Canon EOS 3D at 46.1mp Next Month? [CR1]

[jrista]

Even if the thermal cooling doesn't give Canon sensors as high a DR as SoNikon Exmor, thermal cooling combined with two additional bits should give them better overall DR (assuming Canon doesn't jack up ISO 100 read noise to 100e-!!! :''''( ).

Um, what's this thermal cooling supposed to be exactly? A fan on the side of the camera? Heat dissipation through a part of the camera that has a "never touch here" sticker on it?

No details yet. It could just be a heat pipe cooler, which is an efficient way to passively draw heat away from the sensor and possibly to the shell. If heat is drawn away to multiple external dissipation points, none of them should be too hot to touch. Another option would be peltier cooling. A Peltier is a thermoelectric cooling device (TEC) that uses P & N type silicon nodes in an array sandwiched between ceramic plates to draw heat from one side of the peltier to the other. They are extremely powerful coolers in very small packages (say, exactly the size of the sensor die?). They generate their own heat, but the thermal differential from the hot side to the cold side can be on the order of tens to even hundreds of degrees. Even a moderately powerful peltier in a camera could cool the sensor to sub-freezing temperatures. Combined with an advanced heat pipe sink and maybe some fans, and you could dissipate a LOT of heat from a sensor, and nearly eliminate electronic noise if you cool it enough.

 

[CatfishSoupFTW]

Since they are calling it the 3D maybe it will have eye control focus! (dreaming)

the day that ever comes back...

D: maybe it can?! bringing back that EOS 3 * (correct me if im wrong) seeing it shares a very similar name

 

[marekjoz]

Even if the thermal cooling doesn't give Canon sensors as high a DR as SoNikon Exmor, thermal cooling combined with two additional bits should give them better overall DR (assuming Canon doesn't jack up ISO 100 read noise to 100e-!!! :''''( ).

Um, what's this thermal cooling supposed to be exactly? A fan on the side of the camera? Heat dissipation through a part of the camera that has a "never touch here" sticker on it?

No details yet. It could just be a heat pipe cooler, which is an efficient way to passively draw heat away from the sensor and possibly to the shell. If heat is drawn away to multiple external dissipation points, none of them should be too hot to touch. Another option would be peltier cooling. A Peltier is a thermoelectric cooling device (TEC) that uses P & N type silicon nodes in an array sandwiched between ceramic plates to draw heat from one side of the peltier to the other. They are extremely powerful coolers in very small packages (say, exactly the size of the sensor die?). They generate their own heat, but the thermal differential from the hot side to the cold side can be on the order of tens to even hundreds of degrees. Even a moderately powerful peltier in a camera could cool the sensor to sub-freezing temperatures. Combined with an advanced heat pipe sink and maybe some fans, and you could dissipate a LOT of heat from a sensor, and nearly eliminate electronic noise if you cool it enough.

And Peltier cooling would require lack of LCD in the rear. Reasonable power and termosensors management could make such a solution really a breakthrough with relative small costs. The main problem here I see is a heat dissipation - some kind of quiet radiators or noisy fans would be neccessery and radiators could burn photographers hands. Radiator would heat other camera regions and most probably could cause weight increase. Anyway, it's really worth of consideration, if the radiator could have a good mount to the tripod plate, which could help dissipate the heat. There are landscape and studio shooters, who would be more than happy having much higher image quality, without even noticing, that the tripod is 5 degrees warmer.

 

[jrista]

Even if the thermal cooling doesn't give Canon sensors as high a DR as SoNikon Exmor, thermal cooling combined with two additional bits should give them better overall DR (assuming Canon doesn't jack up ISO 100 read noise to 100e-!!! :''''( ).

Um, what's this thermal cooling supposed to be exactly? A fan on the side of the camera? Heat dissipation through a part of the camera that has a "never touch here" sticker on it?

