One cannot expect churning 60MP files out of camera at 16FPS.new sensor could be is 1/3 from high resolution cameras sensor. Just to keep cameras on order
Like dx2 and 5sr ,sounds good ratio for me .
so if 80mpixel Rs camera so 30 mpixel sport camera ,but if Rs is 150mpx then even 60mpix is possible.
you’re not going to get ethernet 7 in a newsroom in a sports stadium. Your lucky if you get decent WiFi to send your files through.While I personaly dont work on a Sideline in a stadium with Ethernet connected, I can certainly see that a higher resolution can be very beneficial for sports-photogaphers. It allows for much tighter crops, giving the editor quite some advantage. And Ethernet CAT7 is certainly fast enough to handle a bit higher data rates. 30mpixel instead of 22 shouldnt be that much of a problem, even at gettys editing/publishing speed, where an image is transferred, picked, croped, edited, tagged and published in less than 90 seconds. I think better crop options are great for sports.
Also: if they just include a "smaller jpg" option, for the people with incredible need for speed and high amount of pictures, than this topic would be solved
It also makes the camera way more versatile. Basicaly I could replace my 5D IV with it, if the 1DX III offers 30mpixel (or my Sony a7r IV which I just ordered). But for studio work, portraits, landscape and product shots, 22mpixel are not thaaat awesome. The higher resolution makes big prints, recomposed wedding photos and way better product shots possible (better retouch, cleaner cutout path).
Time will tell. As I use the current 1DX II for video projects, I am very exited for the Mark III, since its video options apears to be way advanced. Especially the unhandy codec and the missing hdmi 4k out on the Mark II are quite cumbersome. In Camera Canon RAW video is quite some heavy and welcomed upgrade in my opinion =) this alone may justify the upgrade for me =)
But than there is still the option to safe smaller JPGs in camera (20mpixel" for example and the problem would be solved )you’re not going to get ethernet 7 in a newsroom in a sports stadium. Your lucky if you get decent WiFi to send your files through.
Not really. But we used to wear out cameras in the film days pretty quickly with a lot less shots. The Nikons, in particular, used to break down constantly, and the crappy focus helical, made out of all aluminum (you could hear the grinding), would roughen to the point of feeling it was going to break. Using the earlier motors destroyed a number of them.Camera body with over the limit sensor on Ebay in one month
Yes you may be right. I'm probably out of my depth discusing it as I'm not really sure where in the cycle some tasks would have to be completed. There are also many tasks betond the few I mentioned. I guess my point was there is a lot going on and adding more MP's to the mix isn't as easy as just dropping in a 30mp sensor and a faster card slot.Not necessarily. The mirror could be all of the way back down and the AF working on the next shot using the dedicated processor while the sensor is still being read out using the two image processors. There's nothing that says the mirror can't be all of the way down until readout is complete. Rather than slowing down the mirror, they can just pause the mirror (and shutter reset) after it has returned to the reflex position.
They're different, yes, but they're not completely different. You're still using the data from more than one pixel to generate both luminosity and colour for the target pixel. If you're using 4 pixels in the source to generate a single pixel in your 4K output you get the best possible output and avoid the usual problems associated with resampled video.Demosaicing and resampling are completely different things. You don't 'resample' when demosaicing you just use the luminosity values of other pixels to determine the most likely color of each individual pixel, the resolution stays the same.
No the ideal 4k camera would have a three chip or three layer sensitive sensor/s at 4k resolution.