Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7   Go Down

Author Topic: canon 1d mark III  (Read 41113 times)

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10071
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #40 on: February 22, 2007, 07:18:17 pm »

Quote
We are a long way from a super lens for cameras, but perhaps someday such a lens can be constructed. I would not expect it before the next PMA show.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102481\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Bill,
I don't think I was implying it would be easy. Building a full scale camera lens from such materials might never happen in our lifetime, but building a microlens just a couple of microns in diameter is another matter.

Interestingly, a superlens at optical frequencies has already been constructed in the labs, but through a different process than use of metamaterials. Here's a reference from Wikipedia.

Quote
In 2005, the first optical superlens was constructed by physicists at University of California, Berkeley. This allowed scientists to observe objects as small as 40 nmone-tenth the size of objects which can be viewed with conventional optical microscopes. The superlens constructed at UC Berkeley did not employ a negative refractive index metamaterial as in Pendry's perfect lens. Instead a thin film of silver was used to amplify the evanescent waves.
Logged

bjanes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3354
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #41 on: February 22, 2007, 08:36:47 pm »

Quote
Interestingly, a superlens at optical frequencies has already been constructed in the labs, but through a different process than use of metamaterials. Here's a reference from Wikipedia.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102485\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That is the same group referenced by Pendry in the Scientific American paper. As I interpret the article, the index of refraction was negative as was permittivity (ε). With this lens the distance between the object and image is smaller than the wavelength of the light, hardly practical with a camera.

"But we cannot yet fabricate a material that yields = -1 at visible wavelengths. Fortunately, a compromise is possible. When the distance between the object and the image is much smaller than the wavelength, we need only fulfill the condition ε = -1, and then we can disregard .  Just last year Richard Blaikie's group at the University of Canterbury in New Zealand and Xiang Zhang's group at the University of California, Berkeley, independently followed this prescription and demonstrated super-resolution in an optical system. At optical wavelengths, the inherent resonances of a metal can lead to negative permittivity (ε). Thus, a very thin layer of metal can act as a superlens at a wavelength where ε = -1.

Both Blaikie and Zhang used a layer of silver about 40 nanometers thick to image 365-nanometer-wavelength light emanating from shaped apertures smaller than the light's wavelength. Although a silver slab is far from the ideal lens, the silver superlens substantially improved the image resolution, proving the underlying principle of superlensing."

Bill
« Last Edit: February 22, 2007, 08:44:56 pm by bjanes »
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10071
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #42 on: February 22, 2007, 10:29:01 pm »

Quote
That is the same group referenced by Pendry in the Scientific American paper. As I interpret the article, the index of refraction was negative as was permittivity (ε). With this lens the distance between the object and image is smaller than the wavelength of the light, hardly practical with a camera.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102494\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

But Bill, I've just written that I don't expect a fully functioning camera lens made from metamaterials to be available in my lifetime. Microlenses are a different kettle of fish though, don't you agree?

As you must have gathered, I'm a technology optimist. I don't know enough to understand why certain developments are impossible. However, it's apparent that sometimes things that seem impossible from a practical viewpoint can become feasible as developments take place in other disciplines, especially in computer science.
 
In Australia we are having a political debate about nuclear energy in light of the fact we have so much uranium but are getting most of our energy from burning coal.. But the holy grail of energy production has always been the development of the fusion reactor, something which Australia seems not to be involved with.

Quote
.... the world's top industrial nations including the United States, Russia and the European Union signed an agreement to build the world's first full-scale nuclear fusion reactor, the $A15 billion International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor project (ITER). After the International Space Station, ITER says, it is the world's biggest science project.
Nuclear fission, nuclear fusion what's the difference? Fusion has been mooted for decades as the next generation of nuclear power, one that uses hydrogen instead of uranium.
There is a virtually limitless supply of fuel, say supporters, as hydrogen can be extracted from seawater. Moreover, fusion produces little radioactive waste one of the main worries about fission and no greenhouse gases. It promises, say supporters, nothing less than a world where energy and global warming concerns are solved.

This idea has been kicking around for many decades. I'm glad someone is still working on it and taking it seriously. I guess you don't spend $15 billion without some expectation of success.

Another theoretically possible technological breakthrough of great consequence is the Quantum computer. They are still wotking on that too.

Quote
Science Daily Physicists at the Commerce Department's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have taken a significant step toward transforming entanglement--an atomic-scale phenomenon described by Albert Einstein as "spooky action at a distance"--into a practical tool. They demonstrated a method for refining entangled atom pairs (a process called purification) so they can be more useful in quantum computers and communications systems, emerging technologies that exploit the unusual rules of quantum physics for pioneering applications such as "unbreakable" data encryption.

