Canon 5D X with Quad Core DIGIC 7 Processor Rumors from PB

[ishdakuteb]

Original topic can be found via below link:
http://www.photographybay.com/2015/08/02/canon-5d-x-with-quad-core-digic-7-processor-rumors/#comments

Original topic of content:
"New rumors about the upcoming Canon 5D X have surfaced over at the DP Review forums. The rumors claim that the Canon 5D X will feature a single DIGIC 7 quad core processor, while the upcoming 1D X Mark II will have two DIGIC 7 processors and one DIGIC 6 processor (perhaps the DIGIC 6 processor will be used for AF processing?).

According to forum poster MichaelVadon:

The Digic 7 is going to be a quad core cpu which will allow 4x the processing power for high MP, high frame rate bodies. The 5DX will contain one Digic 7 and the 1DX Mark II will contain 2 Digic 7s and 1 Digic 6. The Digic 6 will be for metwring and other smaller tasks. The 1DX will have a different larger battery while thr 5DX will keep going with the same.

This comes from the same forum member that first dropped the 5D X name last month as the camera to replace the 5D Mark III.

Prior rumors about the Canon 5D X have pointed to a 24-28MP sensor, 8-9fps still image frame rate, a new flash system and 4K video capture.

As with all rumors, take these with a heavy dose of salt until we hear something a little more solid than a forum posting."

I am waiting...

 

[expatinasia]

I enjoyed reading that until I got to the larger battery for the 1D X. The battery on the 1D X is already amazing and you are hard pushed to empty it in a day when taking stills.

Video is another thing mind you as that does drain the battery a lot.

Three processors in one camera?! Wow. Hopefully USB 3.1 as well.

 

[Proscribo]

Three processors in one camera?! Wow. Hopefully USB 3.1 as well.

Actually 1Dx also has three processors, two DIGIC5+s and one DIGIC4.

 

[Maximilian]

When would Canon release a camera with these spec/

- base ISO 50
- No low pass filter
(something which is ++ in 810)

Canon think they already introduced it and called it 5DS/R.
If you don't like it or if it does not fit your needs, feel free to jump ship because Canon won't do anything here within the next ... say 3 to 4 years?

 

[PureClassA]

I would assume "larger battery" means "more capacity" not "bigger size" They just did that going from the LPE6 to the LPE6N for all the other pro bodies. And you can still use the older LPE6 model in cameras that come with the new E6N (think 5DS) They kept the same physical form factor and size but increased the capacity internally.

I enjoyed reading that until I got to the larger battery for the 1D X. The battery on the 1D X is already amazing and you are hard pushed to empty it in a day when taking stills.

Video is another thing mind you as that does drain the battery a lot.

Three processors in one camera?! Wow. Hopefully USB 3.1 as well.

 

[jcarapet]

larger 1dx battery may be a necessary evil due to upping the image processors. While smaller nm chips have become more efficient, they are still moving through quite a bit of juice to capture images. especially when talking a 4x jump in compute.

 

[Chaitanya]

I am loking forward to what canon does with 6D mark II, improved Af(dual pixel and through viewfinder) will be more than enough to get a lot of sales.

 

[Travelintrevor]

i know who this Michael V is and don't buy into his speculations one bit. He makes similar claims on a different forum but no one there bites....part of me wants to post his website so he can be contacted but I feel this would go too far.

Again, I would not bet 1 penny on his info.

 

[MarkII]

I don't think anyone cares how many processors it has. Image quality, responsiveness, handling, features and cost matter.

Canon has some big problems on the horizon. Compact sales are being eaten by mobile phones, and mirrorless competition is expanding up to challenge even the Canon FF models. I doubt that this will affect Canon's professional customers, but Olympus, Sony and Fuji are certainly going to affect its share of the enthusiasts market.

It would be nice to see some innovation coming out of Canon. The 5Ds(r) are interesting, but here they are just waay to expensive for what they offer (nearly 4k euros). Meanwhile Sony introduces cheaper mirrorless FF cameras that have sensor IS, comparable resolution and which can adapt nearly any 3rd party 35mm lens with few compromises - thereby eliminating the biggest barrier to existing Canon users migrating to a new system.

If Canon wants to retain the enthusiasts market, it needs to respond to this with innovation of its own - not with lukewarm reheated versions of the same thing. There are a ton of easy things that Canon could do, from not deliberately crippling features in software (auto-ISO limits, intervalometers, etc) to making the system more attractive (why is the speedlight wireless control not built in to Canon bodies, rather than requiring a clunky add-on?!).

As someone who currently shoots a mix of Minolta/Leica film and Canon digital,

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

i know who this Michael V is and don't buy into his speculations one bit. He makes similar claims on a different forum but no one there bites....part of me wants to post his website so he can be contacted but I feel this would go too far.

Again, I would not bet 1 penny on his info.

+10

 

[telemaq76]

they can have 1 digic2 or 10 digic7 super + who cares, users want results, not onboard tech. When you buy a TV you watch the image quality, not the brand of the image-chip inside.

