Canon EOS 7D Mark III Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
Truth be told, I would be worried about 150 MPix FF sensor at f/11. With 150 MPix on FF, you'll getting DLA after f/4 and f/5.6 is already being affected (not by much of course). So f/11 or even worse, f/16 could lead to significant softness of the image. And I'm talking about rather medium sized print of 24" (60 cm) on the long edge.
Mikehit said:
Truth be told, I would be worried about 150 MPix FF sensor at f/11. With 150 MPix on FF, you'll getting DLA after f/4 and f/5.6 is already being affected (not by much of course). So f/11 or even worse, f/16 could lead to significant softness of the image. And I'm talking about rather medium sized print of 24" (60 cm) on the long edge.
Upvote
0
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
Depends on what you compare it to. If you compare a smaller MP pic to a larger MP pic at 100% view, then you will see it, drastically. If you want to crop, you will see it, as well dractically as before. If you don't crop and compare it to print, its a matter of how big you want to print. Flaws get magnified. If you just make small prints you wont see the difference. A 120MP file would not improve on that, nor would a 50MP one; current 20MP files are fine as they are. If you want to print bigger prints and retain the detail or get more detail out of it (small print for lesser MPs and larger prints for higher MPs), diffraction has to be taken into account and is in fact more visible.
But...this is a 7D Mark III thread...
Mikehit said:
Depends on what you compare it to. If you compare a smaller MP pic to a larger MP pic at 100% view, then you will see it, drastically. If you want to crop, you will see it, as well dractically as before. If you don't crop and compare it to print, its a matter of how big you want to print. Flaws get magnified. If you just make small prints you wont see the difference. A 120MP file would not improve on that, nor would a 50MP one; current 20MP files are fine as they are. If you want to print bigger prints and retain the detail or get more detail out of it (small print for lesser MPs and larger prints for higher MPs), diffraction has to be taken into account and is in fact more visible.
But...this is a 7D Mark III thread...
Upvote
0
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
That is sort of my question. An 8MP image blown up to 20" will be limited by out and out resolution
A 50MP, or 150MP camera will have vastly more resolution but will have an element of diffraction, but the greater resolution will always be obvious (and no-one has ever proven otherwise to me). In which case there is no downside to more pixels.
M_S said:
That is sort of my question. An 8MP image blown up to 20" will be limited by out and out resolution
A 50MP, or 150MP camera will have vastly more resolution but will have an element of diffraction, but the greater resolution will always be obvious (and no-one has ever proven otherwise to me). In which case there is no downside to more pixels.
Yep, but when people start wanting the 7Diii to be 30+ MP (equivalent to 70+ on FF) these questions about diffraction are always going to occur and I recall them being raised when the 5DSR came out. And it is (to me) a classic case of theory vs practical application.
Upvote
0
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
Well, in 7D III, you care less about DLA, because it's meant more as a sports/wildlife camera, where you usually want as fast aperture as possible (thus limiting DLA). But in 5DSr camera, you would want reasonable compromise for studio works or landscape, as apertures around f/8 to f/11 are frequently used.
If you print small or do not heavily crop, then why would you need high resolution in the first place, right?
Mikehit said:
Well, in 7D III, you care less about DLA, because it's meant more as a sports/wildlife camera, where you usually want as fast aperture as possible (thus limiting DLA). But in 5DSr camera, you would want reasonable compromise for studio works or landscape, as apertures around f/8 to f/11 are frequently used.
M_S said:Mikehit said:
Depends on what you compare it to. If you compare a smaller MP pic to a larger MP pic at 100% view, then you will see it, drastically. If you want to crop, you will see it, as well dractically as before. If you don't crop and compare it to print, its a matter of how big you want to print. Flaws get magnified. If you just make small prints you wont see the difference. A 120MP file would not improve on that, nor would a 50MP one; current 20MP files are fine as they are. If you want to print bigger prints and retain the detail or get more detail out of it (small print for lesser MPs and larger prints for higher MPs), diffraction has to be taken into account and is in fact more visible.
But...this is a 7D Mark III thread...
If you print small or do not heavily crop, then why would you need high resolution in the first place, right?
Upvote
0
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
Exactly. I just tried to elaborate on the point. I get it, that one has some whiggle room when downsizing the pic in respect to noise and DLA, but that was not the main purpose I had in mind when getting me the high MP camera. And if you go for large prints, it is like it is, with all the ups and downs. On that sensor size, and from what I have seen so far, I would spend more time on other stuff than raising the bar yet another time. At least, thats my opinion for now.Khalai said:If you print small or do not heavily crop, then why would you need high resolution in the first place, right?
