Canon EOS R body with more than 75mp on the horizon [CR2]

[ethanz]

Isn't it amusing how these GAS threads always circle back to this! To think I'm now beginning to consider an R version camera.

Jack

No Jack, we must resist the GAS. If you give in, I have to give in.

 

[ethanz]

View attachment 181786View attachment 181782View attachment 181783View attachment 181784

Those aren't 75MP cat pictures Don. Make em big. Just be careful around that first cat, he looks dangerous. Cute cats

 

[3kramd5]

Have you ever heard of the concept of time? The 6d sensor is for todays standard not good anymore, but by the time it was released it was great. If you release a sensor that's about the same in terms of DR range 5 years later than yes, it's a crippled sensor. Obviously every sensor of every camera will at one point in time be outdated, but if you are already outdated by the time you release the sensor, despite being capable of delivering a much better product, it's a shitty/crippled sensor.

r.v. crip·pled, crip·pling, crip·ples
1. To cause to lose the use of a limb or limbs.
2. To disable, damage, or impair the functioning of: a strike that crippled the factory.

I can’t get behind the philosophy that something which is merely unimproved over time is “crippled.”

It 6D was good enough, then 6D2 is “no better than good enough.”

Could they have used a better sensor? Yah sure probably. But does the dynamic range of the camera (the more appropriate consideration since nobody outside canon likely has sensor-level performance measurements) impair use of the camera in any significant way? Probably not. Ergo, it isn’t crippled.

 

[Graphic.Artifacts]

Someone is angry!
I suggest you stick to taking you cat photos with your flawed 6D mkii and leave the adults to taking real photographs with their equally flawed 'other Canon' cameras that subtract all the 'niceties' of the Nikon you aspire to. Oh by the way it's 42 years of wisdom shooting with a camera - with film and digital.
Canon should employ you as the head of their R'n'D department.
I can see it now....Your / Their, next camera the EOS D850 ....as it has "niceties".

Have a lovely day.
It's been great looking into your creative realm.

We don't appreciate personal attacks on posters. If you have something of value to say just say it. Otherwise just go back to being an anonymous lurker.

 

[Don Haines]

r.v. crip·pled, crip·pling, crip·ples
1. To cause to lose the use of a limb or limbs.
2. To disable, damage, or impair the functioning of: a strike that crippled the factory.

I can’t get behind the philosophy that something which is merely unimproved over time is “crippled.”

It 6D was good enough, then 6D2 is “no better than good enough.”

Could they have used a better sensor? Yah sure probably. But does the dynamic range of the camera (the more appropriate consideration since nobody outside canon likely has sensor-level performance measurements) impair use of the camera in any significant way? Probably not. Ergo, it isn’t crippled.

Everything on the 6D2 is better than on the 6D, with the exception of the sensor. Could Canon have made the sensor better? Of course they could have.... Could they have made it better and sold it at the same price? Only Canon knows.... Do they have the manufacturing capacity to have mass produced a better sensor? Only Canon knows....

As someone with a 6D at work and a 6D2 at home, I can confidently state that this is not a "crippled" camera.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

That's all true, but when we talk about sensors, images, monitors, the conventional notion is just the pixel count or dimensions in pixels. What you've described below is all true, but for resolution as in lines per mm

Define resolution any way you want, but you are absolutely and categorically wrong about the standard convention about defining resolution. Look at tabulated resolution measurements: they are in line pairs per mm or lines per picture height. Or they are in MTF values scaled to unity. Doubling the number of pixels in a sensor just increases the possible lines per picture height or line pairs per mm by the square root of 2. The resolution of a sensor depends on the linear dimension of each of its pixels, which scales with the square root of the total number.

 

[AlanF]

That's all true, but when we talk about sensors, images, monitors, the conventional notion is just the pixel count or dimensions in pixels. What you've described below is all true, but for resolution as in lines per mm

People do indeed talk about the resolution of a sensor in terms of number of pixels, but they are missing what really determines resolution. Quote from Wikipedia: "For practical purposes the clarity of the image is decided by its spatial resolution, not the number of pixels in an image. In effect, spatial resolution refers to the number of independent pixel values per unit length." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_resolution
It's the spatial resolution that governs my choice of lens and sensor, and I know that doubling the number of pixels increases the resolution of my images by up to 1.414 times and not two times.

