Anyone else have a sneaky feeling that this is going to be ground breaking? Or will it just be enough?
Are we going to be seeing the first outing for the curved sensor?
Are we going to be seeing the first outing for the curved sensor?
Would they have to oscillate around their focal point for IBIS rather than vibrate in a plane?A curved sensor would require specifically designed lenses. Although they could be substantially smaller than current designs, I doubt we’ll see anything like that given the recent spate of new RF lenses that have been released or are planned for release.
Anyone else have a sneaky feeling that this is going to be ground breaking? Or will it just be enough?
Are we going to be seeing the first outing for the curved sensor?
Mirroring the EOS R would yield a 5DIV.In most other respects it will probably mirror the EOS R.
I am expecting to see 83.2 Mpixels.Only if you consider 80+ mp ground breaking. In most other respects it will probably mirror the EOS R.
Yeah, I just couldn't remember the exact Mpixel count of the 90D, so said 80+.I am expecting to see 83.2 Mpixels.
Just like the 20Mpixels of the 7D2 scales up to the 5Dsr, I would expect that a high density R camera would have the same pixel size as the 90D, and with a FF sensor we would have an 11,136 X 7,424 sensor, or 83.2 Mpixels
I am expecting to see 83.2 Mpixels.
Just like the 20Mpixels of the 7D2 scales up to the 5Dsr, I would expect that a high density R camera would have the same pixel size as the 90D, and with a FF sensor we would have an 11,136 X 7,424 sensor, or 83.2 Mpixels
What is ground-breaking about a Sony?It will not be ground breaking. Nothing Canon ever does on the tech side of their cameras is ground breaking. They are slow and steady, and they release middle of the pack equipment, but with rock solid reliability because nothing makes it out for release until it's fully proven out.
I've resigned myself to the fact that no camera that Canon comes out with will blow my socks off. In fact it probably won't even match what Sony's got. But, it will be very reliable and work flawlessly, and that's important to me, so I grudgingly stick with them.
good point!That's effective Mpixels, right? The full sensor would be 88MPixels if the 90D one is scaled up.
Yeah I think so too. I see a lot of participants on workshops with Sony A7, Nikon, Fuji and Panasonic even but none of them are as 'convincing' as my EOS-R. The lcd screen on the R is miles ahead and image quality is superb especially with the RF lenses. More megapixels would be great so long as DR isn't suffering.What is ground-breaking about a Sony?
Is it ergonomics, color rendition, water leaking?
Yes, some specs are impressive, but they have an advance of a few Milc generations on Nikon and Canon.
I'm certain the next Canon "mirrorlesses" will be very convincing cameras.
good point!
if they keep the same margin around the edge of the sensor, the effective pixels could be higher than 83.2 megapixels
Your post starts out by asking what's so great about Sony, and then immediately pivots over to admitting Sony is good, but making excuses about why Canon isn't as good.What is ground-breaking about a Sony?
Is it ergonomics, color rendition, water leaking?
Yes, some specs are impressive, but they have an advance of a few Milc generations on Nikon and Canon.
I'm certain the next Canon "mirrorlesses" will be very convincing cameras.
Many of us out here in Canonland are hoping your last statement is so very true. Meanwhile, I have no problem with Sony, Fuji, Panasonic and whoever, pushing the boundaries of what they can produce, innovating where possible, giving us choices and hopefully, making us all better photographers.What is ground-breaking about a Sony?
Is it ergonomics, color rendition, water leaking?
Yes, some specs are impressive, but they have an advance of a few Milc generations on Nikon and Canon.
I'm certain the next Canon "mirrorlesses" will be very convincing cameras.