Big Megapixel Camera in 2014

[jrista]

Look at all the pieces of the puzzle....

Clue 1: With the pixel density of the the 7D, only the top Lglass lenses are able to outresolve the sensor.
Clue 2: Canon has recently been upgrading it's high end lenses to outresolve said density.
...
That they realize that a high megapixel camera will be useless without the appropriate lenses to take advantage of it.... That this has been in the planning for a long time....

I'm not sure I understand this comment about needing better lenses for the high MP FF.
As you've correctly pointed out, the 40 MP FF would have about the same pixel density as the current 7D (which I have) and I haven't seen any reason to think that there is a problem with the "old" line of lenses and the 7D. My 500 f4L IS USM (no II) is just fine with the 7D.
If its a good lens, its a good lens. If its a bad lens, be it poor resolution or barrel distortion, it will show up the same unless you're printing larger, won't it?

See my visual examples of the difference between good glass (EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS) vs. excellent glass (EF 500mm f/4 L II IS + 1.4x TC) in the quote below of one of my previous posts on another thread. There are significant differences between good glass and excellent glass when the 7D (or for that matter any one of Canon's 18mp cameras) are involved.

To put some images behind my claims. Below are two photos of House Finches. One is the normal red morph, the other an orange morph. Same bird, otherwise, same size (maybe a slight size benefit to the orange morph) with the same amount of base detail...feathers, beak, eye. Both of these were shot at pretty much the same distance (around 7 feet...red morph maybe a few inches farther), ISO, and aperture, although the red one was up in a tree so my focal plane was shifted a bit, thus slightly blurring the top of its head and the back of its right wing. The body feathers and beaks are in focus on both birds. Both birds were positioned within the same rough area of the lens...slightly off center towards the upper left corner. Both full-scene images below are cropped to roughly the same area (few pixels difference in width and height).

Both photos shot with my 7D, ISO 400, f/6.3, in my backyard. The red morph was shot with my EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS lens with a full stop of additional light at twice the shutter speed (1/1600s, which should be an IQ advantage!) The orange morph was shot with a rented EF 500mm f/4 L IS II. Both lenses had AFMA adjustments for this body.

Here are the full images, scaled down to 900 pixels. Even at this level, you can see the difference in quality between the two photos can be seen. The orange morph is sharper and clearer (probably thanks to better microcontrast.)

At 100% crop (1:1 zoom, PIXEL PEEPING for all you pixel peepers!), the difference in IQ is beyond clear. The 100-400mm lens produces far softer results (even ignoring the slightly out of focus crest on the red morph). This kind of softness is what I've come to expect from the 100-400mm lens at less than f/8, and beyond f/8 diffraction again softens the image. (There is roughly the same amount of noise in both photos. It is more apparent in the red morph due to the increased lens softness, which blurs detail but does NOT blur noise. Clear, sharp detail tends to trump noise. The background in the red morph also provides a greater area of <= 18% gray tone, where noise becomes most apparent...the orange morph has a greater area of pixels > 18% tone.)

Scaled down to web size, the red morph photo is good enough. Most people won't notice the slight softness. From a print standpoint, I probably would not print the red morph photo, however the orange morph photo is definitely printable. It is not only printable, it could also easily be blown up two, maybe three times larger, and still be high quality, even higher quality than the red morph photo printed at original size!

 

[bseitz234]

I think the other thing they're probably concerned about updating are the corners. Remember, the 7d's crop sensor only captures the center of the image delivered by a FF lens. The FF corners (especially of the current UWA lineup) are much harder to get right, and this will be more noticeable with this pixel density on FF. Hence all the rumors about a new 14-24...

 

[meli]

I think it will be high frame rate because high frame rate is what Canon does better than anyone else. I have also been poring over Canon patents for the last month, and they seem to have quite a number of parallel readout and parallel pixel processing patents for high speed readout of high megapixel count sensors. Canon has also prototyped a 120mp sensor with a 9.5fps readout rate using some combination of block and row/column parallel readout and on-die image processing.

I see no reason why that technology could not be applied to a "measly" 30-40mp FF sensor to achieve at least 6-8fps. I also see no reason why ISO range would have to suffer. High ISO capabilities are not mutually exclusive with low ISO capabilities. On the contrary, high ISO is limited by physics, while low ISO is limited by electronic noise sources. Canons maximum well capacity is already more than high enough to fully exploit 14 bit data, as well as fully exploit 16 bit data...the only thing in the way is their high read noise. That could be solved with a parallel digital readout approach that applies digital noise reduction similar to Sony. If Canon solves the noise problem, they could easily have both quality high and quality low ISO performance.

