A new Canon DSLR seems to be getting teased on social media by a Canon ambassador

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,167
373
He is promulgating the idea that 300mm is effectively 600mm on FF. It is that for field of view but it is not 600mm on for "reach" unless you are comparing a 20 mpx 4/3 sensor with a 20 mpx FF. You will get exactly the same resolution as a 32 mpx sensor on APS-C. A 375mm telephoto on a 7DII or a 5DSR will give the same resolution as 300mm on the EM1X. I would like the Pro Capture that the Olympus has. A 100-400mm II on a 5DSR has a similar weight to a 300mm f/4 on the EM1X and has the advantage of a full frame sensor, twice the field of view and spot centre focus to be set against the fast frame rate and Pro Capture of the EM1X. Some pros and amateurs would take the Olympus but I far prefer the Canon set up. YMMV.
All fair points but I think he quite explicit in saying that that aspect of 'reach' is not relevant to him: he gets an image that is good enough for him irrelevant of whether absolute quality matches the FF gear. And what appeals to him is the options the technology (such as procapture) gives him and the much smaller kit size makes it more flexible.

I have 7D2 with 100-400 and also (recently) the E-M1X with300f4+1.4 tc. Guess which is much smaller. I have only just got the E-M1X so not done full field testing yet but so far it looks promising. Regards reach, both lenses will give 400mm so the bird on the sensor will be independent of sensor size, so the EM-1X gives more pixels on the target. What effect that will have I will be looking at very closely.

I have often said that if you want to talk technical and ultimate quality then talk to an amateur enthusiast. If you want to talk what is 'good enough' without compromising then talk to a professional. I think he exemplifies this.
 
Reactions: Pape

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,167
373
A genuine question: what an image taken with E1 MX at ISO 6400 would look like at pixel level? I am still a little unconvinced that micro 4/3 cameras can be good in low light​
Pixel level is irrelevant to me. I want to see how the noise in the final image looks.

For all the benefits of MFT, even many professional advocates of the system will say if a majority of your work is in low light then maybe MFT is not for you. So while noise can bean issue with MFT it is image level not pixel level.
But the gap is closing.
 

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,035
1,821
All fair points but I think he quite explicit in saying that that aspect of 'reach' is not relevant to him: he gets an image that is good enough for him irrelevant of whether absolute quality matches the FF gear. And what appeals to him is the options the technology (such as procapture) gives him and the much smaller kit size makes it more flexible.

I have 7D2 with 100-400 and also (recently) the E-M1X with300f4+1.4 tc. Guess which is much smaller. I have only just got the E-M1X so not done full field testing yet but so far it looks promising. Regards reach, both lenses will give 400mm so the bird on the sensor will be independent of sensor size, so the EM-1X gives more pixels on the target. What effect that will have I will be looking at very closely.

I have often said that if you want to talk technical and ultimate quality then talk to an amateur enthusiast. If you want to talk what is 'good enough' without compromising then talk to a professional. I think he exemplifies this.
I made a mistake with my calculation: a 331mm lens on a 7DII will give the same number of pixels on a bird as 300mm on a EM1X, not 375mm (3.72µ vs 4.1µ pixels). You would need a 463mm lens on a 7DII to give the same number of pixels as a 300mm + 1.4xTC on an EM1X. We all want different characteristics for our gear, and I can see the attractions of the EM1X.

For those who are guessing the relative sizes, try these:
http://j.mp/30tlfyQ





 
Last edited:
Reactions: Pape

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,035
1,821
Pixel level is irrelevant to me. I want to see how the noise in the final image looks.

For all the benefits of MFT, even many professional advocates of the system will say if a majority of your work is in low light then maybe MFT is not for you. So while noise can bean issue with MFT it is image level not pixel level.
But the gap is closing.
Yes. In decent light, even a 1" 2.7-crop factor sensor can give superb resuts
 

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,000
871
Alberta, Canada
So off I went to Costa Rica, not having much of a clue about anything other than looking at photos and reading a bit. Of course we wanted to go to the cloud forests, rain forests and deep in the jungle (with trees that are easily 200 feet tall) because there are lots of cool creatures there.

And guess what? I was thrilled when I could get a shot at less than ISO 6400 and didn't need to crop too heavily. At those ISOs the 1DX2 does pretty well and with selective NR I have many decent shots but I shudder to think of not having the ability to shoot up to even ISO 12800.

Here, I needed 800 mm (F8) for the reach with still quite a bit of cropping to do. I hesitate to go too low on shutter because even slight movements at 800 mm introduce blur so there I am at 1/1000, and thus ISO 10000 - this is cloud forest in the afternoon and that's what you can expect. I know the frustration having shot with the 1D4 and been quite disappointed relative to high ISO.

