High megapixel EOS R series camera in testing [CR2]

[slclick]

Your are right. Much of the large wall art is lame. Or, the managers or designers don't realize better may be available. I remember walking into a car dealership a couple years ago looking at a tall wall mural of redwoods and most small detail was gone. It was almost abstract.

I think I've been to that Subaru dealership!

 

[mpb001]

Can we have a nice R6, with a measly 20 MP sensor with great low light performance first? Please?

 

[slclick]

Can we have a nice R6, with a measly 20 MP sensor with great low light performance first? Please?

It's whats been said all along

 

[Chaitanya]

I don't believe Canon ever has or ever will license anything to third party lens makers. Sigma, Tamron etc., reverse engineer Canon protocols. Canon cooperates with software makers like Adobe because it is in their best interests and they don't really compete on software. But lenses...nope.

Canon seems to have opened up EF-M mount, also many Sigma lenses on EF have their profiles built into Canon DSLRs so to a certain degree EF mount has been opened up as well. Making MF lenses is easier as engineers just have reverse engineer mount dimensions while reverse engineering encrypted protocols is much harder task.

 

[mpb001]

It's whats been said all along

True, but while we have seen the R5, which isn’t due until “after” the R6, why haven’t we even seen the rumored R6?

 

[M. D. Vaden of Oregon]

I just shutter shudder to think what it would cost to either upgrade my computer or purchase a new one after shelling out the money for the camera.

True proof of a photographer I guess.

Jack

Sometimes I get a small smile or chuckle when opening a file that came from my 5DS in Lightroom. I don't even have to look at the EXIF data to know whether it was from an old 5D mk ii, the EOS R or other. As soon as I open the file and start any changes, I can hear the fans in my computer case start to rev-up.

 

[davo]

It's whats been said all along

Isnt the R6 supposed to be a plastic frame and no top lcd etc.?

 

[masterpix]

The main differnces between a medium format and 35mm sensor are that the medium format sensor has bigger pixels on the sensors for the same sensor "size" just due to the fact that the medium format sensor is bigger in size, so 150MP sensor in medium format has larger pixels than the 35mm sensor. However, as much as I would liek to have a phase-one camera, there is a lack of varity of lenses for medium format and the price... ow.. that is a very painful point, Medium format cameras cost a magnitue or more than any 35mm cameras.

 

[HarryFilm]

Hard call for me ... EOS R5? ... or EOS R high-megapixel? I often print 30 inches, and last year, a distillery requested an 18,000 x 18,000 pixel redwood file for a 10 foot print. I improvised with the 5DS shooting mulitple frames. Half the photos I take are normal portraits and wedding photos.

Wish Canon could let me test out their new high megapixel body.

View attachment 189240

That is a rather STUNNING PHOTO!

It really shows the size of the trees! Because you said Redwood, I am assuming that's either Sequoia National Park or Redwood Forest in California, although I HAVE seen a few Douglas Firs almost as big as that one in Northwestern Vancouver Island! Where was that photo taken?

--

 

[HarryFilm]

We’ve been hearing about a possible high rez Canon mirrorless for two years now. It’s usually given as 75mp, or a bit higher. So this, at a rumored 90mp, or so, makes far more sense than a 150mp model. It fits within Canon’s 100mp capability for their new lenses.

hopefully, the per pixel IQ will not be limited by too much. While I like the concept of 75-90mp, the camera that’s much more interesting to me is the R5.

---

What CANON SHOULD BE DOING for the high-end fashion and product photographers is focusing on 50 to 100 megapixels at say 70mm by 46mm sensor sizes which is actually a TRUE medium format sensor size so that the photosites are either 8.5 microns for 3:2 aspect ratio 50 megapixels (8192 x 5488 pixels) or about 5.8 microns for 100 megapixels (12000 x 8000 pixels) at that large size. Such a Super-MF camera would have OUTSTANDING dynamic range and clarity at 16-bits per colour channel (48-bit colour!)

THAT would actually best most high end MF film cameras!

Even at $20,000 per body, they would sell over 10,000 cameras ($200 million US) and another TWO BILLION DOLLARS U.S. in lenses in about 2 years --- That's DEFINITELY worth some research dollars which can trickle down to a higher pixel count 35mm FF mirrorless global shutter body down the road!

--

 

[Ozarker]

That is a rather STUNNING PHOTO!

It really shows the size of the trees! Because you said Redwood, I am assuming that's either Sequoia National Park or Redwood Forest in California, although I HAVE seen a few Douglas Firs almost as big as that one in Northwestern Vancouver Island! Where was that photo taken?

--

Sequoia/Redwood... two different trees.

 

[Diko]

I think if I go that high for megapixel...I'll just get a medium format camera sensor.
....
But for a larger sensor that what will be on the R5, I think I'd save my pennies and go to a larger medium format sensor, like maybe the Fuji offerings.
...
Yep, I anticipate it will be $$$$...but I think it would be tons of fun, to use with my 501 CM and older glass.

