Canon 120mp DSLR Information

[shtarker]

These blogs are always so crazy. People complain for months that Canon isn't doing anything and falling farther behind Nikon. Then they start announcing improvements and people complain they are making foolish updates. AND they may very well be the same people on different accounts. 10 years from now, 20 - 50 megapixels will be considered small, just like under 10 megapixels used to be the norm and everything caught up.

I think it's great that Canon is making advances. It isn't for me right NOW, but in a very short period it may be the norm.

GO CANON!!

 

[TeT]

Canon, I love you but stop fighting the pissing fight ! You are looking stupid doing so...
There is no need for 120 mp... in fact it is absurd ! It is so absurd it is mind blowing !
Asides from super compression... let the medium format do the medium format formats !
Hey Canon !!! How about synching to 8000 ?
How about a " professional camera " with out silly modes ? Something that won't break ? Canon how about making the more weather proof for guys that actually use them in the element not the wedding guys ?
Canon how about impact resistant ? S___ Canon how about you get your head out of your ass and stop upgrading lenses to make the new one come out for the geeks to rush and buy them ?
How about you look at the poster of all your old cameras and remind yourself why are you there.
Remember guys... you don't need a 120 mp camera for any reason... billboards were made with 6 megapixles back in the day and nobody thought we would get 20... 120 ??? Spend your research money somewhere else. We already know you can do it.
Once again... disappointed...

Sure, get your head out Canon the 5DS was frivolous and we dont want upgraded lenses either...

 

[telemaq76]

every 5 years for canon exposition, canon shows an aps-h of 150mpx, it s some kind of demo product. Already readed about that 5 years and maybe 10 years ago. nothing new

 

[Diltiazem]

The blog also says"

"First off, Canon has an actual working prototype that they were shooting live images at the full 120MP resolution on the Expo floor. The sensor is a 120MP APS-H format sensor mounted in a Canon 5Ds camera body."

That's why the camera looks similar to 5D series, but the final product could be different.

 

[wsmith96]

Fantastic! With this much resolution, all you need is one camera body, one high quality prime, matching your wide angle requirement and then you can crop as much as you like and still print as big as you like ...

Hey, hadn't thought about that, but you are right. That would make the gear bag much lighter

 

[LonelyBoy]

These blogs are always so crazy. People complain for months that Canon isn't doing anything and falling farther behind Nikon. Then they start announcing improvements and people complain they are making foolish updates. AND they may very well be the same people on different accounts. 10 years from now, 20 - 50 megapixels will be considered small, just like under 10 megapixels used to be the norm and everything caught up.

I think it's great that Canon is making advances. It isn't for me right NOW, but in a very short period it may be the norm.

GO CANON!!

I remember when a 6mpx cropper was "plenty" and bigger than that "took up too much hard drive space and processing power". Now they've gone from 18 to 20 to 24. FF has gone to 43 and 50. How long until 120 seems normal and 50 sounds as quaint as the 8 in the 1d3?

 

[wsmith96]

How long until 120 seems normal and 50 sounds as quaint as the 8 in the 1d3?

I'm betting 4 years.

 

[Maiaibing]

100 ISO sounds like a deal killer.

Lets see. So so did ISO 6.400 for the 5DR/S - until it turns out that you can actually get better high ISO shots with the 5D/R than the 5DIII/6D when down-sampled. That's why I have one now even if I at first thought the 5DS/R was DOA for my use.

Maybe if Canon can push solid ISO to 800 at production (more would of course be better)?

 

[rrcphoto]

100 ISO sounds like a deal killer.

Lets see. So so did ISO 6.400 for the 5DR/S - until it turns out that you can actually get better high ISO shots with the 5D/R than the 5DIII/6D when down-sampled. That's why I have one now even if I at first thought the 5DS/R was DOA for my use.

Maybe if Canon can push solid ISO to 800 at production (more would of course be better)?

I think it was simply a prototype limitation..

 

[davidmurray]

It's also a sign Canon doesn't really care what the competition is doing and just make honest and good products.