Doubt it. Actually 5d3's data throughput is lower than d800's or 7d's and on par with d600's. 6D's is on par with the rebels!
Oh Canon surely can do FPS better than anyone..., but its reserved for the top dog only as is a bunch of other features.

 

[pedro]

Don't understand all the tech. But the current process seems promising. Will an updated 5D body (next cycle? 5DX?) provide the same high ISO IQ as my 5D3 does by now or will it be even improved although the MP count will be much higher? So, is Canon drifting away from its' 20-22 MP scheme due to much more improved senor tech? I for myself would like them to stay at these MP levels...Or will a 36+ MP sensor yield the same results as a current 22MP sensor? If they don't remain within this MP count, could the 6D type bodies possibly take the 20 MP sensor niche held by the 5Ds? Anyone? Cheers, Pedro

 

[willhuff.net]

Will Canon's planned "big" megapixel camera in 2014 still be considered "big" by the time it hits the shelves over a year from now?

 

[[email protected]]

Will be good development to have 3 5D variants; one the classic 22mp (current), one 40mp with AA Filter and one without hopefully Canon can retain the same fps as the current one.

Will be a winner and just need few of the older lens need updating

What I cannot see is a market for a D4x being same sensor as the D800/e and being 2-3 more expensive just for a pro body and few more fps.

 

[Lee Jay]

A faster update? One suggestion from a known source is that Canon has loose plans to replace and/or update the EOS 5D Mark III quicker than the previous iterations.

Speculation: The 7DII will have newer sensor technology. The 6D has lower read noise than the 5DIII and the 1Dx has lower read noise than the 6D. If the 7DII is even better, then the 5DIII will be looking very dated compared to the rest of the lineup in this area. So they might want to put out a 5DIIIn or something with just a sensor update.

 

[jrista]

I think it will be high frame rate because high frame rate is what Canon does better than anyone else. I have also been poring over Canon patents for the last month, and they seem to have quite a number of parallel readout and parallel pixel processing patents for high speed readout of high megapixel count sensors. Canon has also prototyped a 120mp sensor with a 9.5fps readout rate using some combination of block and row/column parallel readout and on-die image processing.

I see no reason why that technology could not be applied to a "measly" 30-40mp FF sensor to achieve at least 6-8fps. I also see no reason why ISO range would have to suffer. High ISO capabilities are not mutually exclusive with low ISO capabilities. On the contrary, high ISO is limited by physics, while low ISO is limited by electronic noise sources. Canons maximum well capacity is already more than high enough to fully exploit 14 bit data, as well as fully exploit 16 bit data...the only thing in the way is their high read noise. That could be solved with a parallel digital readout approach that applies digital noise reduction similar to Sony. If Canon solves the noise problem, they could easily have both quality high and quality low ISO performance.

Doubt it. Actually 5d3's data throughput is lower than d800's or 7d's and on par with d600's. 6D's is on par with the rebels!
Oh Canon surely can do FPS better than anyone..., but its reserved for the top dog only as is a bunch of other features.

Well, I am not saying they would let the 7D II pound out 30fps. I figure it will be in the 8-10fps range at 24-25mp range. My hope is that it will be 8-10fps with better IQ at both low and high ISO...but that is just my hope. The 1D X definitely has better noise characteristics compared to the others, and it does not seem to exhibit the oscillating +/- 1/3rd stop ISO quirk (which is a big improvement IMO). It does, however, still have the low ISO DR issue, and while its noise characteristics are better than the rest, it does still have over 38 electrons worth of read noise at low ISO settings, which is actually higher than the 5D III.

(I am not sure why it works that way, but whatever the core, common, fundamental design factors of Canon's 500nm process are, it causes a non-linear read noise issue in all of their sensors (basically, read noise climbs from a floor around two electrons worth at high ISO to between 10 to 40 electrons worth at low ISO. Sony Exmor sensors effectively have a flat, linear noise curve. I'm hoping a move to 180nm process will allow Canon to solve those issues.)

 

[meli]

24mp x 10fps would require 1dx's pipeline so its highly unlikely, even 24x8 would be kinda farfetched but it might be forced if the competition steps up. That would drive the whole APS pro category to 2K pricerange across the brands and the signs sofar from both camps point to a more conservative generation, i guess we'll see..

