A Big Megapixel Discussion
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
- Status
M
M.ST
Guest
RE to: AND IT NEEDS TO BE CHEAPER THAN THE 1DX OTHERWISE WE MAY AS WELL USE MEDIUM FORMAT DIGITAL
That make sense, because medium format cameras as my H5D-60 are much cheaper than the 1D X and everyone can afford such a camera. (big grin)
How much megapixels do you really need? Do you make printouts for big walls or big campaigns?
No DSLR can beat the image quality of a medium (mid) format camera. But the new professional big megapixel cameras from Canon and Nikon (not on the market yet) are very good.
That make sense, because medium format cameras as my H5D-60 are much cheaper than the 1D X and everyone can afford such a camera. (big grin)
How much megapixels do you really need? Do you make printouts for big walls or big campaigns?
No DSLR can beat the image quality of a medium (mid) format camera. But the new professional big megapixel cameras from Canon and Nikon (not on the market yet) are very good.
Upvote
0
Now I'll be happy when I see 6D Mark II with the same sensor technology as this future 1DS albeit at a lower MP, and 7D-like AF coverage with at least 9 cross-type current, 6D center point performance and priced just like 6D during initial intro. I think for most of us, that's the real deal unless you're rich or you're earning money from photography.
Upvote
0
Bruce Photography
Landscapes, 5DX,7D,60D,EOSM,D800/E,D810,D7100
I have both the Canon 5D3 and the Nikon D800 and D800E. I'm starting to do 24x60 inch prints quite a bit more regularly solely because I like them, they sell, and I can do them with visibly better quality using Nikon 800's than with my Canon gear. I do miss some of my Canon glass but I'll just have to wait. How long I'll wait is up to Canon. A 14-24 competitor to the Nikon version would be a great place to start once they start delivering a new 36+ MP camera. I don't care anymore about announcements - delivery is the only thing that matters. The Nikons are treating me just fine for now and I assume that Nikon won't introduce any more landscape type products for awhile. But I really do want them to deliver more tilt shift lenses like the Canon design - Canon tilt shift rocks. The Canon 70-300L also rocks but the Nikon 300mm D also is great for some landscapes. Too bad they don't fit Nikon bodies. How about a special telextender that converts Canon lenses to Nikon -- maybe 1.1 mag?
Upvote
0
dilbert said:
I want more better pixels... a 40MP sensor with 12stops DR like the D800E and no pattern noise or banding.. and it needs to be lighter than the brick like 1DX.. and have backlit buttons for working in low light. a 14-24 that is even better than Nikon's is also needed.. and should not be too difficult to make,the Nikkor is getting long in the tooth at this stage..
Upvote
0
I wish they would just announce/release thier 70d/7dM2 before new rumors come out and make people expect more.
Upvote
0
Would like to see a 34mp+ 5d X with same AF from excellent 5D MK 3 and fps around 6 mark and also the excellent Mraw, Sraw functionality as well coupled with CF and SDXC card slots. Would be good if Canon could roll down 4K across their range as well to get march on their competition - as this will be the next big thing.
Doing a competitive 5D X in the price range of the 5D MK III will sell like hot cakes.
Hopefully Nikon could do a D800s / D800es with improve video and faster fps.
Doing a competitive 5D X in the price range of the 5D MK III will sell like hot cakes.
Hopefully Nikon could do a D800s / D800es with improve video and faster fps.
Upvote
0
My 2 cents from a Pro advertising, fashion & corporate perspective is.
Canon we really need this, but we need it to be really well designed and produced, with pixel performance to match.
That means 40MP+ and most importantly at least equal to or better than the D800 sensor in DR and shadow noise banding (when pulled up) Anyone who's used a D800 will tell you its fantastic you can lift the shadows 3 stops and no banding or breaking up or colour noise. Even many Hasselblads and Phase Ones are not as good.
