Improvement on digital camera

[cloudwalker]

Most people believe dslr is a big step into photograph. So what do you think the improvement that is need to be done for dslr?

1. Most dslr do not have a full framed sensor. The field of view crop factor makes wide angle shooting more expensive with wider angle lense.

2. Generally more expensive compare to film cameras, in terms of camera body, storage, and ...?

3. Requires certain amount of knowledge on computer.

4. Sensitive sensor, difficult to clean if got dust, which easily happen when u need to change lenses during shooting in certain environment.

5. Lens manufacturers produes lenses that not compatible with each other. If u want to switch from canon to nikon, u got to throw away all ur canon lenses and buy nikon lenses.

ps.
a. please add to the list
b. take note this is not a comparison between digital & film camera, we are tired of that

 

[darkness]

5. Lens manufacturers produes lenses that not compatible with each other. If u want to switch from canon to nikon, u got to throw away all ur canon lenses and buy nikon lenses.

Well, I dunno abt you, but I won't throw them away, I will sell them...

Anyway, I guess this is one of the motivations behind the 4/3 system.

 

[frisky]

Most people believe dslr is a big step into photograph. So what do you think the improvement that is need to be done for dslr?

1. Most dslr do not have a full framed sensor. The field of view crop factor makes wide angle shooting more expensive with wider angle lense.

2. Generally more expensive compare to film cameras, in terms of camera body, storage, and ...?

3. Requires certain amount of knowledge on computer.

4. Sensitive sensor, difficult to clean if got dust, which easily happen when u need to change lenses during shooting in certain environment.

5. Lens manufacturers produes lenses that not compatible with each other. If u want to switch from canon to nikon, u got to throw away all ur canon lenses and buy nikon lenses.

6. Make both full frame and one with a crop factor. Those will crop factor are excellent for long telephoto lens. Heck, make one with a 2.0x crop factor......

ps.
a. please add to the list
b. take note this is not a comparison between digital & film camera, we are tired of that

 

[sulhan]

Hiee....

THis is a wild one. Well lots of time we hear people wanting to have higher ISO speed like ISO 1600 or even higher.....like 3200 and don't want noise or even reduced noise...

All these is because the Digital system try to mimick the Film ISO equivalent but do not want "noise". (forcing it to have different level of sensitivity)

So ...if they can make sensors that have a wide range of sensitivity....wouldn't that mean that its uneccessary to have specific function like ISO switching? Just give the Maxed out Specs....

Just give a camera with full manual controls - Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority or Full Manual and thats it......hence only specify the Slowest Shutter speed in the specs or longest Bulb timing that will start giving noise....

Well....too radical for some to accept this maybe......

regards,
me

 

[TME]

Hiee....

THis is a wild one. Well lots of time we hear people wanting to have higher ISO speed like ISO 1600 or even higher.....like 3200 and don't want noise or even reduced noise...

All these is because the Digital system try to mimick the Film ISO equivalent but do not want "noise". (forcing it to have different level of sensitivity)

So ...if they can make sensors that have a wide range of sensitivity....wouldn't that mean that its uneccessary to have specific function like ISO switching? Just give the Maxed out Specs....

Just give a camera with full manual controls - Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority or Full Manual and thats it......hence only specify the Slowest Shutter speed in the specs or longest Bulb timing that will start giving noise....

Well....too radical for some to accept this maybe......

regards,
me

Explain?? BTW, I PMed u...

 

[ST1100]

Hiee....

THis is a wild one. Well lots of time we hear people wanting to have higher ISO speed like ISO 1600 or even higher.....like 3200 and don't want noise or even reduced noise...

All these is because the Digital system try to mimick the Film ISO equivalent but do not want "noise". (forcing it to have different level of sensitivity)

So ...if they can make sensors that have a wide range of sensitivity....wouldn't that mean that its uneccessary to have specific function like ISO switching? Just give the Maxed out Specs....

Just give a camera with full manual controls - Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority or Full Manual and thats it......hence only specify the Slowest Shutter speed in the specs or longest Bulb timing that will start giving noise....

