Bingo! New Canon 5Ds has 50.6 MP new rumored specs

[Famateur]

Figure this, at 50mp, will it be the equal of a Hasselblad? No way. Pixel size does matter. Larger ones are typically better, but when you are constrained by 35mm format, fitting more means making them smaller. Increases in resolution comes at the cost of smaller pixels. Thus, smaller pixels will have to become more efficient and accurate. The rumored 6400 ISO is an indication that efficiency wasn't increased much at all - they're just putting out high mega pixel count.

K, I agree with most of your comments. This one, I'm not so sure. If the smaller pixels were the reason for the ISO 6400 limit, would we not see the same limit on the 7DII? I believe the pixels are about the same size, yet the 7DII goes to ISO 16,000. In addition, it has been reported that the quantum efficiency of the 7DII is higher than that of earlier Canon sensors, including full frame.

I would think the biggest differences/advantages of medium format are:

1. Shallower depth of field.
2. Larger sensor = more light.

Anyway, food for thought...

 

[PureClassA]

Figure this, at 50mp, will it be the equal of a Hasselblad? No way. Pixel size does matter. Larger ones are typically better, but when you are constrained by 35mm format, fitting more means making them smaller. Increases in resolution comes at the cost of smaller pixels. Thus, smaller pixels will have to become more efficient and accurate. The rumored 6400 ISO is an indication that efficiency wasn't increased much at all - they're just putting out high mega pixel count.

K, I agree with most of your comments. This one, I'm not so sure. If the smaller pixels were the reason for the ISO 6400 limit, would we not see the same limit on the 7DII? I believe the pixels are about the same size, yet the 7DII goes to ISO 16,000. In addition, it has been reported that the quantum efficiency of the 7DII is higher than that of earlier Canon sensors, including full frame.

I would think the biggest differences/advantages of medium format are:

1. Shallower depth of field.
2. Larger sensor = more light.

Anyway, food for thought...

I thought the limiting factor in this case was the heavier CFA design. Get more color depth, sacrifice sensitivity?

 

[Famateur]

I have lenses to shoot anything. However, I do a lot of targeted street photography where I cannot control any of the surrounding circumstances. Cars and people get in my way. Disturbing backgrounds popping up from nowhere. Unruly pedestrians wanting to pass me during a shot. Good scenes appearing and disappearing in an instant.

Cropping is an essential way to help me focus those shots on what I want to show and get rid of all the urban "noise". A ruined full body shot can thus often be saved by cropping the picture into a close portrait shot in stead.

I am sure others also have their reasons to crop a lot regardless of arming themselves with the "right" tool for the right job. Not all of us have the luxury of having control over our subject and surroundings.

Great point, Maiaibing. I often find myself cropping for similar reasons. Sometimes I frame for one composition, but some time later, I'll see a composition I like even better with some cropping. To me, cropping is one of the tools of the the creative process, and 50MP would sure enhance that.

It all comes down to philosophy of use, and that can vary a lot from one artist to the next...

 

[talicoa]

So how does the pixel density compare to a 7dII? I'm not sure cropping is always the answer when composition is more important.

Also, I really feel the 5DMKIII has hit a very useable sweetspot of quality and useability. If I were to upgrade, I would need to update my computer, cards, and card reader. I think if I need this level of quality I will just flip to portrait mode, and take three shots and photoshop a pano.

I will probably sit this one out. Looks good for some people though. If nothing else it will give me something entertaining to read about for a while. What will the fanboys on both sides say if this thing has a Sony sensor?

 

[Famateur]

Absolutely. This is (hopefully, pending tttmnbso* results) the camera I've been waiting for to become my Canon landscape camera.


* TTTMNBSO: The thing that must not be spoken of

LOL! I love it. Thanks, jrista!

 

[Famateur]

Figure this, at 50mp, will it be the equal of a Hasselblad? No way. Pixel size does matter. Larger ones are typically better, but when you are constrained by 35mm format, fitting more means making them smaller. Increases in resolution comes at the cost of smaller pixels. Thus, smaller pixels will have to become more efficient and accurate. The rumored 6400 ISO is an indication that efficiency wasn't increased much at all - they're just putting out high mega pixel count.

K, I agree with most of your comments. This one, I'm not so sure. If the smaller pixels were the reason for the ISO 6400 limit, would we not see the same limit on the 7DII? I believe the pixels are about the same size, yet the 7DII goes to ISO 16,000. In addition, it has been reported that the quantum efficiency of the 7DII is higher than that of earlier Canon sensors, including full frame.

I would think the biggest differences/advantages of medium format are:

1. Shallower depth of field.
2. Larger sensor = more light.

Anyway, food for thought...

I thought the limiting factor in this case was the heavier CFA design. Get more color depth, sacrifice sensitivity?

Yep. That's what's being reported, and it would seem to make sense to me. Still wondering if there's some artificial limiting at play, too, in order to more clearly differentiate this body for its target segment...

 

[jrista]

* TTTMNBSO: The thing that must not be spoken of

;D lol

8)

 

[Dholai]

I am likely the happiest....

..person and one in a micro minority looking at the specs.

I need...

