits and the like on the side. I generally don't print larger than 8X10 though I have the capability to print up 13X19. I've put the 4 MP and 6 MP photos side by side at 8X10 and there isn't a discernable difference. That's from 4 different printing sources. At 11X14, there is a difference, but you need a magnifying glass to see it. At 16X20, there is a noticible difference up close. Let me say that again, UP CLOSE. At 4 feet from the print, there is a slight difference, but you have to look for it. At 6 feet, there is no difference in the prints.

Take that FWIW. These are real test that I and a couple of photo friends performed a while back when the issues were really hot on the internet. The print sources were an Epson printer, Canon Printer, Fuji mini lab and Noritsu mini lab.
 
Couldn't agree more with you John. As i sit here I'm looking at a 13x19 print of the all-time favorite picture I ever took (a snowy owl - a rare visitor in these parts - taken in the middle of a blizzard down at Washita NWR). It was taken with a D30 back in 2000. From six inches you can see some artifacts, but from a few feet away (i.e. normal viewing distance) and especially framed, it looks perfectly fine, just like a traditional print. I don't think anyone who ever owned a D30 would argue that not only was its 3mp sensor the equal of 35mm, up to 8x10 it simply blew film away, but people still don't believe it. I actually read articles claiming the D30 barely had the resolution for 8x10s, based on some ridiculous megapixel formula. This at the same time news and sports shooters were making these incredible magazine images with the old, ancient 2mp Nikon D1, which was the first real mass-produced digital slr that wasn't a Kodak-modified DCS model. People can argue the merits of 35mm drum scans and lines of resolution all they want, but in real-world applications those buttery-smooth noise-free, grainless D30 images made gorgeous prints. That's what really convinced me that megapixels had much less to do with image quality than the physical size and quality of the sensor.
The only reason i upgraded to the 10D was for the improved autofocus (which still turned out to be disappointing) and the improved long-exposure capability (which in fact was as good as advertised). Although the resolution increase from the D30 to the 10D was nice, I certainly never felt underpixaled (if that's a word) with the D30.
That's part of the reason I chose not to upgrade to the 20D (now if it had the 1-series autofocus, I'd be on it in a heartbeat) but the resolution increase is fairly minimal.
My personal threshold for upgrade is at least 11mp, a maximum of 1.3x factor and Canon finally putting a decent autofocus on their prosumer models. That's one area where Nikon has it all over Canon...
 
Gotta second chad's thoughts on the purpose in PJ work... 4mp is more than suitable for photos in a paper.

I don't think anyone who ever owned a D30 would argue that not only was its 3mp sensor the equal of 35mm, up to 8x10 it simply blew film away, but people still don't believe it. I actually read articles claiming the D30 barely had the resolution for 8x10s, based on some ridiculous megapixel formula.

Amen... I still shoot with a D30, and while it would be nice to have an 8mp sensor for cropping etc, the main reason I want to upgrade is the improvements in noise both with time and ISO. The other sad but true reason is that there still is some 3mp "discriminaton" so to speak with many magazines. I actually got a free 36x24!! blowup from www.jumbogiant.com. Despite being from a 3mp sensor, it looks excellent from a few feet away.

Aaron
 
How in heck did you beat me to that :D .... it is funny that a second hand site has the stuff even before Canon made the press release... I wonder if they put it up too soon on accident?

Aaron
 
Originally posted by Aaron Kennedy
How in heck did you beat me to that :D .... it is funny that a second hand site has the stuff even before Canon made the press release... I wonder if they put it up too soon on accident?

Aaron

For what it's worth, that link was found by someone on dpreview by manually putting in the address, since it wasn't linked to yet on the PMA site at the time.. I'm sure there were plenty of sites with pages prepared, but they probably couldn't post them publically due to Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) matters...
 
Further PMA news.


Universal Visual Format & the Fast Imaging Light Management technology

Just when everyone was coming to accept the digital process, news has started to leak out about some amazing new technology that is set to revolutionize still photography.

Supported by Kodak, Fuji, Nikon and Canon amongst others, the new technology, known as Universal Visual Format (UVF for short), will be officially launched this spring.

Many details of the format are still secret but the proponents of the process are foreshadowing great advantages for UVF.These claims include: Totally platform independent files that will be able to be read in 5, 10 or 100 years time, with no compatibility concerns. Details of this technology have not been revealed but it uses a system called \"spatially correct access memory\" where the memory files are written in the same geometric relationship as they exist in the image. Images are stored in maximum quality RAW format to obviate the need for image quality choice at the taking stage. The file size per image will vary from 30 megabytes to a huge 150 megabytes, depending on the selection of image size within the UVF format. Very cheap removable memory cassettes that will cost as little as $7 per gigabyte.

UVF will automatically write semi-archival files as you go, obviating the need to transfer portable memory to CD after the shooting session is completed. This is achieved by using what the developers of the system call \"Fast Imaging Light Management\" technology.The system is compatible with all existing SLR lens ranges and unlike digital does not have a focal length multiplier effect, so wide angle lenses will retain their full angle of view.

Avoidance of the problem with digital SLR's of dust accumulating on the CCD sensors by providing a cleaned sensor for every photograph. UVF mages can be printed to paper, projected or sent over the Internet via an adapter that will cost in the order of $250.UVF projectors will be available in the Spring of 2005 and will provide two to three times the resolution of current digital CCD projectors. They will be fullystand-alone machines, with no need for a separate computer interface and unlike digital projectors, will be able to show full screen vertical as well as horizontal images. The really good news is that UVF projectors are expected to sell for as little as one fifth the price of digital projectors.

As mentioned at the start of this article, full details will be revealed later this month. Keep watching for further information on a system that will almost certainly revolutionize photography in the future.

Wow, this sounds like a real alternative to the kilobuck+ DSLR mania sweeping Stormtrack. 8)
 
Back
Top