Lower noise at ISO 50-200, would also welcome lower noise around ISO 200-800. And tbh I wouldn't expect a really clean file above that.. I myself don't shoot actual work that needs to be super high res in dark environments anyway.. Often I'm being paid because it's all about lighting and how I can make a scene look and feel.. not just capture it.
Flash sync to be 1/500 sec min, most guys like me use proper studio / location flash a LOT and being able to control the mix with ambient light would make it a MF killer.
Thunderbolt or USB 3 is a must and some really good built in wifi could be welcomed that could facilitate realtime raw file transfer ( but we are maybe still a couple of years away form this)
5 FPS is prob enough for a camera like this, with current 5D III autofocus also.
Form factor I don't mind but at least a 5D III size and feel, I think I'd prefer a 1D but slightly smaller vert grip and lighter. But I would like it feel very solid, tactile.. quality rubber and plastics even nicer buttons esp the main top shutter speed wheel. And sound like a proper camera.. cluunk! not a snap klackety klack (coughs 5D III boo)
Video.. No I've got my 5DIII for that which I dont use that often for video anyway. Unless their R&D could get a 2.5K or 4K clean uncompressed out like Magic lantern have, but I suspect this would completely cut into 1D Cinema sales.
Cost.. we dont mind say £4-5K for a good piece of kit and would rather that than a D800 direct competitor/ price buster thats cut down on features and quality.
I strongly believe if they met these specs then EVERY PRO ( in Advertising, fashion and corporate) would instantly have one in their bag. In the UK most other pros in this sector use Canon, often alongside Hasselblad or Phase one. But everyone prefers to shoot with their Canon, and importantly everyone loves the colours from RAW file more than Nikon and it's also the quality of L primes that keeps us on Canon. And very importantly its the user interface is much nicer than Nikons, simply quicker plus the C1-3 are invaluable too.
Now to all the haters here, if you don't need the MP or maybe would like one at 5D price then you're not getting it.. what Canon are hopefully taking their time making.
Nikon went 'hey look a 36 MP sensor thats great'. Yes it really is a great sensor but the camera is much much a lesser tool, the 5DIII is very very good in that respect and thats what Canon have been working on, and probably trying to hang on to their current sensor process as long as possible.
And Canon know there's a big proper pro segment of the market that would love such a camera, but I'm slightly nervous that Canons Marketing will want to jump on the D800/ amature photo pixel peeper bandwagon that actually don't need such a camera..
Yes what many say is 22MP is FINE for most situations, even many pro ones. BUT when we do a job that needs to be used billboard size or for a wall sized shop display then 22MP starts to break up, also under heavy stylish processing and retouching which is very often required in our work we really start to notice how the file starts to get noisy and break up.
If there are any Canon staff reading this.. please GET IT RIGHT for the PROS with this one - read my specs wish list and what everyone else is saying most importantly NOT JUST MORE PIXELS.. BUT BETTER PIXELS, then release a cut down smaller cheaper version in a year or so to keep all the amature pixel counters happy (90% will never actually need it tho, just think they need it!)
Peace!
Canon we really need this, but we need it to be really well designed and produced, with pixel performance to match.
That means 40MP+ and most importantly at least equal to or better than the D800 sensor in DR and shadow noise banding (when pulled up) Anyone who's used a D800 will tell you its fantastic you can lift the shadows 3 stops and no banding or breaking up or colour noise. Even many Hasselblads and Phase Ones are not as good.
Lower noise at ISO 50-200, would also welcome lower noise around ISO 200-800. And tbh I wouldn't expect a really clean file above that.. I myself don't shoot actual work that needs to be super high res in dark environments anyway.. Often I'm being paid because it's all about lighting and how I can make a scene look and feel.. not just capture it.
Flash sync to be 1/500 sec min, most guys like me use proper studio / location flash a LOT and being able to control the mix with ambient light would make it a MF killer.