The NIST process for "purifying" an unusual property of quantum physics called entanglement involves illuminating two pairs of beryllium ions (charged atoms) with a series of ultraviolet laser pulses. (Credit: Bill Pietsch, Astronaut 3 Media)Ads by Google Advertise on this site

The NIST work, reported in the Oct. 19, 2006, issue of Nature,* marks the first time atoms have been both entangled and subsequently purified; previously, this process had been carried out only with entangled photons (particles of light). The NIST demonstration also is the first time that scientists have been able to purify particles nondestructively. Direct measurement would destroy the delicate entangled state of atom pairs; the new experiment gets around this problem by entangling two pairs of atoms and measuring only one pair.
Logged

macgyver

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 510
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #43 on: February 23, 2007, 01:49:14 am »

Personally, I think the biggest new feature is one that most people seem to have overlooked.

The name rhymes.

1Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee Mark Threeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee  
Logged

Marsupilami

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 77
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #44 on: February 23, 2007, 02:48:36 am »

Quote
The majority of Canon's market is PJs -- covering news and sporting events. If you've ever seen a news or sports press conference, you see PJs all the time holding cameras above their heads not looking thru the viewfinder so that they can get the shot without being blocked. Well, I think Live View is entirely appropriate here.

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102360\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I have done press and sports with the 1d MkII and while live view would be a great thing here at the 1d Mark III it is not well made, think twice .... the screen is fixed in the body ! so for the overhead shots you can forget this feature. Might be that some other use is found for that feature.

This is certainly a great evolution of a great camera, but if Canon want to make the next leap, they have to say goodby to the outdated body of the 1d series.
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10071
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #45 on: February 23, 2007, 04:28:33 am »

Basically, I'm concerned with raw performance rather than bells and whistles. (That's raw as in sheer). Canon seems to have delivered this. Sometimes they make minor improvements, as in the 30D, but mostly major improvements as in the 1D3.

As I recall, the 1D Mkll preceded the 1Ds2 which preceded the 5D. The upgrades will probably follow the same pattern, which means I could expect an upgrade to the 5D around October this year.

It almost goes without saying, there'll be greater pixel count, improved shadow noise, a 6400 ISO setting, auto-cleaning sensor and larger LCD screen. Hopefully there'll be a few surprises also.
Logged

phila

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 318
    • www.philaphoto.com
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #46 on: February 23, 2007, 04:41:26 am »

I think this quote from IR says it all really.

"...The EOS 1D Mark III isn't just for sports anymore. It's a more universal camera for the vast majority of pro photographers. With the multiple improvements in the new camera, photographers will no longer need to trade off resolution, image quality, and speed against each other. The 1D Mark III now has enough of all three to satisfy a huge slice of the market in a single camera body..."

/www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E1DMK3/E1DMK3A.HTM

I have been using a 1DMkII for several years now for everything from MotoGP to interiors, with great success. If I wasn't after bigger file sizes I'd already have my order in! As it is, looks like I'm waiting 'til later in the year.  

CJD

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 97
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #47 on: February 23, 2007, 05:19:12 am »

Anybody know if there be a live histogram with the Live View feature?
Logged

jani

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1624
    • yet
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #48 on: February 23, 2007, 05:43:07 am »

Quote
Anybody know if there be a live histogram with the Live View feature?
It's a bit unclear in the white paper, but it appears that there will be if you have enabled exposure simulation (which is what the relevant custom function is about):

Quote
Below the image, the shutter speed, aperture, exposure level (exposure compensation
amount, AEB level), flash exposure level, shots remaining, and ISO speed are displayed.
In the magnified view, the magnified location, magnification, and AE lock status are
displayed on the right of the image. In addition, when you press the INFO button, the
Picture Style, battery check, AE lock status, and flash-ready are also displayed on the
lower left of the image. If C. Fn IV -16-1 is set and you press the INFO button again, a
brightness or RGB histogram appears on the right of the image. (For flash shots and
bulb, the histogram display will be grayed out.)

Press the INFO button again and only the Live View image (without information) will be
displayed.
Logged
Jan

madmanchan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2115
    • Web
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #49 on: February 23, 2007, 11:49:50 am »

Looks like we finally have our one-touch mirror lockup ... turning on Live View will lock up the mirror.
Logged
Eric Chan

jani

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1624
    • yet
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #50 on: February 23, 2007, 12:23:03 pm »

Quote
Looks like we finally have our one-touch mirror lockup ... turning on Live View will lock up the mirror.
But turning on Live View isn't a one-touch operation, unless I've misread something.
Logged
Jan

madmanchan

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2115
    • Web
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #51 on: February 23, 2007, 02:33:12 pm »

Quote
But turning on Live View isn't a one-touch operation, unless I've misread something.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102626\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

All you have to do is press the SET button, which is right on the back of the camera. See page 23 of the White Paper.
Logged
Eric Chan

X-Re

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 143
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #52 on: February 23, 2007, 02:35:12 pm »

You have to have Live View enabled (custom function). After that, SET button will work to bring the mirror up...
Logged
Dave Re
dave@daverephoto.com website: [u

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6487
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #53 on: February 23, 2007, 04:50:06 pm »

Quote
... scaling can be used to decrease the pixel size and improve spatial resolution or to shrink the transistor size and increase the photosensitive area. As pixel size decreases, the f/ratio of the microlenses becomes limited.

