Digital Camera Information

If you’re new to Digital SLR cameras, then cleaning your digital camera sensor is a scary thought. My first experience is to use the professionals, however considering the frequency, the regularity of dust contaminating the sensor and the cost; it does make sense to do it yourself. Once you’ll learn how to do it, it gets easier after that.

Luckily I’ve found a great article on cleaning your cameras sensor by www.macworld.com. Click here for the full article. So why not give it a try.

Click here for the science behind cleaning a sensor.

www.DigitalCamerainfo.com has an excellent head on comparison between the Nikon D200 and the Canon EOS 5D. Although they did not give their own recommended conclusion, they did highlight the advantages and disadvantage of each camera.

Here is the their conclusion

“We elected to debut our Head-to-Head review format with a comparison of the Nikon D200 and Canon EOS 5D - the latest designs by the two premiere DSLR manufacturers. Again, we chose the Canon EOS 5D and not the EOS 30D because the 30D internals are over a year and a half old, while the 5D much more accurately illustrates where Canon is in their developmental progression. In comparing these cameras, many core differences between Nikon and Canon’s approach becomes apparent. Canon has directed their efforts towards developing and engineering the camera’s internal components – manufacturing most of their own parts, particularly their sensors, and concentrating on high ISO performance, dynamic range, and obviously high resolution. Nikon on the other hand, has focused more on furthering the general design of the camera – engineering fast, reliable autofocus, flexible metering, logical control layout, and advanced flash capabilities. Both the D200 and EOS 5D have a lot to offer consumers: high resolution, strong dynamic range, fast internal processors, and extensive control at price points that would have been impossible just a year or two ago. However, neither presents a perfect camera.

These two models stand to represent the leading DSLR manufacturers and indicate that professional-level quality is now accessible to general consumers. Nikon has voiced that they will remain with APS-sized sensors, alluding to less expensive models than Canons counterparts; while Canon will continue to develop their full-frame designs and at least for the time being, offer an advantage at high sensitivities. Although there is a significant degree of differentiation in these two particular models and each manufacturer’s current design ideology, both represent remarkable breakthroughs in their own right that continue to force the rest of the industry to play catch-up.”

My bet is the more affordable Nikon D200. Click here for the full review

Here is a very interesting paper by Richard F. Lyon from Faveon titled “A Brief History of ‘Pixel”

The abstract of the paper is as follows:

“The term pixel, for picture element, was first published in two different SPIE Proceedings in 1965, in articles by Fred C. Billingsley of Caltech’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The alternative pel was published by William F. Schreiber of MIT in the Proceedings of the IEEE in 1967. Both pixel and pel were propagated within the image processing and video coding field for more than a decade before they appeared in textbooks in the late 1970s. Subsequently, pixel has become ubiquitous in the fields of computer graphics, displays, printers, scanners, cameras, and related technologies, with a variety of sometimes conflicting meanings.”

Click here for the paper

NASA has just released the first images of Mars from its new camera system. This will provide a platform of what type of images the Mars Reconnaissance Orbitor will provide when its main mission begins in fall.

Three cameras were used in this mission, these are 1. High Resolution Imaging Science Experiment, 2. Context Camera and 3. Mars Color Imager. Together they gathered up to 40 minutes of data which was used to merge and form the image.

According to Steve Saunders, Mission’s program scientist at NASA Headquarters. He says…

“These images provide the first opportunity to test camera settings and the spacecraft’s ability to point the camera with Mars filling the instruments’ field of view,”.. “The information learned will be used to prepare for the primary mission next fall.” The main purpose of these images is to enable the camera team to develop calibration and image-processing procedures such as the precise corrections needed for color imaging and for high-resolution surface measurements from stereo pairs of images.”

In essence this is very interesting stuff from NASA.

