IBIS and 100mp coming to an EOS R camera? [CR2]

Sep 22, 2016
120
19
#62
With Sony already having a 100MP sensor, and Nikon saying one is in the works, doesn't Canon bascially have to have one, too?
 

Don Haines

posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Jun 4, 2012
7,521
633
Canada
#64
100 MP... everything turns blury.... hopefully they design a less savage shutter for such high MP camera
You should take a peek at the latest micro 4/3 cameras from Olympus and Panasonic. If you scaled up the sensor to FF size, you would have 80Mpixels, and they produce sharp images.
 
Likes: scyrene

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
267
55
#65
When people think about 100mpx being too much, they forget about the bayer filter that essentially means the accurate colour resolution of an image is 1/4 of the total resolution, because each of the 100 million pixels on the sensor is only receiving either red, green or blue light so the colour information from four pixels (at least, more in more complex algorithms) is required to generate the colour for a single pixel. Generally this isn't a big problem, but if you have images with large areas of predominantly one shade, such as a green plant or a red dress, the real perceptive resolution of what that sensor will provide will be significantly less than the 100 megapixels.

So, downsampling a 100 megapixel image to a 25 megapixel image would give you a 25 megapixel image with, assuming an ideal lens, the optimum sharpness and colour accuracy.

Is this important for most people? Of course not. But there are certain tasks, such as high resolution reproduction of artworks or natural objects, where capturing the finest detail accurately is important, and for that a 100 megapixel EOS R can't come soon enough!

Of course at 100megapixels diffraction is going to be a real bitch, but that's another thing altogether!

Since half the pixels of a Bayer-masked sensor are filtered for green light, and the green range is what human eye/brain systems use to discriminate fine details, the effective resolution of a Bayer-masked sensor is NOT one-fourth the resolution of the sensor. It's much closer to one-half, as tested using alternating black and white lines of decreasing width.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
267
55
#66
The best camera for high res imaging of art and natural objects is a scanning back. Accurate color, mad resolution, and minimal diffraction issues.
Of course no flash and minimal portability but then for that niche it is less important.
Yes. And Large Format lenses and camera boxes in front of the scanning back.
 

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
267
55
#67
The real use for me with a 100 megapixel camera would be to get more reach out of existing lenses, or to be able to use smaller lenses, for birding and other wildlife photography. So, what it comes down to is, are two things: first, how good are heavily cropped photos? Secondly, when a 100 megapixel image is taken under ideal lighting and reduced down to 5 megapixels or so, how much better or worse is it compared to a 30-ish megapixel camera reduced down to 5-10 megapixels?

In reality, every single time, a 1DX with the ideal focal length lens (ie no cropping required) reduced down to print or screen resolutions produces better results than a camera with a lot more megapixels and a lens with a lot less focal length.

So, will the 100 megapixel camera change this dynamic at all?

If so, a 100 megapixel mirrorless could be a wonderful tool. For example, I can imagine that it could have a crop mode that would turn it into a 25 megapixel camera, using only the center 1/4 of the image circle at very high pixel density, yet filling up the EVF.

Only time will tell if what I'm wishing for is simply a pipe dream, or a possibility. But, these are exciting times!

Regarding IBIS: I still don't really care, but it would be wonderful just to shut up the people who go on and on about how the R doesn't have IBIS. :)
Of course, the center quarter, in terms of area, of a 36 x 24 mm frame is 18 x 12 mm. That's very close to the 17.3 x 13 mm Micro Four-thirds cameras in a 4:3 aspect ratio. The diagonals are 21.63 mm versus 21.64 mm.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
1,992
246
Vancouver, BC
#68
You just described a current µ43 sensor. Cheaper, lighter, available now.
Except, there is no optical super telephotos for MFT (or anything close). And there won't ever be, because the size of the image circle makes it so it doesn't make sense to have a gigantic lens to a little tiny camera. Plus, I don't want a MFT sized camera; I want a 5D sized body, to be paired with such a lens.

