# Coming Tech & More [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 11, 2011)

```
<div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/08/coming-tech-more-cr2/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/08/coming-tech-more-cr2/"></a></div>
<p><strong>What’s in store for 2012?

</strong>I’m told the following technology will be appearing in Canon DSLR products in 2012.</p>
<ul>
<li>OLED Screen</li>
<li>Massive jump in dynamic range</li>
<li>4:2:2 Video (No RAW)</li>
<li>Big bump in battery life</li>
</ul>
<p>If I could hypothesize, that looks like a 5D Mark II replacement or upgrade.</p>
<p><strong>New Product Meetings

</strong>A couple of reports around the globe about Canon showing new products to reps and higher end dealers.</p>
<p><strong>EF 300 f/2.8L IS II

</strong>There are a couple of reports that the new 300 f/2.8L IS II we be starting to Ã‚Â become available in very small numbers relatively soon. Before the end of August prehaps.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## outsider (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

Does "massive jump in dynamic range" translate at all into cleaner images at higher iso?

Is there any relationship between iso and dynamic range?


----------



## awinphoto (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

Interesting... but I was already holding my breath on some of the other rumors... I dont know if i have any more ability to hold any more for this one.


----------



## Lawliet (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



outsider said:


> Is there any relationship between iso and dynamic range?



As a secondary effect. At a given base sensitivity more DR allows you to draw more data out from shadows. Think of th H-modes.

But once you're photon limited the only way to increase DR is by lowering the base sensitivity, expect a glass ceiling.


----------



## motorhead (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

I assume we can expect the improved DR to be offered to all Canon cameras as the various models are upgraded. Its the best news I've heard in a while as DR has been the stumbling block with digital.


----------



## -zero- (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

Can't wait to see what they mean by "massive" is it 1, 2 or dare I say 3 stops of improved DR

OLED is also very welcome, I can already imagine the screen of my Galaxy S on a canon camera (drool)
an OLED screen will also help with battery life

this is CR2 so it's still not confirmed but very plausible


----------



## EYEONE (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



-zero- said:


> Can't wait to see what they mean by "massive" is it 1, 2 or dare I say 3 stops of improved DR
> 
> OLED is also very welcome, I can already imagine the screen of my Galaxy S on a canon camera (drool)
> an OLED screen will also help with battery life
> ...



OLEDs use less power and look nice but typically don't do well in bright ambient light situations. Unless they have improved a lot on OLED would not be fun to try to see outside. Well, the normal LCD isn't that much fun either actually.


----------



## Lawliet (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

If only the AR properties of the display are good, gets you much further then a bit of brightness.


----------



## Shnookums (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

Please... I just hope that all this new technology will make it to the next 1D(s)... When the 7D as announce it has new stuff like better metering, LCD viewfinder, etc... None of which has made it in the 1DIV.

Why doesn't Canon take some calculated risk with it's flagship cameras? The 1DII, 1DIII and 1DIV are all the same except for ISO, resolution and LCD screen size upgrade...


----------



## Lawliet (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

At the same time unlock the AF-point linked spot metering in the 7D. The sensors can do it...


----------



## kubelik (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



-zero- said:


> Can't wait to see what they mean by "massive" is it 1, 2 or dare I say 3 stops of improved DR
> 
> OLED is also very welcome, I can already imagine the screen of my Galaxy S on a canon camera (drool)
> an OLED screen will also help with battery life
> ...



1.5 real stops over the 5D mark II sensor would be fantastic by me. I'll even take 1 usable stop, if the IQ is increasing at the same time.

