That would work for me.

Quote:
E-mailed to me by David Stemple

My dream camera would be a 12 or 16 mega-pixel model with many of the features found in canon Mark 1s or Nikon D200 but with one major difference a 12x optical lens would be built in going from 28mm on the wide end....... It can be a larger sensor like D-SLRs or smaller sensor like regular digital camera whatever works the best with the lens they put on it. Something good enough to go down to at least f/s 2.8 so we can shoot night time high school football games.

I would settle for a lower resolution if the images were really clean. Loads of people are in love with the picture quality of their 4MP Nikon D2Xs with great MTF scores, and the camera is constantly being used for publication.

A resolution of 10MP will take one into the territory of very large prints. 12MP will show little or no difference over 10MP and 16MP means unnecessarily large files. If the goal is a prosumer camera for "high school football games", 16MP is massive overkill. 16MP from a large full-frame or medium-format sensor is for studio advertising photography, big buck weddings and large landscape prints. A DX sensor may yield diminishing results as it approaches 16MP. Certainly for 8MP, the 2/3" sensor on our Coolpix cameras is much too crowded. Noise at ISO400 is worse than one would expect at ISO3200 with an ideal sensor.

Current 10MP cameras with small 1/1.7" sensors require active and very aggressive noise reduction. The result is smeared detail and colour. The idea of 12MP to 16MP on anything smaller than a DX sensor is terrifying.

Even with very fast glass, the light level in high school stadiums would require ISO1600. With a small sensor, the result would look like a painting when noise reduction was done with it - at 12MP to 16MP. The gain in megapixels would be offset by the loss of detail as the engine tries to deal with the incredible levels of noise. On the other side of the coin, these tiny sensors do allow 12x lenses that don't require a semi to haul.

Over a DX sensor an F-2.8 28mm->336mm equivalent lens would be quite huge, specially if it had to maintain f-2.8 for its whole zoom range. The closest real world Nikkor is the 18mm->200mmm (27mm->300mm equivalent) It is an f-3.5->f-5.6 and weighs 560 grams (19.8 oz.). f-2.8 is nearly a stop wider at the wide end and two full stops at the tele end. Olympus has a 90mm->250mm for the four-thirds system that maintains f-2.8 over the much shorter range - not quite 3x. It weighs 3,270 grams (7.21 pounds) and gives you a penny in change from a $6,000 bill.

Quote:
That way we would not need to carry all of those lenses with us to get the quality and print sizes.

Considering the Oly 3x f-2.8 at roughly the tele end of the dream camera's 12x lens weighs over seven pounds and costs $6k, the lens for this dream camera would more likely be 12 pounds and $12k with the larger DX sensor, even if it was built in. A 16MP sensor will clearly show any flaws in the lens, so no compromise could be made in resolution, or control of lens aberrations. Designing a 12x lens for a 16MP sensor would be daunting and supremely expensive. I may have priced it too low, in fact.

One of your body-guards hired to protect the camera, could also be employed to carry it to the high school football games.

Quote:
Something that uses AA batteries would also be a plus.

Absolutely.

Quote:
Oh, and it should have two card slots (than can handle at least a 4GB card) that can change from one card to next when it fills up or write raws to one card and jpegs to the other.

Doable. Since the camera is now up to about $14k retail, why not? Of course, if you can afford the camera, you can also afford a couple of 8GB cards. With 15MB to 20MB, 16MP RAW files, they would be quite useful. Include GPS and WiFi as well.

Quote:
A Complete system with flash, batteries and memory cards that would fit into a Lowepro nova AW-1 bag.

Actually, make that a normal mini-van instead.

So you have your choice of dreams. A camera of reasonable size with a over packed sensor and the need for constant and aggressive smearing to deal with horrendous noise, or a huge heavy beast costing half the price of a Hasselblad H3D. You are a victim of the laws of physics either way. Everything in camera design - or photography for that matter - is a series of trade-offs.

My dream camera would be the D200 guts and operating system, but designed without the mirror, allowing the fully articulated monitor and EVF of the late lamented CP8x00 Coolpix camera. It would have the standard Nikon F-mount, allowing any of the lenses Nikon has sold since the mid 1970s.

The only downside is that it would still need the focal plane shutter, since the lenses don't have shutters built in. This would mean that the shutter would have to close before making the exposure, creating a bit of lag, and flash sync would top out around 1/250th making it less easy to use syncro-sunlight flash than the Coolpix cameras that will sync right up to the top shutter speeds. Trade-offs again.

Thank you for your insights into my dream camera. I never realized that to build such as camera was so expensive and heavy. I had figured with my limited understand of how cameras are made and optics involved that they could take a D-SLR body and build a lens into it and meet my needs.

