Nikon D700

After the launch events of this Summer and this Fall (before and during the Köln Photokina), there are two brands leaving important questions open. This is Sony and Nikon. While the two near-friends had us used to seeing them working together around the Sony digital photo sensors, we discovered two very divergent/different announces about 35mm Full Frame dSLR cameras: A Sony Alpha 900 pushing the resolution to record levels (24.6MP) and a Nikon D700 limiting its resolution in favor of maximum sensitivity (12MP).

Sony Alpha 900 - publicité

Some would have us thinking that Nikon would have rejected the sensor offered by Sony (used on the Alpha 900) for reasons of insufficient image quality. It does not seem so obvious when looking at the results actually obtained by Sony, but why not? After all, Nikon did obtain a special edition of the Alpha 700 sensor in order to build its Nikon D300…

So what?

It is not very difficult to forecast. Nikon is preparing a Full Frame SLR photo camera with very high resolution (the Nikon D800 of the rumour mill or the D4 promised around Christmas?) and Sony will derive a low resolution version of the Alpha 900 (most certainly named Alpha 800). Their moves will be opposite but very complementary (and predictable).

In both cases, you can say that Canon will not be forced into running with the pack. With their EOS 5D Mk II (and the last EOS 5D, sold at bargain prices), there is enough to sustain the pressure, but Canon will need to react in 2009, before Summer.

French magazine Réponse Photo has delayed its parution date to 23rd possibly to wait for the revelation of a yet-unannouced camera (obviously it could only be from Nikon or Canon).

It is quite possible that Canon is trying to arrive after the Nikon announcement of its 24,6MP Full Frame camera (Nikon D800 or Nikon D900, maybe?), scheduled for 18th of September.

Beware: We said announces, not releases.

Already done:

Beware: This will be updated as often as needed. This may lead to repeated publications in the RSS feeds and some publication date changes.

Canon EOS evolution

This is what Chasseur d’Images reveals on its web site home page. the new Full Frame sensor from Canon “dépasse la barre des 21 millions de pixels” (has more than 21 million pixels). The camera should be at the top of the category with all the possible bells and whistles including LiveView and a video mode. But above all, we must expect that the design has been improved: “rajeuni et d’une belle finition alliant robustesse et légéreté, grâce à un châssis en alliage de magnésium” (rejuvenated and with a nice finish blending robustness and lightness).

The title of the illustration seems to confirm the name of the camera: Canon EOS 5D Mark II. This was very probable, but many other names had been published here and there (and here too).

We’ll know all the details on September 17th in the morning.

• 24 mega-pixel 24X36/Full Frame CMOS sensor
• DIGIC IV processor
• LiveView
• Video Mode
• Integrated Cleaning System
• Full compatibility with Canon EF and EX-series Speedlites
• Magnesium alloy body
• New battery, new grip
• Price: 2600€
• Official announcement: 17/09/2008

It seems possible that this is real data, not a leak, since it is said that Canon has miscalculated the limit date for its recent NDA (they are trying to extend it).

And the announcement date seems to be what everybody thinks about the official launch of the Canon EOS 7D or Canon EOS 5D Mark II.

Canon EOS 7D, is it really the new Full Frame camera?

From CanonRumours. But it seems to be an elegant fake from Xitek.com.

Canon EOS evolution

As seen on Canon EOS evolution (US web site).

Importantly, the progression of the moon phases will apparently progressively reveal the new camera around the end of the month, just in tome for the opening of the Photokina fair.

Image et Nature

So, no Canon EOS 5D Mark II or similar. It will be Canon EOS 7D.

I told you that the press was currently held by the Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs). Here is one which failed to cover it completely…

Canon EOS 5D Mark II

Canon EOS 7D

Anyway, do not expect to get any reliable information now. Canon has put under NDA (Non Disclosure Agreement) all press representative and has provided the pre-production cameras for the initial hands-on reviews to pop up everywhere when the embargo is lifted.

This is exactly the reason why  we no longer have any information about the upcoming Sony Alpha 900 which will be fighting in exactly the same market. Possibly with exactly the same weapons (two cameras to simultaneously cover both the $2000 and $3000 ranges).

