Canon EOS 90D full specifications

[AlanF]

Yes, at a given Fstop the level of diffraction will be the same, but how the sensor records that diffracted light changes with the properties of the sensor. Why do you think that some sensors are more diffraction limited than others? Do you even shoot macro bro?...

More pixels will always give you more resolution. But, when the radius of the Airy disk from diffraction gets larger than the length of a pixel, you get diminishing returns - see https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?threads/diffraction-airy-disks-and-implications.36639/

 

[PureClassA]

The video specs here was not exactly complete in the first place as someone observed. How sure are we that there indeed won’t be 23.976fps recording on this camera?

Also, what kind of crop is there for 120p? The promo video said „narrower fov” but I didn’t see anything about how much narrower in these specs...

The fact that it records in mp4 H.264 means that it records only in IPB? ALL-I was outputting MOVs right?

No chroma subsampling specs as well? 4:2:0 only? Can it record an external recorder?

Also no bitrate information, so it all implies that these specs are not exaclty a fully comprehensive specification. Is it? It is official information?

Yeah that was me. I find it really odd ball to include a 120fps capability but NOT 24fps... The video specs we see now may be correct just NOT COMPLETE. It said 25/30 on the video. 25 is a PAL framerate. That video may been intended elsewhere in the world. Just wait and see what the official Canon USA announcement and spec list says. If no 24 again, then we can sigh and head shake.

Otherwise I reallly like this new 90D!!!

 

[Braintoggle33]

I like watching grown man argue about camera specs

 

[Dalantech]

More pixels will always give you more resolution. But, when the radius of the Airy disk from diffraction gets larger than the length of a pixel, you get diminishing returns - see https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?threads/diffraction-airy-disks-and-implications.36639/

Thanks!

 

[Proscribo]

I could see how maybe choosing the filter values could align the sensor maybe to a given band of light, but in general color balancing and correction is a software function, no?

Yeah but if the start colors are way off noise gets multiplied a lot in not-so-nice ways. Ideally we wouldn't have the colourful patches (this again won't probably happen).

Mostly I am still dreaming tho, but who knows?

 

[BillB]

I like watching grown man argue about camera specs

Yep. Time for some more popcorn.

 

[djack41]

With DxO PL PRIME noise reduction it will be good enough for significant cropping at iso1600.
With those specs and spot AF to boot, it's on my purchase list, hopefully for my next trip in November. Paired with the 100-400mm II it should be pretty awesome for bird photography.

I shoot bird-in-flight. The big question is the AF. The Nikon D500's AF leaped far ahead of the 7d2. Another question is the buffer size. Sure hope that Canon got rid of the silly AA filter.

 

[jayphotoworks]

Interesting, what do you shoot that can't be shot with a camera with a single card slot?

For video work after using dual card camera systems, I too am reluctant to go back to single card cameras. Originally, like others I thought that it would be nice to have a safety factor for shooting critical moments that cannot be re-shot, and this has allowed me to rely on a single primary card that I don't swap out anymore for most shoots. But later, I realized it was also convenient to pass off the second card to an editor after a shoot without waiting for the file copy to complete. I can head home after the shoot and start working up color grade samples in Davinci while the editor works on the edit. Same day edits would arguably benefit as well since you can just keep swapping out card 2 without having to worry about data corruption if you gave the editor your primary card. Most data corruption occurs from bad card readers and improper mounting/ejecting of media.

But FWIW, Canon still does not allow you to simultaneously record video to dual slots at the same time even if the camera has dual slots.

 

[jayphotoworks]

True, but in this contracting camera market all of the camera companies have projected the later, fewer numbers of sales but higher earning higher end models are where they have all stated the market is going and how they are going to achieve projected income levels in that smaller market.

This is the part that I hope Canon gets the message. Yes, Canon has gained market share in aggregate, but it would be speculation to say which product lines are successful. I would like to think that when the entry market finally finds its new normal and Canon's revenue needs to come from higher end models, that they will understand that the removal of 24p (or differentiation like this) will probably alienate enthusiasts much more than a tourist with a kit lens combo that doesn't know the difference.

 

[AntlerstoPeaks]

More pixels will always give you more resolution. But, when the radius of the Airy disk from diffraction gets larger than the length of a pixel, you get diminishing returns - see https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?threads/diffraction-airy-disks-and-implications.36639/

Looks like with a 32.2MP sensor for a crop will give you roughly 3.24um pixels, down from the 80ds 3.73um pixels. This would reduce the DLA from f/6 to f/5 ish. Well have finally reached the point where most f/5.6 lenses will be diffraction limited wide open.