As for the 12 to 16MP shortly after I wrote this thread I had a friend give me samples from an 8MP and a 12MP camera (Cannon D-SLRs of high school football games) and unless you printed huge images you really could tell the difference on a standard 8 x 10. I was under the impress the difference would have been huge. When I moved from a 4MP to a 5MP camera last year at the request of the newspaper I work for.... so they could get full color covers out of my shots I noticed a huge difference in just that 1mp increase.

D-SLRs are kind of out my price range at this time and I do also shoot a lot of smoke and fire scenes. I am afraid to get a D-SLR especially if I change lenses because of the amount of smoke I deal with at times and afraid it might ruin or get the sensor dirty. I tend to use the full range of the 38 - 380mm lens on my Fuji so I would likely change lenses on a D-SLR if I had one.

Thanks again for your very detailed insight into my dream camera. I think I will let the dream float into thin air now and save the space in the back of my mini van for other stuff.

dave
Photo 5 Fluvanna County Fire-Rescue
Staff Photographer Fluvanna Review

It is said that yacht buyers must consider speed, luxury and economy. However, no matter the boat, they can only have two of the three.

Camera design - and in fact every aspect of photography - is a matter of trade-offs. Small sensors make it possible to create reasonable and affordable 12x zooms. The trade off is low ISO ratings and high noise. At the telephoto end of the zoom, it may be difficult with the low ISO settings to achieve a high enough shutter speed for sharp images. Making a zoom lens that is f-4.0 to f-6.3 results in a light compact lens that is not much use in low light, while one that maintains f-2.8 through the full range is big and expensive. Design goals must be set before the first numbers are fed into the design program, embedding these goals into the design.

Photographers also make these kinds of decisions for every picture they take. Higher shutter speed means either higher ISO and more noise, or wider aperture and less depth of field. Going with Program mode, means handing the decision to a programmer on the other side of the world who can not see what you are photographing.

Choosing a wide angle lens will give great depth of field, but may make the picture cluttered. Going to a long lens means that focus may be too critical to get all the subject in and sharp. When assessing a shoot, all these and more, go through the photographer's mind, making the photograph the best set of compromises that circumstances will allow. Everything in photography is a series of trade-offs.

What I would like is all the features offered by the Samsung Pro 815 (which I have) coupled with a full sized (35mm)sensor. That would make it unbeatable for a keen amateur.

Well I settled on trying a Fuji S-9100 for the time being. I have had it a week and I am really starting to love it. The photos in ISO 400 meet my low light requires for night time sports when needed and having both a CF slot is a major plus as I can now use 2 and 4GB cards......

Hi David,
Please keep us posted on the camera. I am seriously considering getting on myself.

A couple interesting things to note about my use of the Fuji S-9100 to photograph a large scale high school graduation that produced 812 keepers out of over 1200 taken.

I started with an olympus 1GB H series xD card as my storage medium. It ate through two sets of batteries within 250 shots. All batteries were fulled toped off or charged the day before.

I switched to a 2GB Sandisc Ultra II CF card. That card with the three set of batteries installed was used to capture the other 1000 or so images without the need to change batteries.

I believe the batteries used for the xD card were 2300 and 2500mha. For the CF card the batteries were 2500mha. Their is still power on the batteries used with the CF card.

Image processing speed and shot to shot was the same for either card. The camera did a good job in very bright sun directly on the stage/podium area. I had a hot shoe flash but found I didn't need to use it.

Only 5 of the images came out blurry. I shoot everything at ISO 100 on P mode or A mode f/s of 2.8, 5 and 8. I shoot all the images in 9mp normal mode. I meant to set it to the 9mp fine mode but for some reason it didn't. Everything looked really good on my monitor at 100%.

I did not print any photos out.

The camera is a little heavier than I am used to. At the end of 4 hours of shooting my writ was tired but not hurting too bad. I held the camera up for most of the time not laying it down.

I did find one significent thing that needs pointed out. Their was a slight bit flare in the EVF before I started hooting from sun etc. I added my 58mm UV filter and that did the trick to make the images good. The lens hood when put on was NO GOOD as when I shot at full wide 28mm it had a few points of the lens hood showing up on the edge of the frames in EVF. So I caned the lens hood. Additional tests lead me to believe this cookie cutter lens hood(that comes with the camera) is anti productive on my camera.

