1Dx M2 Sensor Resolution - Back of envelop estimate

[RGF]

The current 5DS / 5DSR can shoot 5 FPS at 50MP. That is 250 MP / second.

At 12 FPS, that is equivalent to 20MP second. Assuming that Canon squeeze another 20-33% in sensory transfer speed, that would make the max possible resolution of the 1Dx M2 resolution at 24-27 MP. If Canon opts for higher FPS the max resolution might be around 25MP.

Of course if Canon could increase the transfer rate even higher, then they could provider higher FPS or higher resolution.

Guess a thought.

 

[neuroanatomist]

24 MP, 15 fps. That's my guess.

 

[RGF]

24 MP, 15 fps. That's my guess.

That's close to a 50% increase in resolution plus a 33% increase in FPS.

The 1D M4 was 16 MP, 10FPS, the 1Dx is 18 MP, 12 FPS. About 30% increase in MP/sec.

You proposal is a 75%.

Don't think we will see an increase that large. Possible, perhaps.

 

[Don Haines]

24 MP, 15 fps. That's my guess.

That's close to a 50% increase in resolution plus a 33% increase in FPS.

The 1D M4 was 16 MP, 10FPS, the 1Dx is 18 MP, 12 FPS. About 30% increase in MP/sec.

You proposal is a 75%.

Don't think we will see an increase that large. Possible, perhaps.

but we are talking about a change in storage technology with cFast.....

 

[Dylan777]

24 MP, 15 fps. That's my guess.

My number is slightly different to Neuro. My guess is 22mp 14fps slightly better in high iso.

 

[wtlloyd]

That would work for me...I've owned a 1D2, 1D3, 1D4 and 1Ds3....but never the X. Really hoping we get a mid-20's MP camera...

24 MP, 15 fps. That's my guess.

 

[ERHP]

My guess is more, more and more than the current model. We have 18MP-12/14FPS now, probably 24MP at 14/15. If Canon goes the CFast route, 540MB/s(3600X) is currently the fastest card available so the buffer bottleneck may be gone. I would still like a ~5FPS 'quiet' mode. The top ISO will most likely be the equivalent of 1M, though like all top expanded ISO's, of limited usability. All conjecture though as Canon will do what Canon thinks Canon needs to do.

 

[neuroanatomist]

24 MP, 15 fps. That's my guess.

That's close to a 50% increase in resolution plus a 33% increase in FPS.

New math? MP: 24 – 18 = 6; 6 / 18 = 33% more resolution. Frame rate: 15 – 12 = 3; 3 / 12 = 25% higher fps.

 

[RGF]

24 MP, 15 fps. That's my guess.

That's close to a 50% increase in resolution plus a 33% increase in FPS.

New math? MP: 24 – 18 = 6; 6 / 18 = 33% more resolution. Frame rate: 15 – 12 = 3; 3 / 12 = 25% higher fps.

Right. Did those in my head and am a bit under the weather. Still 12FPS x 18 MP = 216 MP/Sec while 15 x 24 MP = 360 MP/Sec, an increase of 68%

 

[tpatana]

24 MP, 15 fps. That's my guess.

That's close to a 50% increase in resolution plus a 33% increase in FPS.

New math? MP: 24 – 18 = 6; 6 / 18 = 33% more resolution. Frame rate: 15 – 12 = 3; 3 / 12 = 25% higher fps.

Sometimes I wish math was mandatory at elementary schools.

Also, data bus speed aside, the mirror physical movement becomes another bottleneck. I don't know much about mechanics, but even the 12fps seems crazy high speed for the mirror to slap around.

I don't like mirrorless that much, but that's one huge advantage for them.

 

[AlanF]

24 MP, 15 fps. That's my guess.

That's close to a 50% increase in resolution plus a 33% increase in FPS.

New math? MP: 24 – 18 = 6; 6 / 18 = 33% more resolution. Frame rate: 15 – 12 = 3; 3 / 12 = 25% higher fps.

Right. Did those in my head and am a bit under the weather. Still 12FPS x 18 MP = 216 MP/Sec while 15 x 24 MP = 360 MP/Sec, an increase of 68%

It is 5/3 times greater, an increase of 66 2/3%, or 66.67% rounded.