 

[Joules]

Why not 60 * 8MP?

Do we know that's comparable? Is that 14 bit Data coming of the sensor, or lowered before passing the Bottleneck because it is only used for video.

 

[AlanF]

Looks like with a 32.2MP sensor for a crop will give you roughly 3.24um pixels, down from the 80ds 3.73um pixels. This would reduce the DLA from f/6 to f/5 ish. Well have finally reached the point where most f/5.6 lenses will be diffraction limited wide open.

True. That's one reason why I am keeping my 400mm f/4!

 

[AlanF]

I shoot bird-in-flight. The big question is the AF. The Nikon D500's AF leaped far ahead of the 7d2. Another question is the buffer size. Sure hope that Canon got rid of the silly AA filter.

I also shoot BIF. The D500 is indeed better at tracking than the Canon. But, the 5DIV, 5DSR etc lock on faster than the D500 (according to those who use both). I use the central 9 points on the 5DSR and 5DIV and pan myself rather than use sensor tracking, and find that they are really good at capturing small fast birds in flight and even dragonflies because they lock on so fast. I would like the AA-filter to be dropped but will have to live with one - it probably loses about 10% on a high density filter, based on my experience comparing the 5DIV with the 5DSR, allowing for the difference in pixel density.

 

[trounds]

Maybe I miss it somewhere. What is the 90D's shutter life?

 

[SecureGSM]

That is the property of the lens (aperture) and is the same no matter the sensor or if there is a sensor at all.

Not quite correct.

Diffraction Limited Photography: Pixel Size, Aperture and Airy Disks

www.cambridgeincolour.com

 

[Ricardo_fon]

I must say that this looks great. My last DSLR was a 40d which I loved, and I haven't really been keen on another. But this one appeals to me a lot.

 

[Scenes]

So you admit the cripple hammer is real and Canon did it to make more money.

It’s really not an issue. If you want a camera that shoots 24p. Don’t buy a 90D. It’s really as simple as that. There are any number of cameras from other manufacturers that do. I doubt canon will care you buy either way. Yes 24p is dominant in movies but it’s not like Avengers was shot on 80D’s now is it?

Also as I understand it, the 90D being released doesn’t automatically brick all 70D/ 80D cameras out there. If you’re shooting 24p on either of them right now that’s awesome. Don’t buy this. Keep what you have and keep on trucking.

 

[Timedog]

Makes no sense to me why they're suddenly giving an actual vs effective pixels number. Defitely don't remember seeing that before on Canon stuff, or at least not advertised do blatantly. Do not remember seeing effective vs actual pixels when researching and buying any of my current Canon cameras.

Also why is there such a large difference between effective and actual? You only need a 1 pixel border around the edge to correctly debayer, right? The large difference almost made me think IBIS might be in there or something weird.

 

[slclick]

I shoot bird-in-flight. The big question is the AF. The Nikon D500's AF leaped far ahead of the 7d2. Another question is the buffer size. Sure hope that Canon got rid of the silly AA filter.

How is the 80D's AF system compared to the D500? That should be your yardstick, not a vastly different body like a higher tier model, discontinued or not.

 

[yeahright]

Not quite correct.

Diffraction Limited Photography: Pixel Size, Aperture and Airy Disks

www.cambridgeincolour.com

In the very link you posted it even explicitly says "Diffraction thus sets a fundamental resolution limit that is independent of the number of megapixels, or the size of the film format. It depends only on the f-number of your lens, and on the wavelength of light being imaged. One can think of it as the smallest theoretical "pixel" of detail in photography."
which supports the claim that diffraction has nothing to do with the sensor or its pixel size.

The diffraction limit of a sensor is merely the f-number above which it is not possible to take full advantage of its high pixel density, but this doesn't imply that the result is any worse than from a sensor with a lower pixel density. Given a particular f-stop there is a particular smallest pixel size whose further decrease will not give you more resolution due to the diffraction limit. But this doesn't mean it will give you *less* resolution. It will simply not increase any further. A sensor with higher pixel density always provides at least as much resolution as a lower pixel density sensor. But, after the diffraction limit has passed, not necessarily any more. And you can always downscale the image to get the (almost) exact same result.