also, if canon is really taking 35mm to the ~30MP range, I hope the AA filter is being weakened or removed. as medium format shooters have noticed, moire really drops off as your resolution increases; I can't see it being a huge issue if we are shooting 32 MP images


----------



## Gothmoth (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



kubelik said:


> also, if canon is really taking 35mm to the ~30MP range, I hope the AA filter is being weakened or removed. as medium format shooters have noticed, moire really drops off as your resolution increases; I can't see it being a huge issue if we are shooting 32 MP images



and if moire is a problem on some images canÂ´t it be removed via software afterwards?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



kubelik said:


> also, if canon is really taking 35mm to the ~30MP range, I hope the AA filter is being weakened or removed. as medium format shooters have noticed, moire really drops off as your resolution increases; I can't see it being a huge issue if we are shooting 32 MP images



32MP FF is less density than the current APS-C cameras and they still use AA filters, and they use them for good reason


----------



## Super Mario (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

These are not 5D MKII specs, these are specs that all models will have.


----------



## gene_can_sing (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

4:2:2 is GREAT for video. Just hope it comes out sooner than later.


----------



## WarStreet (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



motorhead said:


> I assume we can expect the improved DR to be offered to all Canon cameras as the various models are upgraded. Its the best news I've heard in a while as DR has been the stumbling block with digital.



Agree ! Improving the biggest weakness in comparison to film, is the best move.


----------



## lcdsantos (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

Nothing about a new speedlight???

SpeedlightÂ´s rumors to a 580EX replacement (680EX, 700EX...) started more than one year ago.

And I see nothing on the horizon line...

I want need to buy a new speedlight (I have just one very very old 380EX) and donÂ´t wanna invest on an 580EX2 if a 700EX is soon to be lauched...


----------



## bvukich (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



kubelik said:


> also, if canon is really taking 35mm to the ~30MP range, I hope the AA filter is being weakened or removed. as medium format shooters have noticed, moire really drops off as your resolution increases; I can't see it being a huge issue if we are shooting 32 MP images



Ditto. At the resolutions we're getting to, for stills moire should _almost_ be a non-issue. It's video where you'll see the problems, unless they are doing binning instead of line skipping, which _should_ help. All the more reason though, to split the line into great video with acceptable stills, and great stills with acceptable video. It will probably take a couple generations before we can have both in the same camera (but I hope they prove me wrong).



Gothmoth said:


> and if moire is a problem on some images canÂ´t it be removed via software afterwards?



Unfortunately, not really. You can often do it manually and get acceptable results, but only because a human knows what it should look like, and can tweak until it looks usable. Many of the obstacles to removing moire in software are the same as de-interlacing video. You can do it, but you have to both invent, and throw out data. Never a good thing when quality is concerned, and it will never be as good as getting clean source data.


----------



## kubelik (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



LetTheRightLensIn said:


> kubelik said:
> 
> 
> > also, if canon is really taking 35mm to the ~30MP range, I hope the AA filter is being weakened or removed. as medium format shooters have noticed, moire really drops off as your resolution increases; I can't see it being a huge issue if we are shooting 32 MP images
> ...



from everything I've heard from Leica M9 shooters, the prevalence of moire effects occurring in photos is grossly exaggerated. and that's only an 18 MP full frame camera. so I'm not sure that I buy the idea that 32 MP isn't sufficient to make moire a non-issue in 99% of situations.

also, the supposition that moire is read at an absolute level and not a relative is incorrect. for the purposes of moire, an 18 MP APS-C sensor is ... an 18 MP sensor, not a 46 MP-equivalent sensor. an 18 MP full frame and 18 MP APS-C shooting the exact same image (in terms of framing) will exhibit the exact same amount of moire. a 32 MP sensor, whether APS-C or FF, will perform better than either 18 MP sensor.


----------



## 60D User (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



EYEONE said:


> -zero- said:
> 
> 
> > Can't wait to see what they mean by "massive" is it 1, 2 or dare I say 3 stops of improved DR
> ...




OLED screens do very well in bright ambient light situations. Much much better than an LCD would do, all while saving battery as well. The OLED screen on my phone when I am outside at high noon, I can turn the brightness up and it is as clear as day. This is a great addition for cameras.


