Here’s a vague Canon roadmap for 2019 [CR1]

tron

EOS 5D SR
Nov 8, 2011
4,031
334
Last edited:

nitram

EOS M50
Jun 14, 2018
39
16
Switzerland
I don’t think mirrorless is ready or capable of competing with PDAF for sports or other high speed photography and hope for a DSLR in the next 7D.
I think it is but it is a more a question of processing speed. Currently, the face tracking and eye tracking is limited to 'close' range on the R and RP. To me, this indicates that the processor is likely not able to 'look' for faces and eyes everywhere on the sensor. Instead, the computational intensity is reduced by only looking for features that cover a certain portion of the sensor. I see this being fixed by either changing the algorithm to be more efficient or to have a faster processor. The problem is that the AF performance needed for a 1DXII replacement might need 4x or more Digic 8 processors and this would drain the battery like crazy. To me, Sony's processor fabrication talent has helped it beat Canon for the moment.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,377
806
Reusing 5ds sensor doesnt sound bad joke if it comes with ibis and pixel shift and mirrorless system. lot of improvements on one step.
I agree. But you just know that there would be weeping and gnashing of teeth about dynamic range and high ISO if Canon reused an old sensor again. Even though the 5Ds sensor is already excellent at high ISO (and there's not much left to physically gain there), and not bad at all at 4ev of shadow latitude.

People can't get passed pixel peeping and DxO scores, hence all the memes about the current 5Ds being a "studio camera" that "needs a tripod" and "doesn't work well at high ISO." (All false.)

On top of that the 5Ds sensor doesn't have DPAF and can't do video at all. (I mean yeah...there's limited 1080p...but it's an afterthought.) I think the next R will be a high resolution model, but I can't imagine Canon will reuse the 5Ds sensor. They'll go with the 5D4 pixel architecture for DR and DPAF. Unless it's the first of their next generation architecture though I would expect severely cropped/binned 4k, if there's any 4k.

Or...maybe it will be cropped 8k.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,377
806
Regarding Sony's 20fps:

Uncompressed RAW drops it to ~12 or so
If you force mechanical shutter, it's limited to 5
If you use adapted lenses that must focus wide open, the burst drops variably based on the lens, generally to 12.
Ouch. I did not know that. So you get 5 fps or maybe 12/15/20 but with potential rolling shutter effects. Meh.
 

bokehmon22

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
356
186
I still like canon’s OEM speedlites, but I use them reluctantly. I also prefer third party lights (profoto).
I struggle to find the value in Canon OEM speedlight. $250 for 430 EXII, 600EXII $480. If I buy a couple of 600, I would have fund the entire cost of my Godox lighting system that's more comprehensive to handle every task from shooting midday sun in HSS to wedding reception.

It doesn't provide the power of a strobe and speedlight of Godox lighting system. It's also system interchangeable with the trigger. I have yet to find any portrait or wedding photographer shooting with Canon lighting for a long time. It's mostly Godox or Profoto lately for their versatility.
 

bokehmon22

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
356
186
I agree. But you just know that there would be weeping and gnashing of teeth about dynamic range and high ISO if Canon reused an old sensor again. Even though the 5Ds sensor is already excellent at high ISO (and there's not much left to physically gain there), and not bad at all at 4ev of shadow latitude.

People can't get passed pixel peeping and DxO scores, hence all the memes about the current 5Ds being a "studio camera" that "needs a tripod" and "doesn't work well at high ISO." (All false.)

On top of that the 5Ds sensor doesn't have DPAF and can't do video at all. (I mean yeah...there's limited 1080p...but it's an afterthought.) I think the next R will be a high resolution model, but I can't imagine Canon will reuse the 5Ds sensor. They'll go with the 5D4 pixel architecture for DR and DPAF. Unless it's the first of their next generation architecture though I would expect severely cropped/binned 4k, if there's any 4k.