Imagine how cool it would be with an optical 400mm or 600mm and being able to switch with a button press to crop mode, or go to a wider crop. A lens like a 400mm DO would have a whole new utility to it.
 
Likes: Jack Douglas

Don Haines

posting cat pictures on the internet since 1986
Jun 4, 2012
7,521
633
Canada
#69
Except, there is no optical super telephotos for MFT (or anything close). And there won't ever be, because the size of the image circle makes it so it doesn't make sense to have a gigantic lens to a little tiny camera. Plus, I don't want a MFT sized camera; I want a 5D sized body, to be paired with such a lens.

Imagine how cool it would be with an optical 400mm or 600mm and being able to switch with a button press to crop mode, or go to a wider crop. A lens like a 400mm DO would have a whole new utility to it.
Certainly not a native 300F4, the equivalent of the Canon 600F4, or an adapter to allow you to use a Canon lens, or a Metabones speedbooster.....
 
Jan 28, 2015
2,729
314
Irving, Texas
#70
You should take a peek at the latest micro 4/3 cameras from Olympus and Panasonic. If you scaled up the sensor to FF size, you would have 80Mpixels, and they produce sharp images.
This is true. My Olympus produces bitingly sharp images. I only have the Olympus M. Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro. Don, do you happen to have the 40-150mm? I think that's my next step.
 

Pape

I'm New Here
Dec 31, 2018
18
2
#71
If your shooting with a 100 mp camera your likely using a tripod.
I dont think you will use much tripod with 100mpixel camera ,if you not studio photographer .
On old film days sturdy enough for sharp pics tripod was like 10kg right?
100 mpix camera is like 5x more sharper what film so you need 50kg tripod if equally constructed, and i dont think simple one screw attach to camera would be sturdy enough .
Ibis doesnt help either cause imagestabilizers wont handle micro movements only ones you can see bare eye ,imagestabilized picture is like 1mpixel as sharp if tooked 4stop under normal handhold time.
So only way shoot on field is use old hand hold rule 1/50sec with 50mm objective x5 = 250/s with 50mm.

I am dreaming about camera with 100mpxl cencor ,what when you take photograph combines 9 pixel work together and output is blended median or mean,and produce one big pixel ,so picture what comes would be 10mpixel
.And then inside 1/1000 from shoot camera looks what areas on picture are on focus and closes all pixels what are on unsharp area and shoot very fast 10 max resolution cropped to focused area pics and fuses them with original pic, so part of pic is 10mpixel density sized pixels and part 100mpixel density.
I dont know if its possible make camera like that but sounds cool :p
 
#72
IBIS, 100MPix & no mirror are a good combination for ultra high resolution photos ... with the right lens on the camera.

And hopefully a 25 MPix raw mode where you get R-G-G-B pixel quadupletts for one image pixel which makes color moiree of monochromatic light sources (LEDs e.g.) a thing of the past + roughly (13+14+13=)40 bit color depth + gives better high ISO IQ !

While I would prefer the 25 MPix-mode for what I do with my current (older) lens selection - it would be always good to have alternatives for different applications!
 
Jun 6, 2016
293
15
#73
With Sony already having a 100MP sensor, and Nikon saying one is in the works, doesn't Canon bascially have to have one, too?

---

I'm pretty sure Canon KNOWS large-sensor and low-light sensor imaging like the back of their hand!

Canon already has manufactured and tested HUUUUUGE image sensors such as those noted below:

a) 120 megapixel APS-H 29 mm by 20 mm Sensor at

See links at:
http://www.canon.com/technology/future/cmos.html

Canon building 120 megapixel DSLR:
https://petapixel.com/2015/09/08/canon-were-building-a-120-megapixel-dslr/

b) 250 megapixel sensor at 29.2×20.2mm. APS-H format at 19,580 by 12,600 pixels:

https://petapixel.com/2015/09/07/canon-unveils-a-monster-250-megapixel-sensor/

c) 448 megapixel sensor 202 mm by 205 mm at around 25,700 x 17,400 pixels which was made for spy satellites.