Hope these things help you all make an informed decision on the Fuji S-9100. I really love the camera and if I had to buy a new camera tomorrow becaue it was stolen or run over I would get the same one again. But would get 2x CF cards and not use the xD cards I have due to power issues.

dave

My dream camera would be the FREE 1D mark 3 that Larry was thinking about buying for me.... You did say DREAM camera..LOL

Yeah we'd all like a free camera too.

dave

My dream camera would be a Canon EOS30D with the following:
1) 16 Megapixels (most of the prints I sell are large size)
2) Backlit screen that I can see in bright sunlight but with option to shut off the backlight when I don't need it so to conserve power.
3) Possibility to delete JPEG files from the memory card without deleting the RAW (I shoot boot formats and sometimes when the card is full it would be useful to get rid of the JPG and still keep the RAW)
4) White Balance button like the one on video cameras to set the whites with a sheet.

to be continued...

Luca

Interesting that this thread started out as the perfect small format size camera, not DSLR because those are already available. I'd like a camera like you specified, but with a zoom starting at 24mm (I's settle for 28mm) in a 4"x2"x1" size.

I think we'll see that the next round of top of the line DSLR's are close to 22 megapixels.

Ahhhhh..... the 22MP Mark III, YUMMY!
Downfall is storage, CPU speed and RAM when it comes time to preview and working your shots.
Nikon lovers have to be digging deep into the new D3 and to top it off for you nighttime school event shooters, ISO 25000+, no typo. I would imagine somewhere between the noise you'll see an image.
I'm very eager to see the Nikon ISO modifications, could easily make me want to beg for one of those instead of a Canon Mark III (22mp only).
Interesting discussion and reference to the smaller camera's.

I've always been an advocate that the more information you have to work with, the better the results can be. But I wonder who, outside of studio photographers and fine art photographers that sell large prints, will find the extra 20% increase in resolution really necessary. Like you pointed out, storage needs will increase. Additionally, and this will be the killer for wedding or event photographers, processing times will also increase. But if Nikon came out with it, I would be tempted.

Quote:
Ahhhhh..... the 22MP Mark III, YUMMY!

I think we are now getting some hints of what cameras may be in a couple of years. With the D3, Nikon foregos huge numbers of pixels in favor of superb image quality at all ISO settings. Taking viewing distances into account, there really is no limit to the size of print that can be made from this.

Both the D3 and D300 have "LiveView" via a full VGA resolution 3" monitor. Reports on pre-release cameras say that the view is amazing - with no visible pixelation. Panasonic has also announced their next camera with LiveView, and it does have an articulated monitor, which the Nikons do not.

LiveView was quite underwhelming in its first version on Oly and Panasonic cameras. Poor autofocus or no autofocus with the mirror up and shutter lag of a full second. With the D3 and D300, autofocus is said to still be slower than focus with the reflex system, but fast enough to be usable.

Projecting these trends forward, I would expect the D400 generation to sprout a swing and swivel monitor while probably retaining the optical finder system. Focus via main sensor will still be just a bit slow. By the D500 generation, the optical system will have been replaced by an articulated monitor and very high resolution EVF - at least on some models. All the cameras will continue to use the F-mount lenses. The result will be pretty much my dream camera, and it should happen in two to four years.

Horrible things are happening with point-and-shoots where the megapixel race is still running unabated. With the density of photosites on the tiny 10MP - 12MP sensors, very aggressive noise reduction is being applied and detail drastically smeared. I read of similar results with the 1Ds MkIII, though not so drastic. Those who have had a chance to shoot with pre-production models write of a "plasticky" look to the JPEGs, likely due to full-time noise reduction. I can also see this with the D200 if high ISO noise reduction is set on maximum. Noise is considerably more attractive than this smearing.

Perhaps Nikon's 12MP D3 sensor is at or near the optimum resolution for a full frame sensor - it has no noise reduction whatever built into the sensor, and needs none. For those who really need over 20MP, medium format sensors and large format scanning backs are probably the best solution. Full frame 35mm chassis cameras may have now passed the optimum resolution.

Fantastic and informative reply Larry. All I could come up with was "Yummy"!
The pixel race and compression are factors for sure in the point and shoots.
As for the storage and processing speeds, I'm quite certain that we'll never hit the wall any harder than we usually do prior to upgrading our equipment.
Very interesting point regarding the plastic smear look. Noise would be favoured over this for sure. My problem with converting to Nikon is of course the lens factor. All my gear is Canon and I would have to basically start over.
Ah well, that's life!
Thanks for the info.
Cheers

I have two dream cameras and you could help me make the right choice.This will be my first DSLR but would call myself an advanced amateur.Torn between the Canon EOS40D vs. NikonD300 due out this month. If money is not the issue, why would I get one vs the other? I shoot everything with an older Minolta Maxxum 5000i and a Canon G2. I just like bigger and better. First 35MM was a Canon. I have this opinion that Nikon is better, but why (or not?) Help

I doubt that there is a clear winner in all categories, and I would expect that either will astound you with its capability and sophistication. Since I already had an arsenal of Nikkor manual lenses of high quality, it was a natural to buy the D200. I added a 12-24mm (18-36mm equivalent) super-wide zoom and an 18-200mm 27-300mm equivalent) super-zoom for everyday use. I have nothing but praise for it. The D300 is said to improve on every aspect of the D200 and I would go for one without hesitation.

