More Big Megapixel Talk

[expatinasia]

How many people are there who actually need 8FPS in a 40MP camera?

Quite a lot I am sure, why not. Gives you more choices in post.

If this is true, and an 8fps 40Mp camera came out in the next 6 months, I am sure a few 1DX buyers would be pretty annoyed.

Would be interesting to see what technology they build into such a system. Headphone jack would be one - if you can call that technology!!

[xthebillx]

How many people are there who actually need 8FPS in a 40MP camera?

Quite a lot I am sure, why not. Gives you more choices in post.

If this is true, and an 8fps 40Mp camera came out in the next 6 months, I am sure a few 1DX buyers would be pretty annoyed.

Would be interesting to see what technology they build into such a system. Headphone jack would be one - if you can call that technology!!

X2
Being an early 5D3 adopter, it's kind of annoying that canon is releasing specs on the year's bodies one at a time. It's somewhat smart for canon; but at the consumer end, it sucks because if a body that better fits your needs is announced a quarter or two later you sell at a loss or buy another body. Announcing the whole line mid-year for the following year would be so much better for the consumer...it works that way for the auto industry!

[1DSLR]

I have a theory about what the upper left arrow means by pointing off and away from the triangle.  That arrow represents Canon users that give up and change over to Sony/Nikon/Panasonic/Olympus/etc.:


(image from Northern Light)

Sony is the most likely since Sony has less invested in DSLR's.  Unfortunately, Sony persists in failing to provide features expected in camera bodies at this price point for the more advanced photographer market sector.

For example, I would purchase a NEX 7 plus the new version of the Metabones EOS to Sony E-mount adapter to provide a digital back for my favorite Canon lenses while retaining their image stabilization and electronic aperture control.  The NEX 7 reportedly has good focus peaking (3 selectable levels of focus peaking) for my focusing needs on that body.  For a small, quiet, reportedly high IQ camera, Sony's new RX100 might become my new always-with-me camera.

However, Sony's NEX 7 and the RX100 both fail to meet one of my critical needs, autoexposure bracketing.  The NEX 7 and the RX100 will autoexposure bracket a maximum of 3 exposures at a maximum of only +/- 0.7EV!  Furthermore, this is never stated in the Sony's RX100 manual (which sets a new standard in inadequate documentation); you have to find out this from user reviews.

The NEX (and probably the RX100, but you can't find out from Sony's "manual") has an HDR mode, but then it only saves JPEG's, not RAW.  What were they thinking?

I also have a theory why Sony continues to provide such inadequate AEB on some of its top end cameras.  Actually the AEB specification was written to provide up to 7 exposures with each step up to 3EV.  However, someone mixed up the numbers and a decimal point and it became only 3 exposures each up to 0.7EV steps.  This error now perpetuates itself because no one wants to admit it; the loss of face would be too great.

[caruser]

Announcing the whole line mid-year for the following year would be so much better for the consumer...it works that way for the auto industry!

That sounds like an interesting comparison, we are so used to secrecy from companies like Canon or Apple, but on the other hand car makers don't seem to suffer it being known more than a year in advance when a replacement is due, and even other tech companies like Intel have reasonably well known road maps and schedules. So why?

[nicku]

I have a theory about what the upper left arrow means by pointing off and away from the triangle.  That arrow represents Canon users that give up and change over to Sony/Nikon/Panasonic/Olympus/etc.:



Sony is the most likely since Sony has less invested in DSLR's.  Unfortunately, Sony persists in failing to provide features expected in camera bodies at this price point for the more advanced photographer market sector.

For example, I would purchase a NEX 7 plus the new version of the Metabones EOS to Sony E-mount adapter to provide a digital back for my favorite Canon lenses while retaining their image stabilization and electronic aperture control.  The NEX 7 reportedly has good focus peaking (3 selectable levels of focus peaking) for my focusing needs on that body.  For a small, quiet, reportedly high IQ camera, Sony's new RX100 might become my new always-with-me camera.

However, Sony's NEX 7 and the RX100 both fail to meet one of my critical needs, autoexposure bracketing.  The NEX 7 and the RX100 will autoexposure bracket a maximum of 3 exposures at a maximum of only +/- 0.7EV!  Furthermore, this is never stated in the Sony's RX100 manual (which sets a new standard in inadequate documentation); you have to find out this from user reviews.