See link at:
https://www.dpreview.com/articles/7964414898/canonlargestsensor

Original Press Release:

TOKYO, August 31, 2010—Canon Inc. announced today that it has successfully developed the world's largest*1 CMOS image sensor, with a chip size measuring 202 x 205 mm. Because its expanded size enables greater light-gathering capability, the sensor is capable of capturing images in one one-hundredth the amount of light required by a professional-model digital SLR camera.

At 202 x 205 mm, the newly developed CMOS sensor is among the largest chips that can be produced from a 12-inch (300 mm) wafer, and is approximately 40 times the size of Canon's largest commercial CMOS sensor.*2

In the past, enlarging the size of the sensor resulted in an increase in the amount of time required between the receiving and transmission of data signals, which posed a challenge to achieving high-speed readout. Canon, however, solved this problem through an innovative circuit design, making possible the realization of a massive video-compatible CMOS sensor. Additionally, by ensuring the cleanest of cleanroom environments during the production process, the sensor minimizes image imperfections and dust.
Because the increased size of the new CMOS sensor allows more light to be gathered, it enables shooting in low-light environments. The sensor makes possible the image capture in one one-hundredth the amount of light required by a 35 mm full-frame CMOS sensor, facilitating the shooting of 60 frame-per-second video with a mere 0.3 lux of illumination.*3

Potential applications for the new high-sensitivity CMOS sensor include the video recording of stars in the night sky and nocturnal animal behavior.
Through the further development of distinctive CMOS image sensors, Canon will break new ground in the world of new image expression, in the area of still images as well as video.

*1 As of August 27, 2010. Based on a Canon study.
*2 The approximately 21.1 megapixel 35 mm full-frame CMOS sensor employed in the company's EOS-1Ds Mark III and EOS 5D Mark II digital SLR cameras.
*3 Approximately one-half the brightness of a moonlit night.

---

That 448 megapixel sensor announcement was QUICKLY REMOVED from Google, Bing and DuckDuck Go and the Canon website once the U.S. CIA, NSA and NRO got wind of that! Good thing I saved the original news announcements and still have them! It's probably now on the successor Wide-Field-of-View spy satellites operated by the NRO (National Reconnaissance Office) spy imaging agency in the USA! At a photosite size of ABOUT 7.6 to 7.8 microns in size this will DEFINITELY OUTPERFROM the canon 1DxMk2 in low-light imaging -- which is ALREADY GOOD !!! If they keep THIS 202 x 205 mm sensor at 100 megapixels (10,000 by 10,000 pixels) then photosite size would be on the order of 20.2 microns which would be an UTTERLY MIDNIGHT TURNED INTO DAYLIGHT type of image sensor sensitivity! It would COMPLETELY BLOW AWAY the Sony A7s2!

For more information, do web searches on

"A 300mm Wafer Size CMOS Image Sensor for Low-Light-Level Imaging”

By

Hidekazu Takahashi, et al

from Canon's Imaging Research and Development division and
one of the scientists who basically invented this large-sensor gear!
 
Last edited:
Jul 26, 2011
960
110
#74
When people think about 100mpx being too much, they forget about the bayer filter that essentially means the accurate colour resolution of an image is 1/4 of the total resolution, because each of the 100 million pixels on the sensor is only receiving either red, green or blue light so the colour information from four pixels (at least, more in more complex algorithms) is required to generate the colour for a single pixel.
The RGB filters do not represent sharp or total cutoffs. There's quite a bit of overlap between them. So a target would have to exist entirely within the peak of R or B to be recorded at 1/4 resolution. (For G it would be 1/2.) For any real world target...even a "red" or "blue" one...all of the pixels will have some response to the light and will contribute to the final resolution.

The only time you're going to see significant CFA related resolution loss is when testing in a laboratory with very specific color filters over the lens.

It should also be noted that probably every RAW converter today looks at the 8 neighboring pixels, not just the four sharing a given quad.
 