Thunderbolt or USB 3 is a must and some really good built in wifi could be welcomed that could facilitate realtime raw file transfer ( but we are maybe still a couple of years away form this)
5 FPS is prob enough for a camera like this, with current 5D III autofocus also.
Form factor I don't mind but at least a 5D III size and feel, I think I'd prefer a 1D but slightly smaller vert grip and lighter. But I would like it feel very solid, tactile.. quality rubber and plastics even nicer buttons esp the main top shutter speed wheel. And sound like a proper camera.. cluunk! not a snap klackety klack (coughs 5D III boo)
Video.. No I've got my 5DIII for that which I dont use that often for video anyway. Unless their R&D could get a 2.5K or 4K clean uncompressed out like Magic lantern have, but I suspect this would completely cut into 1D Cinema sales.
Cost.. we dont mind say £4-5K for a good piece of kit and would rather that than a D800 direct competitor/ price buster thats cut down on features and quality.
I strongly believe if they met these specs then EVERY PRO ( in Advertising, fashion and corporate) would instantly have one in their bag. In the UK most other pros in this sector use Canon, often alongside Hasselblad or Phase one. But everyone prefers to shoot with their Canon, and importantly everyone loves the colours from RAW file more than Nikon and it's also the quality of L primes that keeps us on Canon. And very importantly its the user interface is much nicer than Nikons, simply quicker plus the C1-3 are invaluable too.
Now to all the haters here, if you don't need the MP or maybe would like one at 5D price then you're not getting it.. what Canon are hopefully taking their time making.
Nikon went 'hey look a 36 MP sensor thats great'. Yes it really is a great sensor but the camera is much much a lesser tool, the 5DIII is very very good in that respect and thats what Canon have been working on, and probably trying to hang on to their current sensor process as long as possible.
And Canon know there's a big proper pro segment of the market that would love such a camera, but I'm slightly nervous that Canons Marketing will want to jump on the D800/ amature photo pixel peeper bandwagon that actually don't need such a camera..
Yes what many say is 22MP is FINE for most situations, even many pro ones. BUT when we do a job that needs to be used billboard size or for a wall sized shop display then 22MP starts to break up, also under heavy stylish processing and retouching which is very often required in our work we really start to notice how the file starts to get noisy and break up.
If there are any Canon staff reading this.. please GET IT RIGHT for the PROS with this one - read my specs wish list and what everyone else is saying most importantly NOT JUST MORE PIXELS.. BUT BETTER PIXELS, then release a cut down smaller cheaper version in a year or so to keep all the amature pixel counters happy (90% will never actually need it tho, just think they need it!)
Peace!
Upvote
0
klickflip said:
High res allows down sampling which creates a cleaner file.. I can't see 1/500sec flash sync being achieved,MF still rules in that regard...
1DX form would be brilliant if they could match the Nikon D4 weight.. or even beat it...USB 3 is a must,and super fast XQD memory cards in both slots would be nice...
Upvote
0
I know they will offer a high MP camera if only to placate those demanding it.
It will be nice to see improvements in IQ but in truth does the pro in studio or in the field actually need the resolution?
The desire for a high flash sync, IMO, is the best feature we could get on a new camera of any sort.
In the studio we carefully control every element of the scene. Huge DR is not an issue as we alter the DR of the scene. (Just like pros since.....forever).
In the field we have less control but still a one stop increase in DR is not going to let you read the shadows significantly better especially when going to press.
And THAT is where the real issue is. Just how much different will the image be in the final usage?
Already we see scores of images in Vogue or AD that are made on a diverse range of cameras and we would be hard pressed to see the difference. Yes, I know we may be able to if we really, really try and are lucky at guessing. (See Michael Reichmann's comments on his test results with pros on this score) but as the vast majority of images go to the web and even billboard images do not need the res we think they do, we are really fooling ourselves in believing that we NEED the camera. We WANT the camera.
What would help is better lenses and AF and that higher flash sync that lets us control the amount of fill outdoors.
It will be nice to see improvements in IQ but in truth does the pro in studio or in the field actually need the resolution?
The desire for a high flash sync, IMO, is the best feature we could get on a new camera of any sort.