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

Chuck Westfall is on the record saying OLED was "coming soon," back in 2009. That was after a 2007 acquisition of Tokki Corporation and a decision to "accelerate" OLED development in that year. Considering that OLED appears to be rolling out on a variety of devices now, I'd say it doesn't sound crazy at all. Probably the one "rumor" I've seen recently that I think is certain to translate to reality. A bit different from the SEDtv debacle.

Personally I'm still holding out hope for 


bvukich said:


> It's video where you'll see the problems, unless they are doing binning instead of line skipping, which _should_ help. All the more reason though, to split the line into great video with acceptable stills, and great stills with acceptable video.


Of course, the AA filter has really no impact at all on video moire - since (so far) the line more-than-skipping approach is the only one that there has been the data throughput and processing capability to utilize. I suppose that, going forward, they will have to start using at least some binning (maybe in conjunction with line skipping) else you won't see any improvement in dead / hot pixel effects, and moire certainly won't improve if they continue sampling a fixed resolution from an ever-growing number of pixels on the sensor. Hopefully the new DIGIC will represent a leap forward in that area.


----------



## Canihaspicture (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

Dear Canon: If you can give me 14+ stops of DR then I will be your new best friend. Thanks (fingers crossed)


----------



## bwhitz (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



gene_can_sing said:


> 4:2:2 is GREAT for video. Just hope it comes out sooner than later.



+1

If Canon uses their 4:2:2 50mb/s Mjpeg codec (which they probably will, since they don't want to license AVCHD from Sony/Panasonic) with 12-14 stops of DR... they are going to absolutely destroy every sub-$50,000 video device on the market. It will basically be a mini-Arri Alexa for around $3500. Not to mention the FF sensor, which is an amazing look not equaled by ANY other video medium besides Imax. Those "Proper video camera" guys will have to kiss the F3,FS100, and AF-100 goodbye... ;D


----------



## Stuart (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

a multi level sensor i hope.


----------



## bvukich (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



Edwin Herdman said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > It's video where you'll see the problems, unless they are doing binning instead of line skipping, which _should_ help. All the more reason though, to split the line into great video with acceptable stills, and great stills with acceptable video.
> ...



Good point, the frequency cutoff on the AA filter is way to high to have any tangible effect on video unless you were just cropping to get the pixels you need. Binning really is the way to go. You can bin semi-sanely from 8k->4k->2k, you just end up with a tiny crop factor up or down because of the non-sane resolution progression between each.

<videoresolutionrant>
They should have let an engineer come up with the standard resolutions. As it is now they can't even decide on a standard horizontal resolution for 4k.

If I were king...
Spec at academy ratio, and crop down the vertical as desired:
2k	2048x1536	3.1 MP
4k	4096x3072	12.6 MP
8k	8192x6144	50.3 MP
16k	16384x12288	201.3 MP

</videoresolutionrant>


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Aug 11, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

Good point on the resolution. At the price points of even "2K" video projectors and cameras, though, I think the real driver has probably been old-fashioned industry rivalry. Hey, if you ain't got 70mm you're nobody! Then there's the real name of the Sony sound standard "SDDS" ..."still doesn't do $&@!" All more headaches for projectionists. Of course, consumers have been thankfully insulated from a lot of this, mainly because modern computer / display hardwares are becoming sophisticated enough to stretch most content invisibly to the consumer and to a more or less reasonable degree of quality.


----------



## FredBGG (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

"massive jump in dynamic range" 
This would be very interesting, but it would be silly if this "massive jump in dynamic range" were not included in the flagship camera.


----------



## gferdinandsen (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

Honestly, the only thing I care about in that rumour is DR. Battery life is not a big deal, and I don't shoot video. Even extra MP is just pushing the limits, my PXMIA 9500 can't even print a 21.3 MP print at 100%, and I have only ever once printed something larger (a scan printedd at 18x24)...none the less, I have a friend who will buy my 5D2, so I guess I will get a 5D3 when availaible.