Source

Jeff Keller from Dcresource has an excellent review on the much anticipated Canon 30D. Although the Canon 30D is an upgraded 20D, the improvements are not as large as the Nikon D200 is to the Nikon D100. Beside the softer images and a less bright LCD, the Canon 30D still gets a top rating from Jeff. Here’s a conclusion of his review.

“The Canon EOS-30D is an excellent midrange digital SLR. While it’s new features aren’t exciting enough to get this 20D owner to run out and upgrade, those who are moving up from point-and-shoot or entry-level D-SLRs should definitely give the 30D a look.

As always, I strongly recommend trying the EOS-30D and its competitors before you drop the big bucks on a digital SLR! “

Click here for the full review.

Fujifilm has filed a US patent for the design of a new sensor. An abstract of the patent states the following:

Multilayer deposition multipixel image pickup device and television camera

“A multilayer deposition multipixel image pickup device comprising a pixel unit, wherein the pixel unit comprises: a plurality of electromagnetic absorption layers being capable of absorbing electromagnetic waves of different wavelengths and performing photoelectric conversion; at least one pair of electrodes that sandwich each of electromagnetic absorption layers; a charge transfer and charge read part; and a plurality of contact parts that couple at least one of the electrodes and the charge transfer and charge read part, wherein a length between outermost surfaces of ones among electrodes of the pixel unit is smaller than a pixel size that is a circle-equivalent diameter of the same area as a first electromagnetic absorption layer of the electromagnetic absorption layers, the first electromagnetic absorption layer having a largest area in said plurality of electromagnetic absorption layers.”

The new technology appears to address the problems in the Foveon X3 sensor by several innovative techniques:

(1) The color separation is done by colored dye sensing layers which are separated by isolation layers. This gives the sensor a much more accurate color separation than relying on silicon’s spectrum absorption property.

(2) Addition of a fourth layer (blue-green) to enhance blue-green color separation.

(3) Photo electronic collection and read-out circuitry is completely buried under the sensing layers so most of the pixel area is used for sensing, making usage of surface area much effectively.

(4) The controlling/read-out circuitry can be CCD or CMOS type.

(5) No micro lens and low-pass filter are used so no shading effect and higher resolution.

The sensing layer thickness is pixel size dependent and is said preferably within 3-8 microns, making chip size of 5-10 mega pixels. If the Foveon X3 experience can be borrowed, the luminance resolution of this stacked type sensor would be at least twice of the Mosaic sensor, and the “color resolution” is much improved like the Foveon X3.

The sensor is said to address the Foveon X3 problem of conflict with accurate color separation versus high sensibility. Overall, it looks like a color film with the sensing element being sandwiched, an idea only a film company could come up with.

Interestingly, the research is being jointly carried out with Saitama University and Fuji Photo Film Co., Ltd.

Source

Here is a very interesting site www.wrotniak.net that has a great article on how you can take photos of the Moon with your digital camera. In addition, the article explains the different variety of equipment used and the best method to use it.

Interestingly, the article mentions that “almost any camera, digital or not, can be used — under one condition: it has to have (or be able to use) a lens of a focal length large enough to provide sufficient magnification.”

Here is an interesting list of the top 401 paid occupations in the US. According to a Bizjournals.com (analysis of data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics), photographers are ranked 217 out of 401 paid occupations and this does not include free lance wedding photographers. The average annual salary is $34,028 with an hourly rate of $16.60. This may sound low, especially with the all equipment needed to get started; however there is one thing that is really critical here. That is, photographers enjoy what they do. Period!

Interestingly, the top three occupations are physicians (doctors), pilots and lawyers.

Source

Epson has released an update to the Epson R-D1, the R-D1s. Yes, it’s very expensive; however they seem to have created a niche market where they can charge a premium price. That is low volume, high price and no competitor. They have taken the best of digital technology and seamlessly integrated it into the rangefinder tradition. The all-metal Epson Rangefinder R-D1s body incorporates a bright 1.0x viewfinder, so you can compose your image free of distortion or dimming, even in low light. ISO settings range from 200 to 1600, with shutter speeds from 1 second to 1/2000 second.