Jack


184633
 
Reactions: Pape

raptor3x

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 26, 2012
530
24
State College, PA
whumber.com
The Olympus sensor is indeed very good for its size, remarkably so in fact. But, in the images you link to, that from the 5DSR is much larger than that from the EM1X, and downsizing the 5DSR image would greatly increase its relative S/N.
Certainly true, but the other poster I responded to was asking about noise at pixel level rather than at an image level.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,927
310
Maybe for video, but not for stills. By your definition, a 7DII would have 1.6x the reach of a 5DSR with the same lens. But, you can crop the 5DSR image to be the same size as the 7DIIs with the same number of pixels on target. The 7DII and the 5DSR have the same resolution "reach" (apart from the AA-filter) as they have same size pixels within 1% (4.1/4.14 microns).
I suppose it’s fair to define it as sufficient focal length to put a desired number of pixels on your target. I’d stipulate that if you fill the frame, you’ve done that.
 

SecureGSM

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 26, 2017
936
67
Certainly true, but the other poster I responded to was asking about noise at pixel level rather than at an image level.
Not a noise at pixel level. I beg your pardon. I was interested to know if you can notice image degrading substantially at iso6400. Thank you very much. I shoot with 5D IV and am sceptical beyond a reason that this Oly can deliver a decent image quality at a iso 6400 unless downsampled.
I know what I am talking about as even 5DIII image falls apart at iso 6400
 

Pape

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2018
251
103
In my logic 600mm f4, 5dsr got double better reach than olympus stuff. olympus got sharper sensor but 15cm front lens got better quality so they are equal.
i feel size of view doesnt matter cause you can crop full frame to what ever size . it contains all smaller formats.
Best camera is one you can shoot all day .Depends about photographers muscles i guess :) . i think even olypus would be too heavy for me.
Just make tht nikon 300mm f4 equivalent tube or better for me mr canon. i bet it would make soccer moms happy too!
 
Last edited:

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
6,000
871
Alberta, Canada
Anyone who's aging is going to be thinking about lighter. I hiked for 8 hours straight a few weeks back with the 400 DO II X2 and the 1DX2 over my shoulder and I was really beat. At some point the fun factor starts to dissipate and lighter gear becomes a consideration or one has to give it up altogether. I assume baby boomers represent a fair number of Canon's customers right now that they would like to keep.

Jack
 

raptor3x

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 26, 2012
530
24
State College, PA
whumber.com
Not a noise at pixel level. I beg your pardon. I was interested to know if you can notice image degrading substantially at iso6400. Thank you very much. I shoot with 5D IV and am sceptical beyond a reason that this Oly can deliver a decent image quality at a iso 6400 unless downsampled.
I know what I am talking about as even 5DIII image falls apart at iso 6400
The E-M1X at ISO 6400 will look fairly close to the 5D3 at ISO 12800 or the 5D4 at somewhere between 12800 and 25600. If you shoot at ISO 6400 often and are not happy with the 5D3, then you definitely won't be happy with the E-M1X.
 

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,035
1,821
Anyone who's aging is going to be thinking about lighter. I hiked for 8 hours straight a few weeks back with the 400 DO II X2 and the 1DX2 over my shoulder and I was really beat. At some point the fun factor starts to dissipate and lighter gear becomes a consideration or one has to give it up altogether. I assume baby boomers represent a fair number of Canon's customers right now that they would like to keep.

Jack
Precisely why I have stopped hiking with my 400mm DO II and carry the 100-400mm II on the lighter 5DSR rather than your heavier 1DXII. Or, I take the Sony superzoom. But, the M1X is larger and heavier than a 5D, and the Olympus 300mm +TC longer and as heavy as the Canon zoom. As you know, Jack, I am always looking for lighter gear but alternatives have not convinced me to switch from Canon. I leave the superior heavier gear to the younger and stronger.
 
Reactions: Jack Douglas

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,035
1,821
I suppose it’s fair to define it as sufficient focal length to put a desired number of pixels on your target. I’d stipulate that if you fill the frame, you’ve done that.
My first digicam was a Casio QV10. Believe me, filling its 0.25 kilopixel sensor did not put a desired number of pixels on target.
 
Reactions: StoicalEtcher

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,017
153
Davidson, NC
Anyone who's aging is going to be thinking about lighter. I hiked for 8 hours straight a few weeks back with the 400 DO II X2 and the 1DX2 over my shoulder and I was really beat. At some point the fun factor starts to dissipate and lighter gear becomes a consideration or one has to give it up altogether. I assume baby boomers represent a fair number of Canon's customers right now that they would like to keep.

Jack
I take my G7X II when I travel and leave everything else at home. It does a more than adequate job for documenting where I've been, posting pictures on the web, and printing the nicest shots on 13" x 19" paper to frame and hang on the wall. I rarely miss the good gear for those purposes. And then, it is almost always that the 24mm equivalent on the wide end is not wide enough, so I make a few shots to stitch together in Photoshop. An M50 might be fun, but it wouldn't fit in my pocket.

When I'm going out to make pictures per se, then the 6D2 and appropriate lenses are used. Less than half a day wearing it and the 100-400mm II wears me out, without the hiking, but the pictures are worth it. Right now we have just passed from being too rainy to get out and make pictures to being too hot. Trips to Washington, DC, and a couple weeks later to Denmark and Sweden are coming up, so it is back to the G7X II, unless the III comes out soon.

