Digital Camera Information

The full-frame digital format was pioneered by Canon in the EOS-1D of 2002, and they’ve been using it for all their EOS-1–series professional DSLRs, including the current top-of-the-line EOS-1Ds Mark II and, more recently, the extremely successful prosumer EOS 5D. Essentially what makes it possible is Canon’s CMOS sensor technology—a 24×36mm CCD would still be prohibitively expensive at this point, and that’s the main reason why only Kodak and, very briefly, Contax, were the only other companies to field DSLRs using this format.

The advantages of full-frame digital sensors include:

1. The ability to use 35mm SLR lenses, particularly wide angles and ultra wides, without curtailing their angle of view. It does however exposes poor quality optics.

2. Better ability to control depth of field with aperture selection.

3. Larger pixels able to capture more color information and deliver better imaging performance at high ISOs and thus producing less noise. This is more so in low light situations.

The downsides of full-frame DSLRs can be stated as: They tend to be larger, heavier and more expensive than models with smaller sensors. And their lenses have to be larger and heavier as well to cover the larger, oblong 24×36mm format, which doesn’t match standard enlargement sizes like 8×10 and 16×20. Clearly a full-frame DSLR makes a lot of sense for a pro or anyone else with a big investment in wide- and ultra-wide-angle 35mm lenses, and few will quibble with the outstanding image quality provided by the Canon DSLR models cited above.

The question raised by the introduction of the red-hot Canon EOS 5D is therefore not so much a technical question as a marketing question: namely, will Canon or anyone else bring out a consumer full-frame DSLR for, say, $1,000 and blow everything else into the weeds? Answer: Not bloody likely. Canon, in the interest of profitability, seems determined to maintain a two-format policy, remaining steadfastly committed to APS-C–format DSLRs like the new prosumer EOS 30D and the consumer/mass market EOS Rebel XT on the one hand, and the full-frame EOS-1 series and 5D on the other. The twain will not meet in the foreseeable future, and prices for full-format DSLRs will be maintained at the $2,000+ level going forward.

Four Thirds Format

When Olympus unveiled the Olympus E-1 on June 24, 2003, they extolled it as the first DSLR system designed for digital from the ground up. Using a 4/3-type CCD sensor measuring 17.3×13mm with a diagonal of 22.5mm, its aspect ratio is 4:3 (hence Four Thirds,) with a lens mount twice the diameter of the image circle of the lens.

The system is claimed to provide less fall off and superior image quality, especially with wide-angle lenses, by allowing the incoming light to strike the sensor directly rather than at oblique angles. Other advantages of the FT system are: 1. Improved optical efficiency due to a less-oblong format requiring a smaller image circle. 2. Smaller, lighter, easier-to-design lenses, and potentially smaller, lighter camera bodies. 3. The format enlarges directly to popular enlargement sizes like 8×10 and 16×20 with no wasted image area.

While the pro-aimed Olympus E-1 had a tough time going up against such well-entrenched competitors as Nikon and Canon, the FT system has really come into its own with successful consumer DSLR models like the Olympus EVOLT E-300 and the new EVOLT E-330. And the FT system clearly received its biggest shot in the arm yet at PMA 2006 with the announcement of cooperation between Olympus and consumer electronics giant Panasonic, the introduction of Panasonic’s high-end Lumix DMC-L1 using the FT system and a new Leica FT-mount lens, and Sigma’s adding of five new FT-system lenses to the existing line of Olympus and Sigma FT-mount optics.

To say that advocates of the Four Thirds system are ecstatic about these recent developments is an understatement. Many claim that Panasonic and Olympus are now poised to capture a significant market share. Most skeptics acknowledge that the FT system is technically viable, but they question whether those still in the process of moving from 35mm to DSLRs can be persuaded to switch to the FT mount, and whether sufficient numbers of new consumer DSLR buyers will go for an alternative to the still-dominant APS-C format. However, with the marketing and technical prowess of Panasonic behind it, the FT format stands a good chance of success, particularly if Olympus and Panasonic continue to introduce attractive, stylish and compact new DSLR cameras and lenses at competitive price points.