Or...maybe it will be cropped 8k.
I wouldn't be surprised if they reuse 5DSR would you? EOS R reuse 5D IV sensor, EOS RP reuse 6D II sensor. If they don't consider it as flagship camera, they may reuse it.

All the sensors we have from 2 years ago isn't bad. It just leave a bad taste when they aren't trying to improve on the sensor when many of the competitors are doing it - Sony, Nikon and Panasonic.

I also wouldn't expect IBIS either if it's 5DSR replacement. They probably want to introduce that in a flagship camera as a selling point.
 

3kramd5

EOS 5D MK IV
Mar 2, 2012
3,082
403
I struggle to find the value in Canon OEM speedlight. $250 for 430 EXII, 600EXII $480. If I buy a couple of 600, I would have fund the entire cost of my Godox lighting system that's more comprehensive to handle every task from shooting midday sun in HSS to wedding reception.

It doesn't provide the power of a strobe and speedlight of Godox lighting system. It's also system interchangeable with the trigger. I have yet to find any portrait or wedding photographer shooting with Canon lighting for a long time. It's mostly Godox or Profoto lately for their versatility.
I like them largely because they’ve never failed me. They’re also interchangeable with other systems, FWIW. I used to drive canon speedights from a Sony a7Rii with yongnuo transceivers.

I’m not claiming they’re the best, just saying I like them.
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,377
806
I wouldn't be surprised if they reuse 5DSR would you?
Yes. I think their next high resolution sensor will use the 5D IV pixel architecture if not something newer.

All the sensors we have from 2 years ago isn't bad. It just leave a bad taste when they aren't trying to improve on the sensor when many of the competitors are doing it - Sony, Nikon and Panasonic.
Oh, I can almost guarantee you they're trying. But their "trying" involves getting passed some engineering or fabrication hurdle they're facing.

I also wouldn't expect IBIS either if it's 5DSR replacement. They probably want to introduce that in a flagship camera as a selling point.
I imagine a mirrorless 5Ds/sr replacement would be a MSRP $3k - $3.5k camera. It would be "a" flagship camera. And while I think it's silly to say that particular sensor needs a tripod (higher shutter speeds will do), it is a sensor that benefits a lot from IS. It would be a good body to introduce IBIS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bokehmon22

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,646
244
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
I agree. But you just know that there would be weeping and gnashing of teeth about dynamic range and high ISO if Canon reused an old sensor again. Even though the 5Ds sensor is already excellent at high ISO (and there's not much left to physically gain there), and not bad at all at 4ev of shadow latitude.

People can't get passed pixel peeping and DxO scores, hence all the memes about the current 5Ds being a "studio camera" that "needs a tripod" and "doesn't work well at high ISO." (All false.)

On top of that the 5Ds sensor doesn't have DPAF and can't do video at all. (I mean yeah...there's limited 1080p...but it's an afterthought.) I think the next R will be a high resolution model, but I can't imagine Canon will reuse the 5Ds sensor. They'll go with the 5D4 pixel architecture for DR and DPAF. Unless it's the first of their next generation architecture though I would expect severely cropped/binned 4k, if there's any 4k.

Or...maybe it will be cropped 8k.
There is a near zero liklihood that the 5DS sensor would be reused if even only for the (most glaring) fact that Canon has moved all of its full frame fabrications (and I believe all crops as well) to on-chip ADCs. That sensor still used the older off-chip process, which is partly to blame for it’s lack of high ISO performance. A new 5DS/EOS R Pro with a similar resolution chip on the new fab should have notably better upper iso performance in terms of lower noise and like I said, that’s a chip you’d likely see IBIS employed as it makes the most sense there and that’s probably also why Canon is unclear on the release timing as they are probably trying to get IBIS into this thing
 

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,377
806
That sensor still used the older off-chip process, which is partly to blame for it’s lack of high ISO performance. A new 5DS/EOS R Pro with a similar resolution chip on the new fab should have notably better upper iso performance in terms of lower noise...
I literally just posted, in this thread, comparisons showing rough parity between 5D IV, 5Ds, 1DX II, A7 gen 3's, and A7S2. I should have included the 6D2 (off sensor ADC) and the A72 (on sensor ADC) because the 6D2 is notably better than the A72 while a bit behind the A73.