+1

 

[davidmurray]

Canon, I love you but stop fighting the pissing fight ! You are looking stupid doing so...
There is no need for 120 mp... in fact it is absurd ! It is so absurd it is mind blowing !
Asides from super compression... let the medium format do the medium format formats !

I'd say Canon's strategy is to produce high resolution glass for high resolution bodies.
If the glass can do it I'd want a body to match.

A professional camera should be much more capable than a cellphone, and there are cellphones out there that exceed the sensor resolution of current DSLRs.

I think the future of DSLRs is bright, but only if they have much greater capability than a cellphone camera.

Megapixels, dynamic range, sensitivity. . . bring it on I say! I've got the glass to match.

 

[YellowJersey]

Canon’s development announcement of a 120mp DSLR took the photography world by surprise, as we expected some incremental increases in resolution, but more than doubling the 50.6mp resolution of the Canon EOS 5DS and EOS 5DS R is quite the jump.</p>
<p>A lot is being made about the APS-H sensor in the prototype currently on display at the Canon EXPO. We wouldn’t read too much into it, as Canon always uses APS-H for their high resolution prototype sensors. The likelihood that Canon would bring back the APS-H sensor size in a consumer EOS product is between nil and none.</p>
<p>More information on the 120mp DSLR:</p>
<ul>
<li>RAW files are 210mb</li>
<li>Camera ID in the EXIF is: EOS Y038</li>
<li>Camera prototype is only working at ISO 100</li>
</ul>

the 210MB raw files do not make any sense.

canon's compression usually yields around 1.1 to 1.5 bytes per pixel in the CR2 file size - so it should be around 140-170MB in size, not 210MB.

210MB smells like the uncompressed size - or 16 bit readout.

I found the 210mb RAWs rather curious as well. I'm not sure what it means. Don't Nikon(Sony) sensors have a much higher file size? I'd speculate that maybe this involves dynamic range improvements (braces to get pelted by rotten fruit), but I'm not going to do any more than toss that out there for someone with a greater technical understanding to talk about. It would seem odd that such a high resolution would have better DR, though.

I'm also curious to know what kind of lenses could handle that kind of resolution, especially after the 5Ds(r) and its recommended lens list.

 

[jrista]

210mb files? Yikes! Those terabyte(s) hard drives are looking pretty weak all of a sudden. ;D

That's a whole heapin' helpin' of megabytes!

LOL

You guys should get into astrophotography. Then a 210mb data file will seem like nothing. I regularly work with 250-750 megabyte 32-bit or 64-bit floating point FITS files. My average project size on disk is 50-70 gigabytes. I usually have a variety of active projects taking up disk space at any given point. I've filled up a 3TB drive with astro work on multiple occasions. I periodically delete intermediate working files and archive the rest to BluRay disk to free up space.

But yeah. This is the trend. Higher and higher resolution. In a few years, I wouldn't be surprised if 80-100mp cameras become the norm.

 

[Orangutan]

Any chance this is actually for a light-field camera rather than a normal DSLR? 200MP full-frame DSLR seems a big jump, unless there's some really good reason for it.

Another possibility: a number of years ago I read that one of the major manufacturers put mini-sensels between the standard sensels. With their limited surface area they preserved the highlights of the image. An updated version of that with two or three sensel sizes could preserve 5 or 6 stops of highlights.

 

[Crosswind]

Any chance this is actually for a light-field camera rather than a normal DSLR?

Software that can handle and display pictures made with a light-field camera isn't really fleshed out (think Lytro). It probably requires a totally different DSLR body construction too.

That smells more like 2020+. But you made a good point. I guess light-field cameras certainly have serious potential in our future. But nothing for Canon's 120mp giant.

 

[rfdesigner]

The whole thing is just an elaborate practical joke on DXO.

If you downsample from 140MP to 8MP (DXO Print 'measurement') you 'gain' a minimum of 6 stops. Even if they used the same sensor tech they currently have that is measured at around 10 stops, that takes the 'new' sensor to an unassailable 16+ stops of DR, from a 14 bit file. :

you may laugh.. but it is perfectly possible to downsample a 2D or 1D dataset and gain bit depth.