Excellent DR and low ISO performance. Will be using it for Landscape/Portrait and Macro work.

I do NOT need..

Video capability-4K or 444K
High ISO
WiFi
GPS
Very high frame rate

All I care about is a still camera with so far unseen still image quality in 35 mm format for the work I mentioned above.

I will buy it even if it breaks me. Will work many more extra shifts but will enjoy it immensely.

Thanks Canon

 

[jrista]

* TTTMNBSO: The thing that must not be spoken of

Can we just say "Voldemort" instead? Thats seems a lot easier and means exactly the same thing

"Voldemort" implies unmitigated, unfettered evil....threfor, they don't mean the same thing.

 

[jrista]

Re: I am likely is the happiest....

..person and one in a micro minority looking at the specs.

I need...

Excellent DR and low ISO performance. Will be using it for Landscape/Portrait and Macro work.

I do NOT need..

Video capability-4K or 444K
High ISO
WiFi
GPS
Very high frame rate

All I care about is a still camera with so far unseen still image quality in 35 mm format for the work I mentioned above.

I will buy it even if it breaks me. Will work many more extra shifts but will enjoy it immensely.

Thanks Canon

Aye, I don't need much for a landscape camera. Would probably make for a nice macro camera as well, true true. All I care about is getting the best RAW image quality possible. Resolution certainly plays into that, but noise does as well. At 50mp+ they are certainly not going to have any problems on the resolution front. That leaves noise...and I REALLY hope they worked their asses off on the noise front.

 

[Lawliet]

I would think the biggest differences/advantages of medium format are:

1. Shallower depth of field.

MF lenses rarely are what one would consider fast in 35mm, f/4 or f/5.6 are quite normal, f/2.8 takes the place of f/1.4. They're rather designed to avoid the flaws lots of small frame lenses have wide open. And you've got the leaf shutter to avoid mortons fork of ND filters or f/16.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

A big reason for DSLR video is the cost and weight savings, so if they force to spend more and to lug a second set of stuff around for top video too that defeats the purpose and those extra sales mostly won't go to them anyway. If they don't want to let 4k and basic usability features go for quite so little yet then they should have (maybe they did?) also a 5Dsc for say $2000 more than the 5Ds adds 4k video internally recorded and the basic zebras/various while filming focusing aids, etc.

Assuming there is no technical reason it can't be done with this sensor (and perhaps there is, in which case then it's all besides the point and you just cheer on that it's a top stills only camera and they have delivered that).

 

[takesome1]

I am going to be so upset with this camera.

It should have been able to do 12 fps and noise improvement so we can get great results at 12800.
It should have had GPS, WIFI and Pop Up Flash.
It should shoot 4K video (even though it would have 42 million wasted pixels since 4K is only 8 mp).


Any way I am so upset.

I wish they would announce this thing so I can get my pre-order in.

Oh, and that will upset me as well. I want this camera released now, not in a few months.

 

[takesome1]

Assuming there is no technical reason it can't be done with this sensor (and perhaps there is, in which case then it's all besides the point and you just cheer on that it's a top stills only camera and they have delivered that).

I don't know technically, but common sense looking at the numbers. 8mp for 4k video. A 50mp camera. Wouldn't it be wise to make your best 4K video camera on a body that has fewer and larger pixels? Wouldn't it give a better image overall?
Then occasionally what is common sense and obvious isn't what is technically correct.

 

[Lee Jay]

Assuming there is no technical reason it can't be done with this sensor (and perhaps there is, in which case then it's all besides the point and you just cheer on that it's a top stills only camera and they have delivered that).

I don't know technically, but common sense looking at the numbers. 8mp for 4k video. A 50mp camera. Wouldn't it be wise to make your best 4K video camera on a body that has fewer and larger pixels? Wouldn't it give a better image overall?

Details matter, but likely not.

 

[jeffa4444]

Main point of 4K video is resolution 8MP doesn't cut it and larger pixels may give wider DR but not resolution. The current "sweet spot" is around 5.5um to 6.5um.
Sony FF A7r is 12MP.

Canon should be aiming to adopt H.265 HEVC for 4K it's double the data rate of H.264, 10bit instead of 8bit as in the 1D c and conforms to 4K bluray.

 

[chilakamarthi]

With all these new models in market, where 6D MK2 stands and will they come with 2 or not ? If there is one when can we expect it?

 

[PureClassA]

With all these new models in market, where 6D MK2 stands and will they come with 2 or not ? If there is one when can we expect it?

All the 5 bodies will be $3000-4000, including the mark4. So yes we still have a 6 body around 2k.

 

[Arkarch]

Regarding 4K video,

While the bulk of my work is landscape, I am sometimes called in to do event work including video. I found the Ninja-2 to be a fine outboard External Video Recorder via the HDMI cable for these needs. Actually I found it to be a superior solution with the direct disk editing capabilities.

This seems like a great opportunity for Atomos and other EVR manufacturers to provide 4K connection off this high res sensor. What am I missing other than small portability (and of course the yet-to-be-known HDMI output spec)

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

It should shoot 4K video (even though it would have 42 million wasted pixels since 4K is only 8 mp).

that's not how it works