Canon IFA 2008

Everybody expects it to happen, but here is a noticia (in Spanish) where the writer informs us that the Canon people at the IFA2008 exhibition confirmed that the Canon EOS 5D will be renewed with the arrival of a new D-SLR camera with a Full Frame sensor within the scope of the next Koln Photokina fair.

In parallel, it has been observed that a Flicker user published an image that appeared to be marked as coming from a Canon EOS 6D (in the EXIF part of the file). But the author quickly confirmed that this was only a quick an dirty modification of the JPG file while testing some unrelated part of the Flicker operation.

So, we are still left without precise information about which name will be held by this new camera from Canon. But the latest descriptive rumour says that the EOS 6D or Canon EOS 7D (or whatever) will have the following features:

• 21.1 M-pixel Full Frame
• DIGIC IV
• ISO 100-6400 (extension: 50 ISO & 12800 ISO)
• 5 fps
• 3.2″ High Resolution Screen (LCD)
• 19-point AF
• HDMI Out
• Liveview
• HD Movie Mode
• Viewfinder: 100% Coverage
• Full weather sealing
• EF Lenses only

Anyway, this 2008 edition of the Photokina will be very interesting. You’ll see plenty of people running in the alleys from the first day to have a look at all the new cameras and photo products to be presented there.

Il faudra attendre la Photokina pour en savoir davantage sur le prochain “5D” à capteur 24×36. (we will have to wait for Photokina to know more about the next “5D” with a 35mm sensor).

Only a few days to wait now until we know more about Canon EOS 5D-MkII, Canon EOS 6D or Canon EOS 7D.

Canon EOS 50D

Seeing that this also presents a 15MP camera, I start to wonder whether Canon has really a replacement ready for the EOS 5D Full Frame SLR camera. Several of the features attributed (by the rumour) to the EOS 5D MkII seem to be appearing on the Canon EOS 50D. It could mean that the leaks were actually coming from the EOS 50D and not the EOS 7D (or whatever name it will have).

Of course, we will have to wait a little more to know if Canon is really ready to announce two major cameras at the Photokina fair (one Canon EOS 50D in mid-range and one Canon EOS 7D at the high-end). But it looks more and more like Nikon and Sony will have an empty field to compete with the aging Canon EOS 5D.

Since the EOS 5D MkII is expected around this time and no later than September PMA fair, this is quite a possibility and having a handful of these cameras in the hands of pro photographers for all to see would be a very nice promotional opportunity for Canon. This is much needed after the thunderous launch of the Nikon D700 and just before the arrival of the Sony Alpha 800/900 (direct competitors in the Full Frame SLR camera market).

I’m still sceptical about an EOS 50D that would be arriving a little too early according to Canon habits in terms of launches, except if it was a low-cost version of the previous Full Frame camera. And, there, it would be a great event. Think about it! Simultaneous launch of two war machines hitting right into the center of the preoccupations of the most enthusiast photographers.

Some people expect the announcement to happen on Monday.

1. There will be two cameras at the same time (either Canon EOS 3D and Canon EOS 6D, or Canon EOS 3D and Canon EOS 7D) launched just before the Olympics (to allow pro photographers to publicly play with them during this very public event).
2. There will be two cameras at the same time (either Canon EOS 3D and Canon EOS 6D, or Canon EOS 3D and Canon EOS 7D) launched after the Olympics (usually pronosticated for Monday, September 8, 2008).

Did you notice the common points and the divergence?

Unfortunately, it is rather impossible to say where is the information and where is the fake news bit.

As you can notice, it is expected that the Sony Alpha 900 will be targetting low prices despite it’s 24MP sensor (or it will have a little Alpha 800 brother, while the Alpha 900 would shoot for a higher price point). But the current Canon EOS 5D seems to be an astonishingly good bargain (while stocks last).

• Nikon D3x because Nikon is not yet out of voice and they prepare a high-end pro SLR to go along with the D3; Probably beginning of 2009.
• Sony Alpha 900 because Sony promissed in September 2008 (launch at PMA in August 2008?) its super-hig-end 24 million pixels FF camera.
• Canon EOS 5D MkII because the replacement for the EOS 5D is coming soon (maybe not even waiting for August) and maybe with a cheaper little brother under the name of Canon EOS 3D.