No details yet. It could just be a heat pipe cooler, which is an efficient way to passively draw heat away from the sensor and possibly to the shell. If heat is drawn away to multiple external dissipation points, none of them should be too hot to touch. Another option would be peltier cooling. A Peltier is a thermoelectric cooling device (TEC) that uses P & N type silicon nodes in an array sandwiched between ceramic plates to draw heat from one side of the peltier to the other. They are extremely powerful coolers in very small packages (say, exactly the size of the sensor die?). They generate their own heat, but the thermal differential from the hot side to the cold side can be on the order of tens to even hundreds of degrees. Even a moderately powerful peltier in a camera could cool the sensor to sub-freezing temperatures. Combined with an advanced heat pipe sink and maybe some fans, and you could dissipate a LOT of heat from a sensor, and nearly eliminate electronic noise if you cool it enough.

And Peltier cooling would require lack of LCD in the rear. Reasonable power and termosensors management could make such a solution really a breakthrough with relative small costs. The main problem here I see is a heat dissipation - some kind of quiet radiators or noisy fans would be neccessery and radiators could burn photographers hands. Radiator would heat other camera regions and most probably could cause weight increase. Anyway, it's really worth of consideration, if the radiator could have a good mount to the tripod plate, which could help dissipate the heat. There are landscape and studio shooters, who would be more than happy having much higher image quality, without even noticing, that the tripod is 5 degrees warmer.

Why would you have to drop the LCD? Peltiers can be extremely thin. As for a heat sink, I mentioned a heat pipe cooler on top of the Peltier. With a heat pipe, you could draw heat away from the peltier and dissipate it at multiple locations around the camera body, distributing the heat load and eliminating the possibility of burning the user. you wouldn't even really need a "radiator"...a few heat plates along the outside of the body would probably do. With enough heat distribution, the camera would probably feel only slightly warm to the touch. Active cooling could add noise, but it could also be configured to only turn on if the sensor is particularly hot (such as when being used in the sun.)

 

[xthebillx]

If it has an integrated grip, will the grip be heated?

 

[RGomezPhotos]

I was thinking that Canon would go Medium Format before hitting this megapixel range. I guess Canon got some more tricks up it's sleeve!

This would be an awesome studio camera. I was thinking that if you use the smaller RAW size files, that this camera can double as a really good all-arounder camera. But with the proposed ISO range, it really wouldn't be much better than the 5DMK2 at that point. You'd have to go full megapixel to get all the use out of the camera. Because 5fps is pretty darn good for many people.

I do think 5fps seems pretty fast for all these pixels. That's a huge barrier for the D800. It's speed. I also don't think it will be in a Pro body either. Not that it really matters since a studio/landscape camera will largely be on a tripod.

At first I thought this camera would be around $4k. But now I'm thinking it will start at $5k and eventually drop to $4500. The 5DMK3 will be in the $2700 range by the time this thing comes out and it's a HUGE jump in price. Totally different markets though. Unfortunately I don' t think the 7DMK2 (if it ever comes out) will fit between the 3D and 5D. I got a feeling the 7DMK2 will be the camera the 5DMK3 should've been...

 

[marekjoz]

Even if the thermal cooling doesn't give Canon sensors as high a DR as SoNikon Exmor, thermal cooling combined with two additional bits should give them better overall DR (assuming Canon doesn't jack up ISO 100 read noise to 100e-!!! :''''( ).

Um, what's this thermal cooling supposed to be exactly? A fan on the side of the camera? Heat dissipation through a part of the camera that has a "never touch here" sticker on it?

No details yet. It could just be a heat pipe cooler, which is an efficient way to passively draw heat away from the sensor and possibly to the shell. If heat is drawn away to multiple external dissipation points, none of them should be too hot to touch. Another option would be peltier cooling. A Peltier is a thermoelectric cooling device (TEC) that uses P & N type silicon nodes in an array sandwiched between ceramic plates to draw heat from one side of the peltier to the other. They are extremely powerful coolers in very small packages (say, exactly the size of the sensor die?). They generate their own heat, but the thermal differential from the hot side to the cold side can be on the order of tens to even hundreds of degrees. Even a moderately powerful peltier in a camera could cool the sensor to sub-freezing temperatures. Combined with an advanced heat pipe sink and maybe some fans, and you could dissipate a LOT of heat from a sensor, and nearly eliminate electronic noise if you cool it enough.