----------



## kubelik (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



gferdinandsen said:


> Honestly, the only thing I care about in that rumour is DR. Battery life is not a big deal, and I don't shoot video. Even extra MP is just pushing the limits, my PXMIA 9500 can't even print a 21.3 MP print at 100%, and I have only ever once printed something larger (a scan printedd at 18x24)...none the less, I have a friend who will buy my 5D2, so I guess I will get a 5D3 when availaible.



plenty of folks here print larger than that ... much larger. it would be great not to have to stitch multiple images together to get 24x36 or 30x40 prints, especially when its not landscapes but buildings you're photographing


----------



## Super Mario (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



bvukich said:


> Good point, the frequency cutoff on the AA filter is way to high to have any tangible effect on video unless you were just cropping to get the pixels you need. Binning really is the way to go. You can bin semi-sanely from 8k->4k->2k, you just end up with a tiny crop factor up or down because of the non-sane resolution progression between each.
> 
> <videoresolutionrant>
> They should have let an engineer come up with the standard resolutions. As it is now they can't even decide on a standard horizontal resolution for 4k.
> ...


You shouldn't really worry about that since 1080p on Canon cameras is "fake 1080p" and in reality closer to 720p. Lets just wait if they can come up with a real 1080p first.


----------



## gkreis (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



gferdinandsen said:


> Honestly, the only thing I care about in that rumour is DR.


I still have my old trusty 40D as I wait out the 7D,60D, etc. family of sensors. If they can give a big jump in DR with a tech improvement that is introduced across the sensor lines then I will be TICKLED! My wait will be worth it. Give us even lower noise and 2 stops more in DR and I am finally going to own a 7D2.... drats... I am hooked in the Rumors again.

Oh no......


----------



## NotABunny (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



Lawliet said:


> But once you're photon limited the only way to increase DR is by lowering the base sensitivity, expect a glass ceiling.



A DRAMATIC increase in dynamic range (and reduction in noise) can be achieved with tricks like multiple ISO readings of the same exposure. Of course, if they only mean a dramatic increase then maybe they have some fancy tech that does it.




-zero- said:


> OLED is also very welcome, I can already imagine the screen of my Galaxy S on a canon camera (drool)



That's what I was expecting they meant with "surprise", something not to big, not too small. SAMOLED+ is bloody brilliant on my SGS2. Of course, on a photo camera there may be other requirements in terms of color calibration (especially over time).

I have no idea how the LCDs from the 7D / 60D look in direct sun light, but my display is usable, at least on par with similar LCD based PDAs from the competition.


----------



## Stuart (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

Battery life is very useful for continuas video use.


----------



## Flake (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

If they are going to use an OLED back light I do hope they manage to put a decent one in. Apple crippled the iMac by using a cheap OLED which has a narrow Gamut and a response which is anything by linear. By comparison Dells U2711 uses the same panel but has a conventional back light & is a supreme performer. There's more to a back light than many people think!

More battery life is nice but not if that involves me having to change all the LP-E6 batteries and replace them with larger ones like the NP-E3

More dynamic range is always welcome, but I'll not be selling the ND grads just yet!

As for video I don't use it a great deal (not normally professional but some do want it) but any progress is welcome.


----------



## AG (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



Flake said:


> If they are going to use an OLED back light I do hope they manage to put a decent one in. Apple crippled the iMac by using a cheap OLED which has a narrow Gamut and a response which is anything by linear. By comparison Dells U2711 uses the same panel but has a conventional back light & is a supreme performer. There's more to a back light than many people think!



Um you may want to check your details on that claim. 

As far back as i can remember Apple have been Anti OLED


----------



## senduran (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



AG said:


> Flake said:
> 
> 
> > If they are going to use an OLED back light I do hope they manage to put a decent one in. Apple crippled the iMac by using a cheap OLED
> ...



Err, you're both talking nonsense. Firstly there's no such thing as an OLED back light. OLED displays do not have backlights. Apple use LED backlights in their LCD monitors.

