Canon EOS 5D Mark IV to be 30mp? [CR1]

[RGF]

i had speculated in the past that "30" sounds better when compared to "36" instead of "28" compared to "36"

it just "sounds" like it's much closer.

Why must it compete/compare with 36MP cameras? Canon already has a 50MP to trump 36MP and 42MP. Instead Canon can market a 28-30MP camera as more a performance oriented camera. It may have a small increase in fps--I think 8fps would be nice; I doubt that Canon would go higher than 9fps for product separation reasons. If it can glean a modicum of improved low-light performance and, yes, better DR than the 80D, I'd line up to get one (I'd line up even if it stayed at 22-24MP if it had these other improvements).

+1000 A sane person stating the obvious...

Canon is using a well known marketing strategy of sandwich competitors products. On the MP front they have the D810 sandwiched between the 5Ds (R) and 5DM3. It would not make any sense for them to increase their sensor resolution to match or exceed the D810. Keeping it below allows a low rez options and the 5Ds offers a high rez options. You might argue about how effectively their products offering is, but overall both Canon and Nikon offer great cameras with minor differences (though at times these differences are noticeable).

 

[tron]

...
Why must it compete/compare with 36MP cameras? Canon already has a 50MP to trump 36MP and 42MP. Instead Canon can market a 28-30MP camera as more a performance oriented camera. It may have a small increase in fps--I think 8fps would be nice; I doubt that Canon would go higher than 9fps for product separation reasons.

Because you're assuming that the successor to Nikon's D810 (that already does 5 fps vs 6 fps in the 5DIII) won't also have a fps increase. Rinse and repeat with Sony. Canon need to deliver a product that is not only better than their current product but they have to shoot to be competitive with where their competitors will be.

Imagine, for a moment, that Nikon go from 36MP in the D810 to 42MP in a D820 and increase fps from 5 to 8. How good does the 28MP 5DIV that does 9 fps look now?

Then again maybe Nikon will go from 36MP D810 to > 70MP in the D820 or D900 but retain the 5fps and bring the D750's (D750 does 24MP @6.5fps) successor (lets call it a D760) in with the 36MP sensor at 8 fps. How does a 28MP 5DIV that does 9fps look against that?

Or maybe Sony's A99II will do 8 fps at 42MP...

It doesn't. But then Canon has to make a faster/better 5Ds(R) which most of you tend to forget it exists as well as you tend to forget that maybe 5DIV would have to compete with D750 successor and 6DII would have to compete with D610 successor...

 

[Antono Refa]

More FPS, better high ISO, touch screen, DPAF, Auto AMFA. I don't care about the 8MP, not at all.

I 2nd that.

 

[abbebus]

More FPS, better high ISO, touch screen, DPAF, Auto AMFA. I don't care about the 8MP, not at all.

I 2nd that.

I agree. Look at the Nikon D500. Just 20 mp, but wow, what a camera…
I hope canon goes the same way with 5D4. 24 mp, 8-9 fps, better AF (all points cross-type), better DR, touchscreen, gps, wifi. And please, a built in RT flash transmitter!

 

[pedro]

I'd hope for a 5DIV although I am not in the race for any camera. After the 5DIII got stolen my current 6D does just fine...Hope its second edition will se a 24 MP sensor or remain at 20, although this is unlikely in times of a 20 MP flagship.

 

[RGF]

...
It doesn't. But then Canon has to make a faster/better 5Ds(R) which most of you tend to forget it exists as well as you tend to forget that maybe 5DIV would have to compete with D750 successor and 6DII would have to compete with D610 successor...

I think this is the alignment that you're referring to:

D8xx - 5Ds
D7xx - 5D
D6xx - 6D

Which seems about right on features and is why 24MP would not be enough for a 5DIV - it would only be "catching up" with the D750.

bad idea if canon matched Nikon.
Canon needs to offer something better than Nikon

5Ds
D810
5DM4
D750
6DM2
D6xx

Canon does not need to match/beat Nikon feature by feature but overall, on major aspects of the camera, they need to lead Nikon.

 

[pedro]

...
It doesn't. But then Canon has to make a faster/better 5Ds(R) which most of you tend to forget it exists as well as you tend to forget that maybe 5DIV would have to compete with D750 successor and 6DII would have to compete with D610 successor...

