Nikon D800 at 36mp, Will Canon Respond?

[Polansky]

I find this rumour very hard to believe.

If true it would kill ALL sales of Nikon 3Ds and 3Dx.
A Prosumer camera that would have more megapixels than its top of the line model for 1/3 of the price.
Probably would have better ISO performance as well then above mentioned two camera's due to technology progressment.

Though Mr. Nikonrumours is 99% sure... I think he misses 298% of his brains to think that Nikon would kill all of its professional equipment overnight.

If true (very hard to believe) and Canon doesn't respond, then Canon will loose all of its userbase within month.
Lets be fair the 5D2 has a supergood sensor and changed the cameramarket with its video capabilities, but its AF sucked from the beginning.

Either the D800 is crippled by e.g. lack of a proper AF system, or this camera will make many Canon users to hop over to the other side.

But lets wait and see.
(Meaby Mr. Nikonrumors was misinformed and got the specs of a new Canon camera to be released on the 26th of october). 

[Meh]

I'm willing to bet it falls over on IQ

Maybe but don't be so sure.  Taking the new Sony sensor as an indication of what's possible the full well saturation is almost as high as some current FF sensors and they got the noise way down leading to very large DR.  A similar design used for a 30-40 MP FF sensor might just result in improved DR, ISO performance, etc. than what we have in FF sensors today.

As I'm digesting Nikon possibly releasing a 36 MP FF sensor, I'm considering Nikon's historical position that they would not sacrifice IQ for resolution.  So the question is have they caved to the MP race or has technology advanced to the point they can offer 36 MP without sacrificing IQ.  I suspect the latter is the case.

[Flake]

I wonder how Nikon users will deal with the double think a camera like this will have them spouting.  For years they've been saying that 12MP is in fact better, less is more and other such- more images per GB - clients don't need or want such big files, bigger pixel sites etc etc.  A 36MP camera will suddenly turn all that on its head, and they'll be having to argue the same words that Canon FF users have been using all these years.

They do have a point with some of their defence of low MP counts 36MP files will triple the processing time needed, 100 images on a D3 pushed through DxO or Capture one will take 3x as long, many will be forced to upgrade PCs and buy new storage which won't hold as much.

I'm happy with 21MP I've never yet been asked for more MP (though I know Nikon users who have been), I'd rather see the technology advances give me better dynamic range / noise; more fps; more shots in the buffer; than a similar performing camera with more MP.  Alternatively I'd be happy for a choice of two cameras one 21MP 7-8fps and a 40MP camera at 3-4fps

[awinphoto]

I wonder how Nikon users will deal with the double think a camera like this will have them spouting.  For years they've been saying that 12MP is in fact better, less is more and other such- more images per GB - clients don't need or want such big files, bigger pixel sites etc etc.  A 36MP camera will suddenly turn all that on its head, and they'll be having to argue the same words that Canon FF users have been using all these years.

I was wondering the same thing

[bchernicoff]

If true (very hard to believe) and Canon doesn't respond, then Canon will loose all of its userbase within month.

This cracks me up. You really think that pro photographers are chomping at the bit to be able to take 7,311 x 4,874 pictures instead of 5,616 × 3,744? They will cast off all their thousands of dollars in Canon lenses and flashes and go buy the equivalent Nikon gear? Taking pictures that are 1700 pixels wider is an overwhelmingly compelling feature to a pro? I guess they feel limited artistically by the extra resolution? Get real.

[Gothmoth]

i hope canon will stay way below 30 MP with it´s next FF camera.
there are more important things to improve then the MP count.

and even average joe customers now know that more and more MP are not that important.

if i have to choose 36MP and 1 stop less dynamic range or 28MP and 1 stop more dynamic range i go for the later.

If true (very hard to believe) and Canon doesn't respond, then Canon will loose all of its userbase within month.

the idiots... maybe. but i would not care.

[wockawocka]

I wonder how Nikon users will deal with the double think a camera like this will have them spouting.  For years they've been saying that 12MP is in fact better, less is more and other such- more images per GB

Nikon also said a photographers ability is dictated by the equipment they use. 

For me it's exciting to think what 4 years of development will bring. I wholely believe that 36mp is possible with great IQ and ISO performance. What I would expect though is a high number of shooting resolutions available relative to the sensor size.

I'm still happy to shoot 21mp at a wedding but for studio I'd prefer to work as large as possible.

[awinphoto]

If true (very hard to believe) and Canon doesn't respond, then Canon will loose all of its userbase within month.

This cracks me up. You really think that pro photographers are chomping at the bit to be able to take 7,311 x 4,874 pictures instead of 5,616 × 3,744? They will cast off all their thousands of dollars in Canon lenses and flashes and go buy the equivalent Nikon gear? Taking pictures that are 1700 pixels wider is an overwhelmingly compelling feature to a pro? I guess they feel limited artistically by the extra resolution? Get real.

