April 24, 2014, 09:17:22 AM

Author Topic: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]  (Read 162893 times)

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • *******
  • Posts: 12842
    • View Profile
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #675 on: February 27, 2012, 06:54:06 PM »
Quote
...because if 36 MP is better than 22 MP, then 41 MP must be even better!  Plus, no more fussing about with all those heavy, expensive lenses, and you still get to use Zeiss glass...  :P

Well...let's not let common sense get in the way of a good argument! I'm sure the new Nokia phone will get lotsa kids excited, but why don't we stay on point?!!

The simple fact is that 36MP is better than 22MP and there is no logical reason to believe otherwise. I've watched Canon let its long-held lead in the professional digital race get whittled down by both Nikon and Sony over the past few years and really don't care to stick around while other camera makers come out with better products.

Well, I could argue that the folks at Nikon have sung a very different tune for the past several years, until their recent paradigm shift. But...I won't argue that because I think you're right and they're not.

@Brian - I suspect a high ISO shot, with similar sensor tech, but one downsampled from 36 MP vs. 22 MP for the same 16x20" print, the downsampled one would show less noise. 

Barring the limits of diffraction, I'd rather have more MP and not need them than need them and not have them.  Storage is cheap, my computers are fast, there's no real downside.

But I will remind that Canon explicitly stated that if the market 'demanded' it, they could rapidly develop a high MP FF dSLR. Given that sensors take years to develop, that statement implies they have such a sensor ready, and even prototype cameras built around it (although the statement could easily be a bald-faced PR lie).  So, it's likely that if the D800 is very popular, Canon can and will respond, fairly soon, even if it's only an 'in-development' announcement like the 200-400mm lens.

Plus, despite the 36 MP vs. 22 MP debate, it wouldn't surprise me at all, given the current state of market share, for the 5DIII to outsell the D800 once they're going head-to-head.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #675 on: February 27, 2012, 06:54:06 PM »

briansquibb

  • Guest
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #676 on: February 27, 2012, 07:01:06 PM »

@Brian - I suspect a high ISO shot, with similar sensor tech, but one downsampled from 36 MP vs. 22 MP for the same 16x20" print, the downsampled one would show less noise. 


I was thinking along the lines where a 22mp sensor was optimised for low noise as compared to a sensor that was designed for high mp.

Recent example that this shows up was the noink D3

« Last Edit: February 27, 2012, 07:05:18 PM by briansquibb »

Brad Trent

  • Guest
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #677 on: February 27, 2012, 07:19:27 PM »

But I will remind that Canon explicitly stated that if the market 'demanded' it, they could rapidly develop a high MP FF dSLR. Given that sensors take years to develop, that statement implies they have such a sensor ready, and even prototype cameras built around it (although the statement could easily be a bald-faced PR lie).  So, it's likely that if the D800 is very popular, Canon can and will respond, fairly soon, even if it's only an 'in-development' announcement like the 200-400mm lens.

Plus, despite the 36 MP vs. 22 MP debate, it wouldn't surprise me at all, given the current state of market share, for the 5DIII to outsell the D800 once they're going head-to-head.

A couple of things...

Unless Canon actually does have a 30+MP model ready for Photokina, at best it would still take them a year to get any new product to the market. If my own anecdotal evidence can be used as a benchmark, that might be too late for a lotta pros who are ready to jump to Nikon. I have spoken to countless numbers of friends...all dedicated 5D mkII users...who are extremely interested in the D800. And for all the same reasons I am...because the higher megapixel count will be greatly appreciated by advertising clients. Of course a wedding guy doesn't need a 36mp chip to do his job, but I do.

As for a new 5DIII outselling the D800, that's kind of a no-brainer, but only because Canon already has a much greater market share and of those users, there are a lot of reasons why they wouldn't be inclined to change to Nikon. A lot probably don't make a living at photography, some are perfectly happy with the current megapixel count and then there are the guys who have tens of thousands invested in glass. In my case, all I would have to replace is a 50 f1.2, 85 f1.2, 16-35mm and 70-200mm zooms...compared to a lotta guys, that's nothing!

KitH

  • Guest
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #678 on: February 27, 2012, 07:21:57 PM »
Mike f2   

Hang on to your money until after NAB (April) in Las Vegas.   We should be seeing decent comparisons between the new products by then and there'll be demo content to see from everyone.   

Is your username an aperture or a very old Nikon?   Because you're training up in video, you really ought to consider being a "T" value instead of an "f".     