The NEX (and probably the RX100, but you can't find out from Sony's "manual") has an HDR mode, but then it only saves JPEG's, not RAW.  What were they thinking?

I also have a theory why Sony continues to provide such inadequate AEB on some of its top end cameras.  Actually the AEB specification was written to provide up to 7 exposures with each step up to 3EV.  However, someone mixed up the numbers and a decimal point and it became only 3 exposures each up to 0.7EV steps.  This error now perpetuates itself because no one wants to admit it; the loss of face would be too great.

Considering that Sony is providing ALL the sensors for Nikon DSLR's... I wonder why to compete with them when the sensor business is so good. Concentrate on mirrorless and high end compacts. Sony is addressing to the really big majority of the buyers - The compact camera users.

In my opinion a really smart marketing/profit move.

[meli]

I second that. It is a travesty only as long as the sheep dole out more money without demanding substantive changes from the camera maker.  In this day and age there is no reason why we talk about "fps" in the 10's when this bottle neck is introduced primarily by  the shutter/mirror mechanics and of course the speed at which the chips and the system are able to process and record the images falling on the sensor.  Computers and chips evolve continually and very fast. As I see it...the primary hurdle is to break the strangle hold mirror boxes have over the community... but that will reduce the flimsy super-duper number the companies use to bait us with..8.9 fps!!! (Oh my god, you wet your panties!) ...the new cam is 9.2 fps...(OH My god!!! I need stronger Depends)...

Mirrorless full frames are the future, when this will happen... depends on the number of sheep... baaahhh!

Lets see what happens to the current MP leader, the d800:

It shares the same mirrorbox/shutter with D4 (11fps).
In this case if mirrorbox was at full speed you would have to move approximately:

74.4MB x 11 = 818MB/s or 6.55Gbit/s to the processor and then
41.3MB x 11 = 462MB/s or 3.7Gbit/s throughput to the storage.

Even if you could load the camera with serious ram and processor you would hit into power efficiency and thermal/interference issues which with the current technology would probably require also a complete redesign of the dslr form.

So in this case everything else in the chain is the bottleneck in getting the full mirror potential

Assuming that mirror/shutter would peak at around 10-14fps, data throughput & cpu intensive tasks (such as a move to 16bit files, lens correction, deconvolution sharpening etc) will balance out the advancements in tech for the near future.

Apart from that, evf vs ovf although promising still has a long way to go & i'd rather see fully fledged HUD implementations in the next slr generation than laggy dr-limited noisy evfs

All in all i would be confident buying slrs for the next decade!

[Bengt Nyman]

If you want mirror less "SLR" now you can buy one of the Sony Alpha cameras.

Not quite.
You still get a semitranslucent mirror, though stationary, but worse; Sony Alpha still uses off-sensor focusing.
The reasons why future high IQ cameras should be mirrorless is to achieve accurate image sensor focus, and to avoid SLR mirror vibrations.

[Daniel Flather]

My 2c.

The right hand side of the triangle represents mirrorless. The EOS-M is totally within this section as it is totally mirrorless. The 650D is half on the mirrorless section as it has composite auto-focus for video and liveview mode.

"What goes here?" - a new camera.
"What does this little arrow mean?" - the new camera will be either fully mirrorless or at least have composite phase/contrast auto-focus like the 650D does.

As opposed to partially mirrorless?   

+1 I had the same thought.

[FunPhotons]

From a marketing standpoint I doubt they'll release a high FPS version, even if they could. Presumably they'll need to keep the same focus and exposure system as the 1DX, I can't imagine they'd cripple that with both the 5DmkIII and 1DX having it. If they also kept a high FPS then why would anybody buy a 1DX?

My guess it will have worse ISO and FPS, but otherwise be identical with the 1DX and having 40+ MP. If they do it.

[jouster]

Why would you spend that kind of money on a mirrorless camera?

The mirror, its inaccurate focusing plane and its slapping around are what prevents digital cameras from reaching the next level of resolution and accuracy. The 36 MP Nikon D600(E) is presently both camera of the year and Nikon's biggest headache. The era of the DSLR, the mechanical slapper box, is rapidly coming to a close.
 

Its end can't come soon enough.

[moreorless]

If you want mirror less "SLR" now you can buy one of the Sony Alpha cameras.