APS-C Format

APS-C is the format that really ignited the DSLR revolution, beginning with pro-aimed models from Nikon and Canon. Eventually, as prices came down and the market broadened, enthusiast and consumer models were offered by every major SLR maker, notably Pentax and Konica Minolta, and now Samsung and Sony. With a 2:3 aspect ratio like 35mm, APS-C enabled 35mm SLR owners to make a reasonably seamless transition to digital, and as the top models from Nikon, Canon and Pentax prove, this format is certainly capable of delivering professional quality images.

Actually APS-C is only a nominal format designation. Most DSLRs using it have CCD or CMOS sensors measuring 22.5×15mm, giving a multiplication factor of 1.6 when calculating 35mm-equivalent focal lengths. Nikon uses the DX system with slightly larger CCD sensors measuring 23.6×15.8mm, which works out to a multiplication factor of 1.5.

Telephoto fans are thrilled with APS-C because their tele lenses are “longer” thanks to the “cropping factor,” but wide-angle fans generally have to buy new wide-angle lenses and wide zooms specifically designed for APS-C–format cameras. Lens makers have been very happy to oblige, creating many outstanding new lenses that will only work on APS-C DSLRs. And while APS-C does not enlarge directly to 8×10 without cropping, it sure provides full-frame 4×6s that are vastly more popular among amateurs.

Of course since 2003 the ’super zoom’ market has ballooned and consumers on a budget have got a lot more options open to them. Crucially the one thing that is most likely to help ‘point and shoot’ big zoom users get a higher hit rate, image stabilization, is no longer restricted to the top end of the market, and no longer commands a huge price premium. This means any ‘budget’ super zoom without IS needs to offer an awful lot - at an awfully good price - to be considered a serious competitor.

And so we get to the Z650. Although it offers some real improvements over the Z740 (better picture quality, larger screen), it’s more evolutionary than radical. Like its predecessor it’s actually a very nice camera, and an easy and (usually) enjoyable one to use, and the color is typical Kodak - rich, vivid and generally very accurate. It’s also very compact, has excellent photographic controls and is very easy to use. The results won’t win it any awards for detail or sharpness, but - once you’ve spent a few days with it and learned its foibles - the Z650 is capable of a very high hit rate, and unless you print at sizes above 5×7 inches the output is perfectly tuned for the target market.

But in the final analysis the Z650 - like the Olympus SP-500UZ - falls between two stools. The price is undoubtedly keen, but there needs to be much more clear blue water between it and models such as the Panasonic FZ7, which you can get for around $40 more - less than the price of a decent steak dinner. And the FZ7 will give you sharper results, a higher level of specification and - crucially - optical image stabilization (not to mention a better aperture range and higher zoom factor). And if you act quickly you could pick up a Konica Minolta Z6 for even less. And if the Z650 is aimed at the ‘point and shoot’ brigade then surely they don’t need all those manual controls, and would be happier with something pocketable like the new Panasonic TZ1 - or even Kodak’s own recently announced V610?

It’s such a non-issue I’d never have found it if I hadn’t tried to repeat it out of curiosity. I’ve made over 8,000 shots with my D200 and have never seen this except for when I tried to reproduce it.

The D70’s non-issue was an infinitesimal hue shift only slightly visible at 1/8,000 of a second at ISO 200, which of course was a condition under which no one would ever photograph.

The D200’s non-issue happens if you severely overexpose (blow out) a large portion of the image at ISO 400. When viewed at 100% there may be a mild vertical striping, banding or corduroy effect in moderately exposed sections. You have to blow out a large portion of the image in exactly the right way to cast exactly the right striped veil over the darker parts of the image. Images that show this striping are so blown out that my grandma would be smart enough to delete them in the camera before she ever got to looking for this nuance on her computer at 100%. Even then these bands only appear under just the right combination of bad exposure.