Well....too radical for some to accept this maybe......

regards,
me

The idea is interesting, but how to meter when you don't know the ISO? Unless the camera sensor super-gilat got 50 stop noise-free dynamic range, ie one ISO fits all.

 

[Poon]

6. Make both full frame and one with a crop factor. Those will crop factor are excellent for long telephoto lens. Heck, make one with a 2.0x crop factor......

Wouldn't people prefer to take photo ff and crop it on computer instead? Much more control that way.

 

[CYRN]

The idea is interesting, but how to meter when you don't know the ISO? Unless the camera sensor super-gilat got 50 stop noise-free dynamic range, ie one ISO fits all.

if like that .. no need iso and shutter speed already... if the dynamic range exceeds the human vision...WOW!!

 

[ST1100]

if like that .. no need iso and shutter speed already... if the dynamic range exceeds the human vision...WOW!!

You'd still need/want to set the shutter speed to control how the picture turns out sometimes.

 

[nightpiper]

i wud like to see a change in ccd technology. i expect to see organic material used instead of silicon, very much like OLED (hopefully it comes with wider dynamic range & alot lesser noise). if organic material can give out light, it can also take in light. quite like the analogy of speakers & mic relationship.

next, since its all electronics now, i wud hope to see the image sensor closer to the lens. this wud give better overall pic quality.

i think DSLR can juz make do w/o the view fiinder, juz like those compact digicams. althou u rely on the LCD display & consume more energy, but the advantage of taking away the mirror is greater, or at least thats how i feel.

1st, u dun have mirror flipping vibratn.
2nd, u shave off some cam weight.
3rd, u won't damage ur eyes when u shoot sunrise/sunset by looking at the LCD instead of starring at the sun thru the viewfinder.
4th, the lens can move a lot closer to the sensor.
5th, implement a protection screen juz in front of the sensor to avoid dust & easy cleaning. similar to sigma's SD10 but much closer.
6th, becos the lens is much closer to the sensor, u dun need special 'digital specific' lens for the job.

And of cos, having a full frame sensor is nice.

what abt having juz auto white balance & daylight? that shud take away alot of fiddling. for those image manipulation capable people, u can tweak the WB later & for those 'idiots', u can juz send ur pics to any photo labs as usual to get them printed & burned into CD. no need to use a computer at all.

make menus navigation easier. how abt Graphic Interface juz like windows? everyone or most people r already accostumed to such interfaces, so why not make it a '1 screen sees all' & then juz select that appropriate menu folder? analogy to erriccson handphone T610 style.

lastly, i wud very much like to see a single standard for RAM cards used. its like buying computer rams & u get to choose how branded u want. not forgetting the competitiveness of such a standard.

BTW, anyone wants to object to using normal AA size batts? or wud u all rather have a standard sized Li Ion batt for all brands & models? whichever it is, i think a fixed standard for batt is good.


ok, next better contributer pls. :>

 

[nightpiper]

i forgot to mention abt special effects. anyone still remebers minolta's special efx card? well, i think DSLR can implement something like that too. u can have build-in soft filter efx & other cheesy stuffs. these efx can be downloaded from websites (of cos the efx must be of another fixed standard or open source). efx writers can make some money by charging a fee for their special 'plug ins'. how cool is that!! of cos the more efx u put in, the less internal buffer u have. there's always a trade off isn't it?

c ya!!

 

[ibika]

Most people believe dslr is a big step into photograph.
QUOTE]


... u call tat a big jump???... oh... you mean $ wise har :sweatsm: :sweatsm:

 

[AntZ]

To me, just very accurate metering algo will do.

 

[Winston]

Most people believe dslr is a big step into photograph. So what do you think the improvement that is need to be done for dslr?

1. Most dslr do not have a full framed sensor. The field of view crop factor makes wide angle shooting more expensive with wider angle lense.

Agreed. But it's all electronics and in time, the price of CCD will fall and perhaps Full Frame CCD will be very affordable and even digital backs for Medium Format may drop to a few thousands only.
DVD recorders costs ard $5k just 1-2 years ago, and now you can get one for less than $2k.
DSLRs costs $3.8-4k in 2000 and one can get an entry level one for less than $2k.

