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

[Lee Jay]

"Video 1920×1080 30fps (ALL-I or IPB)
"

Hello 2007!!!!!

Gee...I don't even have an HD TV yet. The only HD device in my house is my computer. I may buy a 4k device later this year, but it will be used as a computer monitor. I'm not planning to replace my CRT SD TVs at any point in the foreseeable future.

1. You are in the extreme minority still using SD 4:3 CRT for movies/TV. (personally I've had HD1080P TV since early 2007 and HD1080 tuner for computer monitor since something like 2005)
2. even you say you are going 4k for a monitor later this year and that could certainly be used to view 4k no?

I suppose, but that isn't its purpose. It's purpose is to allow me to use four simultaneous 1080p windows for a sort of all-in-one quad-monitor setup. I do a lot with many windows open at a time.

3. 4k allows for much better quality 1080P overall
4. 4k can act as a 2x TC for 1080P wildlife
5. 4k allows for panning in 1080P frame

I know. The only reason I want it is for post-capture stabilization in the process of producing 1080p final videos.

 

[Proshooter]

These specs look perfect for my needs.

I shoot architectural, Industrial & product.
Been shooting Canon professionally since 1981 as well as 6x6, 6x17 & 4x5.

For Architectural I need as wide an angle of view as possible with minimal distortion.
I shoot a lot of interiors including many tight spaces like automotive and aircraft interiors.
That means full sized sensor bodies paired with quality wide angle lenses fit my work best.

At one time I shot with Hasselblad SWC Superwide, but once I went all digital I found medium format digital systems didn't offer comparable wide fields of view due to crop factors as well as full system costs. My first full time digital body was a 1Ds mkII. I found that RAW files I could make with this system were comparable to the film scans I could make from my medium format system (8000ED scans, not $100 wet drum). I had several disappointments with that system including the $8000 price tag and sensor dust issues but once I started using it I stopped shooting film.

My newer body is a 5D mkIII. Compared to the 1Ds it nearly completely solved the sensor dust issue, cost far less ($3500) and added capabilities of HD video, 14 bit (over 12 on the 1Ds) and HDR which I use as an auto bracket. The only thing I need to improve on this is more resolution and perhaps addition bit depth.

I do high end retouching. Over 12,000 hrs of Photoshop when I last tallied it a couple of years ago. When I'm detailing shots to remove signs, fix pavements and other details more resolution helps. I understand that 50mp will likely exceed the resolving powers of my lenses, which is why I shoot all L lenses and use top end polarizer filters. I am planning to upgrade my glass as improved version are available.

I'm not concerned about high ISO, I can use the 5D for anything that requires on camera flash, low light, high fps, etc. If this new camera shot only ISO 100 and was full manual I'd be fine with that. I'm also not worried about file sizes. I already manage terabytes of files on my desktop and use high powered computers to work and manage my files.

I can understand shooters that want everything in one camera, but I don't think this is that type of camera. There are plenty of other do-everything options, but most have to make multiple trade offs to do that. I'm happy this includes HD video and would have liked a 4K capability, but I'll happily give that up for the additional resolution. 50mp fits my needs. 40+ might have been acceptable but 36 would have fallen short of my expectations.

I'm also glad to see the "R" version that will allow me to decide when to add anti-aliasing, moire control and edge softening in post production if needed at all.

Some earlier posts suggest the US pricing might be $3450. That would be great. I can consider anything up to $6000 per body and make a business model for it, over that becomes less clear.

Looking forward to Feb.6th when more details about the specs, cost and availability come out.

 

[Lee Jay]

I understand that 50mp will likely exceed the resolving powers of my lenses, which is why I shoot all L lenses and use top end polarizer filters.

Your lenses will out-resolve this sensor, easily.

I'm also glad to see the "R" version that will allow me to decide when to add anti-aliasing, moire control and edge softening in post production if needed at all.

You cannot do, in post, what an AA filter does. It's actually theoretically impossible. All you can do in post is something that hides some of the aliasing that is captured. You can't recover the original signal.

 

[Busted Knuckles]

I suspect that I will be one of the first to pre-order this. The only question I really have is the AA filter vs not.

These photosites are going to be pretty small already - I have to now go study the Nikon discussions on the topic. How often and to what extent a shot gets wiggled up.

 

[PureClassA]

I suspect that I will be one of the first to pre-order this. The only question I really have is the AA filter vs not.

These photosites are going to be pretty small already - I have to now go study the Nikon discussions on the topic. How often and to what extent a shot gets wiggled up.

