Search results

Uhh we can't really know which "gen" of stacked sensor it is unless Canon tells us. Yeah it's a Canon first, but if it is similar to the latest large Sony stacked sensors calling it "1st gen" is kinda misleading. If I had to guess then I'd say it's probably slower to read than a1 but since it...

Uh, no. There are exactly 0 UHS-III cards available, and the same stands for SD Express. And by the way, SD Express requires new cards too, unless you're fine with all your existing cards running at UHS-I speeds at maximum. So when CF Express is arguably better, why not go straight for that.

I think you're underestimating the size of the 1DX. It is absolutely ridiculously huge. It is no wonder those who want small (not just smaller) are amazed by A9/A1, when the other option is this.

Pros did fine with 1/60s* scanning shutters a long ago and now the a1 electronic shutter does full sensor scan in 1/200s* while 1DX III does it in 1/300s* with mechanical shutter, so I'd say while faster is better we have already reached the point of diminishing returns for majority of...

It can take 1.4x or 2.0x teleconverter. ;)

Line by line is enough if it is faster than the mechanical shutter (those are around 1/200-1/300s), if it is easier than implementing a global shutter. Tho you'd want one mechanical curtain to be left in there for dark frames.

The mirror already is translucent. The AF module sits below the mirror box and there is second mirror behind the main one. Question just is can DPAF work with that amount of light.

Why not?

How much light goes to the AF sensor on a typical DSLR? What if you just ditched the separate AF module altogether and used the image sensor for AF, the 1DXIII already uses a CMOS sensor in place of the more traditional line sensor.

Would be about time to see that in every body costing over 2000$.

So you are the one with the one and only accurately focusing EF 50mm f/1.4!

Actually you probably mean nothing to gain in high ISO shadow noise, as with an ISO invariant sensor you could just use base ISO through the whole range and have base ISO dynamic range all the way to "ISO102400" or whatever the marketing team wants to put out. ;)

Yeah DGO is different in that it uses both gains at the same time by reading the separate halves of the pixel with different gains. Could be that Canon didn't want to risk 1DX's release schedule by designing it with a DGO sensor and so opted for a more proven design. At the very least this is...

Yeah you could extend the dynamic range that way, but it would not make "20.000 iso that look like they were shot at 6.400 iso today". Sony and its sensors have dual gain too (similar to BMPCC), and it does help a bit but just a bit (less than a stop). The noise introduced by the camera is so...

No, no, and no. Vast majority of the noise at high ISOs is the result from the natural noisiness of light itself https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shot_noise, nothing you can do about that*. *Assuming conventional bayer (or similar) sensors.

12 megapixel quad pixel sensor (essentially a quad bayer -like sensor), R6's 20MP doesn't sound so little anymore does it.

This has mostly been a limitation of DSLRs as their AF systems have so little light to work with (and I think they need larger cone anyway). Sony's A9 does fine(ish?) at f/13 for example. Anyhow not believing until I see that they work with every lens. Those protrusions haven't been there just...

What are you talking about? o_O

Yet they can give a rough euro pricing. :unsure:

There is no room. https://www.canon-europe.com/pro/stories/rf-70-200mm-f2-8l-is-usm-lens-developers-interview/