It makes all the sense as long as there's the busness justificaiton and the proprietary lenses.

So far 83 MPs on a Sigma 50 mm ART with its 33 perceptual MPs or the manually focused costing $4K Carl-Zeiss Otus with its 45 MPs (if I recall correctly)... I don't see aby reason to go for the new high MP Canon body. Especially having in mind the R requires new lenses.

The logical way is MF. Bigger pixels, bigger body (yes, when pixels are more, better steady hand along the higher speeds), better DR.

Canon had to choose and they made the logical path towards mirrorless, leaving MF for other times (eventually). Both requiring new series of lenses. Obviously in next 10-20 years no Canon MF. :-( How unfortunate for me.

 

[mpb001]

The R6 is likley to sell well, especially with the IBIS, new sensor and smaller, lighter body for travel. It will complement my 5DIV. The sensor is not much smaller than 24 MP found on similar cameras, so Im fine with that. Plus it will be a new sensor, likley to produce decent higher ISO photos than say the RP or 6DII.

 

[SecureGSM]

L

The R6 is likley to sell well, especially with the IBIS, new sensor and smaller, lighter body for travel. It will complement my 5DIV. The sensor is not much smaller than 24 MP found on similar cameras, so Im fine with that. Plus it will be a new sensor, likley to produce decent higher ISO photos than say the RP or 6DII.

let me guess:
1. A single memory slot,
2. No joystick
3. 1/4000s fastest shutter speed
4. Limited FPS: 8fps-ish
5. A limited weather protection
6. X-Sync speed up to 1/180s

What else?

 

[Aaron D]

...and the price... ow.. that is a very painful point, Medium format cameras cost a magnitude or more than any 35mm cameras.

Yeah just for fun I checked out a Rodenstock HR Digaron-S 28 mm f/4.5 just now: $9000!

And I read somewhere about the editing nightmare required to correct for consistent colors across the frame--because of the steep angles light is bent through. And I may be wrong, but I've heard sharpness is only mediocre. So I don't get it.

 

[cayenne]

Can we have a nice R6, with a measly 20 MP sensor with great low light performance first? Please?

I think the answer to that has been laid out so far last a likely.......No.

 

[cayenne]

<snip>
Especially having in mind the R requires new lenses.

<snip>

You can readily run any EF glass you currently have (or buy) for as long as you want with the adapter, which I'm to understand works extremely well.

So, there is no requirement for new R lenses with any new R camera out now or appreciably in the future....

HTH,

C

 

[melgross]

---

What CANON SHOULD BE DOING for the high-end fashion and product photographers is focusing on 50 to 100 megapixels at say 70mm by 46mm sensor sizes which is actually a TRUE medium format sensor size so that the photosites are either 8.5 microns for 3:2 aspect ratio 50 megapixels (8192 x 5488 pixels) or about 5.8 microns for 100 megapixels (12000 x 8000 pixels) at that large size. Such a Super-MF camera would have OUTSTANDING dynamic range and clarity at 16-bits per colour channel (48-bit colour!)

THAT would actually best most high end MF film cameras!

Even at $20,000 per body, they would sell over 10,000 cameras ($200 million US) and another TWO BILLION DOLLARS U.S. in lenses in about 2 years --- That's DEFINITELY worth some research dollars which can trickle down to a higher pixel count 35mm FF mirrorless global shutter body down the road!

--

Hah! While I’m retired, I still remember very well how fashion works from my film lab. We would get large, for the day, files of 33mp. For the photogs who didn’t do anything other than the “clicks”. And a lot didn’t want to learn anything about digital other than for the clicks. But as soon as the files were sent to the studio, either advertising, or designer, those files would be reduced to half the rez.

the truth is that for that work, high rez files aren’t necessary, except for a very few uses. Most purposing is for catalog and magazine, with most of the rest used for online.

 

[Ozarker]

Hah! While I’m retired, I still remember very well how fashion works from my film lab. We would get large, for the day, files of 33mp. For the photogs who didn’t do anything other than the “clicks”. And a lot didn’t want to learn anything about digital other than for the clicks. But as soon as the files were sent to the studio, either advertising, or designer, those files would be reduced to half the rez.

the truth is that for that work, high rez files aren’t necessary, except for a very few uses. Most purposing is for catalog and magazine, with most of the rest used for online.

So true. Print magazine resolution is not high or large. Even fashion billboards are not high resolution.

 

[unfocused]

let me guess:
1. A single memory slot,
2. No joystick
3. 1/4000s fastest shutter speed
4. Limited FPS: 8fps-ish
5. A limited weather protection
6. X-Sync speed up to 1/180s

What else?

If that's the case, it sounds pretty good to me.