A leaked document suggests that Canon has a 63mp full frame image sensor in the works.

Yes, you do, indeed!
Please sell or trade in you cameras and lenses for the latest and greatest shiny new toys the moment Sony/Oly/ who-ever-not announces the new photographic miracle that is oh so amaZing.
I will gladly buy your instantly outdated pro quality lenses and old-fart pro grade Canon DSLR for pennies in the dollar. :) pretty please, my friend!
Can't serve you actually, as I did not buy 6DII to make you happy :) While upset at the 6DII release, I went with the 5DIV instead. Along with 70-200/2.8 II IS and 24-80/2.8 II, I think, that so far we kind of still have the latest and greatest. As for MILC to accompany/replace our 5DIV, I wait for some mysterious new sensor to appear in 1-2 years timeframe. Not looking into any competing brands - am too lazy/conservative to move my butt.

But as for Canon, I have new gripe to moan about - the .cr3 support. I am an on1 user and it seems Canon did not provide specs to anybody just Adobe. Others have to reverse engineer it. With the RP, there are some comments out there, stating the'Ve changed something and even LR/ACR has problems to support it. Once again - does Canon try to capitalise / licence here, do they support only Adobe, because they are still kind of testing the format? Or are they complete dorks again?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Randywayne

Diko

7 fps...
Apr 27, 2011
433
5
37
Sofia, Bulgaria
Best for what?
Exactly! The question arises due to the idiotic marketing messages coming from CANON. "1Dx - our flagship". It's not just the sensor though. Indeed have tested both 1Dx - I & II. Faster AF, better DR, lower Noise. Images are... awesome. However IMHO best for sport, birds, kids and anything moving fast. Night photography... haven't made side-by-side tests with 5D4 for comparison after down-sampling final images. But hey - what do I know. They need to sell something awkwardly expensive. Actually pro sport photography is the most expensive in reality both as bodies and lenses (as investment, have no idea how well are they paid, AFAIK usually the press photo agencies give them the equipment).

What is it exactly that looks unnatural to you in this image?
The image is flat. It is surreal.

Just was playing around what I can pull off these days from the usual equipment.

Do you see the sky - how dark it is with saturated blue on a sunny day? The shadows are near to non existent. Go out and see with your eyes. The regions where there are highlights and shadows are NOT supposed to be so saturated at all that much! Your eyes wouldn't register it that way. Unless I PS the cat in to show it's a... lollipop child's dream it's totally fake. This here is obviously an event. Really it was :D And not some piece of an art fart.

And having in mind I agree "more is always better to have and not always use" concerning DR, there are people that have shifted the aesthetic (10x 2 mobile photography possibilities) to kitsch. The age of not restraining to always max out have led to FB being full with this "plastic and unreal" caricatures instead of photos.

Maybe I am old.

Enough off topic. I would enjoy the 63 MP ex-beast to be the next security thing though maybe even for that it's not good enough. AFAIK HDR video capabilities are already on CMOS implemented with dual exposure or iso like capabilities in mind.

On the other hand when I think of it. 63MP that's between 33 MP (8k) and 133 MP (16K), so maybe it is dual something 8K. But hardly that would be for video, since the overheating would be tremendous and the data to be processed would have "from-the-future-rates". Way too cutting edge - better refrain myself from day dreaming.

Since there's no mention of something new (е.g. IBIS) for photography in that datasheet it's USELESS when superior in-house sensors are available already.

Another possibility it to be a leak of an old "from the recycle bin" or forgotten archived data sheet. Hardly a publicity stunt since it would be a bad PR for CANON :))))

Last possibility that most of you would dismiss is "ear-hunt". The good old "leaking on purpose fake info that is changed to regions or security levels". If that is the case I bet the mole is not tech savvy since he/she would be aware the data is weird.
 