That said, what really counts is how the camera feels in your hands and works for your eye, so be sure to get hands-on time in stores before making your decision. An awkward feeling camera, is no pleasure to use.

Second, go over the specifications of both and see which features are most important to the way you wish to shoot. Spend some time in introspection about your relationship to photography, and the decision will be much more easily made.

Finally, the D300 should be on the shelves - at least for those who put down early deposits - in about three weeks, and I expect that reviews will quickly follow. Most major reviewers have had the pre-release version for some time now, but reviews are usually embargoed by non-disclosure agreements until the camera is actually shipping. There will certainly also be reviews comparing them, which can be very useful. Realize that reviewers too, have their preferences in the feel and features of cameras, so read as many as possible to get a broad sense of the opinions.

Both, I am sure are excellent cameras, but the key is to finding which one puts you in your comfort-zone. Take your time in deciding, since you are not only buying a camera, but also buying into a whole system. If you have no lenses for either, it would be wise to define your needs, then see which brand has the glass closest to what you defined. In my case, the mix of zooms and manual primes is perfect for me. Neither will likely let you down, so take the time to see which one comes closest to our dream camera.

>>I have this opinion that Nikon is better, but why (or not?) Help<<

Nikon obtained its mystique in the 50's in large part because the US military PX stores (mostly in bases in Japan during the Korean conflict) sold their early cameras, and many were brought back to the US from this source, including one of my first 35mm cameras in 1952. Then Nikon by chance got a very talented US distributor by the name of Ehrenreich, and the Nikon cameras caught on with many US photojournalists. In those early days in Japan Nikon and Canon were both small camera companies among many in Japan and began largely mimicking Zeiss and Leica cameras of the pre-war era of the late 30's in Europe.

It was not until the mid 60's that Canon started to catch up marketing in the US, but Nikon had already gotten ahead in reputation.

Nikon since then has remained a relatively small, almost exclusively a camera company, while Canon diversified into one of the worlds largest technology companies. And Canon has many times the capital and research capabilities compared to Nikon today. Canon, besides Sony is one of the few manufacturers that does the R&D and manufacture of their own digital image sensor chips. Nikon, Pentax, Olympus and like camera companies have to buy their digital camera image sensor chips from a few technology companies that make these chips like Sony, Kodak and Phillips.

Today when most cameras with 10mpx sensor chips for example are compared, one must question who made the chip which is the core of the entire system, and if nearly all brands have essentially the same chip made in the same factory, the only real distinguishing factors are the camera features and body configuration, and of course brand reputation and loyalty.

Considering dSLR cameras have bodies closely related to their 35mm film predecessors which in many cases have not changed basically for 30-40 years, there are a lot of older photographers who have an investment and loyalty that will not change very much. Who would ever want to admit they made the wrong choice 10, 20, 30 years ago; and changing from one brand system to another for many can be a very expensive proposition.

In other words does the reputation one brand of camera today have really reflect the performance and quality of its current dSLR cameras? Not a lot from what I have observed.

Here's my want list...
1) audible 3-more-shots-left tone for when my memory card is almost full
2) a different tone for when it IS full
3) the "opps I erased all accidently and can I get them all back" for the clutzes like me.
4) I too like the dual card idea
5) ambient light sensor for the LCD so it adjusts for the temperature and intensity of your viewing light.
6) Password protected operation - that is, you put in a password, and if someone goes to use your camera, it won't function. This way, if it is stolen, they have to contact the mfg to get it reset... and thus, they crook is caught in his own guile.

Unlike most, I want something simple. I've been doing photography for 50+ years and I am a "techie" by profession. I started with Box Brownies, then Leicas in the early 60s, Pentax Spotmatics in the 70s, Nikons in the 80s and 90s. First digital camera was a VGA HP unit purchased as soon as they were introduced. Since then, I count 5 upgrades to the Nikon D300 and P5000 I have today.
But what I want is a digital replacement for my Minox 35 I carried around the world for 15 years. One could argue the current P+S cameras like my Nikon P5000 fit that description, but not quite.
Everything is too complex. The Minox 35 was so simple. Open the lens cover and shoot immediately. No autofocus - zone focus worked brilliantly. Simple aperture-priority exposure. Easy to use viewfinder. Never miss a picture while the thing is booting up or trying to figure where to focus.