And Peltier cooling would require lack of LCD in the rear. Reasonable power and termosensors management could make such a solution really a breakthrough with relative small costs. The main problem here I see is a heat dissipation - some kind of quiet radiators or noisy fans would be neccessery and radiators could burn photographers hands. Radiator would heat other camera regions and most probably could cause weight increase. Anyway, it's really worth of consideration, if the radiator could have a good mount to the tripod plate, which could help dissipate the heat. There are landscape and studio shooters, who would be more than happy having much higher image quality, without even noticing, that the tripod is 5 degrees warmer.

Why would you have to drop the LCD? Peltiers can be extremely thin. As for a heat sink, I mentioned a heat pipe cooler on top of the Peltier. With a heat pipe, you could draw heat away from the peltier and dissipate it at multiple locations around the camera body, distributing the heat load and eliminating the possibility of burning the user. you wouldn't even really need a "radiator"...a few heat plates along the outside of the body would probably do. With enough heat distribution, the camera would probably feel only slightly warm to the touch. Active cooling could add noise, but it could also be configured to only turn on if the sensor is particularly hot (such as when being used in the sun.)

Sure it could be thin and I agree, that heat pipe on top might be enough. It's just a matter of average Peltier cooler power consumption as a function of it's cooling demands as a function of desired goal - temperature on a sensor. If you wish to go really low, then you need more power so the more heat dissipation. More than electric power used for Peltier will be necessery to dissipate as a heat. Some good solution could be thermal isolation of the sensor like in vacuum flask. Anyway - if you go really low, then you might be forced to remove the lcd from the back of the body.
Peltier cooled sensors are widely used in microscopy and you find there brands well known and often mentioned here. It's interesting who has patent for Peltier cooling of camera sensors?

 

[marekjoz]

I was thinking that Canon would go Medium Format before hitting this megapixel range. (...)

I'm against taking away their R&D resources for a new battle front as there is still much to do in the DSLR area. Medium format would require another lenses, new body concept. Starting medium format would almost be for them like EOS Cinema line. Who knows how much negative influence on EF lenses and EOS bodies had research on EOS C product line? Maybe we could have 5d3 and 1 dx more than a year earlier and the promised lenses as well.

 

[bdunbar79]

$7000-$8000. Priced and marketed in parallel with the 1Dx as a flagship camera for the segment of users that complained about the 18mps of the 1Dx.

... exactly, recently there was a bootleg shot of a Canon slide with a space next to the 1dx, that's where the 3d will go.

If Nikon can sell the D800 where they are, Canon can sell this camera in the $4k-$5k range.

It's not about what Canon *could* do, but about what brings them their best revenue - and the specs of the 6d shows that Canon is pretty confident to get away with almost everything because people are only talking about switching to Nikon, not actually doing that.

But even if I repeat myself: People, stop buying the 5d3! Wait and save for the 6d or 3d! (then the price of the 5d3 will drop eventually and I can get one )

Exactly. Canon's BEST revenue for this would be in the $4k-$5k range. Charging higher than the 1DX makes absolutely no sense to either Canon or the consumers. Comparing the 6D to this isn't comparing apples to apples. The 3D or whatever is going to be for professionals and professionals know when something is priced more than double its worth. Canon knows this, and a prime example is the 1Ds Mark III vs. the 1D Mark IV pricing: the cost of making a great DSLR reduced over time, and this was reflected in costs in the future for new DSLR's. Again, $8k-$10k makes absolutely no sense to everyone.

Why compare the 3D to the 5D Mark III? Again, makes absolutely no sense because these cameras do not serve the same interests. I would ill advise telling someone to take a 1Ds3 to a wedding; I know people did it, but the 5D Mark II was a far better tool for that, relatively speaking.

