Upgrading patterns

[Jeremy_Jachym]

[ QUOTE ]
Bloomberg reports that both Canon and Nikon are expecting digital SLRs to account for a larger portion of each company's camera production this year, and that together the companies control 80% of the digital SLR market.

[/ QUOTE ]

OpenRaw is attempting to unite digital photographers to force camera manufacturers to to publicly document their RAW image formats. A discussion on the potential merits and pitfalls of doing so can be found at the following link: http://forums.robgalbraith.com/showf...&page=0#342902
I have read a number of posts regarding camera manufacturers milking their upgrades using pixels as their biggest bait, while allowing other concerns to fall by the wayside.
Since this forum gathers so many photographers and considering Bloomberg's claim that digital SLRs will account for a "large portion of each company's camera production" why not unite Nikon & Canon users and create a list of improvements we would like to see. The way I see it is digital photography is still in it's infancy and so is the pattern of upgrades. If photographers are happy with the way things are running let the ball continue to roll, but if you also believe that technological advancements should take precedence over marketing then let's see if there's something we can do about that.
Take for example foveon chips. From what I've read and understood they seem to be the real deal. Said another way: the chips design is more technologically advanced then Bayer sensors. Apparently Sigma has an exclusive 2 year contract with the manufacturers of this chip. Perhaps instead of releasing the mark 3 a year and a half from now with 22 million mega pixels (purely speculation) Canon & Nikon could explore another direction encouraged by it's clientele: a new chip design that captures full red, green & blue channels?
By no means am I the most articaulate character or claim to have a very solid technical understanding of digital photography. First and foremost I'm writing this to begin a dialogue about what photographers think about camera manufacturers upgrading patterns. Best,

Jeremy

[MarkTDavidson]

The problem is that when they say DSLRs will make up x percent of the market, they mean that 85% of those DSLRs will be the entry level models like the Rebel etc. Pros trying to choose equipment are not swayed by a new digital ZX-50 from Pentax though a consumer might.

These companies are not photo saints ready to risk the company for what is technically excellent or best. They are shareholder owned businesses that have to explain to the shareholders (owners) a long range plan of growth and market dominance.

It was several years ago that consumer digital cameras exceeded the quality of point and shoot 35mm cameras so as far as quality is concerned consumers never had it so good ever.

I would also argue that with the exception of a few niches, pros have never had it so good either. I never dreamed , in 1974, that I would one day own a camera that could shoot 8FPS while keeping a moving subject in focus automatically, have a 250 flash synch, have ISOs up to 3200 and allow me to enlarge to 40x60 without a thought to grain. And with only a stack of cards smaller than a roll of 35mm film allow me to shoot all day.

[KirkDarling]

To go along with what Mark said, Canon and Sony (Nikon's sensor manufacturer) have invested tens of millions of yen in R&D of their own sensors, with those dollars amortized by future earnings. There is probably zero chance that they'll license or adopt a "not invented here" sensor until their own sensors have earned those R&D yen back--especially considering that the Foveon hasn't been so much superior to their own offerings that they're losing major sales to Sigma.

I suspect both Canon and Sony have their own answers to the same problems that the Foveon solve, and I expect they'll integrate those answers as predicitons of profitability allow.

The question of change--especially a sudden change induced from outside--will always provoke the question from stockholders: What's in it for us? Unless someone can quantify what they will save or what they will earn in solid yen, change is very difficult. "For the good of mankind" doesn't hack it.

I'd also echo Mark in my astonishment of just how good things are these days. Getting a good 11x14 from 35mm used to take a heck of a lot of very careful effort and the best technque from shooting through printing. These days, even better (technically speaking) images just roll out of the cameras. I'm not expecting perfection, I'm just expecting continuous improvement, and so far I've never been disappointed--things just keep getting better and better. People who flock to every next new gadget with the expectation that it will finally raise them to Nirvana will always be disappointed.


"Watson was an extremely intelligent character. He only seemed dull when placed against the brilliance of Holmes."

[DavidHarpe]

I currently have two 1DMKII's and a 1DsMkII. The 8MP cameras are used for 90% of my jobs because 17MP would be overkill. I haven't had a job yet where I've wished I've had more megapixels past the 17MP 1DsMkII.

I'm content with the raw resolution of the cameras I have. If Canon comes out with a 12MP D2X competetor, I won't be buying it. If they come out with a $10,000 24MP beast, I probably wouldn't be buying that either...at least not out of NEED :-).

What WOULD make me upgrade is high dynamic range versions of the cameras I already own. A true 16 or 24 bit per channel DR out to ISO1600 would be awesome.

Dave

[KirkDarling]

[ QUOTE ]
I currently have two 1DMKII's and a 1DsMkII. The 8MP cameras are used for 90% of my jobs because 17MP would be overkill. I haven't had a job yet where I've wished I've had more megapixels past the 17MP 1DsMkII.

I'm content with the raw resolution of the cameras I have. If Canon comes out with a 12MP D2X competetor, I won't be buying it. If they come out with a $10,000 24MP beast, I probably wouldn't be buying that either...at least not out of NEED :-).

What WOULD make me upgrade is high dynamic range versions of the cameras I already own. A true 16 or 24 bit per channel DR out to ISO1600 would be awesome.

Dave

[/ QUOTE ]

Shooting portraits, I can manipulate dynamic range, but I want the ability to make highly detailed 40x60 prints. I'd be first in line for that 10,000 24mp camera.

Horeses for courses.