The new Canon 40D

[Patrick]

It looks almost certain the new Canon 40D will be announced on Monday.

If the trickle of info is correct, it looks as if us Canon users that have been waiting for this new camera have been rewarded with a worthwhile replacement provided the price is not silly.

Check this out those that are interested http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/Canon_1DS_MkIII.html,

It seems a 40D was ready earlier in the year but considered not to have enough extra to compete with the Nikon so went back for more development.

Patrick

[Ian]

Re: The new Canon 40D

It looks almost certain the new Canon 40D will be announced on Monday.

If the trickle of info is correct, it looks as if us Canon users that have been waiting for this new camera have been rewarded with a worthwhile replacement provided the price is not silly.

Check this out those that are interested http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/Canon_1DS_MkIII.html,

It seems a 40D was ready earlier in the year but considered not to have enough extra to compete with the Nikon so went back for more development.

Patrick

I do find the sensor size variations in all the rumours (Sony, mainly) perplexing. Canon has three sensor sizes and two lines of lenses, one for the smaller sensor size.

I've just received a lovely looking 16-80 (24-120) CZ Sony 'DT' lens for the A100 - will this work with the rumoured 1.25x cropping factor larger A-series DSLR that is rumoured? Probably only with a reduced resolution switchable cropping mode. Will Nikon have to introduce a new lens mount for a full frame sensor?

As you know, Patrick, I wish the 40D would have the APS-H size sensor of the EOS-1D range, but it looks pretty certain that the 40D will have the smaller sensor size, though upped to 10MP from the 30D's 8MP.

So the rumours also say there is extra weather proofing for the 40D (extra? - either this is a weather-proofed camera or it isn't, there aren't really half measures for this kind of thing). And if the 40D is a weather proofed body, where are the EF-S weather proofed lenses? Tweaks to the image processing system will no doubt be welcome.

I'd be very disappointed if the 40D didn't have live view and support for UDMA (300x) memory cards should be due by now for very fast in-camera buffer clearing. I guess the 40D will have the vibrating sensor filter cleaner, too.

But I am beginning to feel that the 40D is again a little too late with the feature set it is going to offer - it sounds like the 40D should have been launched a year earlier. The Sony rumours certainly suggest this.

Ian

[Patrick]

Re: The new Canon 40D

I do find the sensor size variations in all the rumours (Sony, mainly) perplexing. Canon has three sensor sizes and two lines of lenses, one for the smaller sensor size.

I've just received a lovely looking 16-80 (24-120) CZ Sony 'DT' lens for the A100 - will this work with the rumoured 1.25x cropping factor larger A-series DSLR that is rumoured? Probably only with a reduced resolution switchable cropping mode. Will Nikon have to introduce a new lens mount for a full frame sensor?

As you know, Patrick, I wish the 40D would have the APS-H size sensor of the EOS-1D range, but it looks pretty certain that the 40D will have the smaller sensor size, though upped to 10MP from the 30D's 8MP.

So the rumours also say there is extra weather proofing for the 40D (extra? - either this is a weather-proofed camera or it isn't, there aren't really half measures for this kind of thing). And if the 40D is a weather proofed body, where are the EF-S weather proofed lenses? Tweaks to the image processing system will no doubt be welcome.

I'd be very disappointed if the 40D didn't have live view and support for UDMA (300x) memory cards should be due by now for very fast in-camera buffer clearing. I guess the 40D will have the vibrating sensor filter cleaner, too.

But I am beginning to feel that the 40D is again a little too late with the feature set it is going to offer - it sounds like the 40D should have been launched a year earlier. The Sony rumours certainly suggest this.

Ian

I suspect most of the info has been leaked by Canon, and there could be some intentional misinformation in order to spring a few surprises.

But yes it will probably be a C sensor, I too would love the the larger H sensor, if I could find the money I would buy the MkIII. The weather seal appears to me to be a waste of time without sealed lenses, although it should help keep dust out. Live view would seem inevitable, one up on Nikon but then Canon need to get one or two things up on Nikon. There may be more to this camera than has yet been suggested, reading that article they want No 1 spot again and only something a bit special can compete with the 200 from Nikon, bearing in mind that will also be due for replacement in the not to distant future, as Nikon would appear to want to upgrade their cameras more regularly than they have in the past.

Sony rumors would indicate stuff under development could give Canon a run for their money when they get under full steam.