 

[RLPhoto]

Canon Will do whatever is in the best interest's of Canon. ;D

 

[torger]

I think Canon thinks this is a niche camera, primarily competing with medium format digital.

Anyone familiar with medium format digital prices know that this camera does not need to be cheap. I think it is smart of Canon to make it a true pro body (unlike the D800) since it will then be more attractive as a "MF killer".

Even with a high cost body you will need the best lenses which will not be cheap either. High resolution photography is not cheap, so I would not spare any expenses on the body.

The 40 megapixel Hasselblad H4D-40 is $16,000 body only, and it is one of the cheaper MFD systems.

 

[torger]

If Canon releases such a high MP camera, then price will be one of the major factors accountable for its success. It does not look like an "upgrade" cam for 5DMKIII as it will appeal to a limited market (landscapes and studio shooters), so it will not be in any real direct competition with 5DMKIII.

Wait a second. I thought studio and landscape shooters represent the majority of the market, at least according to all the whiners on Canon Rumors

No, the majority of whiners on Canon Rumors just want Canon to deliver actual improvements rather than the "same old" that is marginally better than what was previous.

i.e. They don't want a sensor in a camera that is almost identical in characteristics to one that is already 3.5 years old, they want a sensor that measurably has less bad attributes and measurably more good attributes.

Yes the success of this camera will very much be about low ISO performance, since that is what high resolution photographers use. Will it have as good DR as D800 at ISO50/ISO100? If it is as "bad" as 5D mark 3 it will not be a MF killer.

 

[jrista]

If Canon releases such a high MP camera, then price will be one of the major factors accountable for its success. It does not look like an "upgrade" cam for 5DMKIII as it will appeal to a limited market (landscapes and studio shooters), so it will not be in any real direct competition with 5DMKIII.

Wait a second. I thought studio and landscape shooters represent the majority of the market, at least according to all the whiners on Canon Rumors

No, the majority of whiners on Canon Rumors just want Canon to deliver actual improvements rather than the "same old" that is marginally better than what was previous.

i.e. They don't want a sensor in a camera that is almost identical in characteristics to one that is already 3.5 years old, they want a sensor that measurably has less bad attributes and measurably more good attributes.

If you look at Canon's sensor technology, the greatest improvement since they added Correlated Double-Sampling around a decade ago is their microlensing. Gapless microlenses were the most recent evolution on top of having microlenses at all. Since that "innovation" (I'm not even sure Canon was the first to use it), Canon has really cheated their way by. Fundamentally, Canon sensor tech is a decade old, if not older...where as the competition is using sensor tech that has been innovated throughout the last decade, with major improvements as recent as a couple years ago.

Most people used to think that the only real arena left for improvement in sensors was megapixels, and people were sick of "more megapixels." Canon did actually listen to their customers cry for "fewer, but better, megapixels and MOAR ISO!!" Canon's failure, though, was to see that the competition has been doing both...improving the quality of each pixel while concurrently increasing megapixels. I don't think people in general thought that was possible...the old anecdotes (which are still profusely regurgitated across the net even these days) about smaller pixels being worse pixels are wrong, and people are finally beginning to realize that. Canon, who holds the largest user base, seems to be stuck, stagnant, and I think people are finally realizing they have been for a LONG time. Now that its becoming known that we can have both MORE pixels while concurrently getting BETTER pixels, fewer and fewer photographers will be satisfied with Canon effectively standing still with their sensor technology.

The new demand is "More AND better megapixels!!", rather than "Better pixels at any cost, even if it means less megapixels." Personally, I think the demand is justified. Canon needs to get back into the game. They need to start innovating NEW technology, heat up the competition, and help drive prices down. That can only mean a win-win for the consumer...and being a consumer, I like my wins!

 

[KitsVancouver]

I would ill advise telling someone to take a 1Ds3 to a wedding; I know people did it, but the 5D Mark II was a far better tool for that, relatively speaking.