Got that all you manufacturers reading this? KISS - keep it simple, stupid!

PS: My replacement for the Minox is a Casio 2 MP credit card-sized camera I bought almost 6 years ago and always carry with me. Nearest current camera is probably the Leica M8, but I know too many disappointed users...

I am not officially a newbie yet as I haven't quite been able to pull the trigger and buy a camera but I want to really bad. My question (since you're talking about a dream camera) is what to buy. I don't want to buy something too complicated for me to ever figure out, but at the same time I don't want to buy something that in six months I'll be wishing I had bought bigger, fancier, more megapixels, etc. Do you have any suggestions for someone in my positions? I would really appreciate any and all help. Thanks a bunch!

Toni

Guaranteed that in six months you'll want to upgrade no matter which camera you choose. Assuming that you want to start with a point and shoot, decide what you want to shoot and whether a wide angle or telephoto lens will work best. Then focus on the cameras that have a lens within that range. Seven to eight megapixels seems to be the best compromise between file size (and enlargeability) and digital noise because the higher megapixel cameras squeeze more information from the same size sensors.

Quote:
I am not officially a newbie yet as I haven't quite been able to pull the trigger and buy a camera but I want to really bad. My question (since you're talking about a dream camera) is what to buy. I don't want to buy something too complicated for me to ever figure out, but at the same time I don't want to buy something that in six months I'll be wishing I had bought bigger, fancier, more megapixels, etc. Do you have any suggestions for someone in my positions? I would really appreciate any and all help. Thanks a bunch!

Toni

Quote:
Unlike most, I want something simple. I've been doing photography for 50+ years and I am a "techie" by profession.

If you will pardon my newbie staus (my first post) I need to second that statement very strongly. I too have been doing photography for NEARLY 50 years and really need a camera that doesn't require a whole lot of grey matter to remember all of it's features yet has high quality image and superlative build.

It's not that I have any problems remembering what does what and where it's located, it's just that throughout my many years of using film SLRs I've developed what I call "muscle memory"...my body goes automatic and the brain quiets down when I pic up a SLR...this allows me to concentrate on "the subject" rather than "the camera" ...what a concept!

Far too often I find myself picking up my Lumix FX33 rather than my D80...just to avoid the "complications" even though I know that my photos won't be as good.

Actually i can't understand why are you so interested in digital cameras. If the convenient is the reason then ok. But the CLR cameras are better than the digital. I am used with both cameras and from the experience i am saying.

===================
davis
Ohio Treatment Centers

What's a CLR camera?

Quote:
Guaranteed that in six months you'll want to upgrade no matter which camera you choose. Assuming that you want to start with a point and shoot, decide what you want to shoot and whether a wide angle or telephoto lens will work best. Then focus on the cameras that have a lens within that range. Seven to eight megapixels seems to be the best compromise between file size (and enlargeability) and digital noise because the higher megapixel cameras squeeze more information from the same size sensors.

The list is getting harder to choose from, will it be, Canon 50D, a new Canon 5D ( it's replacement ) or would it be a new 24+ mp Sony? "Oh,man" the choices, if one had the money.

*Only SERIOUS inquiries or offers this a real listing not a craigslist hoax*
Brand New Leica S2-P SLR Digital Camera 10802 + S 35/2.5 ASPH Lens
Product Highlights
37.5 Megapixel 30x45mm Image Sensor
S-System Lenses
3.0" LCD and Color OLED Info Displays
Scratch-Resistant Sapphire LCD Cover
Dual Shutter System
Waterproof & Dustproof
Compact Ergonomic Design
LEMO Push-Pull Connector
CF & SD Card Slots
Free shipping and handling via UPS or FedEx. Camera and lens are amazingly priced at $23,000.00I will accept best offers. Only serious offers will be considered
Payment must be made through www.alertpay.com, money order, or certified check
I am located in Savannah, Ga. This is a real listing and a real product, I'm tired of being ripped off by eBay and PayPal.
Don't let this get away AMAZING camera & lens at an amazing unheard of price. Need to sell fast. Again only serious replies and offers.

I'm a relative newbie to this board so here go's.
The knowledge of cammre is large , I want to learn it .
LOL

Full frame digital equivalent of the late Olympus Stylus Epic.

Full frame system camera to take advantage of the Contax G2 lenses. Small,light and using excellent AF lenses.

Wow it is an amazing camera and it has wonderful mega pixels and focuses....
outsourcing services
home healthcare rostering and management