If I understand correctly Canon have full control over their own CMOS sensors but Nikon rely on outside supply for sensors from Sony & Kodak so they are hampered by what can be allocated but of course also helped by the fact that both Sony & Kodak make for others and can produce massive numbers and keep cost down.
Do Canon sell sensors to rivals under there own name, or perhaps under a different name by any chance?

Whatever happens I'm tied into Canon now so hope they produce a corker.


Patrick

[Andrew Thatcher]

Re: The new Canon 40D

I'd be very disappointed if the 40D didn't have live view

Ian

What is it about live view and DSLR's! pointless.

[Ian]

Re: The new Canon 40D

What is it about live view and DSLR's! pointless.

My standard answer to this is that people used to say the same about metering built in to the camera, then TTL metering, then open aperture metering, then auto exposure, then programmed auto exposure, then autofocus... in fact I don't doubt there were serious reservations about the concept of an SLR back when the rangefinder reigned supreme

The main reasons I said that I'd be disappointed if the 40D didn't have Live View is that a) the 1D Mark III has it and, b) whether you use it or not (nobody says you have to use it ) it will be a standard feature in practically all DSLRs within 2 years. Finally, it is genuinely useful once you have used it - for specific situations (critical focus (no chance of TTL focus error) - like macro work, for example, low angle, high angle and candid shots, etc.) - having a live histogram and live white balance and exposure on the screen are other cool reasons. Perspective and alignment aids too.

In fact quite a number of DSLRs have live view now - the Canon EOS-1D Mark III, Olympus E-330, E-410, E-510, Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1, Leica Digilux 3, and the Fujifilm Finepix S5 Pro (The S3 Pro had it in mono-only mode).

Ian

[StuartR]

Re: The new Canon 40D

What is it about live view and DSLR's! pointless.

Although I personally don't see live-view as a "must have" on a DSLR, I'm sure I'd use it if my camera had one and, as I'm interested in the 40D as an upgrade to my 350D, I hope the rumours are true!

As Ian said, it would be very useful for macro photography where physically getting into a position to use the eyepiece can be almost impossible. I do use an angle finder when shooting with a tripod near ground level but there are occasions when even this is awkward. I have even thought of buying a Zigview but haven't..yet.

However, I think to be truly useful any live view needs to be on a flip-out, position adjustable screen - much like my daughter's Canon compact (can remember the model at the moment) which is great for low & high level shots and waist-level tripod shooting. It also needs to be visible in bright daylight conditions.

So, can't agree with the "pointless" Andrew. As Ian also said, no doubt you'd be able to turn it off

[Patrick]

Re: The new Canon 40D

My standard answer to this is that people used to say the same about metering built in to the camera, then TTL metering, then open aperture metering, then auto exposure, then programmed auto exposure, then autofocus... in fact I don't doubt there were serious reservations about the concept of an SLR back when the rangefinder reigned supreme

The main reasons I said that I'd be disappointed if the 40D didn't have Live View is that a) the 1D Mark III has it and, b) whether you use it or not (nobody says you have to use it ) it will be a standard feature in practically all DSLRs within 2 years. Finally, it is genuinely useful once you have used it - for specific situations (critical focus (no chance of TTL focus error) - like macro work, for example, low angle, high angle and candid shots, etc.) - having a live histogram and live white balance and exposure on the screen are other cool reasons. Perspective and alignment aids too.

In fact quite a number of DSLRs have live view now - the Canon EOS-1D Mark III, Olympus E-330, E-410, E-510, Panasonic Lumix DMC-L1, Leica Digilux 3, and the Fujifilm Finepix S5 Pro (The S3 Pro had it in mono-only mode).

Ian

As Ian knows I have never seen live view as a must have feature, but I can see in the future me doing some work with the camera tethered to my laptop, it would be useful if the live view image could be displayed on the laptops bigger screen.

I tried using the 10D tethered (no live view of coarse) but with USB1 and the slow processing of the camera by modern standards it was never really practical.

The highlight preservation feature and 14 bit processing, half the noise of the 30D already considered very good, all adds up to higher quality for us printers.

Patrick

[Ian]

Re: The new Canon 40D

As Ian knows I have never seen live view as a must have feature, but I can see in the future me doing some work with the camera tethered to my laptop, it would be useful if the live view image could be displayed on the laptops bigger screen.

