36+ Mp EOS dSLR (rumored): How do existing EF lenses cope?

[GND]

Valentine's approaching and I'm looking for the perfect match 8) . But there's this matter with resolution :-\ . So, the thing is:

There's a lot of speculation for a new EOS in the region of 36-40Mp. Many are saying improved lenses are required to cope with this resolution. On the other hand most of us are users of exisiting gear, have older generation EF lenses, like for instance the 50/1.4 or the 300/2.8L IS. To be noted after the release of 5D2 notable upgrades to popular lenses like the 24/1.4L II or the 70-200/2.8L IS II took place matching better that camera.

So, can existing lenses take advantage of a leap to a 40 Megapixel sensor resolution? Or do we have to upgrade all our lenses too. I'd wish for a hi-res EOS announcement but if that means lens lag spare me the expense, rather wait for the 5D4 (CR3). As consumer's guide how to tell when a lens (prime/zoom) stretches its limits with sensor resolution before rushing to buy megapixel monsters, does anyone know?

 

[neuroanatomist]

As consumer's guide how to tell when a lens (prime/zoom) stretches its limits with sensor resolution before rushing to buy megapixel monsters, does anyone know?

If you buy a new camera, and stick an old lens on it, and the images look soft despite being technically correct, it might be the lens. But...I think you have no need to worry for quite some time - we're pretty far from hitting a lens-limiting resolution limit.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

A 40mp sensor is not going to out resolve most Canon lenses, the 7D has the equivalent of a 46mp sensor as far as photosite size and spacing are concerned. I take low light images, and have a concern about high ISO though. There does seem to be a trade off.

However, some of the old non L primes might be due for a upgrade. One of the issues with the 7D, is image blurring due to camera shake. You need higher shutter speeds at high er pixel densities if you want to take a benefit of the higher potential resolution. That is likely why all new lenses will have IS except for the ultra wide.

Faster shutter speed required plus decreased high Iso capability is a double whammy for low light shooters, ability to crop means nothing if you have a motion blurred image.

 

[jrista]

Canon has claimed (I think at least in their book on lens design, but possibly elsewhere as well) that their current newest-generation L-series lenses (the mark II's or new entrants like the 8-15mm fisheye) are all capable of resolving enough detail for a 45mp full-frame sensor. That makes a lot of sense, given that the pixel pitch of the 18mp sensor on the 7D is about the same as a 46.7mp full-frame sensor would have.

Its important to note that this only seems to apply to their newest lenses, older ones (mark I's...lenses introduced more than a few years ago) do not necessarily meet this standard. I think this may be a leading factor for new lens releases, such as the recent 24-70 II (which has had considerable improvements on the resolution front over its predecessor), to get Canon's line of lenses "up to snuff", so to say, for the next few years of camera body releases and potential increases in resolution.

I wouldn't be worried about a 40mp sensor, however if they start announcing cameras with 50mp or more, I would begin to wonder. (I don't expect as much...I think Canon has demonstrated their longer-term intention to support 45mp resolution given how many 18mp APS-C sensors they have on the market, which are already at the resolving limit of their best lenses.)

 

[Zo0m]

Based on the fact that canon aps-c sensors are at 18 mp or so nowadays and the FF-sensor is about twice as big i recon most modern mid-high end lenses could support 36 mp+. Nikon seems to believe it it seems

 

[pdirestajr]

Here is a shot using an old Nikkor 24 f/2 Ai-S lens on my 7D. I think this lens is from the 70's-80's? Her eye and some hair are pretty sharp considering there was no focus confirmation, lens is manual and the DOF was super shallow (I was sitting really close to her @f2.8.). Oh and she doesn't stop moving!

This image is also saved down pretty low res for web. And the lens is totally beaten up with tons of scratches over the front element...


Window light by Philip DiResta, on Flickr

 

[pdirestajr]

Or this shot. The detail on the shirt threads are really sharp. And no crazy fringing around her hair right into an overexposed sky!


Vi Playing by Philip DiResta, on Flickr

 

[Picsfor]

And yet, my 5D2(s), can out resolve my 100mm f2.8 Macro (the non L version).
I know this because i've taken duplicate shots with same lens on 30D, 40D and 5D2 (both of them).

For general portrait, i can get away with quite a bit - but once i start using it for macro, i start to notice failings that i never did when used with the 30D and 40D. I don't have the budget to upgrade to the L version, nor do i have the inclination to do Macro work to a level that requires the L, otherwise i would invest in the MPE-65 as well.

So, whilst it is clear some lenses can handle further development in the sensor MP race, others are starting to suffer - but i have no problem with this, it is the down side of technological advancement.

How many of us can play our favourite DOS game on a Windows 7 computer? (sorry, pre 1995 computer era for the children reading in )

 

[awinphoto]

Great shots BTW, for most part, I wouldn't worry too much, but the higher the pixel density, the more the lens will be a factor. At least canon is somewhat regularly updating their lenses... think how nervous some nikon shooters may be right now with the prospect of the 36MP D800 and their lenses..

 

[GND]

Thanks for reassuring.
@pdirestajr: very sharp pics.

Many dub 36-40Mp for "studio" use, what is overlooked in my opinion is the cropping ability. Shooting outdoors with an all-purpose 70-200/2.8 I find it necessary to crop to get the subject right particularly in freeze-frame action shots like airshows, flying birds, etc. (daylight, no more than 100-200ASA). Such I enjoy in 5D2. Starting to crop a 36Mp image (say 50%) I don't know if it would be a strain. For still shots indoors, or candid, guess it would be just fine.