I think this is the alignment that you're referring to:

D8xx - 5Ds
D7xx - 5D
D6xx - 6D

Which seems about right on features and is why 24MP would not be enough for a 5DIV - it would only be "catching up" with the D750.

so the MP war is as silly as in days gone by 8) if so, then Canon got away from their statements made at a time the 5DIII came out, which went something like this: "We see, that the customers appreciate a decent MP count, so we're focussing on an allrounder camera as far as the 5D line is concerned." Its barely correct, but they really seemed to be puttin off the MP race which I was very happy about. So, an excellent 24 MP allrounder cam for events would do... But Dylan got it right back in his day: The times they are-a-changing...;-)

 

[mistaspeedy]

5D mark IV should be 44.7 megapixels... 8192 x 5460
A 16:9 crop from that sensor: 8192 x 4320 would be 8K video... which could be easily down-sampled internally to 4K 4096 × 2160 4:4:4 (full color information for each pixel)

But I know it wont happen

They did something similar with the 5D mark III, which was exactly 3x the width/height of Full HD video (when you take the 16:9 crop).
5760 × 3840 = full sensor 5D mk III
5760 x 3240 = 16:9 crop from 5D mk III 5760 is exactly 3x 1920 and 3240 is exactly 3x 1080

 

[Andrew Davies Photography]

Have things changed in sensor design dramatically recently ? If not then i presume that squeezing millions more pixels onto the same size sensor is a bad thing as far as light pick and pixel pitch with there being more gaps between the many more pixels. I want to see better high ISO performance not worse in a new camera personally and am not bothered by 4k video. Dual CF or faster SD is a must as is wifi, but pixels happy at 20-24 range. Think maybe they should bring out a 5DW for us wedding togs haha - we tend to recommend professional videographers rather than buying cameras with 4K - we have enough to do


Wedding Photographer North East & Yorkshire Northumberland & Wedding Photographer Cumbria

 

[tron]

...
It doesn't. But then Canon has to make a faster/better 5Ds(R) which most of you tend to forget it exists as well as you tend to forget that maybe 5DIV would have to compete with D750 successor and 6DII would have to compete with D610 successor...

I think this is the alignment that you're referring to:

D8xx - 5Ds
D7xx - 5D
D6xx - 6D

Which seems about right on features and is why 24MP would not be enough for a 5DIV - it would only be "catching up" with the D750.

Yes, but certainly D8xx would not supersede 5Ds resolution (Sony went form 36 to 42) so it does not seem plausible for D7xx and D6xx to go near 36Mp. More than 24 possibly but not close to 36. Just my opinion.

 

[ashmadux]

What if it had a 18-24mp crop mode? That would be beast.

Since this body is supposed to have a canon 'first', let's look at the goodies that Nikon has- its possible that it's an offshoot from Nikon excellent bodies.

 

[pvalpha]

To get into the argument - the only reason Canon has to produce a new sensor fab for the 5D4 is to produce a sensor with some sort of advantage over its current sensor systems. They have ADC on Sensor with current tech, but BSI makes the most sense. A 28-32MP 5D4 with BSI would be the perfect test bed for canon to produce higher density BSI sensors.

A fab is not about the surface area of the silicon as much as it is about the features and resolution of the lithography. A fab capable of 14nm fin-fet, for example, can produce any size chip for fin-fet down to 14nm. A fab that incorporates layering techniques can use those techniques across the entire silicon surface. So a fab that produces a 28-32MP FF Canon BSI sensor can also produce a 50mp APS-C BSI Sensor and a 120MP FF BSI sensor. Its just that the die-size determines surface yields. So if you have a FF you get X number of chips per wafer, and if you have APS-C you get ~1.6X chips per wafer. The Fab just determines what features and what size those features can be on your silicon. What changes is the yield per wafer. For example, a piece of silicon with 30nm features on a 14nm process will produce a higher yield than running 14nm features at 14nm process. So a 28-32MP sensor would have a higher yield per wafer than a 50mp APS-C or 120MP FF BSI. And that's base economics, you prove your techniques by using existing designs with new capabilities. Then you work your way up to the limits of the process.

If we see a 22-24MP chip... then you can expect that this is going to be on old fabs with no new features. If we see 28-32MP, expect new features. BSI on a 28-32MP sensor would give you some impressive light gathering ability. Whether or not that translates into direct gains for the sensor's DR depends on how canon uses it. They do have patents for this technique.

 

[Luds34]

Problem with the pixel count is that file size (storage space, resources needed for raw development) is proportional to it, while the actual (linear) resolution just increases with the square root of it.
I don't see much point in going higher than what we currently have if you don't need the best resolution possible. But then you have to increase it by a lot (5DS) to see a significant effect and live with the file size.
30MP (compared to 22.3) would give you 35% bigger files for just 16% more resolution.

Amen!

I think too often people forget the non-linear relationship between the scalar, 1 dimensional megapixel value and how those pixels need to be distributed out in 2 dimensions.

Personally I think 24 MP is more then enough, but understand how marketing might have pushed to cross that 30 mark.

 

[xps]

IMO there is another player appearing: Sony

If the current rumors (taken from Sony Alpha rumors )come true (42 Megapixel sensor, 499 AF Points, Dual AF, 4K video recording, Same A7rII IBIS, Dual card Slot, improved flash system+battery), the rumored A99 successor will be an worthy opponent.
Especially when the current 42MP sensor from the A7rII is inside.