I tried using the 10D tethered (no live view of coarse) but with USB1 and the slow processing of the camera by modern standards it was never really practical.

The highlight preservation feature and 14 bit processing, half the noise of the 30D already considered very good, all adds up to higher quality for us printers.

Patrick

With the Olympus Live View facility you can view on your laptop screen via the video out cable But it's not very practical for field photography

We don't yet know if the image processing tweaks rumoured for the 40D are for in-camera JPEG creation exclusively. Will they be of benefit to RAW users like yourself?

Ian

[Andrew Thatcher]

Re: The new Canon 40D

However, I think to be truly useful any live view needs to be on a flip-out, position adjustable screen - much like my daughter's Canon compact (can remember the model at the moment) which is great for low & high level shots and waist-level tripod shooting. It also needs to be visible in bright daylight conditions.

They would be of some use with a flip out screen. Ive had a G2 Cannon and used the screen a lot. But using it on a compact and a large DSLR with a large lens is something else. And a flat screen is useless they are hard to see in sunshine you still have to be head on to the screen to so see anything. As for using it to focus as Ian said thats just a joke, Ive have shots that look pin-sharp on screen but get them home and they are blurred.

[Stephen]

Re: The new Canon 40D

They would be of some use with a flip out screen. Ive had a G3 Cannon and used the screen a lot. But using it on a compact and a large DSLR with a large lens is something else. And a flat screen is useless they are hard to see in sunshine you still have to be head on to the screen to so see anything. As for using it to focus as Ian said thats just a joke, Ive have shots that look pin-sharp on screen but get them home and they are blurred.

I have to agree with you Andrew, there may be some applications for it but frankly a lot of the time I need glasses to see detail on a small screen, yet I don't through a viewfinder. If I'm honest I'm not entirely sure why they put one on the 1DMkIII Live histogram may be useful, though again I'm not sure I'd use it that often

[Ian]

Re: The new Canon 40D

I have to agree with you Andrew, there may be some applications for it but frankly a lot of the time I need glasses to see detail on a small screen, yet I don't through a viewfinder. If I'm honest I'm not entirely sure why they put one on the 1DMkIII Live histogram may be useful, though again I'm not sure I'd use it that often

If you have used DSLR live view and it doesn't work for you, that I can respect. But dismissing it when you haven't tried it is just daft.

Critical focus: Andrews says images that look sharp on the screen in review mode are often not sharp back at base. I don't doubt that, but live view critical focus is not just about viewing a static image. These modes usually magnify a user-selected region of the frame by up to 10x. As you move the focus back and forth you can see instantly when the scene is sharpest - try it; it really works.

Live view will always give a correct critical focus reference as you see what the sensor is seeing. Viewfinder (or DSLR AF) focus is dependent on the viewfinder being aligned perfectly. Misalignment results in back-focus issues that do repeatedly crop up in discussions about DSLRs.

Why did they put Live View on the 1D Mark III? Well, I ask you - why not?

Ian

[Ian]

Re: The new Canon 40D

They would be of some use with a flip out screen. Ive had a G2 Cannon and used the screen a lot. But using it on a compact and a large DSLR with a large lens is something else. And a flat screen is useless they are hard to see in sunshine you still have to be head on to the screen to so see anything. As for using it to focus as Ian said thats just a joke, Ive have shots that look pin-sharp on screen but get them home and they are blurred.

I agree, the value of live view is certainly reduced when the camera doesn't have a flip-out screen, but it's not lost completely. In situations when using the camera on a tripod, using live view on the back of the camera remains a great way to compose and check focus. You see 100% of the frame, too, not the 95% or so that most TTL viewfinders afford.

Ian

[Stephen]

Re: The new Canon 40D

If you have used DSLR live view and it doesn't work for you, that I can respect. But dismissing it when you haven't tried it is just daft.

Critical focus: Andrews says images that look sharp on the screen in review mode are often not sharp back at base. I don't doubt that, but live view critical focus is not just about viewing a static image. These modes usually magnify a user-selected region of the frame by up to 10x. As you move the focus back and forth you can see instantly when the scene is sharpest - try it; it really works.

Live view will always give a correct critical focus reference as you see what the sensor is seeing. Viewfinder (or DSLR AF) focus is dependent on the viewfinder being aligned perfectly. Misalignment results in back-focus issues that do repeatedly crop up in discussions about DSLRs.