Btw, Canon Lens Work III (the book, ed.2006) says for the EF line-up, particularly L-series, all have "ultra-high resolution", no precise limit. It does have the example of softness on p.135 with an enlarged part of a yacht mast.

 

[wickidwombat]

How many of us can play our favourite DOS game on a Windows 7 computer? (sorry, pre 1995 computer era for the children reading in )

you tried using DOSBOX? its free

 

[Kernuak]

I think a lot of the primes will be fine, however, I do notice the corners getting soft on my 7D with both the 24-105 and the 17-40, so there could be issues with certain lenses. However, whether it is an issue will depend on the type of shooting you do. The sharpness in the corners is of little relevance for wildlife and portraits for example, but for landscapes it was an issue for me and would be if I shot more architecture. I haven't seen any problems with either of those two lenses in the centre and borders. I also haven't seen even the slightest hint of a problem with the 300 f/2.8 either with or without a 1.4x extender or in fact the 50 f/1.4.

 

[marinien]

And yet, my 5D2(s), can out resolve my 100mm f2.8 Macro (the non L version).
I know this because i've taken duplicate shots with same lens on 30D, 40D and 5D2 (both of them).

For general portrait, i can get away with quite a bit - but once i start using it for macro, i start to notice failings that i never did when used with the 30D and 40D. I don't have the budget to upgrade to the L version, nor do i have the inclination to do Macro work to a level that requires the L, otherwise i would invest in the MPE-65 as well.

So, whilst it is clear some lenses can handle further development in the sensor MP race, others are starting to suffer - but i have no problem with this, it is the down side of technological advancement.

How many of us can play our favourite DOS game on a Windows 7 computer? (sorry, pre 1995 computer era for the children reading in )

I have no idea what it looks like when the camera out resolves the lens. The 40D is the highest MPix I've ever owned. Technically, the 5DII has about the same pixel density as the 30D. Could you please show me examples where the 5DII out resolves the 100mm while the 30D/40D does not? Thank you in advance!

 

[wockawocka]

There's hassy users using 30 year old zeiss lenses on their hassy with a 50mp back...I never see issues with lens resolution there either.

I think it's more that each lens has character. An image wide open from a 50L with grab you by the shoulders and shake you whereas one from the 85L with take your brain out an stroke it.

 

[wickidwombat]

well the 600f4.5 Fd lens i got on the 5D2 i really sharp It doesn't look like its even close to having resolving issues and that lens is from the 70's

 

[wellfedCanuck]

Thanks for reassuring.

GPWS G/S inhibit as an avatar? What airplane is that from?

 

[jrista]

Thanks for reassuring.
@pdirestajr: very sharp pics.

Many dub 36-40Mp for "studio" use, what is overlooked in my opinion is the cropping ability. Shooting outdoors with an all-purpose 70-200/2.8 I find it necessary to crop to get the subject right particularly in freeze-frame action shots like airshows, flying birds, etc. (daylight, no more than 100-200ASA). Such I enjoy in 5D2. Starting to crop a 36Mp image (say 50%) I don't know if it would be a strain. For still shots indoors, or candid, guess it would be just fine.

Btw, Canon Lens Work III (the book, ed.2006) says for the EF line-up, particularly L-series, all have "ultra-high resolution", no precise limit. It does have the example of softness on p.135 with an enlarged part of a yacht mast.

Couldn't agree more about "cropping power". I have the same issue with bird and wildlife photography...using "affordable" lenses that cost up to $3000, you have good, but not great, reach. Additional resolution so you can crop is essential to getting "frame" filling photographs when you can't afford the likes of the 600mm or 800mm lenses and an f/8 AF capable body.

 

[jrista]

Thinking about it a bit, there is probably one area where lenses could use improvement: Image Stabilization.

Higher resolution sensors are great in that they capture more detail, and having optics that can resolve enough detail to make that additional detail valuable is also great. However the greater the pixel density, the more likely camera shake is going to affect the results...mitigating or eliminating any detail gains you might have otherwise had.

I think improved IS on telephoto lenses, pushing the envelope beyond the current 4-stop improvement to 5- or 6-stops, would probably be useful. I think it might also be valuable to see 2- to 3-stop IS on wide to normal zooms, like the 24-70, 24-105, maybe even the 16-35, etc. For those who need cropping power more than native resolution, and do things like wildlife, bird, airplane and other forms of photography that involve hand-held or gymbal-mounted operation, better IS might be essential to actually utilizing that additional sensor resolution.

 

[funkboy]

How many of us can play our favourite DOS game on a Windows 7 computer? (sorry, pre 1995 computer era for the children reading in )

I use Vogons to run a bunch of old-school games like Ultima VI on my MacBook Pro (albeit in a tiny window, though there are some interpolation techniques that help make it not look horrible in full-screen HD . See also the remake of WC Privateer on top of the Vega Strike engine.

 

[Maui5150]

How many of us can play our favourite DOS game on a Windows 7 computer? (sorry, pre 1995 computer era for the children reading in )

I use Vogons to run a bunch of old-school games like Ultima VI on my MacBook Pro (albeit in a tiny window, though there are some interpolation techniques that help make it not look horrible in full-screen HD . See also the remake of WC Privateer on top of the Vega Strike engine.

I still have a functioning 8088 based computer running dos 3.0 and has a 10mb hd