Secondly, OLED is relatively new tech and only available cheaply in small sizes, so is "as far back as [you] can remember" only 1-3 years? Apple have never been "anti" OLED, the tech just isn't mature enough yet. Apple is _eager_ to use OLED, what with their multiple patents needing them.

On-topic, for those who actually know what an OLED display _is_, it's a great feature to look forward to on Canon cameras.


----------



## -zero- (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



Super Mario said:


> You shouldn't really worry about that since 1080p on Canon cameras is "fake 1080p" and in reality closer to 720p. Lets just wait if they can come up with a real 1080p first.



Care to explain that?


----------



## kubelik (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



senduran said:


> AG said:
> 
> 
> > Flake said:
> ...



yep. OLEDs can be done well or poorly, just like LCDs and LEDs. done well, OLEDs provide excellent viewing and save on weight and size, as well a energy consumption, which is critical when we're talking about the back screen on a DSLR. chimpers rejoice.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



-zero- said:


> Super Mario said:
> 
> 
> > You shouldn't really worry about that since 1080p on Canon cameras is "fake 1080p" and in reality closer to 720p. Lets just wait if they can come up with a real 1080p first.
> ...



I would also like an explanation of the 'closer to 720p' part. Is the 'p' part fake? With Canon camcorders, when you record at 30p or 24p, it's really recording at 60i but outputing 30p/24p. But you're still getting the full 1920x1080 resolution, so I have no idea where the 720 statement comes from.


----------



## NotABunny (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

I would say that the gamut of the SAMOLED+ on SGS2 is (about) aRGB because I can compare it to my NEC desktop (which is about 98/99 % aRGB).

(In OLED, the pixel itself is emitting light, which means that black has virtually no light loss - there actually is some when the display is totally black and seen in total darkness.)


----------



## NormanBates (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

About DR:
Here's what I'd do: add two new colors to the bayer pattern, white (clear) and black (nd), and move from the current RGGB to something like RGGBWWWKK with a 3x3 basic structure. This should deliver both clean shadows (thanks to W) and safe highlights (thanks to K)

About 720p:
It's a well documented fact that the 1080p video that Canon dslrs deliver comes from upsampling the image that results from the line skipping process, which is much closer to 720p than to 1080p (and that's definitely p, as in "not interlaced, otherwise I wouldn't even touch it")


----------



## bwhitz (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



neuroanatomist said:


> -zero- said:
> 
> 
> > Super Mario said:
> ...



1080p is only a format... the actually resolved detail of the "1080p file" the Canon DSLRs record is only around 720p. This is actually fairly common in video cameras though... most video cameras that RECORD 1080p, come up short from the mark. If you get a chance to... go shoot with a GH2. I've got one along with my 7D and the difference in detail is INSANE!!! The GH2 is true and fully-resolved 1080p... it has nearly double the detail when viewing full-screen. If Canon can do this with their 4:2:2 50mb/s codec and a FF sensor... then they are going to seriously dominate. I'll probably buy two of the MarkIII's if it's true.


----------



## gkreis (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



NormanBates said:


> About DR:
> Here's what I'd do: add two new colors to the bayer pattern, white (clear) and black (nd), and move from the current RGGB to something like RGGBWWWKK with a 3x3 basic structure. This should deliver both clean shadows (thanks to W) and safe highlights (thanks to K)



I've always wondered if you couldn't just have staggered RGGBs, if their size was small enough and bias their exposures so one set is giving you an offset exposure at the same time as the other set. That would mean then that you would need 20 or 30mpx to get effectively 10mpx. So if you have a tech that offers super high density with decent noise performance, you could effectively take two or three photos at once with offset exposures that would be merged in camera to a lower res shot with high DR, right? Am I nuts? Did I just give away a patent idea? ;-)


----------



## motorhead (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

chrome_dude,

That sounds like something I thought at least one camera is already doing. Combining 3 images to produce a better DR final product. I'm just not sure which camera which shows how daft I am!