Although technology is wonderful, limits imposed by the laws of physics are being reached.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102434\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Compact digicam sensors with photo-site spacing less than 2 microns might be approaching those limits, but I doubt that DSLR sensors are anywhere close.

For example, micro-lenses work fairly well on 2 micron digicam pixels.

As far as reducing transistor size, the newly announce Sony CMOS 1/1.8" sensor with 2.5 micron pixel spacing uses 180nm process, giving far larger minimum component size than the newer 90nm and 60nm processes. So even "tiny" digicam pixels are not yet pushing hard at the limits of miniaturization, and seem to have room for reducing transistor size to half or less what it is now.
Logged

bjanes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3354
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #54 on: February 23, 2007, 06:17:02 pm »

Quote
Compact digicam sensors with photo-site spacing less than 2 microns might be approaching those limits, but I doubt that DSLR sensors are anywhere close.

[{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well, do you have any information on what the fill factor of the Canon CMOS chips is? Even if the fill factor approaches 100 percent and the transistor area of the chip is markedly reduced, you still need a sufficient active pixel area to capture photons. The quantum efficiency could be doubled or tripled, but you still have to have a sufficient pixel size to control shot noise and maintain and dynamic range and sensitivity.  These factors are summarized by [a href=\"http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/digital.sensor.performance.summary/]Roger Clark[/url]. Do you have this additional information?

Bill
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10071
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #55 on: February 23, 2007, 07:13:11 pm »

Quote
Even if the fill factor approaches 100 percent and the transistor area of the chip is markedly reduced, you still need a sufficient active pixel area to capture photons. [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102697\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Apart from the greater expense of fabrication, is there any insurmountable obstacle to mounting all the photon receptors and microlenses on one side of the chip and all the processing transistors on the other side, thus providing close to 100% fill factor?

This could be the next step to eke out the maximum dynamic range from a sensor of a given size. Another approach might be to increase the well depth and use the microlens to precisely direct the light vertically down into the well, which I think is already being done towards the edges of the sensor.

There are no doubt lots of improvements that can be implemented before we hit the brick wall of 'the laws of physics'. However, I've often wondered to what extent diffraction degrades the preformance of microlenses. Is it significant ot not, and if so, at what size does it become significant?
Logged

bjanes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3354
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #56 on: February 23, 2007, 10:08:04 pm »

Quote
Apart from the greater expense of fabrication, is there any insurmountable obstacle to mounting all the photon receptors and microlenses on one side of the chip and all the processing transistors on the other side, thus providing close to 100% fill factor?

This could be the next step to eke out the maximum dynamic range from a sensor of a given size. Another approach might be to increase the well depth and use the microlens to precisely direct the light vertically down into the well, which I think is already being done towards the edges of the sensor.

There are no doubt lots of improvements that can be implemented before we hit the brick wall of 'the laws of physics'. However, I've often wondered to what extent diffraction degrades the preformance of microlenses. Is it significant ot not, and if so, at what size does it become significant?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102708\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Amazing things can be done with microlenses as shown by the new Kodak chip used in the Leica M8, but all they can do is refocus the light that falls on them. They can't amplify light. I had thought about adding well depth to my discussion, but there are limits there too as shown in a recent thread comparing Kodak and Dalsa chips. If the well is too deep, edge performance suffers. Kodak circumvented some of this problem with microlenses for the Leica chip. According to Roger Clark, electron density per square micron of chip area has not improved much over the years, but new semiconductors, possibly not based on silicon, could change the situation dramatically. I'm not an engineer, but as I understand it, well depth is not necessarily literal. Increased dielectric properties could increase capacitance without actually changing the physical depth of the well. However, ISO performance is still needed in some areas.

Like you I'm an optimist too, Ray. Tremendous progress will be made in digital imaging, but the "laws" of physics won't be broken. I'm sure that advances will come in areas that I can't image (e.g superlenses, etc), and properties of which we are not currently aware will be utilized. Your thinking is more out of the box than mine, but if we look back at the last 40 years, progress has been made in ways that we or the science fiction writers did not imagine, but many things have remained relatively and unexpectedly unchanged.

Bill
Logged

MikeMike

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 145
    • http://
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #57 on: February 23, 2007, 11:52:18 pm »

`f
« Last Edit: February 24, 2007, 12:13:27 am by MikeMike »
Logged

Ray

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10071
canon 1d mark III
« Reply #59 on: February 24, 2007, 11:19:55 pm »

Quote
I am very interested for having that 14-bit color. That's a huge thing imho.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102890\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
 

I don't think we should assume that 14-bit processing is in itself is a huge improvement, but rather it is indicative of improved shadow noise and dynamic range which requires the additional 2 bits for the capture of which.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 7   Go Up