Anyway, welcome. it's a nutty as a bag of squirrels around here at the moment. 

Orion

  • Guest
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #679 on: February 27, 2012, 07:38:32 PM »
. . .  and I dont mean any offence to anyone..

. . . you say that as if we all married Canon. Say what you want about the company and its products, as long as it is not a waste of time. You have to comnsider everything, including the tech you want to invest in, and WHY! A few hundred $$$ for a person in a techy/artsy business should be the last thing on their mind. Especailly since the new product they seek and complain about isn't even out yet, nor a price mentioned, officially!

It all boggles the mind, comming from a person in media satudies and production, etc. . . . WOW!


BUT... most of you are extolling the OHHH got to have it and these features are worth it.. THERE IS A FULL ON RECESSION On out there..

. . . then buy a previous model, like the 7D or 5DmkII . . . since you choose to use the recession as the main factor.

I am looking for my first and probably last DSLR.. and Ive chosen Canon..CORRECTION I did choose Canon..

wonderful! maybe if you go to Nikon, you won't have so much pressures with price, etc, or maybe try another manufacturer, that can give you quality and price, etc. . . much to choose from and Nikon and Canon are just tops, but not the be all and end all of cameras for people complaining about price and product. search and see what is best for you, after you consider everything.

My decision was based on I work In Media live Broadcasting and have gone from vision engineer to trainee Video cameraman in 2 Years.. and Ive decided to learn the job properly and to do that I feel I need to start with STILLS  and perfect that alongside Video work..Sorry if am boring you all but am old fashioned and if I do something I do it right..

. . . this is really beyond the scope but, you do not need stills knowlewdge to learn video and vice versa. They both have aspects that are shared, but those are learnt as you progress in either field.

The high price thats been banded is Not justifyable.. take a step back and look.. Canon release a slightly improved camera at greatly inflated prices, sell a shed load to the must have new brigade or the canon pros get em at greatly discounted prices for the product to be seen out on the street then when its sales figures start to drop the price falls..ready for the next model.. and to be honest most on here are actually helping Canon Improve there sales by justifying the price.. Listen to YOURSELVES !!

Nikon is at 3300, and the Canon is slated to be @ 3500. . . what if Canon is using better AF and more chips than the D800, and new sensor design. WHy would anyone compare 3300 to 3500!? Who cares!? And to switch to another manufacturer, based on pricing policy when there is such little difference . . . . . . I honestly don't understand why so much beef. . . . if you want a pro system, then don;t argue and change plans based around a few hundred $$$. At the very least wait for a final release date and see for yourself before talking about price and switching. Something just doesn't seem logical, coming from a "vision engineer to trainee Video cameraman. . . ."

START realising and take a stance.. SAY NO (IEI)  TO Canon s Pricing structure and Demand a reasonable price to new product Pricing for Loyalty..to the Canon brand.. its you who can do this..

There is no loyalty! Canon, as well as Nikon, has to make sure they do not fall too far back in tech, and actually keep pace or succeed in order to maintain some sort of market share. Our "loyalty" should only go as far as where you want to spend your money: on this company's priduct or another company's product, all things considered. Loyalty, otherwise, is for weak minded individuals that fail to realise certain aspecxts of thier careers, and how tech and a company's products hinder or maintain that career, etc etc etc etc.. .  . .

Let's start complaining about the price of coffee, as that of 100yrs ago, or the price of bread and coffee in Europe after the intor of the EURO, for god's sake! Or the price of Nike shoes!? . . . or the prioce of the new LED 3D TVs, and then come back in 2 years and find how cheap they are, compared. . . . it's all meaningless, just about.

I have managed to get £1500-£2000 together towards  a decent Camera  BUT I WILL NOT give that money away ..SO am now going to Look at some NIKON (spit) hardware as well

Oh! So, I guess Nikon will comfort that need of yours, concerning price and products, as opposed to Canon! It's the same thing, oh weary consumer!

SO CANON THIS MIGHT BE ONE SALE YOU HAVE LOST..

M (DISAPPOINTED..)

. . .they are betting on your use of "MIGHT." We still have hope for you haha ;)

jrista

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 3266
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #680 on: February 27, 2012, 10:50:22 PM »
I am not sure if you are just being sarcastic, but you realize that at 62mp, not more than 2-3 lenses in Canon's entire lineup could resolve enough detail at any aperture to actually use all those pixels, right?


I'm really sick of people saying this sort of thing, since it's totally false.

