Another mention of a 70+ megapixel EOS R camera

Mbell75

I'm New Here
Oct 21, 2018
23
8
So the EOS R was Canon's answer to the a7iii and we won't be seeing a REAL pro body? Just a budget turd and a 75 MP camera thats sure to cost over $4k that no one is asking for or wants? The 5Ds sold next to nothing. What makes Canon think a mirrorless version of it will sell any better? Where is the 30-35MP pro, mirrorless version of the 5DIV and the 20-25MP pro, mirrorless version of the 1DxII? Canon is a joke.
 
  • Like
Reactions: noms78

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,413
860
But it's not a magnification. It's exactly what you said, a 1:1 view where 1 pixel from the image corresponds to 1 pixel on the screen. "Comp" option shows the 5DSr's image downsampled and D810's image as 1:1.
A typical FHD monitor resolution is 96 ppi. (4k is typically >200 ppi.)

8688 / 96 = 90.5"
7360 / 96 = 76"

Both cameras have a FF 35mm sensor, so...magnification.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,192
1,773
Canada
So the EOS R was Canon's answer to the a7iii and we won't be seeing a REAL pro body? Just a budget turd and a 75 MP camera thats sure to cost over $4k that no one is asking for or wants? The 5Ds sold next to nothing. What makes Canon think a mirrorless version of it will sell any better? Where is the 30-35MP pro, mirrorless version of the 5DIV and the 20-25MP pro, mirrorless version of the 1DxII? Canon is a joke.
There won’t be one “pro” body, there will be several high end bodies.

Expect a high megapixel body, a good wedding shooter body (like 5D4), and a sports body (like the 1DX2). Obviously, they are not all being released at the same time.

Note that the sales for the lower end bodies should be far higher numbers for the lower units plus some who buy lower units will then go on to buy higher units. Fot sales reasons, it makes sense to release the lower units first.

Remember too, these are rumours. It is rumoured that a high megapixel body is coming. That does not mean it is next, or even if it will arrive at all.

P.S. when you use words like turd and joke in a post you essentially remove yourself from a reasoned discussion and invite attacks.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,083
404
I've read that the ADC's aren't linear in which case that's probably not it. But I couldn't say for certain.
I’m not sure they’d need to be linear. It would be enough if they are not matched to a sensor.

That would allow multiple cameras to use similar circuit design and bills of material, simplify the tuning process.
Let’s say the cameras can use their full well capacity. If so, at the base ISO setting, shouldn’t the 5Div (larger wells) take longer to overexpose than the 5Ds (smaller wells), all else being equal?

It doesn’t; they apply the speed ratings such that full exposure is roughly the same between models, meaning the same photon count converts to charge for a given focus plane exposure and same sensor size.
 
Last edited:

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
304
117
The problem is that on current cameras (DSLRs in live view and MILCs), the live image, the histogram and the highlight warnings (‘blinkies’) are based on the jpg conversion algorithm.
Fair enough, but you can equally well make a historgram and highlight/lowlight warnings based on the RAW, couldn't you?

Just because the CPU doesn't show the user that data on a graph doesn't mean the CPU doesn't have access to it, does it?
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,620
2,106
Fair enough, but you can equally well make a historgram and highlight/lowlight warnings based on the RAW, couldn't you?

Just because the CPU doesn't show the user that data on a graph doesn't mean the CPU doesn't have access to it, does it?
Who is ‘you’? I can’t. Canon could, if they choose to do so. I wouldn’t hold my breath on that one...RAW files have been around for a long time, histograms are still based on JPGs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,083
404
What makes you think it's not already done this way? How do you think it's done, if not this way?
They’re based on JPEG. It is known. Some cameras (I think Leica has one) which offers an approximate RAW histogram.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,620
2,106
What makes you think it's not already done this way? How do you think it's done, if not this way?
As stated above, the review image/histogram/highlight warning are all based on the processed data (8-bit converted, most in-camera settings applied), not the RAW image/stream.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

SwissFrank

EOS RP
Dec 9, 2018
304
117
review image/histogram/highlight warning
Why do you think those have any importance to the camera's internal methodology? I think those are just features on the periphery built for you the photographer, not for the camera's internal processing. What I suggest might be less than 20 lines of code. You wouldn't say OMG, we're doing this whole JPG conversion and making a histogram for the user, so we have to use that histogram, even though it totally doesn't aid us in figuring out how to expose to maximize detail captured, and even though the tiny bit of extra code that would do the job exactly could be written while waiting for the bus.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,620
2,106
Why do you think those have any importance to the camera's internal methodology? I think those are just features on the periphery built for you the photographer, not for the camera's internal processing. What I suggest might be less than 20 lines of code. You wouldn't say OMG, we're doing this whole JPG conversion and making a histogram for the user, so we have to use that histogram, even though it totally doesn't aid us in figuring out how to expose to maximize detail captured, and even though the tiny bit of extra code that would do the job exactly could be written while waiting for the bus.
What are you arguing here? Of course Canon could provide a RAW histogram, as I mentioned several posts back. They could have implemented that feature at any time, as I also mentioned several posts back. But they haven’t...as I mentioned several posts back. Those are the facts. If your point is, Canon should give us a RAW histogram option, I’d certainly use one if they do. But I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for one, and I would not recommend that you do so, either (as...wait for it...I mentioned several posts back).
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,173
1,757
Irving, Texas
Why do you think those have any importance to the camera's internal methodology? I think those are just features on the periphery built for you the photographer, not for the camera's internal processing. What I suggest might be less than 20 lines of code. You wouldn't say OMG, we're doing this whole JPG conversion and making a histogram for the user, so we have to use that histogram, even though it totally doesn't aid us in figuring out how to expose to maximize detail captured, and even though the tiny bit of extra code that would do the job exactly could be written while waiting for the bus.
Then write the code. You should be able to knock out those 20 lines in a few minutes. Let us know how it works when you are done. Harry could probably help you. Honestly, a tool like that would be more helpful in the film era. Personally, perfect shadow detail ain't real high on my wish list. Knock yourself out. I didn't realize we had so many coders with so much knowledge around here.