New Canon - wow.

wxwax

Unconfirmed reports of a new Canon .... the next generation of the G5, I guess. It's the Powershot Pro 1.





Details: 8 megapixels, image stabilization, a 28-200L f2.4-f3.5 lens that's supposed to be extremely high quality. Maybe that's why it's not cheap. 1,200 Euros, which is about $1500 I think, although someone said they've already placed a US order for $1,000. Quite expensive, but a nice piece of gear. This would be Canon's answer to Sony's f828. I wonder if it will sway folks away from dSLRs with its combination of quality and portability (assuming its as good as it sounds.)


Also on the dpreview rumormill is a wild sounding Point-and-Shoot, the Powershot S1: 3.2 megapixels, a 38-380mm lens with image stabilization (!) for 600 Euros, about $750 if the price is the same here.

patch29

The new Canon cameras are on dpreview now. They look nice but no 10D replacement? I wonder if they are waiting for Photokina in the fall? I cannot imagine they can wait that long once Nikon's D70 comes out. Perhaps they will surprise us later, but they typically release all the new PMA cameras and info at once. The 1DmkII being an exception because they wanted to have it at the superbowl.

The PowerShot Pro 1 looks like a great all around camera, and sized well for motorcycle traveling.

wxwax

patch29 wrote:

The PowerShot Pro 1 looks like a great all around camera, and sized well for motorcycle traveling.

I wonder if it will suffer from the same noise problems as the Sonyf828, from jamming so many pixels on the same size sensor?

cletus

wxwax wrote:

I wonder if it will suffer from the same noise problems as the Sonyf828, from jamming so many pixels on the same size sensor?

That is the big question. Same goes for the new Nikon CP 8700 as well as the Canon S500. I'm afraid we've reached the point where the pixel count in the upper end compact cameras has more to do with marketing than making better images.

pathfinder

wxwax wrote:

I wonder if it will suffer from the same noise problems as the Sonyf828, from jamming so many pixels on the same size sensor?

I have seen others voice concerns about the imaging chip size and its inherent noise - here is a link to download full size images of the new Canon PowerSHot Pro1 digicamera with the L lens on it --

http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/s1is/sample.html

I was impressed by the absence of chromatic aberration and noise and the clarity of the color. But the images were at ISO 50. Be interested in seeing ISO 800 images..........

cletus

Rather than sensor noise, I've got my doubts about the lens. I know that it's supposed to be good, but I'm having a hard time believing that Canon, Nikon, or anyone else could build a lens that could do all this:

• Wide zoom range (28-200)
• Fast (f2.4 - 3.5)
• Compact
• Fairly low cost - Considering all the other stuff that has to go into a camera like the Pro-1, the lens can't be too expensive if the whole package sells for $1500 or less.
• Image quality to take advantage of an eight megapixel sensor.

Regardless, the Pro-1 is going to be a great camera, and I'm sure it will be a big leap over the G5 and the Nikon 5700 (it's probably going to be a much better camera than the Nikon 8700).

wxwax

pathfinder wrote:

I was impressed by the absence of chromatic aberration and noise and the clarity of the color. But the images were at ISO 50. Be interested in seeing ISO 800 images..........

Or even 200 or 400... where the Sony is having problems. Those shots didn't really lend themselves to CA, IMHO. Not enough contrast, even on the second one. Gorgeous color. Fingers crossed the camera's all that we want it to be.

Hey wait a minute, why do I care? Patch is getting me a 1DmkII.

fish

I'm sorry, but I just don't understand why the market needs a $1500 fixed lens camera.

wxwax

fish wrote:

I'm sorry, but I just don't understand why the market needs a $1500 fixed lens camera.

Well, it looks like it's closer to $1,000. And it's light and portable. The proud owner will have all the glass they need in a single purchase.

You could argue the reverse, actually. Why would anyone spend $1500 on a heavy, bulky camera body, then another $1500 on lenses, when they can get close to the same end product in a more convenient package?

gus

What i need to know is why do we need 8 MP ?? And dont say in some airy fairy voice that you can make good prints with them !

If you want prints dont you use raw or tiff ?

Im lucky to take my 5 MP off 2 MP.

wxwax

Actually, I don't think you do need 8mp, unless you want to make large prints. That's why some folks make fun of the megapixel race between manufacturers. The megapixels have become the de facto marketing measure of a camera's worth, for better or for worse.

fish

wxwax wrote:

Well, it looks like it's closer to $1,000. And it's light and portable. The proud owner will have all the glass they need in a single purchase.