Inheriting the legacy of the Konica Minolta mount system*, α (pronounced alpha) is your connection to the over 16 million compatible lenses sold throughout the world to date. Sony has integrated this renowned mount system with its own leading imaging technology, giving rise to a new breed of digital SLR camera.

α takes its rightful place alongside Sony Handycam video recorders and Cyber-shot compact digital cameras. With the addition of α, you may now choose from a truly complete range of digital cameras, opening up the opportunity to explore the untapped possibilities of digital imaging.

α is far more than just a high-quality SLR camera; it is a way for you to expand the boundaries of your creativity. Every aspect of α has been designed to inspire those who love photography and seek to express themselves through imaging. Sony’s commitment to creating a new world of possibilities through α is unwavering.

“The Fuji Photo Film Co Ltd of Japan has made a breakthrough with the development of a new complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS) sensor by using an organic photoelectric conversion film, and successfully captured a monochrome image with it (Refer to figure 1). Earlier, The Science & Technical Research Laboratories of Japan Broadcasting Corp (NHK) of Japan had the same success; however this was in combination with an imaging tube and not with a CMOS sensor.

Fuji Photo Film has simplified the process by encapsulating the organic photoelectric conversion film with a signal read circuit (made with CMOS technology) into a semiconductor package. This makes it much easier than an imaging tube to use in a compact consumer camera.

Research and development in the field is likely to grow exponentially now that Fuji Photo Film has started work on an organic CMOS sensor, claimed by some to be the ideal imaging device.

The company did not discuss when the organic CMOS sensor might be commercialized. The development does represent a major step forward, however, in that an actual image was output using a standard signal read circuit and a green organic photoelectric conversion film (Refer to Figure 2). Compared to blue or red, green has a greater effect on image brightness information. Future development efforts seem likely to concentrate on process technology, finding ways to make the organic photoelectric conversion films flat and free of foreign matter.

Saving Light
The reason the organic CMOS sensor has been referred to as the ideal imaging sensor is its structure. Existing imaging devices extract only specific wavelengths, using color filters, and convert them to charges. In the green image, for example, blue and red light is discarded. The organic CMOS sensor, however, uses all visible light thanks to a vertical stack of organic photoelectric conversion films (Figure 3, p53). The per-pixel optical utilization is tripled, making it possible that sensitivity would be significantly higher than that of existing imagers.

CMOS sensors with photoelectric converters for each color aligned vertically have already been commercialized by Foveon Inc of the US. The wavelength sensitivity of each converter is fairly low, however, making it necessary to use special image processing before accurate colors can be obtained. The green organic CMOS sensor from Fuji Photo Film, on the other hand, offers wavelength selectivity close to that of silver nitrate film. A source at the firm explained, “We applied the organic colorant technology gained through our work in silver nitrate film and other products.” Evaluation results for the red and blue organic photoelectric conversion films were not presented.

What’s brought this to a head now, however, is a substantial increase in our offline work. Mike’s freelance business is booming these days, with shooting commitments kicking off next week that will keep him buried in pixels through the end of the summer at least. For me, things begin to get similarly hairy starting at the beginning of May, with an unprecedented amount of both assignment work and training-related travel through the summer. And, starting a bit later this year, Mike Sturk and I are teaming up in a new photography-related venture that will be a full-time gig unto itself.

For some time, we’ve been ignoring the signs that these forums have grown too big for us to steer. We’ve purposely turned a blind eye to this evidence, because we’ve seen that thousands of photographers have benefited and continue to benefit from their existence and we’ve really wanted to keep them going for that reason. But as we were discussing our shooting and training plans for 2006 earlier this year, it became clear that we couldn’t put off a hard decision any longer: we were going to have to divest ourselves of the day-to-day running of these forums.