 

[ishdakuteb]

I don't think anyone cares how many processors it has. Image quality, responsiveness, handling, features and cost matter.

1. I don't think anyone cares how many processors it has <-- Assume this statement is true
2. Image quality, responsiveness, handling, features and cost matter <-- Second requirement of matter, responsiveness, seems to be conflict with (1)

There are a ton of easy things that Canon could do, from not deliberately crippling features in software (auto-ISO limits, intervalometers, etc) to making the system more attractive (why is the speedlight wireless control not built in to Canon bodies, rather than requiring a clunky add-on?!).

1. Auto-ISO limits: Someone might be interested in this one, but I do not use this feature ever
2. Intervalometers: I thought they recently implemented in the last two released body, if I am not mistaken...
3. Speedlight wireless control built in to Canon bodies: Totally agree and love this thought. I would like Canon to add assist beam in low light also, might not use it but hey who know

 

[LonelyBoy]

I don't think anyone cares how many processors it has. Image quality, responsiveness, handling, features and cost matter.

1. I don't think anyone cares how many processors it has <-- Assume this statement is true
2. Image quality, responsiveness, handling, features and cost matter <-- Second requirement of matter, responsiveness, seems to be conflict with (1)

Only in conflict if we assume that more processors materially affect the second requirement - can always change the speed of the processors, number of cores, cache size... all sorts of ways to improve "image quality, responsiveness, handling, features, and cost" besides "more processors!".

 

[ishdakuteb]

Only in conflict if we assume that more processors materially affect the second requirement - can always change the speed of the processors, number of cores, cache size... all sorts of ways to improve "image quality, responsiveness, handling, features, and cost" besides "more processors!".

1. Only in conflict if we assume that more processors materially affect the second requirement <-- No assumption in this one, should be a true statement as always, more processors, of course a same level of processor or same model, means faster...

2. I rather have more processors than tweaking/overclocking the speed of a processor if I am paying the same price...

 

[LonelyBoy]

1. Only in conflict if we assume that more processors materially affect the second requirement <-- No assumption in this one, should be a true statement as always, more processors, of course a same level of processor or same model, means faster...

2. I rather have more processors than tweaking/overclocking the speed of a processor if I am paying the same price...

Nope. Many computation problems are either impossible or very inefficient to do in parallel. You also can't take your second point ("paying the same price") at the same time as "more processors of the same level or model". Not only are you not going to get more processors for free, they require more space, more power, more connections, more everything. It is not at all clear that more processors is the ideal approach.

 

[ishdakuteb]

1. Only in conflict if we assume that more processors materially affect the second requirement <-- No assumption in this one, should be a true statement as always, more processors, of course a same level of processor or same model, means faster...

2. I rather have more processors than tweaking/overclocking the speed of a processor if I am paying the same price...

Nope. Many computation problems are either impossible or very inefficient to do in parallel. You also can't take your second point ("paying the same price") at the same time as "more processors of the same level or model". Not only are you not going to get more processors for free, they require more space, more power, more connections, more everything. It is not at all clear that more processors is the ideal approach.

Everything has its own limitation, including computation, photography (will give example later), etc... so efficient or inefficient to perform a job is depend on what kind of job you are trying to do.... i.e. I am using my computer to perform some task on MS Word only, or one application at a time. I do not need Quad Core since Dual Core with higher speed will offer faster speed than Quad Core. Thus, what are you saying here is too general. In short,
1. Can you make a 16 bits processor run as fast, yet secure as 32 bits processor?
2. Can you make a single core processor perform multi-task as efficiency as multi-core processor?

I know it does not relate to camera much, but I still ask. If so, teach me how, I am curious...

I am sitting here and waiting for a lesson from an expert (Remember to give an example along your lessons)...

An example of why I am using point and shoot instead of DSLR in low light
1. I need depth of field (likely to be infinity) which offers by small sensor, and
2. Easy of ability of capturing these type of images in a crowded place

Note: Captured with Canon PowerShot ELPH 100 HS (borrowed it from my daughter), and I do not use point shoot by manufacture default settings, including exposure...

 

[GoldWing]

LARGER BATTERY in 1DX???

I shoot 10,000 shots a day with My 1DX and f/2.8 300mm IS USM II and I can't remember when I've needed more than one battery change on a VERY rare instance. The rumor of a bigger battery is very upsetting. I shoot sports MUST hand hold with my 300... Adding more weight just does not make sense. There is nothing wrong with the current batteries in the 1DX from a charging or usage perspective.

If they need to fill some space.... PLEASE add radio controls for my 600 EX RT's and an internal low light AF beam. THAT would be a much more practical use of the space than a BIGGER battery WE DON'T NEED or WANT!

Concentrate of the "Mirror BOX" that spews debris more than a race horse! Those of us who shoot water sports against blue sky would prefer the space be taken up by a Mirror Box that does not shed oil!!!