 

[Jack Douglas]

No Jack, we must resist the GAS. If you give in, I have to give in.

I'd like to hear what it is you'd like out of a newer R - are you looking for 1DX2 level features? Oh how I hate going backwards on features.

Jack

 

[applecider]

So off topic a little,...

Two members one who wanted a 50mm lens and another whose title suggests that he studies brains have been missing post wise since mid September anyone know why?
Picked this thread to ask as it is active.

 

[HarryFilm]

Oh dear. Canon don't just make cameras and the cameras they make do sell...
Why? Its because they are the Toyota of the camera world. Their products might not be the best compared with other manufacturers (depending on what you define as "best") but they make and sell (thousands of) the most popular cameras on the market because they are reliable and do what they are meant to do.

===

I get that! Heck the company I do work for has like 40 Canon C700's, about 50 of the Canon C500 and C300's Mk2/1's, 20 C200s, 20 C100's, multiple 1DxMk2's, 1Dc's, Many 5D Mk4 and 3's, 5DS/R's, M5's, Canon 4 Million ISO Super-low-light nightvision cameras, Powershots and only about a few million dollars of Canon L-series Still and Cinema Lenses in addition to all the Reds, Alexas, High Speed Phantom Visions, Panasonic Shoulder-mount and Cinema camera, Sony F65/F55/Venice/XDcam Cinema and Pro Broadcast cameras and Canon/Sigma/Zeiss/Arri/Leica/Schneider/Cooke lenses etc we have in our inventory. We keep A LOT of camera companies in business AND WE ARE NOT EVEN A RENTAL HOUSE --- That's just for our internal industrial imaging needs!!! THAT SAID, if another company (AND THEY ARE!) is coming out with some higher resolution, higher frame rates, larger colour depth or better dynamic range camera system then WE WILL BUY IT!

Canon sells a lot of consumer, prosumer and pro still cameras and cinema cameras because in short that DPAF IS "DA SCHIZZ" (i.e. supreme best of best!) for still photo and video autofocus systems AND also to be completely fair some, has some of the BEST MENU systems out there making their cameras very easy to use and ergonomic for pro and consumer uses. ....AND..... their weather sealing on the high end gear is FANTASTIC!

....AGAIN THOUGH.....

Sony is catching up FAST in all those areas and since there are some NEW'ish players coming into the higher end combined Stills/Video gear arena, Canon IS DOOOOOOOOOMED !!!!! DOOOOOOMED I TELL YOU !!!!!! UTTERLY DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMED if they don't shape up and get into faster lenses at GREAT PRICES, higher megapixel 4:4:4 RAW and JPEG-2000 16-bits-per-channel stills (i.e. 100+ mp) at Full Frame and MF sensor sizes WITH GLOBAL SHUTTER AND DCI 4k/8k 16-bits per colour channel (48-bit RGB pixels) video at 60 fps!!!

Those systems are RIGHT ON THE CUSP of being introduced WITH great lenses at price points that will DEFINITELY eat into Canon's marketshare!

 

[HarryFilm]

So off topic a little,...

Two members one who wanted a 50mm lens and another whose title suggests that he studies brains have been missing post wise since mid September anyone know why?

---

Hmm true....I haven't seen NeuroAnatomist's posting in quite a while...maybe he's doing a research fellowship or is on sabbatical which takes up all his time...I don't know either!

Brains! I want BRAINS!!! Where are more brains......aaaaaaaahhhhhh!!!!!! Eaten by Zombies perhaps?

 

[[email protected]]

So off topic a little,...

Two members one who wanted a 50mm lens and another whose title suggests that he studies brains have been missing post wise since mid September anyone know why?
Picked this thread to ask as it is active.

I'd like to think our 50mm-focused friend has sequestered himself with the ER 50mm f/1.2 and is in such unalloyed bliss that he's in danger of asphyxiation.

(Yes, yes, I know he has odd tastes, and would much prefer something small, light, and just better than the old 1.4.)

 

[ethanz]

So off topic a little,...

Two members one who wanted a 50mm lens and another whose title suggests that he studies brains have been missing post wise since mid September anyone know why?
Picked this thread to ask as it is active.