Upvote
0
Sometimes you have to give credit to the competition and see Canon change to the 7D MKII as being incremental whilst the Nikon D500 came completely out of the blue and made it in many ways look out of date.
Canon refresh cycles are not merely of its own doing to remain competitive cycles need adjustment and I think some of that is also about aligning their technology across platforms to simplify production hence why the refresh may come sooner. If true then whats to complain about it will certainly be a leading product.
Canon refresh cycles are not merely of its own doing to remain competitive cycles need adjustment and I think some of that is also about aligning their technology across platforms to simplify production hence why the refresh may come sooner. If true then whats to complain about it will certainly be a leading product.
Upvote
0
I wonder witch upgrades should I expect from Canon....
And I think I have an idea.
Two MAJOR upgrades: Wi-FI & NFC.
A small boost in megapixels and ISO
Dual slot media - CFast (?) and SDXC (still UHS I)
Maybe, just maybe... Dual Pixel RAW
And... That's all folks!
And I think I have an idea.
Two MAJOR upgrades: Wi-FI & NFC.
A small boost in megapixels and ISO
Dual slot media - CFast (?) and SDXC (still UHS I)
Maybe, just maybe... Dual Pixel RAW
And... That's all folks!
Upvote
0
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
A lot of people who'd like more resolution want it for the purposes of cropping, not printing huge.
And you've *always* considered the FF sweet spot to be 24-32MP? That's only become the norm fairly recently, and without both lower and higher resolution sensors of the same generation, how can you be so certain? Especially as it's all a sliding scale, and people said the same thing about lower resolution sensors in the past?
As for file sizes, that's one reasonable argument against higher res sensors (for now), although the cost of storage continues to drop as it has for decades.
Forgive me if I'm misinterpreting what you're saying, but for a given output size, increasing resolution won't make diffraction (or camera shake) more visible. Put plainly: a 60cm print from a 10MP sensor and a 100MP sensor will display the same amount of diffraction. The only problem is when viewing at 1:1 magnification, since you are magnifying the higher resolution image more, so diffraction etc will cover more pixels. On the other hand, the higher res print *may* be sharper, as the sensor can resolve finer details.
Fair point.
Khalai said:Mikehit said:M_S said:rrcphoto said:7D Mark II in the first part of next year sets up the 120MP 5DsR Mark II for photokina
Lets say it this way: 120MP 5dsr II would pose a huge problem and, at least with my skills, would pose a serious problem. Usable aperture is already limited to 7.1-11 because of diffraction and shutter speeds are doubled on the 5dsr to get a sharp picture. Going higher with the MPs would certainly worsen that.
I would leave it at 50 mps and better all the rest, then the 5dsr2 will be an excellent camera. And they should kick Adobe for not making a medium contrast curve a standard for that camera! Almost made me not buy that camera.
If the increase megapixels changes the diffraction limit, then of greater concern is camerashake.
IIRC, digital matched slide film for resolution at 6MP and it was in the days of film that they came up with the 1/focal length 'rule' for hand held shutter speed. So are you saying that with the 5DSR you have to use 1/3xFL ?
IHMO that 120 MPix is simply overkill. I've always considered FF sweet spot in 24-32 MPix region. After all with 34 MPix, you can print up to 16x24" in 300 dpi (4800 x7200 px). It's still not too many megapickles to be worried about diffraction (to a certain degree), you don't usually have to resort to higher SS to prevent motion blur and the file size is nothing scary about storage and editing.
Who want to store 120 MPix files anyway? Five CR2 files, which take up 1 GB of space? DLA around f/4? I think that impracticality of such sensor outweights about any potential advantage the increased resolution might bring.
A lot of people who'd like more resolution want it for the purposes of cropping, not printing huge.
And you've *always* considered the FF sweet spot to be 24-32MP? That's only become the norm fairly recently, and without both lower and higher resolution sensors of the same generation, how can you be so certain? Especially as it's all a sliding scale, and people said the same thing about lower resolution sensors in the past?
As for file sizes, that's one reasonable argument against higher res sensors (for now), although the cost of storage continues to drop as it has for decades.
Khalai said:
Forgive me if I'm misinterpreting what you're saying, but for a given output size, increasing resolution won't make diffraction (or camera shake) more visible. Put plainly: a 60cm print from a 10MP sensor and a 100MP sensor will display the same amount of diffraction. The only problem is when viewing at 1:1 magnification, since you are magnifying the higher resolution image more, so diffraction etc will cover more pixels. On the other hand, the higher res print *may* be sharper, as the sensor can resolve finer details.
Khalai said:If you print small or do not heavily crop, then why would you need high resolution in the first place, right?