Here's what the full-frame version of 184MP looks like on the old 100-400L (18MP 1.6-crop + 2x TC = 72MP on 1.6 crop = 184MP on full-frame)

http://photos.imageevent.com/sipphoto/samplepictures/T2i__3574%20edited.jpg

Yeah, in the corners of many lenses you're going to start having trouble at higher pixel densities, but you're still going to get more detail than you would with less pixel density.  You can't add pixels and get a less detailed shot, and on the better lenses, you're going to get more and more detailed.

Here's 288MP on crop (18MP + 4x = 18*4*4 = 288) or 737MP (288*1.6*1.6) on full-frame through the 400/2.8L (the old one):

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=37493247


I don't really get your math there...an 18mp sensor is an 18mp sensor, it will never produce an image with more than 18 million pixels in it. The number of pixels in the image has nothing to do with "resolution" as I'm using it. I believe you are mixing the concept of magnification (reproduction factor) with spatial resolution. They are not the same. Just because you magnify the moon enough such that, if you took a collage of photos of the whole moon at a given reproduction factor that, when combined, produce a 288mp image, does NOT mean that you have a 288mp sensor or lens, nor does it mean you can resolve beyond a certain degree of detail fineness. I'm not referring to total image resolution, magnification, reproduction factor, etc...I am referring to spatial resolution.

Spatial resolution is limited by optical aberrations at maximum aperture, which usually overpower diffraction, and limited by diffraction at narrower apertures. There are few lenses in Canon's lineup that offer near-perfect image reproduction (i.e. near-perfect lens characteristics) at maximum aperture, and once you stop down beyond about f/5.6, diffraction reduces spatial resolution below that which can be captured by Canon's highest density sensors (which are the 18mp APS-C sensors, or what would be a 47mp FF sensor.) The 500/4, 600/4, 70-200/2.8 II, 300/2.8, and a couple others get pretty darn close at maximum aperture, and nearly 100% at f/8 (which is limited to a max of 86 lp/mm by diffraction), but still less than perfect. Assuming perfection in a lens at f/4, you could resolve as much as 173 lp/mm, and some of Canon's lenses do indeed get very close to that (at least theoretically, I don't know if any of Canon's MTF's are actually real, and independent lab tests that produce real MTF charts for Canon lenses usually tend to indicate far lower than "perfect" lens resolution.)

Here is a simple matter of PHYSICS:

Any and all lenses, no matter who designs it or how perfectly it may be designed, at f/5.6, MTF 50% (about the minimum for a camera to effectively resolve two nearly overlapping points of light as distinct...i.e. neighboring line pairs), is capable of an absolute maximum spatial resolution of 123 lp/mm, assuming total perfection. It would take roughly a 52mp FF sensor, or a 20mp APS-C sensor, to resolve exactly that much detail...WITH an AA filter. We know for a fact that the 100-400 is NOT a perfect, diffraction-limited lens at 400/5.6, by a fair percentage. As someone who shoots with this lens for roughly 12-16 hours every weekend, and several more hours during the week, I can state with confidence that this lens does not resolve more detail than my 7D can resolve itself...at best it can resolve just about enough in the center...116lp/mm. That would be a loss of reproduction accuracy from "perfect" of about 5-6% (beyond margin of error.)

Now, if you slap on TWO additional 2x TC's, that you reduce the maximum aperture to f/22!!! At f/22, MTF 50%, your absolute maximum resolution shrinks to a meager 31lp/mm!!! A mere 3.3mp FF camera, or 1.2mp APS-C camera, would be sufficient to capture maximum detail at f/22. Every lens is diffraction limited by f/22, so our 100-400mm with two 2x TC's can certainly resolve that maximum of 31lp/mm.

Lets assume a modern sensor is capable of resolving detail at Rayleigh, which is an MTF of 9%. The human eye can barely discern detail at this level, and it is a far superior imaging device with cones and rods packed to a density an order of magnitude higher than sensor pixels, not to mention its powered by a vastly superior image processor. But, lets just assume that a modern camera is capable of discerning detail enough at a contrast level of only 9%. At f/22,  you could resolve about 68 lp/mm. You could capture maximum detail at that aperture with a 16mp FF sensor, or a 6mp APS-C sensor.

Thats nothing to say of the increase in optical aberrations with two 2x TC's stacked on top of the already less than perfect 100-400mm lens.