I never expected to live to be this old. Yet I see plenty of folks who are somewhat older still out and very active, so maybe there is still plenty of time to enjoy both travel and photography.
 
Reactions: Jack Douglas

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
2,927
310
My first digicam was a Casio QV10. Believe me, filling its 0.25 kilopixel sensor did not put a desired number of pixels on target.
Bad decision, then.

Most consumers would be well advised to not purchase items which can not do what the buyer wants them to.

Besides, these days cameras have as many at 614000 times more pixels; that corner case is hardly worth considering.
 
Last edited:

AlanF

5DSR
Aug 16, 2012
5,035
1,821
Bad decision, then.

Most consumers would be well advised to not purchase items which can not do what the buyer wants them to.

Besides, these days cameras have as many at 614000 times more pixels; that corner case is hardly worth considering.
It certainly wasn't a bad decision! The QV10 was the very first consumer grade digital camera, and it came on the market 24 years ago. It was a landmark. Casio's QV-10 was awarded the status of "Essential Historical Material for Science and Technology" by Japan's National Museum of Nature and Science. It was great fun, fine for taking mugshots of my grad students to be used at passport size, but not good enough for landscapes etc - a bit like Polaroids or Instamaxes. But, it is a neat example to show that filling the frame is not a sufficient criterion for having enough resolution for all purposes.
 
Last edited:

HarryFilm

EOS RP
Jun 6, 2016
399
29
Harry, how on earth you are going to cool this "assembly" down? rhetorical question though. you can't is the answer, unless you shoot at a sub-zero temperature.:ROFLMAO:
===

Same way you cool GPU's down! Modern microchannel-based cooling pipes embedded into the either the chip substrate itself (i.e. licence some IBM patents) and/or use multi-phase vapour/phase change cooling within micro-sized heat pipes and copper plates that can FAST TRANSFER heat to the outer parts of a case AWAY from areas typically held by a user during phone calls and or when held in the hand. (i.e. expelled from vents or grills embedded into the bottom and top of the phone when held in portrait mode!)

At the speeds envisioned by using ARM-based Qualcomm 855 chips and 8192x6144 pixel or 50.3 megapixel sensors, you're looking at a maximum thermal design power of 5 to 6 watts for the Snapdragon 855 main processor and MANY image sensors are under HALF-A-WATT to as much as 3 watts for very high pixel count image sensors, so by using the extra phase-change cooling or microchannel cooling, it adds barely $60 US to the cost of the phone!

At those cheap prices for the IBM microchannel cooling patents, on a flagship phone with 50.3 megapixels, it's a FINANCIAL NO BRAINER to add the requisite cooling technology to support the added 6 to 8 watts of heat dissipation per required N-amount of time!

---

The parent company I do consulting for, does this ALL THE TIME !!! Phase change cooling mostly with copper plates and heat pipes on the backs of the image sensors and copper or aluminum fins on the outside of the case costs us merely in design time and BARELY $25 to $100 US per device in patent licencing fees depending upon the imaging devices! For that measly amount of money, WHY should we care? We just ADD it to the end user price anyways (which is a LOT more than what a $1500 a Flagship supersmartphone costs!). $60 US out of $1500 retail forsuper-cooling technology is just chump change! As a manufacturer you take the money and eat it! Give the user what they want which is a Big Phone with Lots of RAM, a Powerful CPU/GPU and a BIG-SIZE 2/3rds inch 48-bit RAW and Compressed colour, low-noise, low-light-capable CMOS image sensor!

AND ... for Large 2/3rds inch and APS-C flagship smartphone and tablet designs, that $60 estimated patent licence fee for advanced cooling technology is a MERE drop in the bucket which can EASILY be passed onto the end-user anyways! AND ME AS THE END-USER could care less about an added $60 US when I get a super-smartphone with gigabytes of system RAM, and a Snapdragon 855 attached to a 2/3rds inch image sensor giving me 60 fps 8192 by 6144 16-bits per colour channel RAW or interframe compressed video AND 50.3 megapixel super-sharp RAW 48-bit colour stills that EXCEED the quality of a Canon 5Dr/s ALL at only $1500 US! Again, WHY should I care about companies licencing for 60 dollars worth of cooling technology added on to make me happy? I WANT TO BE HAPPY with my super-smartphone! Soooooooo, goto IBM and licence the embedded CPU and image sensor microchannel cooling technology AND/OR micro-sized multi-phase-change cooling tech!
.
SO YES!!! You CAN cool this in a super-smartphone and since a 2/3rds inch sensor NEEDS about 12mm of thickness anyways for the focal plane issue, you just add the extra cooling within the available left-over 12 mm thick spacing, in addition to putting in extra-thick batteries for all-day use of those big sensors!
.
 
Last edited:

SecureGSM

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 26, 2017
936
67
Appreciate the write up..... And those extra thick batteries are also source of an additional heat that you have to deal with. It’s a catch 22