2. Generally more expensive compare to film cameras, in terms of camera body, storage, and ...?

Camera body. I agree due to the sensor costs.
Storage... No really a 1GB card for $400+ will storage hundreds of images (in JPEG) compared to 36 shots for a film and it can be re-used. Archival to CD-Rs, costs $0.30-0.40 per 700Mb, so a 1GB full CF will take only 2 CD-Rs to archive and then you can format and reuse.


3. Requires certain amount of knowledge on computer.
Not necessarily, with good photography skills, little or no editing has to be done.
Nowadays, many labs accept images from CF directly and you can take the shots, review in the LCD, and pass the CF to the lab to print, if you don't want to connect to PC, edit or burn to CD-Rs.
you can even get one of those Nixvue CD-burners that automatically burns the images from the CFs to CD-Rs if you are a computer idiot and did not want to know how to use a Roxio or Nero program to burn CDs.

In fact, personally I feel if you spent more time on the computer editing your pictures instead of learning how to take better ones, then I feel you should go sign up for a Adobe Photoshop course instead of learning all the stuff about photography.



4. Sensitive sensor, difficult to clean if got dust, which easily happen when u need to change lenses during shooting in certain environment.

Yes, it's a headache. I do hope in future the manufacturers either make sensor cleaning free for life (instead of just within the warranty period) or make their DSLRs with auto-cleaning sensors like the E-1.


5. Lens manufacturers produes lenses that not compatible with each other. If u want to switch from canon to nikon, u got to throw away all ur canon lenses and buy nikon lenses.

The above problem is not related to digital cameras only. Film SLRs users have been facing this problem for decades. There isn't an equilvant of a "IEEE" to standardized all the SLR camera mounts to create a universal mount for all 35mm SLRs.
So I suppose when you make a decision to using a manufacturer's system (be it EOS, F-mount, A-mount, M-mount, R-mount..etc) you should stick to it.

 

[Parchiao]

I wanna see the following improvements.

1. 9MP full frame sensors in the likes of Foveon i.e 27MP
2. sensors that can be interchanged
3. speed that is dependent on the sensor and not just the lens
4. super duper fast writing speed
5. No CA
6. No noise
7. movable sensor i.e. sensor that can move closer to or further from the back of the lens.

 

[TME]

I wanna see the following improvements.

1. 9MP full frame sensors in the likes of Foveon i.e 27MP
2. sensors that can be interchanged
3. speed that is dependent on the sensor and not just the lens
4. super duper fast writing speed
5. No CA
6. No noise
7. movable sensor i.e. sensor that can move closer to or further from the back of the lens.

No CA?? That's in the domain of the lens..... it's the glass that causes CA right? Will sensors also cause CA?

I like the interchangeable sensor thing.. I mean the manufacturer could sell the body and u specify the sensor according to the size of your wallet...... so if u dun have money..... can opt for 2/3 size sensor..... then later down the road, save enough can upgrade to full frame sensor...... hahaha......... pipe dream?? Carrying the upgrading thingy over from PCs to DSLRs.....

 

[Zerstorer]

I wanna see the following improvements.
7. movable sensor i.e. sensor that can move closer to or further from the back of the lens.

Focal plane AF?
Haha...wait for Contax to give you that!

 

[TME]

Focal plane AF?
Haha...wait for Contax to give you that!

Excuse my ignorance but what exactly is focal plane AF? In what way is that superior to AF by the lens? And is it already implemented by Contax?

Thanks!

 

[loupgarou]

Foveon + add IR and UV sensitivity sensors. heh.

why stop there, why not go for camera's that can take the whole environment in 3d holography.

IS should be built into the cam's as defacto standard.

 

[YuHsuan]

Contax RTS III, AF by moving the film rather than the lens element. Downside is that it makes the camera really bulky.

Is it superior? I dunno. When Contax released the RTS III, it wanted a AF camera that is compatible with its manual focus Zeiss lenses.

Coming back to the improvements, I would like to see Minolta's new AS (anti-shake) feature or some kind of IS system for the CCD in a full-fledge DSLR.

Excuse my ignorance but what exactly is focal plane AF? In what way is that superior to AF by the lens? And is it already implemented by Contax?

Thanks!