SecureGSM

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 26, 2017
1,140
187
-pekr-

.... As for MILC to accompany/replace our 5DIV, I wait for some mysterious new sensor to appear in 1-2 years timeframe. Not looking into any competing brands - am too lazy/conservative to move my but....
not sure what is the big deal with the sensor there. I will buy Pro 5D-ish styled MILC from Canon the moment it landed provided (being an event shooter):

  1. dual memory card configuration
  2. joystick, please
  3. -5 EV over viewfinder AF sensitivity
  4. in viewfinder histogram
  5. RF 28-70 F2.0 lens compatible.
  6. 5fps minimum
  7. 5D style (sized) magnesium body.
  8. weather resistant
  9. US$3000-ish priced.
I will keep my second 5D IV body and use for assignments where OVF works better than EVF
 
Last edited:

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
455
303
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
well I am interested generally for macro,extreem macro and street photo.but onе thing I can steel not understand are mega pixels.if y have more than y are able to get more details.Does it mean that the less mxp I have I am loosing more details?
Ok, but 1DXMkII won't be 'the best' for macro and street. In fact it'll be ok for macro and probably the worst for street. Only a medium-format film camera mounted on a tripod will attract more attention in the streets than 1DXMkII.

As to the details, yes, the level of details depends on the sensor resolution, but it also depends on the lens resolution. It's always a system as a whole (basically lens+sensor) that determines the resolution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: caffetin

caffetin

EOS M50
Apr 20, 2019
39
12
and what do y suggest.eos r or some canon crop sensor basically for macro because macro is my basic interest.
 
-pekr-



not sure what is the big deal with the sensor there. I will buy Pro 5D-ish styled MILC from Canon the moment it landed provided (being an event shooter):

  1. dual memory card configuration
  2. joystick, please
  3. -5 EV over viewfinder AF sensitivity
  4. in viewfinder histogram
  5. RF 28-70 F2.0 lens compatible.
  6. 5fps minimum
  7. 5D style (sized) magnesium body.
  8. weather resistant
  9. US$3000-ish priced.
I will keep my second 5D IV body and use for assignments where OVF works better than EVF
It did not want to make it sound negative, just pragmatic. After all - we did our local small photo business in our studio using 70D. Right now, we've got 5DIV, we do weddings too. But each market is different - we charge 350-500 USD per wedding. Average sallary here is around 1200 USD and most ppl don't reach that. Hence we are used to consider what we spend our money for. And we've already got the 5DIV, right? I don't need the second one right now. I am also not sure the tracking speed is there with the R equivalent. So as for the future - it will almost definitely be some R MILC, in e.g. 2 years period. I wish / expect Canon to deliver some advancements. Technology advances, you know. IBIS, better sensor, faster tracking, better eye focus, whatever is better, is better. Then we will buy and 5DIV will move to become second body.
 

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,143
553
and what do y suggest.eos r or some canon crop sensor basically for macro because macro is my basic interest.
I think EOS RP will be better for you than EOS R, 5Ds or 1Dx series.

It is lighter, easier to use, less conspicuous and has focus bracketing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: caffetin

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
455
303
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
Exactly! The question arises due to the idiotic marketing messages coming from CANON. "1Dx - our flagship". It's not just the sensor though. Indeed have tested both 1Dx - I & II. Faster AF, better DR, lower Noise. Images are... awesome. However IMHO best for sport, birds, kids and anything moving fast. Night photography... haven't made side-by-side tests with 5D4 for comparison after down-sampling final images. But hey - what do I know. They need to sell something awkwardly expensive. Actually pro sport photography is the most expensive in reality both as bodies and lenses (as investment, have no idea how well are they paid, AFAIK usually the press photo agencies give them the equipment).
That's the market. They sell it for the price buyers are ready to pay. Also there's little competition. In that niche, only Nikon can compete, and Sony is trying to crawl into this segment with their A9.

The image is flat. It is surreal.
It's flat because it was nearly midday. Also it's a bit too bright. Decrease exposure by about 0.5 stops, pull the shadows down a bit and decrease saturation, it'll become more 'natural':
184028


However it was ok even before I tweaked it, as a random shot from dogs competition. A bit too soft though, maybe because of a slightly off focus or a motion blur.

Just was playing around what I can pull off these days from the usual equipment.

Do you see the sky - how dark it is with saturated blue on a sunny day?
Hmmm I don't know, the sky is ok. Do you want it to be just white/blown out? But we don't see white sky on a sunny day. We see it as pale blue.

The shadows are near to non existent. Go out and see with your eyes. The regions where there are highlights and shadows are NOT supposed to be so saturated at all that much! Your eyes wouldn't register it that way. Unless I PS the cat in to show it's a... lollipop child's dream it's totally fake. This here is obviously an event. Really it was :D And not some piece of an art fart.
If the shadows are non-existent, they can't be saturated... ;) If the shadows are saturated, it's because the whole image is too bright and oversaturated.