I'm a pro photographer and I would look forward to a canon equivalent to this camera.... I'm too invested and shot too long with canon to switch but I on occasion shoot for backgrounds on tradeshow displays... Now I either shoot in peices and merge the photos in Photoshop to create one large photo or upsample in fractals to get the large print... less upsampling or less piecing together to get a natively suitable shot at 150DPI, the better... and no, medium format or large format digi backs aren't in mine or my clients budgets...

[Stuart]

Smile :-) i like how this rumour site is commenting on another rumour site.

Personally i most liked the idea of the low MP FF Canon for a low price. This Nikon one seems to have a poor ISO which is odd.

Come on Nikon publish for real, i want to see Canon & Sony's response - its boring with no announcements.

[eos650]

The 5D Mark II is a great camera. I know several people that have and love them, but I can't bring myself to buy three+ year old technology, believing that a replacement is right around the corner. I have to admit the wait is killing me.

Based on Moore's Law, Canon should be able to get four times as many pixels in their sensor, now, as they could have, three years ago. Of course, it's not always about more pixels, as has been pointed out. There are trade-offs, such as reduced heat, power, noise, etc. Still, I would be surprised if Canon couldn't make a FF sensor that is one or two stops better and still increase the pixel count.

The 5D  was announced on August 22nd, 2005.
The 5D Mark II was announced on September 17th, 2008.

Here are a few things that changed, during those three years (8/2005 to 9/2008):
Megapixels 12.8 increased to 21.1 (60% increase)
Maximum ISO 3200 increased to 25,600 (3 Stop Improvement)
Added 1080p video

Given a similar 3 year time-frame (8/2008 to 10/2011), I believe it's possible that Canon could produce a 5D Mark III with:
33.9 megapixels
Maximum ISO 204,800

Canon has a lot of options and trade-off's to consider when implementing newer technologies and I don't necessarily expect to see a 33.9 megapixel camera with 204,800 ISO, but in theory, based on the leap from the 5D to the 5D MKII, they could.

[marginwalker]

It might be a stretch but perhaps the new sensor on the D800 is a 3 layer sensor like the Sigma foveon? That keep the file sizes the same as 12MP file sizes.

[bchernicoff]

For those of you worried about Canon's response I would like to point out something. The
7D has a 22.3mm x 14.9mm sensor (area of 332.27 sq mm) and takes images that are 5184 x 3456 (17915904 pixels).

17915904  / 332.27 = 53919.72 pixels / square mm

A full-frame sensor is 36mm x 24mm (864sq mm). If Canon used the 7D sensor technology that packs 53919.72 pixels/sq mm on a full-frame sensor it would be 53919.72 * 864 = 46586638.08, which is a little over 46.5 mp.

Canon, using 2 year old sensor technology, could release a 46.5mp full-frame camera with 7D ISO performance. I wouldn't speculate on whether they will choose to do so.

UPDATE: Another thought occurred to me. 46.5 is a little more than twice the 5D Mk II. Wouldn't it be interesting if there was an HDR mode to this sensor which took a 23.2mp image with half the photosites set to one ISO and the other half at a higher ISO?

[kubelik]

I'm absolutely with neuro in that I would prefer a high-MP machine rather than a low-MP.  when I shoot low light I am using a tripod or lighting, either of which negates the need to shoot at some insane ISO.  also, given the amount of time that Canon's spent working on the sensor, I don't believe we need something below 21 MP in order to achieve better image quality.

my relatively modest laptop setup has no problem chewing through 5DII files unless I am trying to stitch together large panoramas; even then, I just need some patience and it will still get there.  you can get a 1TB hard drive nowadays for as much as you spend on a single high-speed CF card; no reason not to invest equally in both in-camera memory and permanent hard drive storage.

I think 46 MP would be a little unnecessarily high, but something in the 30-40MP range would be perfect.  it's just a question of, will canon feel the need to top Nikon at 37MP, or will they be happy with a ~32MP or so camera.

[ronderick]

Since we're on the topic of the D800, I can't help but wonder if the rumored 36 MP sensor is made by Sony or a Nikon-original?

What makes it more interesting is for people who follow Sony stories, you'd probably know about the discontinuation of Sony's FF Camera - and many people suspects that a replacement is also around the corner.

It'll be quite a sight if the announcement of the new baby D collides with a Alpha 900 successor with both using the same sensor technology. 

[Jackson_Bill]

I'm hoping Canon will come out with a full frame with the pixel density of my 7D. I'm not sure I see the advantage of a high ISO (and have not had good experience with using it) over sharpness. On the other hand, what Nikon does really doesn't make a lot of difference to me - I can't afford a new set of lenses.