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

[Canon Rumors]

<p>We’re told that the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV will come out with a 30mp sensor. This is the first time we’ve heard of such a resolution, but it does come from a “retail source”. We’re cautious that it could be a number that was rounded up or rounded down, because the most popular megapixel counts have been 24 and 28.</p>
<p>30mp would be a nice number for a lot of people and put some breathing room between the EOS-1D X Mark II and 5D Mark IV. The 6D Mark II would fit nicely around 24mp.</p>
<p>We hope to hear more soon, and please take this one with a heavy pinch of salt.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>

 

[GuyF]

30mp could be useful for those not needing all 50 of the 5DsR.

Will be interesting to see what Canon can do with the new sensor with regards to noise and (whisper) DR.

 

[padam]

Any number of increase in megapixels is just going to hurt video performance (worse rolling shutter with full readout) and video will be an important part of the camera just like the 1DX II.


But of course a separate model with lower megapixels specifically for video is not out of the question, they did it with the 1DC in the past and now they can do it one level lower as well.

 

[pvalpha]

I would doubt it myself. Even though I am pretty sure that the sensor would be between 28-32MP... I'd expect 28 more than 30 or 32. What I want to know is if it will have BSI. That would change the game quite a bit for this camera, and would certainly be the herald of a whole bunch of refreshing coming down the pike.

 

[tron]

Or ... it could be 6Mpixels less than that ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

 

[jebrady03]

Everyone ready?....
.
Rev your engines typing fingers!
.
.
Heerrre weeeee GOOOOOOO!
.
Tires Keyboards smoking...

 

[bvukich]

I'll be happy anywhere from 24-34 (and preferably 28-32). I could use a bit more resolution then I have now with the 5D3, but I rarely need a much more than that.

 

[ahsanford]

But a 5D has to have more resolution than a 6D! Because it costs more and is better! Because more pixels! :

#clickbait #success

- A

 

[darekbo]

There is no turn back to small number of pixels. This Canon should be competitive for next 2 years so It should have around 36-42 mp. Next year every camera even smartphones will have 20-30 mp.

 

[ahsanford]

There is no turn back to small number of pixels. This Canon should be competitive for next 2 years so It should have around 36-42 mp. Next year every camera even smartphones will have 20-30 mp.

That presumes that dunces* are defining the value of all types of cameras based on the number of pixels. This is somewhat/largely true on the lower-to-mid end of the camera spectrum (cell phones, point and shoots, Rebel-level SLRs, etc.) in which the buyer is much less informed than an enthusiast or professional photographer.

(*not remotely implying that you are, hear me out)

But on the higher end of photography know-how comes the wisdom to know that other things matter. In that light, though some pros need high MP rigs, many would be just fine with the 5D# line sitting on or around the 22 MP it sits at now.

And that would mean (gasp) that a 6D2 could sit below the 5D4 for price/features and yet outresolve it with more pixels. That userbase is closer to entry level and values pixels more than the 5D# camp does -- so give it to them!

I'm personally not opposed to more resolving power in the 5D4 so much as I'm opposed to the expectation that it MUST get more resolving power. I would argue the 5D# camp, if offered the choice of:

+2 fps / +2 stops high ISO / same 22 MP

Same fps, same high ISO as 5D3 / 30 MP

...they would overwhelmingly choose the former.

- A

 

[tron]

There is no turn back to small number of pixels. This Canon should be competitive for next 2 years so It should have around 36-42 mp. Next year every camera even smartphones will have 20-30 mp.

That presumes that dunces* are defining the value of all types of cameras based on the number of pixels. This is somewhat/largely true on the lower-to-mid end of the camera spectrum (cell phones, point and shoots, Rebel-level SLRs, etc.) in which the buyer is much less informed than an enthusiast or professional photographer.

(*not remotely implying that you are, hear me out)

But on the higher end of photography know-how comes the wisdom to know that other things matter. In that light, though some pros need high MP rigs, many would be just fine with the 5D# line sitting on or around the 22 MP it sits at now.

And that would mean (gasp) that a 6D2 could sit below the 5D4 for price/features and yet outresolve it with more pixels. That userbase is closer to entry level and values pixels more than the 5D# camp does -- so give it to them!

I'm personally not opposed to more resolving power in the 5D4 so much as I'm opposed to the expectation that it MUST get more resolving power. I would argue the 5D# camp, if offered the choice of:

+2 fps / +2 stops high ISO / same 22 MP

Same fps, same high ISO as 5D3 / 30 MP

...they would overwhelmingly choose the former.

- A

+1000 These features would make it a small 1DX.

 

[rrcphoto]

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.

 

[Billybob]

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).

 

[jebrady03]

I would argue the 5D# camp, if offered the choice of:

+2 fps / +2 stops high ISO / same 22 MP

Same fps, same high ISO as 5D3 / 30 MP

I would argue that due to direct costs incurred by Canon, the former would be significantly more expensive than the latter and therefore not directly comparable.

 

[ahsanford]

I would argue the 5D# camp, if offered the choice of:

+2 fps / +2 stops high ISO / same 22 MP

Same fps, same high ISO as 5D3 / 30 MP

I would argue that due to direct costs incurred by Canon, the former would be significantly more expensive than the latter and therefore not directly comparable.

Why so? Were it 30 or 22 MP, both would represent a standalone 5D4 sensor that other bodies wouldn't use.

Or would a 30 MP sensor leverage sensor fab equipment that already exists at Canon (that I am not aware of)?

So why would one cost more than the other? Do explain, I'm honestly curious -- I'm fairly ignorant of cost & fab considerations.

- A

 

[midluk]

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.

 

[KeithBreazeal]

I would speculate that Canon has experimented with the dual pixel sensor simultaneously running two different ISO settings resulting in higher DR. ML has the hack for the video alternating fields operating at different ISOs, so the dual pixel would seem to be better for adaptation of the concept.

 

[Maiaibing]

30 MPIX sounds good even if I would prefer 36 MPIX. I may get a 5DIV after all - in fact certainly will if its also 9 fps and has great high iso as in at least 1 1/2 stop better than the 6D (which I expect).

 

[midluk]

I would speculate that Canon has experimented with the dual pixel sensor simultaneously running two different ISO settings resulting in higher DR. ML has the hack for the video alternating fields operating at different ISOs, so the dual pixel would seem to be better for adaptation of the concept.

No, it wouldn't. Both pixel halves see different parts of the lens, which means different parts of bokeh circles. Especially out of focus highlights would look really strange

 

[LukasS]

I'll be happy anywhere from 24-34 (and preferably 28-32). I could use a bit more resolution then I have now with the 5D3, but I rarely need a much more than that.

I would be happy with 28-32 range as well.