Why is that? I'm curious why a 1Ds3 would be a bad camera for a wedding photographer.

 

[bdunbar79]

I would ill advise telling someone to take a 1Ds3 to a wedding; I know people did it, but the 5D Mark II was a far better tool for that, relatively speaking.

Why is that? I'm curious why a 1Ds3 would be a bad camera for a wedding photographer.

Today, in 2012, I would not use it, IF I had either a 5D2 or 5D3. Besides, did I ever say anywhere it was a bad camera for a wedding photographer? No, there are better tools, NOW, however. You have much better ISO performance choices NOW. Technology improves and tools improve, and that is the only point I was making.

 

[Zlatko]

If Canon releases such a high MP camera, then price will be one of the major factors accountable for its success. It does not look like an "upgrade" cam for 5DMKIII as it will appeal to a limited market (landscapes and studio shooters), so it will not be in any real direct competition with 5DMKIII.

Wait a second. I thought studio and landscape shooters represent the majority of the market, at least according to all the whiners on Canon Rumors

No, the majority of whiners on Canon Rumors just want Canon to deliver actual improvements rather than the "same old" that is marginally better than what was previous.

i.e. They don't want a sensor in a camera that is almost identical in characteristics to one that is already 3.5 years old, they want a sensor that measurably has less bad attributes and measurably more good attributes.

Canon substantially improved on the 5D2 when they introduced the 5D3. There were numerous actual improvements, from substantially better high ISO performance to a much more responsive body to much better autofocus. Canon addressed numerous requests from pros. With the 5D3, the 5D series went from prosumer to pro. But then uninformed people whined terribly that it had become too expensive and somehow wasn't improved enough. Which leads me to conclude that many people want better products but aren't willing to actually pay for them; they will always decide that the better product is "overpriced".

 

[Canon-F1]

. Which leads me to conclude that many people want better products but aren't willing to actually pay for them; they will always decide that the better product is "overpriced".

or maybe they just compare canon to other brands....

 

[Zlatko]

. Which leads me to conclude that many people want better products but aren't willing to actually pay for them; they will always decide that the better product is "overpriced".

or maybe they just compare canon to other brands....

I've done that comparison. The D800 is a fine camera, but the 5D3 meets my photographic needs much better. The 5D3 was designed as if the engineers were very attentive to my wishlist for a camera. The D800 was designed for other photographers' wishlists. As a result, there is nothing in the D800 that would make me choose it over the 5D3. But I was addressing the claim that people "want Canon to deliver actual improvements rather than the 'same old' that is marginally better ...". Canon has done exactly that with the 5D3.

 

[Canon-F1]

As a result, there is nothing in the D800 that would make me choose it over the 5D3. But I was addressing the claim that people "want Canon to deliver actual improvements rather than the 'same old' that is marginally better ...". Canon has done exactly that with the 5D3.

and the 6D compared to the 5D MK2 or D600?

no question the 5D MK3 is a great camera.
but i understand that some landscape/studio photographer hoped for more MP and better DR.

and if you don´t care about high iso... i think it´s fair to say that the new 5D MK3 sensor is not such a jump.

 

[Zlatko]

As a result, there is nothing in the D800 that would make me choose it over the 5D3. But I was addressing the claim that people "want Canon to deliver actual improvements rather than the 'same old' that is marginally better ...". Canon has done exactly that with the 5D3.

and the 6D compared to the 5D MK2 or D600?

no question the 5D MK3 is a great camera.
but i understand that some landscape/studio photographer hoped for more MP and better DR.

and if you don´t care about high iso... i think it´s fair to say that the new 5D MK3 sensor is not such a jump.

I haven't compared the 6D to those cameras because it's not out yet.

Photographers who hoped for more MP and better DR will likely get the camera they want, just not on the exact day that they want it, and maybe not at the exact price they'd be happy to pay. Canon is a big company but not so big that they can meet everyone's needs all at once. The landscape/studio photographers will get their wishlist fulfilled on another day.