Fair point.
Upvote
0
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
Downscaling.
Remember that a 24mpx sensor doesn't give you 24 colour megapixels. there are 12 megapixels of green, and 6 megapixels each of red and blue.
These are then interpolated to give you a pseudo-24 megapixel full colour image, bearing in mind every single one of those pixels is the product of assumption, taking the surrounding pixels to assume what the missing colour components would be.
So, even if you don't crop, or you don't print massive posters, the 5DSR gives you the opportunity of massive oversampling which allows you to scale down an image and get a much more accurate representation of both the luminosity and color of each actual pixel in your final image.
Khalai said:If you print small or do not heavily crop, then why would you need high resolution in the first place, right?
Downscaling.
Remember that a 24mpx sensor doesn't give you 24 colour megapixels. there are 12 megapixels of green, and 6 megapixels each of red and blue.
These are then interpolated to give you a pseudo-24 megapixel full colour image, bearing in mind every single one of those pixels is the product of assumption, taking the surrounding pixels to assume what the missing colour components would be.
So, even if you don't crop, or you don't print massive posters, the 5DSR gives you the opportunity of massive oversampling which allows you to scale down an image and get a much more accurate representation of both the luminosity and color of each actual pixel in your final image.
Upvote
0
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
And there in lies the perennial problem of these forums, people with completely different levels of understanding talking across each other. At least you have the honesty to say you don't understand, which is close to unique so for that I congratulate you.
The basis of the problem is 'acceptable', what is acceptable for you might not be for me, or visa versa. Dof calculations along with acuity and resolution (being the foundation) are based on a set print size and viewing distance, cropping hard and printing big are both pushing the boundaries of that equation so they are, in essence and effect, exactly the same thing.
scyrene said:
And there in lies the perennial problem of these forums, people with completely different levels of understanding talking across each other. At least you have the honesty to say you don't understand, which is close to unique so for that I congratulate you.
The basis of the problem is 'acceptable', what is acceptable for you might not be for me, or visa versa. Dof calculations along with acuity and resolution (being the foundation) are based on a set print size and viewing distance, cropping hard and printing big are both pushing the boundaries of that equation so they are, in essence and effect, exactly the same thing.
Upvote
0
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
A 5DSR is 9,000x6000 (for round numbers) and you crop it to 6,000 x4,000. Print that crop to 20x12 and it is the same as printing the original sensor image to 30x18 and cutting out a 20x12 portion of it.
scyrene said:
A 5DSR is 9,000x6000 (for round numbers) and you crop it to 6,000 x4,000. Print that crop to 20x12 and it is the same as printing the original sensor image to 30x18 and cutting out a 20x12 portion of it.
Upvote
0
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
The 5DSR has enough resolution that you can crop out the center of it and give you more pixels from central 62% of the sensor than a APSC 24 megapixel.
The section called "Full-Frame with a twist: crop modes" is informative:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-5ds-r/canon-5ds-r-field-test-part-i.htm
From what I understand, when you shoot in crop mode, you can get a cropped JPEG of the highlight area (there is a 1.6 setting, about the crop of an APSC, as well as a 1.3), with the camera discarding the darkened area. You can also get a cropped RAW file, but the RAW file actually contains the darkened area's original information too; you can uncrop it. Unfortunately, this means the RAW file is still big
Unrelated: I think 7D3 will have 4k video. Not that I care, and if that's the main top-line differentiator between it and 80D, great. I would not pay even an extra $200 for that, but surely, some would. Canon "needs" a 4k option in that price strata to make some people happy
Mikehit said:
The 5DSR has enough resolution that you can crop out the center of it and give you more pixels from central 62% of the sensor than a APSC 24 megapixel.
The section called "Full-Frame with a twist: crop modes" is informative:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-5ds-r/canon-5ds-r-field-test-part-i.htm
From what I understand, when you shoot in crop mode, you can get a cropped JPEG of the highlight area (there is a 1.6 setting, about the crop of an APSC, as well as a 1.3), with the camera discarding the darkened area. You can also get a cropped RAW file, but the RAW file actually contains the darkened area's original information too; you can uncrop it. Unfortunately, this means the RAW file is still big
Unrelated: I think 7D3 will have 4k video. Not that I care, and if that's the main top-line differentiator between it and 80D, great. I would not pay even an extra $200 for that, but surely, some would. Canon "needs" a 4k option in that price strata to make some people happy
Upvote
0
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
I just don't see this in practice. I wish I did, it would mean I could justify buying a 5Ds to produce better quality images. Theoretically of course you are right, the bayer array means that you need many more pixels on target to define colours, especially at the edges of things, but I just don't see it in practice.