Likes: Michael Clark
Jul 26, 2011
960
110
#75
It reminds me of many of the 5Ds complaints coming from people who probably should have got a 5D4, the 5Ds seemed a niche product from the start.
While I hear what you're saying, I still hate it when people call the 5Ds a "niche" camera. The only arguable shortcoming (for stills) is 5fps for sports/action. And in use I haven't found the 5fps to be an issue so much as the buffer depth, which is still serviceable. Sure it can't pump out 8-12fps. But when you nail the shot at 5fps...it's a 50mp shot.

I'm perfectly comfortable using a 5Ds as my main camera for everything. When I say main, the other camera is essentially sitting in the bag as a backup in case something goes wrong.
 
Last edited:
Oct 18, 2013
34
2
#76
Canon seems to be the only team left in the Megapixel wars. If 100MP sensors significantly outperform 45MP sensors why doesn't Sony use them in it's cameras or manufacture and sell them to it's sensor customers. It certainly isn't because they can't. Dividing up the Pizza into smaller and smaller pieces doesn't create more pizza.
The megapixels will get the attention, but something have to give... processing speed, throughput of data pipe, storage, heat dissipation and most importantly price.
 
Jul 26, 2011
960
110
#77
Seems with Canon, it's always tomorrow. Hey Canon, while your at it, trash the AA filter.
The AA filter hardly makes a difference between 5Ds and 5Dsr images while pixel peeping. Except of course when moire rears its ugly head, at which point the difference is observable at normal sizes unless/until you clean up the 5Dsr shot.

Canon dominates wedding and fashion and has resisted the "no AA filter" meme. I hope they continue to do so, or at least offer the choice on their highest resolution bodies.
 
#78
Canon seems trying to evade the problem. DPAF is not working for any high frame rate action. canon have to scrap DPAF altogether and design whole new sensor and AF approach. I m pretty sure they get rid of it.
DPAF is a concept which will - in my opinion - stay for a longer while.

Chip technology which allows more 3D structures on silicon based chips might lead to advanced readout systems on the chip e.g. the complete focus system and leave room for image readout (in terms of time).

At the moment I think DPAF uses only data of focus points or regions and the sensor is in DPAF mode. During exposure the mode is switched to image acquisition mode. In Servo modes you have to switch between modes and that costs time. On chip circuitry might help to get DPAF data independently from image acquisition - the 10 fps of the entry level M50 would be possible with Servo AF (which is at the moment not possible).

I am shure that these sensor designs exist on paper and Canon is able to produce test units (maybe 1 MPix versions) but not on a mass production scale - and that is there they have to solve problems to cut the cost per unit down.
 
Jul 26, 2011
960
110
#79
Canon seems to be the only team left in the Megapixel wars. If 100MP sensors significantly outperform 45MP sensors why doesn't Sony use them in it's cameras or manufacture and sell them to it's sensor customers. It certainly isn't because they can't.
What makes you think they can blow past 50mp, at current tech levels given current consumer pricing, but decided not to because they believed no one would want it?

Dividing up the Pizza into smaller and smaller pieces doesn't create more pizza.
False analogy since resolution is a key component to photographic IQ, and dividing the silicon into smaller and smaller pixels does create higher resolution files.

That said: we have entered the realm of diminishing returns. 24mp is more than sufficient for most photographers and subject/view size combinations. But there are those who want more, and even now still want more. Don't think for a minute that 50mp will be the cap on 35mm sensor resolution. That cap will probably be around 100-150mp.
 
Jul 26, 2011
960
110
#80
Canon seems trying to evade the problem. DPAF is not working for any high frame rate action. canon have to scrap DPAF altogether and design whole new sensor and AF approach. I m pretty sure they get rid of it.
This has everything to do with readout speed and nothing to do with DPAF itself. They need to up their game in terms of chip fabrication to get the read out speeds they need for both FF 4k and high fps DPAF.
 
Likes: pj1974