And it’s a good question to ask, but the answer goes with some of the comments about sensor resolution. About the same people who noticed that resolution is not all that counts (despite what is said or implied by some of the major brands on this market) also understand that going Full Frame is a possibly very important decision for the attentive digital photographer.

WTF is Full Frame?

First you’d like to understand what we are speaking about – precisely. Most Digital Single Lens Reflex (D-SLR) cameras use a sensor whose size is about half of the size of a usual (old?) 35mm film frame. We call them APS-C-sized sensors because it’s not far from the (younger but still old?) APS-C film frame size. Since so many photographers have been trained in the world of 35mm films, everything tends to be compared to it.

Those small sensors are used by camera manufacturers because the smaller the silicon chip, the cheaper it goes. This is the main reason why phone cameras use even smaller sensors (a few millimeters wide for some of them).

Full Frame sensors are those ones that are nearly exactly the same size as a 35mm film: 24mm by 36mm sensitive surface. By silicon manufacturing standards this has long been too big to be reasonably manufactured in large quantities but progress being what it is in this industry (Moore’s law, you know?) it is now becoming feasible. So why not?

The pros of FF

The first one is that if you stick to a fixed number of pixels (say 10 millions of them on one single sensor), the wider the sensors, the larger the individual pixel sensitive element. This has several enormously interesting advantages.

Being big, the pixel is also much more sensitive (it can collect more photons at the same time). So, there is less need to do mathematics and algorithmics to compensate for low light situations. The sensor collects directly enough light and the image is less impacted by noise. Like when you push the volume up on a radio to hide the background noise of a conversation. Those big pixels naturally “push the volume up”.

And noise is a real problem. On very high ISOs and/or on low quality cameras (read “small sensors” like we find them in camera phones or even compact point-and-shoot cameras), you keep shooting images that are dull, covered with little colored specks or lack in details because the camera manufacturer forced on “noise cleaning algorithm” and this removed most details.

Parallely, if you pixel is large and collecting a lot of light photons, it is easier for the electronics to cut it in small pieces: you get better dynamic range. It means that you will find easily more details in the dark areas of the image and you will mostly avoid the blown-out white zones of some light areas. This is a good thing for your photos.

But there are also some other even more subtle but important issues at hand. Many photographers migrating from analog to digital SLR cameras have noticed that the viewfinder now looks like a tiny little tunnel: everything seems to be small and dark. Since the sensor image is smaller, it is sent back to the eye in a smaller size too. It is uncomfortable unless you invest in a camera with a top of the line viewfinder. But if the sensor is Full Frame, it is easier for the camera manufacturer. They don’t have to enlarge the image, it’s already big.

A much more technically difficult argument is something that is now cropping up with large pixel numbers. When we had 6 million pixels on an APS-C sensor, nobody noticed it, but with 10, 12, 14 millions pixels people start to notice that the increase of resolution does not always go with improved image quality. One of the reasons is linked to light diffraction when you close the diaphragm. The pixels are getting so small that the slight diffraction from a lens closed at f/22 or f/16 is becoming larger than a pixel (or at least perceptible there).

Manufacturers (and intensely attentive photographers) now understand that if they want to keep getting more pixels, they -first- have to buy extra-high-quality lenses (at a price) and -second- they must get bigger pixels (and bigger sensors). 20 million pixels on an APS-C sensor will probably never be significantly better than 10-12 millions of them. You have to go to Full Frame if you want more pixels! It essentially gives you more real pixels and an extended diaphragm range: in most cases, it is understood that around 12 millions pixel on an APS-C sensor, closing to more than f/16 is just breaking down your picture.

As a side note, this also explains why so many small cameras and phone cameras are producing really ugly images out of an astonishing number of pixels…

Questionable advantages

Another bane of small sensors is that they have so much Depth of Field (DOF). Everything seems to be in focus. This is good for a digital photo notebook like your camera phone. But if you want to go a little more on the artsy side, you may want to ensure that the subject is neatly focused and leaving the background in a warm fuzzy light. This is more difficult with APS-C sensors than with full frame sensors. However, you have to admit that this is a mixed advantage. For example, macro photography is always lacking in depth of field. APS-C has been bringing a little advantage here.