 

[jrista]

24mp x 10fps would require 1dx's pipeline so its highly unlikely, even 24x8 would be kinda farfetched but it might be forced if the competition steps up. That would drive the whole APS pro category to 2K pricerange across the brands and the signs sofar from both camps point to a more conservative generation, i guess we'll see..

Based on the interview of Maeda, I don't believe that he stated APS-C was going away. On the contrary, he explicitly stated they were indeed producing the successor to the 7D. As for the 7D II using the 1D X "pipeline"...why not? The 7D basically uses the 1D IV pipeline, with dual DIGIC chips and all that, with a higher resolution sensor. I don't really see the difference between the 18mp 7D/16mp 1D IV and a hypothetical 24mp 7D II/18mp 1D X scenario.

 

[pedro]

A faster update? One suggestion from a known source is that Canon has loose plans to replace and/or update the EOS 5D Mark III quicker than the previous iterations.

Speculation: The 7DII will have newer sensor technology. The 6D has lower read noise than the 5DIII and the 1Dx has lower read noise than the 6D. If the 7DII is even better, then the 5DIII will be looking very dated compared to the rest of the lineup in this area. So they might want to put out a 5DIIIn or something with just a sensor update.

5DIIIn sounds intresting. So based on that tech the next "regular" replacement could benefit from an even more advanced sensor tech by sometime 2018. I wonder how much the initial price tag will rise related to these improvements compared to the 3.5k they asked for the original" 5D3... 8) Uh, but anyway the 5D3 will remain a very nice camera, did some low light AF tests yesterday and it was very snappy even at distant nightlights and some falling snow!

 

[charlesa]

All I know is how long will be waiting and waiting without actually being out there capturing frames? I bought a cheap second hand 1Ds III and just went off. If such a body appears in 2014, I will consider it for architectural and landscape work, till then, happy shooting away.

 

[Bruce Photography]

Looking forward to the high mega pixel body

Me too! I would love to be able to use my Canon lenses again. Meanwhile I thinking of buying my second D800E. I just love that camera. I'm thinking of selling my D800 - any interest?

 

[ddashti]

It's good to know that the probability of a 7D Mark II being released is increasing, but the possible replacement of the 5D Mark III? That would just upset many people.

 

[c.d.embrey]

Two things.

1. APS-C cameras are Canon's profit center. Why does Canon refuse to support these customers with new EF-S primes. I own a EF-S 10-22mm, but would buy 10mm (16mmFF), 17mm (27mmFF) and 22mm (36mmFF) if they were available at f/1.4 or f/1.8.

2. I'm much more likely to buy a 31 megapixel Medium Format Digital than a 40 megapixel Canon.

 

[RS2021]

I know we have camps here on whether our current lens resolutions are adquate to meet 40+ MP.

Some of the superteles that were recently redesigned were done with that thought at the forefront of their mind and will do well with the higher resolution sensors. More recent version "II" zooms including the 24-70 II and 70-200 II ... will be fine.

I am not so sure about some of the older legacy L's, let alone consumer EF's.

I am not saying every single one of the older lenses lag behind, I think most do. I think 135L will be fine, but certainly 35L, 50L, and sadly perhaps even the somewhat recent 24L II will not fare so well on high MP sensors.

So it is good to see the acknowledgement in the CR post (if it is truly from Canon) that some of their lenses will have to be updated to meet the high MP sensor demands.

Again, I know some feel most key lenses out-resolve planned sensors... I feel only on paper is such a contention true. Canon will quietly start upgrading their key primes...35L II and some form of 50mm are probably imminent.

 

[Canon-F1]

2. I'm much more likely to buy a 31 megapixel Medium Format Digital than a 40 megapixel Canon.

well some people are happy with just one AF point and the "speed" of a MF camera.
if you are soley a studio shooter MF is maybe the way to go anyway.

others would love a speedy (relative) 30-45 MP DSLR with a great autofocus system.

 

[Arturo Sánchez]

+1 because the actual model is the shit

Gimme my 45mm TS-E L !!!

 

[Arturo Sánchez]

I hope that Canon could create a better sensor with more and more usable dynamic range.

With Nikon when you recover the shadows from a contrasty RAW file you don't get an annoying banding like in Canon,you guys should have a look at this example taken with the Nikon D800:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/photographyforrealestate/discuss/72157629365755068/

 

[armando]

please put in an EVF