Neither ADC architecture nor sampling frequency (MP)...nor BSI for that matter...seem to impact high ISO that much for FF sensors. I would not expect anything more than fractional gains in high ISO for anyone's next sensors. But if Canon moves to on chip ADCs their next high resolution sensor should gain 1-2 stops base ISO shadow latitude.
 

kaptainkatsu

1DX Mark II
Sep 29, 2015
166
62
It's much more likely the PRO Model is a high-res replacement of the 5DS (I have a 5DSR too). 1DX2 people are (majority) not in the market to replace that body style. We may want a small companion body, but not a replacement. An EOS R body will never feel like and balance larger glass in hand like a 1DX2. Not ever. And no, professional 1DX2 people are not going run out and replace all their super expensive glass (think 400mm or 200-400mm) for more compact RF versions or try and strap it to some little compact MILC body.
This. People who don't daily use a 1D body comment and think that 1DX2/D5 users want a smaller body. The big body offers much more balance when using big telephotos and even the 70-200f2.8. Theres a reason why Canon released the version 3 400/2.8 and 600/4 in EF and not RF. I really hope Canon gives the version 3 treatment to the 300/2.8 in EF because I'm in the market in the next few years for a 300. EF will give me the option to use on my 1DX2, future 1dx3 and if its good enough some version of the R. Oh also the OVF is "Always on" which is great when you are running around in a field or woods or race track all day and don't have time to check and make sure your camera is not asleep.
 

scyrene

EOR R
Dec 4, 2013
2,492
345
UK
www.flickr.com
Yup. it's a studio camera. And it's GREAT for that. Outdoors in natural light is fine too provided you shoot in mid to lower ISOs. Tripod mounted or very capable IS lenses are a must unless you can always shoot at very fast shutters speeds. It doesn't take much motion to induce blur thanks to being so Hi-Res.
Erm I've shot the 5Ds extensively in all conditions and for all subjects, using it exactly as I did the 5D3, and it was fine. The 'studio camera' myth needs to die. If you pixel peep or crop a lot more, then you do need higher shutter speeds with the higher res camera, but remember its pixel density is the same as the 7D2 and nobody calls that a studio/special use camera.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dtaylor and Pape

scyrene

EOR R
Dec 4, 2013
2,492
345
UK
www.flickr.com
Market shares doesn't mean their recent camera isn't lackluster. They can still release lackluster camera and still has commerical success by drawing on EF lens user from early 5D2 days. They do have great professional support that's why many people are drawn to it along with legacy lens. It hard for people to switch since many don't want to part with their lens.
This is pretty weak imho, and doesn't explain the continued strong sales of Canon cameras year on year. Incidentally, 'lacklustre' is merely your opinion, which you're welcome to, but it doesn't have any special significance :)
 

peterzuehlke

EOS 80D
Oct 1, 2015
106
19
Differences are slight. Another factor to consider is that the DSLR sensors are simply cooler as they're not being used in LiveView.
For sure, and certainly still an issue for batteries. I would just like new tech I am spending $$$$ on to be a little better IQ not a little worse.
 

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,646
244
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
I literally just posted, in this thread, comparisons showing rough parity between 5D IV, 5Ds, 1DX II, A7 gen 3's, and A7S2. I should have included the 6D2 (off sensor ADC) and the A72 (on sensor ADC) because the 6D2 is notably better than the A72 while a bit behind the A73.

