Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/09/21

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] new 1ds mark II
From: dorysrus at (Don Dory)
Date: Tue Sep 21 19:39:14 2004

You all ask how big the files are?  Well the rule of thumb is an
expanded RAW file is three times bigger, three times 16 is 48 so your
full frame files after your RAW conversion will hit close to 50 MB.

An earlier poster hinted at the other reason why more is better.  Unlike
film, in the digital realm, if a detail is too small to resolve on the
sensor pixel pitch, it doesn't show up.  So a 5-6mp camera looks sharp
while leaving a lot of information missing.  Three years ago all the
manufacturers were showing 20X30 prints or bigger from their 3-5mp
cameras.  You guessed it, lots of bold color, not much fine detail.  Now
that 8mp is common, the detail showed up again, but only in things like
pores on the skin.  You did not see the detail in feathers or the
cellular structure in a flower petal.  I suspect that you will see this
detail with the 16mp sensors.

As to why anyone would want this camera, how many medium format cameras
were sold to pro's.  What about landscape photographers who have had to
tote large format camera's out into the world?  What Canon is doing is
trying to peel off the upper end photographers.  Pretty much what Leica
and Rollei did in the forties and fifties?  I think you would be
surprised how many cameras are sold in this range.

Another question about expense is, would you like to pay $16000 for the
same number of pixels in a medium format back, or how about $22000 for a
22mp medium format back.  Remember, no body, no lens, no meter, no
finder, just the imaging back.  Also, remember that these are not full
frame so wide angles are an issue for these backs.

Canon must be laughing all the way to the bank at $8000 a pop,
especially since they make their own chips.


-----Original Message-----
[] On Behalf
Of Feli di Giorgio
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2004 8:52 PM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] new 1ds mark II

On Tue, 2004-09-21 at 18:12, Adam Bridge wrote:
> But this isn't out of line for scanned film at all! In fact a full
> frame scan of 35mm in 16-bit color is going to be on the neighborhood
> of 120MB/image. 

The 1DsII is 12-bit (4992 x 3328).

> But where are you getting a full-frame image of 50MB?

That's what I read. Seemed to make sense to me since my Nikon SC 5000 ED
puts out a 60ish MB file @ 4000dpi/16bit color (3,946 x 5,959).

> The RAW file for the camera is going to match the pixel-count or
> roughly 17 MB/image. They'll expland a lot after you process them in
> your RAW converter and move them into 16-bit space for real work.

> I think it's not as bad as your back-of-the-envelop computations
> Adam

So, how big do you estimate them to be? Do I need a new pencil?


Leica Users Group.
See for more information

Replies: Reply from bdcolen at (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] new 1ds mark II)
Reply from bladman99 at (Dan C) ([Leica] new 1ds mark II)
Reply from feli at (Feli di Giorgio) ([Leica] new 1ds mark II)
In reply to: Message from feli at (Feli di Giorgio) ([Leica] new 1ds mark II)