Ever listened to a 1bit, sigma delta DAC? I have, it's the way almost all audio DACs work, so that's 1 bit RAW and 16 bits "averaged".

 

[LovePhotography]

210mb files? Yikes! Those terabyte(s) hard drives are looking pretty weak all of a sudden. ;D

That's a whole heapin' helpin' of megabytes!

LOL

You guys should get into astrophotography. Then a 210mb data file will seem like nothing. I regularly work with 250-750 megabyte 32-bit or 64-bit floating point FITS files. My average project size on disk is 50-70 gigabytes. I usually have a variety of active projects taking up disk space at any given point. I've filled up a 3TB drive with astro work on multiple occasions. I periodically delete intermediate working files and archive the rest to BluRay disk to free up space.

But yeah. This is the trend. Higher and higher resolution. In a few years, I wouldn't be surprised if 80-100mp cameras become the norm.

+1

You are usually the most rational poster in this forum.

 

[Don Haines]

210mb files? Yikes! Those terabyte(s) hard drives are looking pretty weak all of a sudden. ;D

That's a whole heapin' helpin' of megabytes!

LOL

You guys should get into astrophotography. Then a 210mb data file will seem like nothing. I regularly work with 250-750 megabyte 32-bit or 64-bit floating point FITS files. My average project size on disk is 50-70 gigabytes. I usually have a variety of active projects taking up disk space at any given point. I've filled up a 3TB drive with astro work on multiple occasions. I periodically delete intermediate working files and archive the rest to BluRay disk to free up space.

But yeah. This is the trend. Higher and higher resolution. In a few years, I wouldn't be surprised if 80-100mp cameras become the norm.

My first digital camera was 0.077 megapixels. The 5Ds has 650 times as many pixels as that..... another 2.4 times is just a tiny increment....

 

[rfdesigner]

210mb files? Yikes! Those terabyte(s) hard drives are looking pretty weak all of a sudden. ;D

That's a whole heapin' helpin' of megabytes!

LOL

You guys should get into astrophotography. Then a 210mb data file will seem like nothing. I regularly work with 250-750 megabyte 32-bit or 64-bit floating point FITS files. My average project size on disk is 50-70 gigabytes. I usually have a variety of active projects taking up disk space at any given point. I've filled up a 3TB drive with astro work on multiple occasions. I periodically delete intermediate working files and archive the rest to BluRay disk to free up space.

But yeah. This is the trend. Higher and higher resolution. In a few years, I wouldn't be surprised if 80-100mp cameras become the norm.

+1

One frame of my mono KAF8300 based camera is 8 Mpixel, that ends up as 2 bytes per per colour per pixel.. so that's 48Mbytes for a single 8Mpixel image, but remember there's no debayering or anti-aliasing filter, so it's much sharper than a DSLR, start stitching frames together (common and relatively easy) and sizes get out of hand pretty quickly.

 

[scyrene]

210mb files? Yikes! Those terabyte(s) hard drives are looking pretty weak all of a sudden. ;D

That's a whole heapin' helpin' of megabytes!

LOL

You guys should get into astrophotography. Then a 210mb data file will seem like nothing. I regularly work with 250-750 megabyte 32-bit or 64-bit floating point FITS files. My average project size on disk is 50-70 gigabytes. I usually have a variety of active projects taking up disk space at any given point. I've filled up a 3TB drive with astro work on multiple occasions. I periodically delete intermediate working files and archive the rest to BluRay disk to free up space.

But yeah. This is the trend. Higher and higher resolution. In a few years, I wouldn't be surprised if 80-100mp cameras become the norm.

+1

You are usually the most rational poster in this forum.

Yeah, some areas of photography already involve that sort of data throughput. I do a lot of focus stacking and panorama stitching these days and again, the files can get huge - 60-150MP images can amount to well over a gigabyte if exported as psd files, and a hundred or more megabytes as a tiff. I only have a middling MacBook but it can handle it, albeit slowly sometimes. We'll manage!