It's certainly a useful trick for static or nearly static scenes.


----------



## bwhitz (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



chrome_dude said:


> NormanBates said:
> 
> 
> > About DR:
> ...



I think Fujifilm has a patent on a sensor like this... not sure if it exists yet though.


----------



## Rocky (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



chrome_dude said:


> NormanBates said:
> 
> 
> > About DR:
> ...


Fujifilm digital camera with EXR sensor is just doing that. They stagger two pixel of the same color sensitivity next to each other. So it is RR GG GG BB. In HDR mode, one pixel is over exposed while the other one is under exposed. Then they are comined to give us HDR. Also they can be independent of each other to give us high resolution or they can combine two pixel of the same color(next to each other ) to become a larger pixel to give us low noise.


----------



## NotABunny (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



chrome_dude said:


> take two or three photos at once with offset exposures that would be merged in camera to a lower res shot with high DR, right? Am I nuts? Did I just give away a patent idea? ;-)



Don't worry. It has been talked about right here, and both RED and Fuji already have working sensors that work in a similar way. But these are for kids (= only two exposures are taken), they are just the tip of the iceberg. Canon and Sony have more resources to pull this off in a complete / consumer way by using multi-ISO readings.

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2011/06/09/red-epic-5k-and-hdrx/


----------



## gene_can_sing (Aug 12, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



bwhitz said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > -zero- said:
> ...



The funny thing is to do fully resolved 1080p is not hard at all to do, as Panasonic and Sony have already shown. Canon could have done it with Digic 4, but choose not too probably because of the added expense.

But yeah, if they do release a true 1080p camera with 4:2:2 on a full frame (which should not be hard at all, especially with Digic 5), the competition will be TOAST.

They just need to release the camera someday.


----------



## AG (Aug 13, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



senduran said:


> Err, you're both talking nonsense. Firstly there's no such thing as an OLED back light. OLED displays do not have backlights. Apple use LED backlights in their LCD monitors.
> 
> Secondly, OLED is relatively new tech and only available cheaply in small sizes, so is "as far back as [you] can remember" only 1-3 years? Apple have never been "anti" OLED, the tech just isn't mature enough yet. Apple is _eager_ to use OLED, what with their multiple patents needing them.
> 
> On-topic, for those who actually know what an OLED display _is_, it's a great feature to look forward to on Canon cameras.



OLED has been around since the late 60's in some format. It was not until the early 2000's that manufacturers like Samsung started claiming that they were able to produce 50" OLED screens on mass (2004) for the television market.

So saying that its "new tech" is blatantly wrong.

Sure it may be fine when used in mobile phone screens but for pure resolution LED LCD still beats it. This may change in the future as the tech develops.

The link that you provide is from a web site called "OLED info" of course they are going to say things to talk up their product of choice. And basing such claims on a patent listing from Feb 2011 means that Apple have looked into doing this but there is nothing to say that they have decided to stick with the idea.

Geez if you want to actually read what patents are being listed daily for Apple products you may want to check http://www.patentlyapple.com/ then you can see that a LOT of what is filed for never comes to fruition.

As for your last comment i for one DEFINITELY do not want an OLED screen on my Canon camera. I would prefer a "retina" style resolution LED LCD instead. But then again thats why they invented EVF's for video, making the screen just for previews not detail.


----------



## pedro (Aug 13, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

@Rocky:

how likely is it, that canon implement the forementioned sensor type in one of their next bodies? I'd love to see a 40+MP 5Diii / iv then, providing near perfect ISO 100k. or if that is too much of wishful thinking: ISO 51200 ;-)


----------



## Super Mario (Aug 13, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



neuroanatomist said:


> I would also like an explanation of the 'closer to 720p' part. Is the 'p' part fake? With Canon camcorders, when you record at 30p or 24p, it's really recording at 60i but outputing 30p/24p. But you're still getting the full 1920x1080 resolution, so I have no idea where the 720 statement comes from.