And having in mind I agree "more is always better to have and not always use" concerning DR, there are people that have shifted the aesthetic (10x 2 mobile photography possibilities) to kitsch. The age of not restraining to always max out have led to FB being full with this "plastic and unreal" caricatures instead of photos.

Maybe I am old.
Probably not as old as pictorialism vs straight photography argument.
184028
 

mk0x55

[5DsR]
Nov 16, 2018
52
47
One doesn't solve the need for cropping by getting a longer lens. You get a longer lens and you still need to crop from time to time.
Sure, sometimes it is desirable and I don't even have a super telephoto lens, which hinders me from taking certain shots. The extra sensor resolution would help with that a bit, the question is if it's worth the other tradeoffs to you or me.

Also with large prints, you'll struggle to print a 6000x4000 image even on A2 at 300ppi, and if you crop, you'll struggle even more.
Right, but considering the normal viewing distance... I have a hard time seeing that as a major problem. I don't mean pixel peeping with a loupe or scrutinizing the image quality of the print from the closest distance your eyes can focus.
If you make an exhibition and need/want to absolutely impress people by the crispiness of your large prints and can't shoot a panorama, then I get the point though.
 

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,143
553
What is it exactly that looks unnatural to you in this image?
The whole image looks artificial.

After your correction, the skies still look artificial, while the rest looks just boring (not your fault, though; it's how it is supposed to look in this light).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Diko

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
455
303
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
The whole image looks artificial.

After your correction, the skies still look artificial, while the rest looks just boring (not your fault, though; it's how it is supposed to look in this light).
The sky is nearly overexposed (on the right side it's completely overexposed) but it's not too bad for this scene. Overexposed tips of balloons are worse. But tbh that's not because of the lack of DR, likely the original shot was overexposed a bit, otherwise it would probably be possible to recover the balloons (but not the sky).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Diko

Quarkcharmed

EOS 5DMkIV
Feb 14, 2018
455
303
Australia
www.michaelborisenko.com
Right, but considering the normal viewing distance... I have a hard time seeing that as a major problem. I don't mean pixel peeping with a loupe or scrutinizing the image quality of the print from the closest distance your eyes can focus.
If you make an exhibition and need/want to absolutely impress people by the crispiness of your large prints and can't shoot a panorama, then I get the point though.
Ok, at 200ppi the max size of uncropped 24mp image will be 30x20" which is enough for A2. But that's not the best quality. But in many cases it'll be good enough, that's true.
 

Diko

7 fps...
Apr 27, 2011
433
5
37
Sofia, Bulgaria
It's flat because it was nearly midday. Also it's a bit too bright. Decrease exposure by about 0.5 stops, pull the shadows down a bit and decrease saturation, it'll become more 'natural'.
Nahh. The edges. The edges are the evident culprit still. Otherwise you are right.
...A bit too soft though, maybe because of a slightly off focus or a motion blur.
24-70 mark 1 (about 16MP perceptual) on a 30 MP body. Still love this lense. Don't like the mark 2.
Hmmm I don't know, the sky is ok. Do you want it to be just white/blown out? But we don't see white sky on a sunny day. We see it as pale blue.
I redid it just to check the camera capabilities and yes. In the original pale blue to white.
If the shadows are non-existent, they can't be saturated... ;) If the shadows are saturated, it's because the whole image is too bright and over saturated.
Yes. Exactly.

Generally posted the image to make an argument that what yesterdays scene was a photographer's nightmare could be today with current cameras easily recovered not only in its glory but (if correctly edited) to accommodate the need it was taken in first place (e.g. something important hidden in the shadows or to set the positive feeling of the event by making the sky more blue-ish than it was). But definitely not all-in-one as here. :cool:

I hardly believe we would need 63 MP unless in photojournalism (event and wedding including) where while shooting one main thing the real moment could be in the 1/5th of the frame. Landscapes as well. Always! And photo-editorial, of course. Currently the right body - about 30-40ish MPs with great glass could do you the job perfectly.