 

[jeanluc]

I hope the resolution is in the 30's.........I would like more resolution than the 5D3 but newer sensor tech than the 5DS. I realize if it is 30 then the file size goes up more than the resolution, but every little bit helps.

I have been seriously looking at the 5DSR, but with what seems to be a new generation of sensors in the pipeline I have held off.

Given the sensor in the now quite dated D800 gives resolution AND better DR etc, I see no reason at all not to expect Canon to at least match the tech of a 5 year old Sony sensor.

If the resolution is much lower than 30, then the rumor we heard a few months back here of a "quick" 5DSR replacement comes to the forefront, as I suspect the current one was an interim fix to placate us landscape shooters until the newer sensor tech was ready for prime time. I doubt Canon will leave their highest MP offering without a new sensor for long.

 

[tron]

...
Yes, but certainly D8xx would not supersede 5Ds resolution (Sony went form 36 to 42) so it does not seem plausible for D7xx and D6xx to go near 36Mp. More than 24 possibly but not close to 36. Just my opinion.

You're assuming that Nikon use the sensor from the A7RII in the successor to the D810. Nikon may skip over it as it may be an internal to Sony only sensor. If you google for D900 or D820, the more recent rumors (or Internet chatter) put that camera at 70-80MP. But that chatter is not a CR2 or CR3 so...

As far as 5DMarkIV we will know in a month. How much better to sit back and enjoy the wait ?

We are one month from announcement and all we got is a CR1 about everything!

 

[LoneRider]

Interesting, Back Side Illumination would be awesome.

But, would they not have waited to release the 1DXii so it would benefit as well?

As much as I think it would be awesome, I can't see it. 4 more weeks, 4 more weeks.

 

[ahsanford]

...
It doesn't. But then Canon has to make a faster/better 5Ds(R) which most of you tend to forget it exists as well as you tend to forget that maybe 5DIV would have to compete with D750 successor and 6DII would have to compete with D610 successor...

I think this is the alignment that you're referring to:

D8xx - 5Ds
D7xx - 5D
D6xx - 6D

Which seems about right on features and is why 24MP would not be enough for a 5DIV - it would only be "catching up" with the D750.

Disagree to some extent, Dilbert -- I think we're talking apples and oranges here. Nikon's FF segmentation is good / better / best, whereas Canon is good / best at detail (MP) / best all-arounder (video, burst, high ISO, etc.). Those two schemes don't line up well at all once you leave the starting blocks.

Sony, on the other hand, is actually fairly well aligned to Nikon, with the exception that they have forgone the starter 'good' rig in favor of a low res / high ISO / video specialist in the A7S line. But the A7 line roughly parallels the D750 and the A7R line parallels the D8XX rigs.

But now that Canon has effectively tipped their hand by bifurcating the 5D line into the 5D3/5D4 and 5DS lines, all eyes are on Nikon. Will they...

• ...try to take the next D750 upmarket to compete directly with the 5D4? Remember, that rig is loved for it's performance/price value proposition, but it's a mish-mosh of the D610 and D810 specs-wise: 1/4000 shortest shutter for instance. But were they to offer the FF baby of the D5 and D500 (FF, but burst higher than the current 6.5 fps, top level AF setup, 4K, etc.) they would morph the D750 from a great value into a real 5D4 competitor.
  
  
• ...dramatically climb the next D810's resolution, or keep the resolution similar and build on its terrific DR / high ISO performance? We've all been waiting for the A7R II sensor to end up in a Nikon, but it's been a year! Perhaps something bigger/badder is coming on their top end rig.

- A

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I don't have a good grasp on fab considerations, but a 2 stop high ISO improvement wouldn't be achieved by an 8mp lower pixel count. MUCH more would have to be done to the sensor to achieve a 2 stop improvement. Additionally, the cost to increase the durability of the shutter/mirror box/whatever would add to the cost of the camera as well. But mostly, I assume the marked increase in production costs would be related to the sensor and the 2 stop improvement.

But to your point... YEAH! I'd take 22 mp and a 2 stop improvement over the DR of the 1DX Mark II (which is where I suspect the 5D Mark IV will perform regardless of pixel count, perhaps slightly better). That would give it industry leading DR, if I'm not mistaken.

Forgive me for not being clear -- I meant a two stop improvement over the 5D3, not the 1DX2.

I'm asking everyone who currently owns a 5D3 what they want more: 8 more MP or 'other things than resolution' (more fps, better high ISO, etc.). My money is on the latter.

- A

A 1/2 stop improvement would be amazing considering a dual pixel 30mp sensor. Sensors are very close to being as good as possible, other techniques are needed to improve sensitivity.

 

[ehouli]

I don't care for more resolution, I wish they would take the AA filter off and allow to have sharper images.