In the studio we carefully control every element of the scene. Huge DR is not an issue as we alter the DR of the scene. (Just like pros since.....forever).
In the field we have less control but still a one stop increase in DR is not going to let you read the shadows significantly better especially when going to press.
And THAT is where the real issue is. Just how much different will the image be in the final usage?
Already we see scores of images in Vogue or AD that are made on a diverse range of cameras and we would be hard pressed to see the difference. Yes, I know we may be able to if we really, really try and are lucky at guessing. (See Michael Reichmann's comments on his test results with pros on this score) but as the vast majority of images go to the web and even billboard images do not need the res we think they do, we are really fooling ourselves in believing that we NEED the camera. We WANT the camera.
What would help is better lenses and AF and that higher flash sync that lets us control the amount of fill outdoors.
Upvote
0
RVB said:
They "only" need to implement a global electronic shutter. That would be great for video as well as allow sync speeds that would make everyone exchange B4s for Moves.
Explaining the the average customer why the speedlights don't really work well at full power will get interesting.
Upvote
0
Bruce Photography
Landscapes, 5DX,7D,60D,EOSM,D800/E,D810,D7100
bycostello said:
Perhaps the more relevant question as far as Canon is concerned: Will Canon be able to sell a camera that is equal or better than the Nikon D800E? I will buy one if it is under 5K. Why? I have a large investment in Canon glass but my Nikon D800 and D800E are much better landscape cameras with the 14-24mm lens but I want to use my Canon tilt-shift lenses again which I think are great.
Perhaps we are talking about a "Want" more than a "Need." As far as Canon is concerned, they Want sales and I'm willing to Buy. It is up to Canon whether they produce a product that I want and be able to deliver it before Nikon delivers an even better product. The clock is ticking.....
Upvote
0
Normalnorm said:
See it all depends upon what you shoot. I wouldn't mind it, but that would be at the very bottom of my list of hopes and expectations for it.
The thing is it is not just one stop, it is more like 3 full usable stops better for some of the competition.
That is quite a lot. And for certain natural world stuff there is no way to add fill umbrellas or flash or anything.
You could take an infinite number of shots where it would make zero difference. You could take an infinite number where it would make a rather noticeable difference. It depends.
Again it depends what you shoot. More MP sure are helpful for distant wildlife shots. A 38-48MP FF camera would put a lot more pixels on your duck than the 5D3. Just look at how the 7D does better than the mighty 5D3 when you are distance limited (under most circumstances, and under ANY if you compare to the 5D2).
If you want crazy crisp landscapes where you can walk right up and admire every last little marvelous texture in the rocks and tree bark, etc....
For me the DR most of all and then the MP hitting like 38MP say (might be better for video than more) would mean infinitely more than higher speed flash sync which I might use once in a blue moon.
Upvote
0
MrFotoFool said:
Why??? How does having it hurt you? At the very least you'd be a fool since you'd pay the same for something that would have less retail value and yet behave EXACTLY the same in hand for you.
Why do so many still photographers have such hatred for video? I thought photographers were supposed to be creative, open-minded types always wanting to explore new things? Even if you don't want to, all the talk about paying as much or even more just to get a body with video disabled sounds utterly nuts to me.
Upvote
0
expatinasia said:
Do they want to sit there with nothing to compete with D800 until 2015 or 2016 though? If it is some giant $8500 1DsX that will hardly compete with the D800.
Upvote
0
LetTheRightLensIn said:
I take your points.
In that case it would seem a high res version of the current 1D body would set you up just fine. For me, I came from a Hasselblad studio background where ultimate image quality and the sync speed (coupled with glorious lenses) were king. Weatherproofing? Shoot inside or bring an umbrella. High frame rate?(How fast can you wind?)Rugged build? Bring a hammer. Even then ultimate image quality for some clients was 8x10 transparency.
Once I have the IQ (5Dmk3 is just fine thanks) all I want is sync speed.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