Neuro is doing ok, he has just been busy. I do like Harry's idea that a zombie ate them though.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

People do indeed talk about the resolution of a sensor in terms of number of pixels, but they are missing what really determines resolution. Quote from Wikipedia: "For practical purposes the clarity of the image is decided by its spatial resolution, not the number of pixels in an image. In effect, spatial resolution refers to the number of independent pixel values per unit length." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_resolution
It's the spatial resolution that governs my choice of lens and sensor, and I know that doubling the number of pixels increases the resolution of my images by up to 1.414 times and not two times.

That's all true Alan, I'm well aware of the math behind it, note however the spatial resolution makes sense only when we take the whole system into account, i.e. camera+lens. In most cases, the lens is the limiting factor. Doubling the pixel count may not improve the actual spatial resolution by 1.414, there may be no improvement at all depending on the lens(es) you use. I wonder how many Canon lenses are able to resolve all actual 30Mp of 5DMkIV, for example.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

I know we all want to have "our camera" released next, but that just is not going to happen. Wait your turn and be happy for those that this model is aimed at, and while you wait, please enjoy some cat pictures taken with a flawed 6D2

To be honest, I think 6DII is a great camera and your cat pictures are nice, but they don't really show 6dII advantages, same pictures could've been taken on a good phone, micro 4/3 or a crop camera. People will not think "wow, and those were taken with 6DII? wow..."

 

[Don Haines]

To be honest, I think 6DII is a great camera and your cat pictures are nice, but they don't really show 6dII advantages, same pictures could've been taken on a good phone, micro 4/3 or a crop camera. People will not think "wow, and those were taken with 6DII? wow..."

I agree. Just about any camera can be used. A 75 megapixel camera is moving towards more specialized use, and in the right hands and conditions should be able to do much better than a general purpose camera like the 6D2.

PS, here are some phone pictures

 

[Mr Majestyk]

CanonWatch denies this and says next camera will be closer to 50MP, a figure I'm much more inclined to believe. I rate this as CR0.1.

If they rehash 5D4 sensor tech can we expect 1fps with tracking?

 

[SereneSpeed]

I'm thinking this is going to be a dual camera release. Like Nikon Z6 Z7 release meets the 5DS 5DSr release... i.e. Canon will release a 75mpix monster AND a ~35~45mpix all-purpose (PRO) camera. Canon already used the current 5D body for the 5DS series, so why not do the same sort of thing again, and reach both markets at the same time?

I can think of plenty of ways this could actually increase Canon's profitability. Mainly, shared R&D on the new platform. Also, not a whole lot of stepping on their own toes - Because lets be honest, if the mpix are HUGE (75+), we're talking niche. I love the sound of that, but I don't want astronomical shutter speeds, all new glass, and a new computer/set of hard drives, just to upgrade my camera.

I'm sure we all believe Canon has been working on a 'new mirrorless 5D series' camera. The 5D series is incredibly popular. They've probably been working on it for a long time. And now they kill the 5Ds series DSLR in favor of a mirrorless version... Seems the best wat to do that would be to piggyback on the already in development prosumer/pro/5 series mirrorless, no?

Just a humble prediction, based on nothing...

 

[stevelee]

To be honest, I think 6DII is a great camera and your cat pictures are nice, but they don't really show 6dII advantages, same pictures could've been taken on a good phone, micro 4/3 or a crop camera. People will not think "wow, and those were taken with 6DII? wow..."

Think how detailed the whiskers could be from a 75MP camera!

 

[AlanF]

That's all true Alan, I'm well aware of the math behind it, note however the spatial resolution makes sense only when we take the whole system into account, i.e. camera+lens. In most cases, the lens is the limiting factor. Doubling the pixel count may not improve the actual spatial resolution by 1.414, there may be no improvement at all depending on the lens(es) you use. I wonder how many Canon lenses are able to resolve all actual 30Mp of 5DMkIV, for example.

Check the recent resolution tests by photozone.de (opticallimits.com). They now routinely do Canon FF MTFs on both a 5DSR and 21 mpx. Even an f/4 zoom is getting close to the extra 50% resolution http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1047-canon70200f4is2?start=1 The same is more true for the best wide aperture primes and to a good extent Even for the softer 150-600mm of lower aperture where diffraction is coming into play.
The cameras are still well within the sensor being the limiting factor for resolution, and not the lens,