Others answered already, but the 1080p stops resolving information after 720p. It's basicly upscaled 720p. If you take any 720p video and upscale it to 1080p, the video is 1080p but it only has the information of the original 720p video.


----------



## Rocky (Aug 13, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



pedro said:


> @Rocky:
> 
> how likely is it, that canon implement the forementioned sensor type in one of their next bodies? I'd love to see a 40+MP 5Diii / iv then, providing near perfect ISO 100k. or if that is too much of wishful thinking: ISO 51200 ;-)


I have no idea. However, My guess is that it might never happen. I am sure that Fuji is having the pattern right on the EXR sensor and its implementation. Fuji may not even want to licience it to anyone else.


----------



## NotABunny (Aug 13, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



AG said:


> As for your last comment i for one DEFINITELY do not want an OLED screen on my Canon camera. I would prefer a "retina" style resolution LED LCD instead. But then again thats why they invented EVF's for video, making the screen just for previews not detail.



I take it you've never seen SGS2 side by side with an iPhone4, showing an aRGB photo (indoors). The SAMOLED+ wipes the floor with the LCD in terms of black level, gamut and sharpness, even though it's significantly bigger. Why sharpness? Maybe it's just the percevied sharpness caused by the different contrasts, maybe it's because of the filters put in front of the LCD, maybe it's just the software viewer (which only shows that differences are given by software, not hardware, so the hardware is not so important).

Of course, only Canon knows what their OLED looks like.


----------



## gkreis (Aug 14, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



Rocky said:


> Fujifilm digital camera with EXR sensor is just doing that. They stagger two pixel of the same color sensitivity next to each other. So it is RR GG GG BB. In HDR mode, one pixel is over exposed while the other one is under exposed. Then they are comined to give us HDR. Also they can be independent of each other to give us high resolution or they can combine two pixel of the same color(next to each other ) to become a larger pixel to give us low noise.



Wow... I need to read up on that... sounds sweet.


----------



## senduran (Aug 14, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*



AG said:


> OLED has been around since the late 60's in some format. It was not until the early 2000's that manufacturers like Samsung started claiming that they were able to produce 50" OLED screens on mass (2004) for the television market.



All of which is irrelevant. Perhaps I should have said "recently commercialised tech". The point being, you can't have thought a company was "anti" a tech just because it wasn't yet commercially viable and wasn't being using by _anybody_.

It's like claiming Canon are anti-fuelcells because a) they haven't used them in any of their products, and b) the concept has been around for over 100 years. Well, no. When fuel-cells are commercially viable for small electronics, Canon may well use them.



> The link that you provide is from a web site called "OLED info" of course they are going to say things to talk up their product of choice. And basing such claims on a patent listing from Feb 2011 means that Apple have looked into doing this but there is nothing to say that they have decided to stick with the idea.
> 
> Geez if you want to actually read what patents are being listed daily for Apple products you may want to check http://www.patentlyapple.com/ then you can see that a LOT of what is filed for never comes to fruition.



All of which is also irrelevant. I've proven that they've at least considered OLED, so they are either neutral or "pro" OLED. All you have is your completely unsupported claim that they are "anti" OLED. Since your reply consisted of multiple paragraphs or irrelevant non-argument, I'll go ahead and assume you were just making that claim up. Hint: the only way to win your argument is to link a statement by Apply that says something negative about OLED.



> As for your last comment i for one DEFINITELY do not want an OLED screen on my Canon camera. I would prefer a "retina" style resolution LED LCD instead.



And if they made an OLED with the same pixel density as a retina display? As I quite accurately pointed out, OLED is still relatively (compared to LCD) new tech, but it's perfectly capable of catching up with LCD on resolution (or rather, cost) if someone invests the money. In all other respects (other than lifetime, which isn't a limiting factor for a DSLR camera screen) it is inherently superior to LCD, and the better contrast and lack of need for glass frontage and subsequent anti-reflective coating should easily make it a better bet for usage in outdoor sun.