Good luck beating me to it ;D. And it's easy. You get the 5DS. I'm betting Canon is rather begrudgingly making the R model, to play ball and silence the small but noisy "F the Filter crowd".

 

[Lee Jay]

I'm also glad to see the "R" version that will allow me to decide when to add anti-aliasing, moire control and edge softening in post production if needed at all.

You cannot do, in post, what an AA filter does. It's actually theoretically impossible. All you can do in post is something that hides some of the aliasing that is captured. You can't recover the original signal.

Why are you so afraid of a Canon camera without an anti-alias filter?

It's stupid, harmful, and can lead to Canon getting a bad reputation.

 

[PureClassA]

I bet for every one R model Canon sells, they sell 4 S models. And I bet they're planning on this.

 

[sarangiman]

150,000 pixel RGB-TR metering sensor
252 zone TTL metering

I don't get this. I thought the 150,000 pixel metering sensor replaced the 35 zone (and similar) metering sensors. Why would this be specified twice?

Wondered the same thing

It is an improved 1D X metering system, the same in the 7D MkII, the 150000 pixels are divided into the 252 zones for a greater coverage. You can read more about it now in 7D Mk II reviews or Canon information pages.

If you look at the specifications on Canon's own Canon 1D X page:
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_1d_x#Specifications

... you'll see they also say: "252-zone metering with approx. 100,000-pixel RGB AE sensor and TTL maximum aperture metering employed."

 

[Boykinally]

I will be preordering the R version myself.

 

[Fazz1977]

50MP gets me very excited... as a landscape shooter who actually prints large. Even while shooting aurora in darkness in Finland, I didn't go above ISO6400 on my 6D. I don't shoot sports... always tripod mounted, and shoot in seconds or minutes, rather than fractions of seconds... so a body like this is perfect!!! Video? Get a 5D3 and stop moaning.

My main concern is can L glass actually resolve that high, or am I going to have to look at zeiss or Schneider glass to complement this body?

 

[kurcobolja]

Synchro is 1/200 sec, serious?

 

[Lee Jay]

I will be preordering the R version myself.

Shoot a lot at f/18.

 

[privatebydesign]

I'm also glad to see the "R" version that will allow me to decide when to add anti-aliasing, moire control and edge softening in post production if needed at all.

You cannot do, in post, what an AA filter does. It's actually theoretically impossible. All you can do in post is something that hides some of the aliasing that is captured. You can't recover the original signal.

Why are you so afraid of a Canon camera without an anti-alias filter?

People are obviously using digital cameras without anti-alias filters quite successfully or else Phase One wouldn't be selling their medium format digital backs - the highest resolution digital cameras available to consumers.

And if the lack of an AA filter meant terrible looking photos, why did Nikon go from the D800 to D810 and drop the version of their camera *with* the AA filter, implying that people preferred that the camera didn't have it?

Why are you so afraid of a Canon camera without an anti-alias filter?

It's stupid, harmful, and can lead to Canon getting a bad reputation.

I have to agree with Dilbert on that one

It isn't stupid, if it is harmful I am sure Canon have run the numbers and think it is worth it, and they can look after their own reputation, even when there are really serious issues. The 1D MkIII got them a terrible reputation for AF, the 1DX is widely regarded by those that push the AF envelope to be the best in the world.

Besides we don't know the nature of 'no AA filter' yet, obviously the D800E was a kludge and not widely loved, but the D810 isn't a kludge and does seem to be loved by its owners, maybe if the 5DRS is an even better implementation of 'no AA filter' that can retain some of the EF lens quality then it could approach MFD for all but the most discerning shooters.

To be sure, some shooters will be more than happy to make the trade off between the additional moire and the intrinsic sharpness 'no AA filter' will give them.

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

For me personally, the question is:

Will the rumored (http://www.techtoyreviews.com/canon-5ds-image-leaked-price-tag-3800/) 3800$ (5DS) or the 4300$ (5DsR) be worth the price, Canon will want to have for it?

Or wait for an 5DIV, an goldenegglayingwoolmilksaw??? But how much will this be????

Those prices are way too high. If true, Canon killed the success of this camera right out the door. It can't be more than the D810. If anything it needs to be less, as most people looking for higher MP and higher DR have already moved to Nikon. I doubt many people are going to pay more for something with just more MP. 36MP is already taxing out many lenses and is a huge amount of detail!

I can't even think of a single professional landscape photographer who hasn't moved on to an A7R or D800/810 by now, who shoots with 35mm format gear.

ummmmmm...your logic here is like in some form of lala land. the 5d3 held it's own and sold really well at a higher price point than the d800's (up until the d810 came out, but, the d810 was also released in the last year of the 5d3's lifespan). Straight up, If 22MP's and less DR can sell extremely well then why in the world would anyone at canon ever even consider putting a 3k price tag on a 50mp body????