The problem is all to do with scale; because of the resolution of even a 12 mp FF camera there is enough RGB coverage to define the detail we can see in say an A3 size print. The increase in colour definition that you are gaining from say a 5Ds is just lost in reducing the detail size down to an A3 print. That detail has just gone. Simple. If it hasn't then it was large enough for the lower mp sensor to define anyway.
I have found that the greater magnification of a larger format gives better tone and detail, so for instance again if we refer to a fairly common "large" A2 print (23.5 x 16.5 inches) a vertical three frame stitch from an old 12.7 mp 5D at about 24 mp is better printed definition than a single frame from a 24 mp M3. However as you reduce the print size, once again there is no difference.
Of course cropping is another thing, you are definitely limited in producing large prints from a heavily cropped 12 mp sensor I should add, when compared with one of todays higher resolution sensors. I've actually seen some very large and good images printed from 5 mp !
jolyonralph said:Khalai said:If you print small or do not heavily crop, then why would you need high resolution in the first place, right?
Downscaling.
Remember that a 24mpx sensor doesn't give you 24 colour megapixels. there are 12 megapixels of green, and 6 megapixels each of red and blue.
These are then interpolated to give you a pseudo-24 megapixel full colour image, bearing in mind every single one of those pixels is the product of assumption, taking the surrounding pixels to assume what the missing colour components would be.
So, even if you don't crop, or you don't print massive posters, the 5DSR gives you the opportunity of massive oversampling which allows you to scale down an image and get a much more accurate representation of both the luminosity and color of each actual pixel in your final image.
I just don't see this in practice. I wish I did, it would mean I could justify buying a 5Ds to produce better quality images. Theoretically of course you are right, the bayer array means that you need many more pixels on target to define colours, especially at the edges of things, but I just don't see it in practice.
The problem is all to do with scale; because of the resolution of even a 12 mp FF camera there is enough RGB coverage to define the detail we can see in say an A3 size print. The increase in colour definition that you are gaining from say a 5Ds is just lost in reducing the detail size down to an A3 print. That detail has just gone. Simple. If it hasn't then it was large enough for the lower mp sensor to define anyway.
I have found that the greater magnification of a larger format gives better tone and detail, so for instance again if we refer to a fairly common "large" A2 print (23.5 x 16.5 inches) a vertical three frame stitch from an old 12.7 mp 5D at about 24 mp is better printed definition than a single frame from a 24 mp M3. However as you reduce the print size, once again there is no difference.
Of course cropping is another thing, you are definitely limited in producing large prints from a heavily cropped 12 mp sensor
I should add, when compared with one of todays higher resolution sensors. I've actually seen some very large and good images printed from 5 mp !
Upvote
0
For me my images are almost exclusively used online, not in print, so the crop *is* a big issue for me, and the ability to print wall-sized images is of no consequence.
Crop and print are entirely unrelated if you have no intention of printing your images!
Anyway, for a slightly connected thing see http://www.everyothershot.com/look-saw-alternatively-good-5dsr/
Crop and print are entirely unrelated if you have no intention of printing your images!
Anyway, for a slightly connected thing see http://www.everyothershot.com/look-saw-alternatively-good-5dsr/
Upvote
0
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
Actually there's a global shortage of Flash memory right now, and HDD's have been the same price since 2010 because everyone knows it's practically a dead technology, 10TB is probably the biggest mechanical Hard Drive that will ever be on the market (at least without using [Edit: "Shingled"] recording which drastically reduces write performance).
http://www.storagereview.com/what_is_shingled_magnetic_recording_smrhttp://www.storagereview.com/what_is_shingled_magnetic_recording_smr
scyrene said:
Actually there's a global shortage of Flash memory right now, and HDD's have been the same price since 2010 because everyone knows it's practically a dead technology, 10TB is probably the biggest mechanical Hard Drive that will ever be on the market (at least without using [Edit: "Shingled"] recording which drastically reduces write performance).
http://www.storagereview.com/what_is_shingled_magnetic_recording_smrhttp://www.storagereview.com/what_is_shingled_magnetic_recording_smr
Upvote
0
Re: Canon EOS 7D Mark II Coming First Half of 2018 [CR2]
It's not the storage that is at issue, that is comparatively cheap, processors and RAM that can do all the manipulation we want to those files is the true cost. Also the post processing programs are woefully short on optimization for those massive layered files.
9VIII said:
It's not the storage that is at issue, that is comparatively cheap, processors and RAM that can do all the manipulation we want to those files is the true cost. Also the post processing programs are woefully short on optimization for those massive layered files.
Upvote
0