Not quite.
You still get a semitranslucent mirror, though stationary, but worse; Sony Alpha still uses off-sensor focusing.
The reasons why future high IQ cameras should be mirrorless is to achieve accurate image sensor focus, and to avoid SLR mirror vibrations.

Theres nothing to stop this in current generation FF SLR's, the mirror can be flipped up and on sensor focusing used.

The reality is that on sensor AF still lags well behind phase AF in speed and tracking ability while EVF tech is still(and likely never will be) the equal of an OVF in realism aswell as being a power drain.

Personally as mostly a landscape shooter who generally uses wide/normal focal lenghts I would be intersted in a FF mirrorless for the size advanatge but the benefits seem much more questionable for other users. Thats I'd guess part of the reason we havent seen one outside of a Leica appear yet, FF sensored cameras are already a niche market so sticking with SLRs you appeal to both the landscape/studio users and action users, alot of the former likely still shoot some of the latter aswell so the extra bulk isnt totally wasted on them.

[swrightgfx]

What mount would a FF mirrorless use, anyway? The only Canon mount that will work would be the EF mount, as it is the only one that would provide a large enough image circle; however, in order to have it focus, you'd need to maintain the existing flange focal distance, which would also do away with any hope of maintaining a compact form factor anywhere similar to the EOS-M (not to mention the lenses would dwarf the camera itself).

As I have said before (see below), a high-megapixel square "APS-H" 28x28mm sensor rangefinder would provide a good mirrorless solution fr the pro user.

Hey if we are gonna dream, how about we make that sensor square too?! Then we are really cooking

I'll buy that.

While the EF mount can accommodate a much larger image circle than most EF lenses currently provide, using a square sensor would indeed only be possible with APS-H and not full-frame, without users having to invest in new glass. The image circle for "APS-H" 28x28 would equate to ~40mm, while square "full frame" 36x36 would require ~50mm (which would only allow for TS-E lenses to be used without severe vignette).

The key point, though, is that both would most likely need to be mirrorless to provide enough lens clearance and maintain infinity.

What about a "Square APS-H" rangefinder targeted to plug the mirrorless gap for professionals?

[Bengt Nyman]

Theres nothing to stop this in current generation FF SLR's, the mirror can be flipped up and on sensor focusing used.

Agreed.
And we do that when we have to, but it's blind, tedious and useful mostly on tripod for stationary subjects.
I would like to be able to get the same results while viewing and without a tripod.
The solution to my needs is not necessarily an ultimate sports camera with hyper fast focus tracking, it's more of a high IQ handheld National Geographics camera. 
I fully trust that the Cmos industry is capable of producing exact on-sensor focus fast enough for general use. I also believe that we will shortly see implementations of optically magnified live view that rival the old optical viewers. I will gladly trade the clarity of the slapping mirror for a magnified live view with exposure preview, dynamic range preview and focus highlight.
 

[CanonFanBoy]

I really hope Canon is not heading towards the wrong direction in this MegaPix war with Nikon ... this round, the competition is not about the number of pixels but the quality of the pixels that put the D800 spreading like wild fire in the market place! Nikon has created a new niche this time .... for giving photographers medium format image quality with a DSLR body and price that took the market by storm!

So, whatever Canon is coming out soon, make sure it is not about packing another few more megapix in the same old silicon die to fool the market .... in order to lead in the Professional and Enthusiast segment again, Canon needs to do something really major to improve on its senor technology especially in terms of Dynamic Range (16stops), Colour Depth (16bits) and Noise ... I hope Canon don't miss the boat, this round!!!! 

[Bengt Nyman]

It is not about the number of pixels but the quality of the pixels that put the D800 spreading like wild fire in the market place! Nikon has created a new niche this time ... I hope Canon don't miss the boat, this round!

The credit goes to Sony, who developed the Nikon D800(E) image sensor. This Sony-Nikon agreement will soon allow the same technology will become available to others.
The big difference in shooting a D800 versus any other FF camera is the D800's depth of detail which eliminates the need to frame tightly using a fuzzy zoom lens and instead allows shooting wider frames with the very best primes. The post cropped image then offers the very best in both detail depth and lens sharpness.
Unfortunately the Nikon D800 focusing problems are taking the edge off Nikon's success with the D800.
Sony themselves, Leica and Hasselblad are jumping on the bandwagon and are also likely to reap great benefits from this Sony high MP technology.