The camera incorporates full manual and aperture priority auto exposure modes, analogue dials and a hot shoe with X-Sync for external flash. Images can be viewed on a bright 2 inch LCD screen. You can switch between colour and monochrome exposures, change ISO settings shot-by-shot, apply tints, and change saturation instantly to match your photographic style and needs. This camera gives a feeling of creative power and control.

Why is the rangefinder so different, well as there is no swinging mirror (unlike a DSLR), rangefinder lenses can approach very close to the film (or sensor). Some almost touch the shutter, coming within 4-5mm of the sensor. This means that wide angle lenses like a 35, 28, 24, or 19mm can be symmetrical, which makes correcting many kinds of aberrations easy, and makes the lenses relatively cheap and low cost.

A DSLR on the other hand has a mirror and the rear element of an SLR lens can’t approach any closer than 38mm from the sensor. So those wide angles lenses are asymmetrical, using what are called “retro focus” designs, like telephoto lenses, in reverse so the negative elements are to the front, the positive elements face the sensor.

Retro focus lenses for SLRs have exit pupils at least 50mm from the sensor. The exit pupil is the “image” of the aperture, and is the place where light “comes from” before it hits the sensor. With a 50mm exit pupil, a lens won’t have light that’s more than arc tan (43.3mm/2/50mm) = 23.4 degrees from perpendicular to the sensor. This is a bit much for many sensor designs to cope with (look at the corner problems with Canon 5D) and is just on the edge of being acceptable.

Rangefinder lenses have exit pupils at the same distance as their focal length from the sensor. So a 35mm rangefinder lens has a 35mm exit pupil, and the angle on full frame is arc tan(43.3mm/2/35mm) = 31.7 degrees from perpendicular. That lens would work worse than the worst of the “problem lenses” on the Canon 5D. It’s even worse for wider lenses, a 28mm (very popular for rangefinders) is 37.7 deg from perpendicular; it’s pretty much not going to work. A 19mm is 48.7 degrees, forget about it, and forget the 12mm Helier.

The main point is that the rangefinder is a different camera and gives the most film-like output from any professional digital camera on the market.

Die-hard Fujifilm fans are getting impatient as the Fujifilm S4 pro has yet to materialize. According to some sources, indications are that the Fujifilm S4 Pro price point has not been officially determined yet. However that said, my bet is you will see a far different and commonsense approach this time round from Fujifilm than with the S3 Pro. Where the S3 Pro was priced too high according to the competition, the S4 pro might be price closer to the Nikon D200 or lower. I’d go so far as to expect a refreshingly aggressive price point which would maximize Fujifilm’s chances of dramatically increasing their market share in the professional camera market very quickly. Fujifilm have a great advantage in that they produce their own sensor using their own technology.

A very successful Fujifilm S4 Pro will also signify plenty of money in the bank for Nikon. You see, as sales increases, sales on Nikon lenses and their flash unit (SB600 and SB800) also increase. Therefore, assuming the Fujifilm S4 Pro can take sales from the Canon 5D and 1DsMkII market without cannibalizing the Nikon D200 sales, then it’s all sweet music to the ears of both Nikon and Fujifilm executives. A win win situation.

There are many views that the collaboration between Nikon and Fujifilm on the S4 Pro has been exceptionally strong because of this very opportunity, that is, the opportunity to shift current and future professionals and prosumers to the F mount DX format.
Some believe the S4 Pro image quality and resolution will match or surpass that which is currently being offered by the Nikon D2x, Canon 5D or 1DsMkII, so the argument over full frame vs. DX is a mute point. It will all be about image quality - something Fujifilm knows a great deal about because of their pedigree heritage in film. Fuji sensor technology simply has no competitor. The dynamic range of the S3 Pro is in a class of its own.

I expect a lot from the S4 Pro.