Depth maps! I don't know if with the IR freq. one could create them, but depth maps are the future. Especially for us! Already enough examples are here. Artificial bokeh (yeah - I know and I love the smart selection tool in PS) in no time. Light accents here and there. The future should bring this on the table. And not a 63 MP body with... unkown purpose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Quarkcharmed

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,411
668
Isn't a 60MP 35mm sensor overkill for security cameras?
Canon has slowly been staking out sensors for speciality applications where there is currently no overwhelming competition. Security and surveillance for military, industry, law enforcement and other high end areas is a growth industry. A sensor is the primary requirement for developing new applications. Canon has previously stated that selling specialized sensors is part of their game plan, I've been expecting to see more and more. No one talks about the sensors that are on military satellites, for example, but there are lots of them, and they are very secret. They are not off the shelf, and highly specialized. Who's to say that some of these are not finding their way into space? They have a lot of extra requirements, but that is often compensated for by packaging them to meet radiation, temperature and other esoteric needs. Semiconductors do not like radiation for sure.
 

mk0x55

[5DsR]
Nov 16, 2018
52
47
Depth maps! I don't know if with the IR freq. one could create them, but depth maps are the future. Especially for us! Already enough examples are here. Artificial bokeh (yeah - I know and I love the smart selection tool in PS) in no time. Light accents here and there. The future should bring this on the table. And not a 63 MP body with... unkown purpose.
I also think that system camera makers have a lot to get inspired by from modern cell phone cameras like that of the new Huawei.
Yes, system cameras have 14+ bits per pixel and phones just 8-12, but phones do a lot of computation on the data captured by their otherwise inferior sensors.
You could get a depth map by quickly make several exposured in burst, with different apertures. Similarly, you could truly max the DR and image fidelity (including texture detail in shadows) by stacking such bursts of different exposured captured in an immediate sequence or perhaps even added on top of each other. Any of these could drastically reduce noise.
While this would not be perfectly applicable to all scenes, having the capabilities in our cameras would save a lot of our time and struggle as well as improve the image quality for many types of shots to a major degree.

This would actually legitimize the continuation of the megapixel race, but we have yet to see such features in system cameras from Canon, Nikon etc. In some other cameras, pixel shift is some sort of a beginning, I guess.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Diko

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
428
253
I also think that system camera makers have a lot to get inspired by from modern cell phone cameras like that of the new Huawei.
Yes, system cameras have 14+ bits per pixel and phones just 8-12, but phones do a lot of computation on the data captured by their otherwise inferior sensors.
You could get a depth map by quickly make several exposured in burst, with different apertures. [..]
The Dual Pixel AF should have enough information for a depth map already, especially if it focused before taking the picture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Diko

Diko

7 fps...
Apr 27, 2011
433
5
37
Sofia, Bulgaria
The Dual Pixel AF should have enough information for a depth map already, especially if it focused before taking the picture.
Yes. But way too limited.
Canon has slowly been staking out sensors for speciality applications where there is currently no overwhelming competition. Security and surveillance for military, industry, law enforcement and other high end areas is a growth industry. A sensor is the primary requirement for developing new applications. Canon has previously stated that selling specialized sensors is part of their game plan, I've been expecting to see more and more. ...
Yes...

Ubdeed Canon are having this and this. They even offer industry standardized CMOS sensors officially. I couldn't find but have read that they build custom single CMOS sensnors (costing hundreds of thousand of $), but couldn't find it to show it.

An yet here the talk is of a mere 63 MP capable CMOS only, when there is officially 120 for sale and they have done APS-H 250 already in the pipeline?

I don't think so ;-)

You could get a depth map by quickly make several exposured in burst, with different apertures.
Yeah! Magic Lanterns sole existnce is due to lack of extra functionalities in the vendor's firmwares. A good example would be dual ISO. And yet could hardly ingnore the fact that Canon has bracketing.

Why not making depth maps with brackets and implementing in a new file format altogether. ;-) E.g. "3D RAW" photo or something.It's a question of pure automation and hard-coding it on a chip. Everyone would love it. Especially the Marketing department! :)))

Have to check that with brackets and depth maps. Any recommendations where to start?

Edit: I found only this.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: mk0x55

GoldWing

Canon EOS 1DXMKII
Oct 19, 2013
66
38
Los Angeles, CA
en.wikipedia.org
Keep on dreamin' ;-)
50mp at 15fps RAW with multipoint auto AWB and full cross points across the entire frame. Auto MA with group A lenses and a built in radio for wifi and canon flashes. New "quad" focus system and AI case (7) that learns as you shoot. OVF now goes -3 to +4. New paint with better adhesion to magnesium body.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Diko