You could argue the reverse, actually. Why would anyone spend $1500 on a heavy, bulky camera body, then another $1500 on lenses, when they can get close to the same end product in a more convenient package?

flexibility. and coolness.

wxwax

pathfinder wrote:

I have seen others voice concerns about the imaging chip size and its inherent noise - here is a link to download full size images of the new Canon PowerSHot Pro1 digicamera with the L lens on it --

http://www.powershot.com/powershot2/s1is/sample.html

I was impressed by the absence of chromatic aberration and noise and the clarity of the color. But the images were at ISO 50. Be interested in seeing ISO 800 images..........

pathfinder, that link is actually to the Powershot S1 3.2mp camera shots.

For the images of the 8mp Powershot Pro1, go here. And if you're interested in chromatic abberration, check out the third shot, the one of the bridge. That's the kind of shot I would expect to produce CA. They wouldn't photoshop an image before putting it on the web, would they?

wxwax

fish wrote:

flexibility. and coolness.

You thinK? I reckon there's more cool factor in a honker like you have, than a prosumer camera.

cmr164

wxwax wrote:

pathfinder, that link is actually to the Powershot S1 3.2mp camera shots.

For the images of the 8mp Powershot Pro1, go here. And if you're interested in chromatic abberration, check out the third shot, the one of the bridge. That's the kind of shot I would expect to produce CA. They wouldn't photoshop an image before putting it on the web, would they?

Well whatever they did, stripped out all the crs and exif info. So it was not just the normal Canon s/w. They were shooting at ISO 50 and that raises a big flag for me about noises and crowded pixels.

pathfinder

fish wrote:

I'm sorry, but I just don't understand why the market needs a $1500 fixed lens camera.

Cheaper is better - but this camera like a lot of digicams has something I REALLY wish they would include on the SLRs - and that is a swing-out rotateable real time LCD viewfinder on the back of the camera which the Pro 1 does have in the picture above.
Nothing better for street photography than to get the camera away from your face. Use the camera like a twin lens at waistlevel. Also means that you can get shots at absolute ground level without laying down in the dust as well. Try taking this picture with as SLR..... as much as I love SLRs sometimes digicams are better!

wxwax

I agree, mentioned it to patch a couple of weeks ago. He said with the dSLR you shoot and check. I like the idea of a screen so you can see what you're shooting, no matter the angle.

DoctorIt

pathfinder wrote:

Cheaper is better - but this camera like a lot of digicams has something I REALLY wish they would include on the SLRs - and that is a swing-out rotateable real time LCD viewfinder on the back of the camera which the Pro 1 does have in the picture above.
Nothing better for street photography than to get the camera away from your face. Use the camera like a twin lens at waistlevel. Also means that you can get shots at absolute ground level without laying down in the dust as well. Try taking this picture with as SLR..... as much as I love SLRs sometimes digicams are better!

This is a great point, and I one of the main reasons I've been considering a traiterous move - replacing my Canon S100 with a Nikon Coolpix SQ. I think its size and that coolpix split/hinge/rotating-body design is unmatched. The A80 is a tank in size comparison.

gus

pathfinder wrote:

Cheaper is better - but this camera like a lot of digicams has something I REALLY wish they would include on the SLRs - and that is a swing-out rotateable real time LCD viewfinder on the back of the camera which the Pro 1 does have in the picture above.
Nothing better for street photography than to get the camera away from your face. Use the camera like a twin lens at waistlevel. Also means that you can get shots at absolute ground level without laying down in the dust as well. Try taking this picture with as SLR..... as much as I love SLRs sometimes digicams are better!

My camera swings 90 degress upwards...something i thought useless untill i started putting it on the ground for shots. Good photo by the way.

pathfinder

DoctorIt wrote:

This is a great point, and I one of the main reasons I've been considering a traiterous move - replacing my Canon S100 with a Nikon Coolpix SQ. I think its size and that coolpix split/hinge/rotating-body design is unmatched. The A80 is a tank in size comparison.

That shot of the asphalt was taken witha CoolPix 995 - Like you I learned to really like the swivel body of the little Nikon CoolPixes. They do great macros too.... I am sorry that the tide seems to be turning from the swivel body - It was not intuitive for me, but I eventually found the swivel was one of those really cool features and not just strange but very useful.