Neither ADC architecture nor sampling frequency (MP)...nor BSI for that matter...seem to impact high ISO that much for FF sensors. I would not expect anything more than fractional gains in high ISO for anyone's next sensors. But if Canon moves to on chip ADCs their next high resolution sensor should gain 1-2 stops base ISO shadow latitude.
I recall some years ago on here there was of course the great DR debates... ugh. And the principal issue was the additional noise being induced in the signal path between sensor and ADC. In other words the sensors themselves were not “noisy” but rather the archtecture of the pathway after it left said sensor. I also seemed to recall the noise improving measurably following the conversion to the new fab process whereby the old signal path which was the culprit was essentially eliminated. Again... Im trying recall discussions from 3-4 years ago, so I may be fuzzy.

To be very clear, I’m not unhappy with my 5DSR. I actually love it apart from the understably huge RAW files but thats expected.

I will say that yes, shadow recovery was notably better in similar situations and settings going from the 1DX (off chip) to the 1DX2 (on chip) in everything I shot. But you are right, the noise itself wasnt as stark a contrast however it was also noticably improved at upper ISOs (1600-6400) on my dx2
 

bokehmon22

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
356
186
This is pretty weak imho, and doesn't explain the continued strong sales of Canon cameras year on year. Incidentally, 'lacklustre' is merely your opinion, which you're welcome to, but it doesn't have any special significance :)
Strong sales doesn't mean anything to me. I don't own their shares. Canon RP may be the best Canon FF camera, but I wouldn't buy it since it doesn't meet my need. Same goes for other electronic devices like Beats headphone, MacBook, etc. I buy stuff based on my needs not what's popular.

You are also welcome to your own opinion. Just don't quote me and offer useless about opinion. I don't care about Canon Rebel, M50, RP.
 

scyrene

EOR R
Dec 4, 2013
2,492
345
UK
www.flickr.com
Strong sales doesn't mean anything to me. I don't own their shares. Canon RP may be the best Canon FF camera, but I wouldn't buy it since it doesn't meet my need. Same goes for other electronic devices like Beats headphone, MacBook, etc. I buy stuff based on my needs not what's popular.

You are also welcome to your own opinion. Just don't quote me and offer useless about opinion. I don't care about Canon Rebel, M50, RP.
You're missing the point, so I'll spell it out. You were basically suggesting that people continued to buy Canon bodies (after the 5D2 era??) because they were tied to the glass. I'm saying the sales demonstrate a lot of people find those bodies *do* meet their needs - glass isn't a good enough motivator to keep Canon at the top for so many years. Suggesting that they actually don't, and people are locked into a system they don't like by the lenses is to raise your idea of a good camera body to the status of universal truth. We know what your preferences are, you've repeated them enough on these forums recently. It doesn't make them any more relevant to anyone else, nor does it explain why other people keep buying things you consider inferior.
 

Larsskv

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 12, 2015
763
183
I recall some years ago on here there was of course the great DR debates... ugh. And the principal issue was the additional noise being induced in the signal path between sensor and ADC. In other words the sensors themselves were not “noisy” but rather the archtecture of the pathway after it left said sensor. I also seemed to recall the noise improving measurably following the conversion to the new fab process whereby the old signal path which was the culprit was essentially eliminated. Again... Im trying recall discussions from 3-4 years ago, so I may be fuzzy.

To be very clear, I’m not unhappy with my 5DSR. I actually love it apart from the understably huge RAW files but thats expected.

I will say that yes, shadow recovery was notably better in similar situations and settings going from the 1DX (off chip) to the 1DX2 (on chip) in everything I shot. But you are right, the noise itself wasnt as stark a contrast however it was also noticably improved at upper ISOs (1600-6400) on my dx2
Recently I got myself a 5D classic to use with Zeiss primes lenses. I have used it quite a lot, and still I haven’t had issues with either noise or lack of dynamic range. Ok, I have avoided putting it in very difficult lighting conditions, BUT, I haven’t had any issue taking the pictures I wanted to make, or from taking a photo worth taking. For most use, I think DR is the most overrated quality in a digital camera. The camera world has been stupified and lost perspective due to the hype around DR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dtaylor