 

[rs]

24 MP, 15 fps. That's my guess.

That's close to a 50% increase in resolution plus a 33% increase in FPS.

New math? MP: 24 – 18 = 6; 6 / 18 = 33% more resolution. Frame rate: 15 – 12 = 3; 3 / 12 = 25% higher fps.

Right. Did those in my head and am a bit under the weather. Still 12FPS x 18 MP = 216 MP/Sec while 15 x 24 MP = 360 MP/Sec, an increase of 68%

It is 5/3 times greater, an increase of 66 2/3%, or 66.67% rounded.

To give this a bit of context, the previous Canon speed demon was the APS-H 1D mk IV. It featured 16 MP and 10 FPS, making a nice round 160 MP/Sec. The existing 1D X represents a 35% increase in throughput. But bear in mind the 1D X was announced almost two years to the day after the 1D mk IV. If it were announced today, the 1D X mk II announcement would be four years later. That's enough time for 35% twice (compound of course), so an 82% increase isn't too unreasonable. And the longer they leave it, the more scope for data throughput increases.

If FPS increases are bound by the physical limits the mirror can flip at, let's go for a mild 15 FPS, so 26MP+ could be a possibility.

 

[StudentOfLight]

20MP @ 12fps (18fps in mirror lockup)

 

[Proscribo]

Also, data bus speed aside, the mirror physical movement becomes another bottleneck. I don't know much about mechanics, but even the 12fps seems crazy high speed for the mirror to slap around.

Indeed. Could it be possible to cut the mirror from the middle? So that upper half would move up and lower half down. I suppose that would allow for higher fps.

 

[rs]

Also, data bus speed aside, the mirror physical movement becomes another bottleneck. I don't know much about mechanics, but even the 12fps seems crazy high speed for the mirror to slap around.

Indeed. Could it be possible to cut the mirror from the middle? So that upper half would move up and lower half down. I suppose that would allow for higher fps.

Bear in mind the viewfinder would end up with a split in the middle with that set up, not to mention the issues with the AF mirror and getting light reliably and accurately to that.

As for 12 FPS, Canon have managed that reliably with the 1D X. And since then they have introduced the Mirror Vibration Control System on the 5DS(r) and 7D mk II. This tech allows the mirror to softly stop at each end of travel instead of slapping into the end stops, allowing for less vibration and quicker settling for viewfinder/AF purposes. This should allow them to push the envelope a little further on their flagship product without breaking a sweat. I imagine 14 FPS could be a given for them, and they could well pull one out of the bag and push it even further.

 

[Eldar]

A 15fps mirror mechanism, with enough durability and reasonable damping to avoid image impact, can be expected to be quite expensive. To me 12 fps is enough. I would rather have resolution, DR and good high ISO, combined with some AF improvements (wider spread of AF points, improved tracking of fast moving subjects and more AF points at f8).

I think Neuro´s guess at 24MP and 15 fps is pretty realistic.

 

[rs]

Read the 1DX people.

At 14fps on the 1DX, the mirror gets locked up. That should tell you all that you need to know.

No-one on here has suggested anything but 12 fps with mirror movement on the 1D X. The previous generation with its smaller sensor ran at 10 fps. We're debating possibilities for the next generation.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Read the 1DX people.
At 14fps on the 1DX, the mirror gets locked up. That should tell you all that you need to know.

We should all be very glad that Canon doesn't design and build cameras in dilbertland.

 

[takesome1]

Canon was promoting frame grabs from video with the 1Dx.
With the next version that is what will likely be pushed even more with 4K video.
Increasing shutter speed is a redundant increase in technology if Canon believes that technology is headed in that direction.
For that reason I think you see mp increase, ISO and DR performance increase if possible and all balanced to the abilities of the latest greatest processors. 24-28mp should be possible, keep in mind the speed and depth of the buffer can be just as important as frame rate.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Canon was promoting frame grabs from video with the 1Dx.
With the next version that is what will likely be pushed even more with 4K video.
Increasing shutter speed is a redundant increase in technology if Canon believes that technology is headed in that direction.

So you're saying the 1D X II will have DPAF and it will be as good as dedicated phase AF for subject tracking?