There is no way your resolving enough spatial resolution to equal 288mp with the 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 lens with TWO 2x TC's tacked onto the end. You might be able to achieve a reproduction factor that would produce a 288mp image if you took a collage of photos at 1600mm. When it comes to the moon, average contrast is very, very low, far lower than say the barbs on the feathers of a bird or even individual hairs on a deer or elk, or a myriad of other common subjects photographed with the 100-400mm L, so your probably safe computing resolution based on an MTF @ 10-12% contrast, rather than 50%. You'll get closer to that physical maximum of 68 lp/mm rather than 31 lp/mm, but there is little chance your actually going to resolve enough spatial resolution to utilize everything an 18mp sensor has to offer, let alone a 288mp sensor.

Don't confuse spatial resolution, which is how the resolution of lenses is measured with MTF charts, with reproduction factor, or effective magnification that a lens is blowing a subject up by. Two very different concepts.

For reference: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/resolution.shtml
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: Canon 5D III/7D II | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

jrista

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 3266
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #681 on: February 27, 2012, 11:01:12 PM »

I am not sure if you are just being sarcastic, but you realize that at 62mp, not more than 2-3 lenses in Canon's entire lineup could resolve enough detail at any aperture to actually use all those pixels, right? You max out at 46mp, which is about 116lp/mm, which is right about where Canon's newest L-series lenses top out at their best aperture as well...which seems to be somewhere between f/4 and f/5.6 most of the time. The only few lenses from Canon that I think could resolve enough detail for 62mp are the new 500mm and 600mm L II lenses (which as of yet are still unreleased) and possibly the forthcoming 200-400 L...and even then, their maximum aperture is f/4, so 173lp/mm.

I don't believe that is the case. I thought some lenses were measured well above that. Plus the total resolution is a combination of sensor and lens that is not direct. Even the worst kit ever made delivers a more detailed image on a 7D than a 40D. A 70-200 + 1.4x TC still delivers more detail on a 7D. A 300 2.8 + TWO TCs still does on a 7D too.

Well sure, the 40D is a 10mp sensor, where as the 7D is an 18mp sensor. Were talking a 33% increase in resolution for the 7D. If we take the 18-55 at 55/5.6, assuming it was a perfect lens (and we know its far from it) it could resolve 123 lp/mm. Assuming the 18-55 kit, given how poor its IQ is (I've owned a couple of these, of differing generations, and all of them exhibit remarkably bad CA at max aperture at all focal lengths), only resolves 100lp/mm. The 40D is incapable of resolving even that much at 87lp/mm, so moving from the 40D to the 7D, which can resolve 116lp/mm, is obviously going to capture more detail. ;)

The 300/2.8 is one of the few Canon lenses that approaches perfection at f/2.8 (and you really pay for it, too, at nearly $7000). I would say the 70-200/2.8 II is another (although based on the MTF charts, the original 70-200/2.8 I is NOT...but it would be the same situation as the 18-55 when comparing the 40D to the 7D with that lens, stacked TC's or not.) These are the reasons I try to evaluate resolution on this forum as spatial resolution...in line pairs per millimeter (vs. megapixels or line widths per picture height), as its easy to explain why you might see such an improvement when moving from a 40D to a 7D, even with Canon's bottom-barrel lenses.
« Last Edit: February 27, 2012, 11:03:28 PM by jrista »
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: Canon 5D III/7D II | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

canon rumors FORUM

Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #681 on: February 27, 2012, 11:01:12 PM »

apeshot

  • Guest
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #682 on: February 27, 2012, 11:19:14 PM »


BUT... most of you are extolling the OHHH got to have it and these features are worth it.. THERE IS A FULL ON RECESSION On out there..



Say, as long as we're handing out free Physics lessons, can we also have an Econ reminder.  The recession has now been over for nearly twice as long as it ever even lasted.  The recession was 18 months long, but it ended nearly three years ago.  Trust me, I know we haven't returned to full-employment, but we've been in a slowly exapansionary period for nearly three years now. 

Buy the 5dII or the 7d depending on how you want to use it, you'll love it.  Or, buy the Nikon 800.  It seems a little odd and ironic that you would write such a passionate Dear Sir letter telling people they are being too passionate about Canon.  The market will set the price.  I love the fact that Nikon has stepped their game up, we all win.

jrista

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 3266
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #683 on: February 27, 2012, 11:21:07 PM »
The market will set the price.

'nuff said! :D
My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: Canon 5D III/7D II | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

jrista

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 3266
  • POTATO
    • View Profile
    • Nature Photography
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #684 on: February 27, 2012, 11:37:56 PM »
I'm really sick of people saying this sort of thing, since it's totally false.