 

[Chuck Alaimo]

So... big sensor, more megapixels ( to keep you buying crap ) after all the technology and research, still could not sync the camera to a higher shutter speed ? Seriously Canon ? Are you serious ? You don't even stretch your focus point to the edges where some of us use daily... Yet you make more megapixels ( which are barely needed ) but you won't make the camera sync at a higher shutter speed ?????????
Canon GET a clue or maybe buy one !!! Listen Canon you make cameras that most sports guys use... why can't you sync the shutter at a higher speed ?
You guys are ridiculous... get off the megapixel wars and make a good camera that syncs faster and the main thing to keep in mind is to shoot it on manual ! For crying out loud !!!
I am disgusted... Shame on you Canon !!!

? ? ? wow, now this is a great first post...lol...did someone that's a regular get their account banned and is back now as this guy to post this???

 

[Lee Jay]

I have to agree with Dilbert on that one

It isn't stupid, if it is harmful I am sure Canon have run the numbers and think it is worth it, ...

Sure...they think they can make some extra money leaving out an expensive part and charging extra for doing so. They surely know there are people willing to pay extra for a lower cost item and that makes Canon far greater profits.

 

[Proshooter]

I understand that 50mp will likely exceed the resolving powers of my lenses, which is why I shoot all L lenses and use top end polarizer filters.

Your lenses will out-resolve this sensor, easily.

I'm also glad to see the "R" version that will allow me to decide when to add anti-aliasing, moire control and edge softening in post production if needed at all.

You cannot do, in post, what an AA filter does. It's actually theoretically impossible. All you can do in post is something that hides some of the aliasing that is captured. You can't recover the original signal.

I currently have a 16-35 L (series I), 24-70 L, 70-200 IS, a 2X (series I) and a Sigma 12-24
Last year CPS loaned me a 16-35 mkII, 14 L and their shortest TL (17?) to compare. The 14 was sharper than anything I currently have, the 16-35 was only slightly sharper on the edges than my current 16-35 but requires a larger filter - it's nice to have one $250 filter that works with 3 lenses. I hope the coming 11-24 is sharp, but only to replace my Sigma, I don't expect it to be close to the 14mm L.

Point being that I've seen the difference in my lenses and newer lenses and plan to continue to upgrade. I believe from what I've read on several of the review sites that a 50mp sensor cannot be fully appriciated with currently available lenses. It seems apparent that Canon has been upgrading their lenses in anticipation of higher resolution sensors.

In so far as "theoretically impossible", you don't know what can do in Photoshop. I would not be trying to replicate "what an AA filter does".

 

[benperrin]

I suspect that I will be one of the first to pre-order this. The only question I really have is the AA filter vs not.

Me too. Wondering if we should start a new topic for the subject. It will be interesting to hear from the perspective of Nikon users as well.

 

[Lee Jay]

Wow, such strong words.

Phase One doesn't use an anti-alias filter and they don't have a bad reputation.

On the contrary, they've got perhaps the best reputation.

So I don't follow your logic.

I do data acquisition for a living. I spend a lot of time thinking about bandwidth, sampling and anti-aliasing. Some of the things I measure make anti-aliasing very difficult. If I collect data without proper anti-aliasing people can't publish much when it comes to analyzing my data because there's no way to know if the data is accurate except in the mean. So I'm very familiar with the lies being told by a sampling system that doesn't do proper anti-aliasing in the analog domain. The idea of paying extra to NOT get that is just idiotic to me. I often pay $700 per channel (often for hundreds of channels) for high-quality anti-aliasing filters.

Why would Canon have been putting such an expensive component into every SLR they make since they started making them if they were not only not useful, but harmful?

 

[Marsu42]

yadayadayada

I have to agree with Dilbert on that one

I'll keep a bookmark around of this historical occasion :->

Besides we don't know the nature of 'no AA filter' yet, obviously the D800E was a kludge and not widely loved, but the D810 isn't a kludge and does seem to be loved by its owners, maybe if the 5DRS is an even better implementation of 'no AA filter' that can retain some of the EF lens quality then it could approach MFD for all but the most discerning shooters.

Imho it doesn't really matter - they are simply reacting to demand as seen with the d800e.

As Canon offers both versions, the joke is on people buying the r as they cannot complain it's Canon's fault. From their business pov, it makes sense - selling a camera with *less* (hardware) for *more* (money) would be the dream of their marketing people, better than selling white Rebels :-o