Let me bracket my metering from spot to evel to center BUT do not make my battery BIGGER.

and while you're at it! KissMyKite!!! http://www.KissMyKite.com

Just make sure I have my new 1DX MKII by Nov. Thank you Canon - ;D

Original topic can be found via below link:
http://www.photographybay.com/2015/08/02/canon-5d-x-with-quad-core-digic-7-processor-rumors/#comments

Original topic of content:
"New rumors about the upcoming Canon 5D X have surfaced over at the DP Review forums. The rumors claim that the Canon 5D X will feature a single DIGIC 7 quad core processor, while the upcoming 1D X Mark II will have two DIGIC 7 processors and one DIGIC 6 processor (perhaps the DIGIC 6 processor will be used for AF processing?).

According to forum poster MichaelVadon:

The Digic 7 is going to be a quad core cpu which will allow 4x the processing power for high MP, high frame rate bodies. The 5DX will contain one Digic 7 and the 1DX Mark II will contain 2 Digic 7s and 1 Digic 6. The Digic 6 will be for metwring and other smaller tasks. The 1DX will have a different larger battery while thr 5DX will keep going with the same.

This comes from the same forum member that first dropped the 5D X name last month as the camera to replace the 5D Mark III.

Prior rumors about the Canon 5D X have pointed to a 24-28MP sensor, 8-9fps still image frame rate, a new flash system and 4K video capture.

As with all rumors, take these with a heavy dose of salt until we hear something a little more solid than a forum posting."

I am waiting...

 

[shutterfreek]

I'm tend to want to have faith that Canon will be up to the task of bringing photography/videography to new levels in the new 5d ? or 1Dx. They did it with the markII, there's no reason they can't do it again. I'm placing my bets on the lucky 7 processor. If they simply provide 1080p at 60fps / 720p at 120fps they have an instant buyer here. And anything in the 22-30mp range would be fantastic. Thanks so much for the update. I'm excited!

 

[LonelyBoy]

Everything has its own limitation, including computation, so efficient or inefficient to perform a job is depend on what kind of job you are trying to do.... i.e. I am using my computer to perform some task on MS Word only, or one application at a time. I do not need Quad Core since Dual Core with higher speed will offer faster speed than Quad Core. Thus, what are you saying here is too general. In short,
1. Can you make a 16 bits processor run as fast, yet secure as 32 bits processor?
2. Can you make a single core processor perform multi-task as efficiency as multi-core processor?

I know it does not relate to camera much, but I still ask. If so, teach me how, I am curious...

I am sitting here and waiting for a lesson from an expert (Remember to give an example along your lessons)...

1. Absolutely... as long as what you're doing doesn't require more than 4gb of RAM, or very large numbers. It also has eff all to do with security. Now, 32 bit CPUs tend to be newer and built on more advanced fabs than 16 bit CPUs, so of course 32 bit CPUs are typically much faster. The same is true of 64 bit over 32 bit CPUs.

2. An adequately fast single-core CPU can absolutely work as well for multi-tasking as dual-core (or quad-core). Remember, for a long time, that's all we had. Regardless, the Digic7 in your OP was labeled quad-core - with two of those, do we really have five independent computations in shooting?

A better example would be using a dual CPU (not dual core; dual CPU) desktop to run Word. That's a whole lot of extra CPU expense, size, power consumption, and noise for no reason. If Digic7 is fast enough, there's no inherent reason to need two of them, and the second one won't come free. That's the end of my input on this.

 

[ishdakuteb]

Everything has its own limitation, including computation, so efficient or inefficient to perform a job is depend on what kind of job you are trying to do.... i.e. I am using my computer to perform some task on MS Word only, or one application at a time. I do not need Quad Core since Dual Core with higher speed will offer faster speed than Quad Core. Thus, what are you saying here is too general. In short,
1. Can you make a 16 bits processor run as fast, yet secure as 32 bits processor?
2. Can you make a single core processor perform multi-task as efficiency as multi-core processor?

I know it does not relate to camera much, but I still ask. If so, teach me how, I am curious...

I am sitting here and waiting for a lesson from an expert (Remember to give an example along your lessons)...

1. Absolutely... as long as what you're doing doesn't require more than 4gb of RAM, or very large numbers. It also has eff all to do with security. Now, 32 bit CPUs tend to be newer and built on more advanced fabs than 16 bit CPUs, so of course 32 bit CPUs are typically much faster. The same is true of 64 bit over 32 bit CPUs.

2. An adequately fast single-core CPU can absolutely work as well for multi-tasking as dual-core (or quad-core). Remember, for a long time, that's all we had. Regardless, the Digic7 in your OP was labeled quad-core - with two of those, do we really have five independent computations in shooting?

A better example would be using a dual CPU (not dual core; dual CPU) desktop to run Word. That's a whole lot of extra CPU expense, size, power consumption, and noise for no reason. If Digic7 is fast enough, there's no inherent reason to need two of them, and the second one won't come free. That's the end of my input on this.

Totally agree on 'second one won't come free"... that is the reason why I am saying, "if I am paying at the same price"...

But a wish is still a wish right?