Here's what the full-frame version of 184MP looks like on the old 100-400L (18MP 1.6-crop + 2x TC = 72MP on 1.6 crop = 184MP on full-frame)

http://photos.imageevent.com/sipphoto/samplepictures/T2i__3574%20edited.jpg


BTW, the image linked above there is a remarkable demonstration of the detail-eating power of diffraction at f/22. :) There is VERY visible diffraction softening of that moon photo that wouldn't be present if you used only 1 2x TC, and you could probably upscale the f/11 shot to the same resolution as this one and still have more detail, or at least as much, as the f/22 version.

My Photography
Current Gear: Canon 7D | Canon EF 600mm f/4 L IS II | EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS | EF 16-35mm f/2.8 L | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro | 50mm f/1.4
New Gear List: Canon 5D III/7D II | Canon EF 300mm f/2.8 L II

Ricku

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 494
    • View Profile
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #685 on: February 27, 2012, 11:45:23 PM »
most of you are extolling the OHHH got to have it and these features are worth it.. THERE IS A FULL ON RECESSION On out there..

I am looking for my first and probably last DSLR.. and Ive chosen Canon..CORRECTION I did choose Canon..

My decision was based on I work In Media live Broadcasting and have gone from vision engineer to trainee Video cameraman in 2 Years.. and Ive decided to learn the job properly and to do that I feel I need to start with STILLS  and perfect that alongside Video work..Sorry if am boring you all but am old fashioned and if I do something I do it right..

 Therefore I was looking at the 7D and at a stretch a 5D mk II.. reasons were get something good and develop with it..not swap and change.. then the 5D Mk III has appeared on the horizon..

BUT
The high price thats been banded is Not justifyable.. take a step back and look.. Canon release a slightly improved camera at greatly inflated prices, sell a shed load to the must have new brigade or the canon pros get em at greatly discounted prices for the product to be seen out on the street then when its sales figures start to drop the price falls..ready for the next model.. and to be honest most on here are actually helping Canon Improve there sales by justifying the price.. Listen to YOURSELVES !!

START realising and take a stance.. SAY NO (IEI)  TO Canon s Pricing structure and Demand a reasonable price to new product Pricing for Loyalty..to the Canon brand.. its you who can do this..

I have managed to get £1500-£2000 together towards  a decent Camera  BUT I WILL NOT give that money away ..SO am now going to Look at some NIKON (spit) hardware as well

SO CANON THIS MIGHT BE ONE SALE YOU HAVE LOST..

M (DISAPPOINTED..)

Smited!

pravkp

  • Guest
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #686 on: February 28, 2012, 12:29:44 AM »
Hi ALL,

This is my First Post and I do Hope this gets to Canon or someone in the Know.. and I dont mean any offence to anyone..

BUT... most of you are extolling the OHHH got to have it and these features are worth it.. THERE IS A FULL ON RECESSION On out there..

I am looking for my first and probably last DSLR.. and Ive chosen Canon..CORRECTION I did choose Canon..

My decision was based on I work In Media live Broadcasting and have gone from vision engineer to trainee Video cameraman in 2 Years.. and Ive decided to learn the job properly and to do that I feel I need to start with STILLS  and perfect that alongside Video work..Sorry if am boring you all but am old fashioned and if I do something I do it right..

 Therefore I was looking at the 7D and at a stretch a 5D mk II.. reasons were get something good and develop with it..not swap and change.. then the 5D Mk III has appeared on the horizon..

BUT
The high price thats been banded is Not justifyable.. take a step back and look.. Canon release a slightly improved camera at greatly inflated prices, sell a shed load to the must have new brigade or the canon pros get em at greatly discounted prices for the product to be seen out on the street then when its sales figures start to drop the price falls..ready for the next model.. and to be honest most on here are actually helping Canon Improve there sales by justifying the price.. Listen to YOURSELVES !!

START realising and take a stance.. SAY NO (IEI)  TO Canon s Pricing structure and Demand a reasonable price to new product Pricing for Loyalty..to the Canon brand.. its you who can do this..

I have managed to get £1500-£2000 together towards  a decent Camera  BUT I WILL NOT give that money away ..SO am now going to Look at some NIKON (spit) hardware as well

SO CANON THIS MIGHT BE ONE SALE YOU HAVE LOST..

M (DISAPPOINTED..)