----------



## catz (Aug 15, 2011)

*Re: Coming Tech & More [CR2]*

422 video with real 1080p without aliasing/moire would be really nice. Based on my personal testing, the 5D resolves significantly more than the 7D, but still it is not true 1080p. This is also evident on the recent Zacuto test. 
http://www.zacuto.com/the-great-camera-shootout-2011/episode-two

The problem for Canon is though that the cinematography folks are already buying Sony FS100 and Sony F3 and leaving Canon behind - the ideal release time for 5D mk III with this would have been early this year and not early next year. And from technological standpoint should have been feasible target for some big corporation like Canon. The Zacuto test kind of illustrates how ridiculously low the resolution really is on the Canon DSLR video compared to a competition with cinematography cameras. I think the low resolution, aliasing and moire are the biggest problems in Canon DSLR video at the moment. 

Well, at least I may buy the 5D mark III then if it lives to the hype in video quality because I am not in financial situation at the moment to both purchase FS100 or F3 and then also possibly replace my lens collection at the same time. I rather want EF-mount version and I am hoping it someday arrives. But Canon has succeeded to disappoint before, like 1D MKIV has really poor resolution compared to 5D mk II video and it came after 5D mk II. The aliasing is more severe and the resolution is barely SD. You can also see that by yourself in Zacuto test (link above). In other words it got worse. What guarantee there is that it does not get worse again with the 5D mark III if they treat the video as worthless add-on feature where consumer grade is ok and no professional quality is required.

And also I want to shoot still photographs and video with the same camera because I could not carry around when traveling both. I am already exceeding the limits of carry-on luggage in airlines. Last time it was quite tricky, they almost forced me to put expensive and fragile camera equipment to check-in luggage (where they would have been got destroyed most likely as a freelance/hobbyist I do not have heavy-duty camera cases for this purpose, and even if I did, what guarantee there would be that they would arrive undamaged and I would not anyway have more allowance for check-in luggage than the 20kg limit (44 lbs) - on my last travel they had opened my check-in bag possibly because they saw the steadicam and rig in the X-ray, if bag gets inspected, what guarantee there is that it is properly packed again and there will be no damage to fragile glass and the interiors are carefully inspected rather than just thrown back). I can barely get the 5D with lenses in the check-in luggage but it would be about impossible with the size and weight of Sony F3 (or Canon equivalent, if such camcorder would surface). I would prefer the DSLR form factor, otherwise the agility will be greatly reduced and I would no longer be able to document my travels even if I could make perfect video with it at home. A EF-mount DSLR which would do 422 or even better 444 video with real 1080p would be excellent replacement for my 5d MK II. If it had HDMI output with clean 444 it would be even better, then I would use Atomos Ninja to record the stream and I would get ProRes files directly without time consuming transcoding from h264 to ProRes before editing. Then if this camera would have higher video resolutions than 1080p, it would be nice of course. With 4K one can shoot exceptionally perfect and sharp 1080p, even if the 4K had some aliasing problems etc., the delivery format being 1080p would mask the problems that can be seen on 4K monitor.

What it comes to OLED: cinematography people are using external monitors anyway. The internal monitor being OLED would be nice, but it is not a killer feature that would make to buy the camera. There are many high resolution OLED displays out already in Samsung and Nokia phones (like Nokia N9 MeeGo phone) and it would be quite possible for such display to be on a camera. However, end results are most important from camera and for manual focus pulls in video a bigger monitor is very much necessary, for me it is almost indifferent if the display was OLED or not. Also the still pictures from the current 5D mark II are about good enough and even if there was some room for improvement, it does not make me to do urgent upgrade. If the still section would upgrade, but video section would remain the same or get worse (like in the case of 1D MK IV happened), that would not make me to do upgrade. Perhaps I would need to start considering the plastic ugly GH2 and go for M42 despite of the drawbacks of the smaller sensor then. I would dislike that, but if Canon would not upgrade video for 422 + no aliasing/moire + real 1080p resolution (resolving full 540 line pairs vertically and 960 line pairs horizontally), it would be like a message from Canon "We don't want you. Go for Panasonic now and put the hack on it to make it a proper video camera".


----------

