Digital BW, The Print

Ernst,

>...
> The fact that the 350D is affordable and
> delivers the 20D quality makes it so good. The low noise of the Canon
> CMOS sets new standards...

Add that to my having a bunch of Canon lenses and an old EOS that is dying,
and it made the purchase of the 350D (Digital Rebel XT in the U.S.) a rather
easy decision.

> There's a steady progress for all sensor sizes and types in signal/noise
> and dynamic range and the price of resolution is going down too.

Yes, I've followed the semiconductor industry for years.  They have been
saying they'll hit the wall for years, but the wall has kept receding as
they approach it.  The progress will probably continue for at least as long
as I'm alive (and I care much less about after than time).

> Kodak's 4/3 like used in the Olympus SLRs has far too much noise.

When I saw Intel give up on the technology at least a decade ago, I read it
as a big signal.  Dominant companies like Kodak almost never can make the
transition when there is a paradigm change.  It's sad to see the giants
whither, but that is the nature of things.


> Olympus should revive their Pen Ft models with APS sensors.

That was a fine little camera.  You're right.

> I'm still expecting a Konica-Minolta that will shift its sensor half a
> pixel in 4 takes. Its anti-shake technology asks for an extension like
> that. Others will follow. What will be a nice 10 MP for action is then
> also a nice 40 MP landscape camera on the tripod.

Yes, I think the Konica-Minolta concept could be a breakthrough. 

> That's what keeps me from buying the Canon 350D right now. The next
> generation will still follow Moore's law and come with twice what this
> generation offers...

Yes, but if one follows that argument too much in a high technology field
like this, one never does anything.  I felt it was time to get in, in part
to not get too far behind the learning curve.  And, it's just plain fun to
explore a new technology.  So, like with my old EOS -- the first affordable
Canon AF with mirror lock up -- when enough of my requirements are met, I
jump, even if I know next year I'll be salivating over the newer, better
model.

Bear in mind that Moore's law does not entirely apply to this field.  It is
based to a significant degree on the shrinking die size of the individual
chips.  With camera sensors, there will probably be plateaus of stability.
The chip sizes will decrease, but since there will be economies of scale in
the lens and other ancillary fields, that might lead to the sensors tending
to stay at a given size for some time. I expect stair steps in that size
decrease, but it's speculation.  


> An 18-55 mm zoom will be enough for me
> too. Maybe a zoom that's a bit shorter + a macro prime of 60 mm if I can
> afford it. 

Canon has a nice, but not cheap 10 - 22 mm EF-S zoom that is tempting, but
not cheap.  That plus a good macro f 2.8 (or better) fixed focus 50 or 60
might be the ticket. 

The worst part of the 350D I've found so far is the tripod handling.  I miss
the big, easy to read dials.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com