While there is some truth in what you are saying, remember that Canon does business NOT charity. With out getting into complex discussion on financial/market aspects, competition & demand drive prices. Even if we are able to make an educated guess on what their cost structure may be, I still doubt if Canon is making super normal profits in the long run. May i suggest we brush up on industry / product life cycles?
Clearly, there are products that cater to different market segments and it's up to us to decide on a product that "suits" us best.
IMHO, £1500-£2000 is still a lot of money to get the best that amount can get. There is always a better one out there or being churned out in the R&D labs.

dunkers

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 76
    • View Profile
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #687 on: February 28, 2012, 12:47:32 AM »
I could never really wrap my head around the idea that people would jump ship just because they're not happy with just one item that either Canon or Nikon releases.

Sure, the item may not be what you expect but is it really worth it to dump something completely just because you're not happy with just one item? It's mentality like that which explains why people are getting divorced more often nowadays.

You've invested money into a company and system that I assume you've come to grow and love. Your current equipment has never let you down before....

But when one and just one new body gets released everybody loses their minds. If you continue with this mentality, you're never going to be happy with what you have.

I for one plan on investing into the 1DX or the 5D (depending on the specs of the latter) and using it for years to come. There isn't a single thing about the 1DX that I'm not happy about, aside from maybe the price tag. But seeing as I plan on sticking with that body for many years the price is worth it. As for the 5D, I really like rumored specs assuming it does around 8 fps.
5D3 | 60D | 100L IS | 70-200L II IS | 24-105L

canon rumors FORUM

Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #687 on: February 28, 2012, 12:47:32 AM »

image2paint

  • Guest
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #688 on: February 28, 2012, 01:26:29 AM »
I know the date was updated to 2nd of march but wasn't there still going to be another announcement 28th feb? What ever happened to that ???

LetTheRightLensIn

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2988
    • View Profile
Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #689 on: February 28, 2012, 01:33:17 AM »

I am not sure if you are just being sarcastic, but you realize that at 62mp, not more than 2-3 lenses in Canon's entire lineup could resolve enough detail at any aperture to actually use all those pixels, right? You max out at 46mp, which is about 116lp/mm, which is right about where Canon's newest L-series lenses top out at their best aperture as well...which seems to be somewhere between f/4 and f/5.6 most of the time. The only few lenses from Canon that I think could resolve enough detail for 62mp are the new 500mm and 600mm L II lenses (which as of yet are still unreleased) and possibly the forthcoming 200-400 L...and even then, their maximum aperture is f/4, so 173lp/mm.

I don't believe that is the case. I thought some lenses were measured well above that. Plus the total resolution is a combination of sensor and lens that is not direct. Even the worst kit ever made delivers a more detailed image on a 7D than a 40D. A 70-200 + 1.4x TC still delivers more detail on a 7D. A 300 2.8 + TWO TCs still does on a 7D too.

Well sure, the 40D is a 10mp sensor, where as the 7D is an 18mp sensor. Were talking a 33% increase in resolution for the 7D. If we take the 18-55 at 55/5.6, assuming it was a perfect lens (and we know its far from it) it could resolve 123 lp/mm. Assuming the 18-55 kit, given how poor its IQ is (I've owned a couple of these, of differing generations, and all of them exhibit remarkably bad CA at max aperture at all focal lengths), only resolves 100lp/mm. The 40D is incapable of resolving even that much at 87lp/mm, so moving from the 40D to the 7D, which can resolve 116lp/mm, is obviously going to capture more detail. ;)

The 300/2.8 is one of the few Canon lenses that approaches perfection at f/2.8 (and you really pay for it, too, at nearly $7000). I would say the 70-200/2.8 II is another (although based on the MTF charts, the original 70-200/2.8 I is NOT...but it would be the same situation as the 18-55 when comparing the 40D to the 7D with that lens, stacked TC's or not.) These are the reasons I try to evaluate resolution on this forum as spatial resolution...in line pairs per millimeter (vs. megapixels or line widths per picture height), as its easy to explain why you might see such an improvement when moving from a 40D to a 7D, even with Canon's bottom-barrel lenses.

Somehow I skimmed your response too quickly and thought I saw you listing 62lp/mm and 46 lp/mm limits  ;D.
But that said you still do a little better than just comparing lens to sensor since it is the combined system that determines the final results and you do a little better than you'd expect by that and even with 300 2.8 IS I and stacked TC on a 7D you can still do better than upscaling, but a lot more of your point is taken now that I read it as 62MP and 46MP hah. Guess I was a little too tired or distracted when I skimmed the post.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: *UPDATE* The Next 5D on March 2, 2012 [CR3]
« Reply #689 on: February 28, 2012, 01:33:17 AM »