Also, APS-C sensors being smaller, they tend to crop the image. So, the standard 50mm lens you used on the old analog camera looks like it is giving you the same image as your old 75mm or 80mm short tele lens when mounted on a Digital SLR camera. This is what is called the crop factor. Depending on your camera (or, more precisely, its sensor), it gives you a small conversion factor (1.6 for most Canon EOS, 1.5 for most Sony and Nikon). This is a nightmare for people in love with wide angle lenses and wide panoramas (it’s becoming more and more difficult to get a wide angle lens: super wide 16mm now looks like a wide 24mm). Many nature landscape photographers suffer from that change. However, being a wildlife photographer myself, I admit that this can be good too: My collection of tele-lenses got a boost going from Minolta analog to Sony digital; The latest addition, a 400mm f/4.5, is nearly exactly equivalent on my Sony Alpha 700 to a 600mm f/4.5 on the old Minolta Maxxum 9xi but it is about half the weight and half the price). Not everybody can be happy with that.

The dark side of the Full Frame

But there are also very bad aspects of these large Full Frame sensors. First, we already said that electronics manufacturing is utterly sensitive to surface. The larger a chip, the more expensive. And not only because of the added material. Defects on a silicon chip tend to be spread quite evenly on its surface. The larger it is, the more defects you have, the more difficult it becomes to manufacture, the more parts you have to scrap (if your chip is twice bigger, a single defect will kill it, but on a smaller one, you would get one good chip and one bad one). Price increase has long been so large that it is not mentionable. Now, things are a bit easier, but… it’s expensive.

Also to mention, bigger sensors mean bigger cameras (your phone camera is small because its photo sensor is small). Bigger means heavier. There is a definite difference between a 300g camera body and 800g camera body. Keep it for more than an hour while shooting! Some photographers may not really care (I often hold a camera behind a lens that is more than 2kg -I previously mentioned a 400mm lens of 2.9kg- and I’ve got used to it but many people would not even think about it. The first time I bought a second-hand Sigma 400mm/5.6 the previous owner was selling it because he had a back ache prohibiting to use it).

But you could also say that you don’t really care if the image is good. And here comes the size of the lens again. To cover the full surface of a Full Frame sensor you need a lens that is large enough for that. It must also be of perfect quality to the extreme corner of the image. But if you get the light in all corners you also have to ensure that the light rays are not suffering from too many angled paths through the lens. If you do not make sure of this during the design, it’s easy to get a correct lens for APS-C, but a pitifully bad one for Full Frame. Quite often, these are difficult goals to reach and you get vignetting (the corners of the image are a little darker than the center) and soft corners (zones that are not as crisp as the center of the image). The larger the sensor, the more difficult to make a good lens for it (again). You go to the pro-quality lenses. Again, there is a price hike and added weight on the scale.

So what?

In the end, the choice to go Full Frame is currently reserved to prosumers or top-flight amateurs or even pro photographers. But we have to keep in mind that the trend will be going there just to keep the quality while other factors are climbing. Don’t believe that electronics progress will remove all limits (diffraction is an optical phenomenon we have to live with). Not everybody will have to go there, but Full Frame is there to stay.

You may not want to invest in Full Frame, but you must take that into account when you buy a lens. Many cheap lenses are only able to serve APS-C sensors. While this was a sensible investment (pay less for the same service), remember that a good lens is supposed to live much longer than your camera (digital cameras have gone the way of computers: 2-year obsolescence is the standard). This is why so many Full Frame (even second-hand) lenses are keeping a high market price. This is why Sony and Carl Zeiss still only manufacture lenses able to work on both APS-C and FF.

When I buy a tele lens, I tend to pay a hefty price on second-hand hardware (more than 2000 Euros on the old second-hand Minolta APO G High-Speed 400mm f/4.5 I got from eBay). I intend to keep that much longer than the Sony Alpha 700 and the Konica-Minolta Dynax/Maxxum 7D I use as SLR bodies behind it. If (and I say if) I go and buy the future Sony Alpha 900 Full Frame camera which is supposed to be available some time this year, possibly at the end of the Summer 2008, all my lenses will still be compatible with this camera body.

So, even if you don’t care about the added quality, think about the rest of your investment in the context of Full Frame sensors.