Why did they put Live View on the 1D Mark III? Well, I ask you - why not?

Ian

Well OK, I'm happy to reserve further judgement, its just how I see it at the moment. But comparing it to metering and exposure types is not quite the same. The camera needs to be able to measure the light in order to make the exposure and the photographer needs to be able to alter that reading using their own skill and judgement. Now with a dSLR using a live view on the fly like most compact users do these days, is not so easy when you have to hold the camera away from the face and perhaps frame with the zoom control on the lens.

As for the MkIII it is a camera built round the concept of speed, both for press and sports photographers to name 2. Unless I'm using my camera on a tripod and in a situation where I can stand back from the camera, I can't see me using it much. I can see certain applications for it like shooting above the head and Macro work, but have Canon incorporated a different screen mode like Panasonic have done on their FX cameras? Much of the picture taking scenario depends on holding that camera up to the eye and face in order to steady and control the camera, and for most picture taking situations I can see the most appropriate focus point in the viewfinder as well as focus confirmation. Blur through movement is a different thing of course

However as I say I'll reserve further judgement, these are just my opinions at the moment, having not tried the system

[Ian]

Re: The new Canon 40D

Well OK, I'm happy to reserve further judgement, its just how I see it at the moment. But comparing it to metering and exposure types is not quite the same. The camera needs to be able to measure the light in order to make the exposure and the photographer needs to be able to alter that reading using their own skill and judgement. Now with a dSLR using a live view on the fly like most compact users do these days, is not so easy when you have to hold the camera away from the face and perhaps frame with the zoom control on the lens.

As for the MkIII it is a camera built round the concept of speed, both for press and sports photographers to name 2. Unless I'm using my camera on a tripod and in a situation where I can stand back from the camera, I can't see me using it much. I can see certain applications for it like shooting above the head and Macro work, but have Canon incorporated a different screen mode like Panasonic have done on their FX cameras? Much of the picture taking scenario depends on holding that camera up to the eye and face in order to steady and control the camera, and for most picture taking situations I can see the most appropriate focus point in the viewfinder as well as focus confirmation. Blur through movement is a different thing of course

However as I say I'll reserve further judgement, these are just my opinions at the moment, having not tried the system

Haha! Fundamentally, a camera doesn't need AF, exposure sensing and control, etc. to take a picture.

Live View isn't the be all and end all and I don't believe (certainly didn't mean) I said it was. But it is a mark of progress, many people will find it useful and many won't. And it costs virtually nothing to incorporate in the camera design in terms of parts. But there are so many nay-sayers who haven't used it and know little about it from a practical sense that are so quick to write it off as worthless.

Anyway, your next camera is likely to have it and you can choose to use it or not - it won't have any detrimental impact on the features you expect, know and love on your camera

I can remember when you were a bit sniffy about LightRoom - now you are its biggest fan

Ian

[Stephen]

Re: The new Canon 40D

Haha! Fundamentally, a camera doesn't need AF, exposure sensing and control, etc. to take a picture.

Live View isn't the be all and end all and I don't believe (certainly didn't mean) I said it was. But it is a mark of progress, many people will find it useful and many won't. And it costs virtually nothing to incorporate in the camera design in terms of parts. But there are so many nay-sayers who haven't used it and know little about it from a practical sense that are so quick to write it off as worthless.

Anyway, your next camera is likely to have it and you can choose to use it or not - it won't have any detrimental impact on the features you expect, know and love on your camera

I can remember when you were a bit sniffy about LightRoom - now you are its biggest fan

Ian

I've used cameras without exposure control etc. However they all need to have the exposure set and focus determined in some way. I had the first practical SLR camera with AF, and I can remember when I had stop down metering on my Pracktica being scoffed at by an old school photographer But having built in metering and open aperture metering etc were true advances in camera use and definitely made things easier for the photographer. Using a hand held light meter would still be the alternative

You are probably right about live view becoming the norm, but I can say without a shadow of a doubt that it doesn't inspire and enthuse me like that Minolta 7000 did, that was a seminal moment indeed.

As for Lightroom you are right, though as I recall I was a bit sniffy about the Beta versions at the time, which I did try and decided to wait till the full version came out. It was then that most agreed that it was a vast improvement, a program designed for photographers by photographers.