Canon is gearing up to finally release a high megapixel camera with 100+ megapixels [CR3]

Even though I fully agree, I still think it would make sense to have the best possible lenses in order to exploit the sensor's potential.
Michelin Pilot Sport tyres are a bit of a waste on a Lada. ;)
Absolutely.. There are some lenses on emount that can’t resolve the max level of detail from the A7RIV’s sensor and that is “only” 61 mp. One such example is my 85mm f1.4 GM, it renders a wonderful image but its soft on the A7RIV even at normal viewing distance on my monitor. Sigma’s 85mm f1.4 Art DG DN however resolves fine detail much much better its actually not even close.

To resolve 100mp+ I hope Canon has already designed their glass to do to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Storage availability has grown much faster than image sizes. 2TB cards are now available. Assuming a 100MP sensor gives a 150MB file size, you can store 13,000 + images on such a card. Computer hard drives have grown as well. My NAS has four 8TB drives and could store a lot of 150 MB images. 8TB drives are common and relatively low cost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
T
I don

Absolutely agreed - I do a lot of landscape photography while hiking and camping and I'll take all the ruggedization I can get. I've been using a 5DIV and anecdotally I have seen plenty of camera failures from other people shooting with me, but so far I've been lucky enough to avoid it. I'm firmly in the potential buyer camp for this, but if it has less ruggedization than a 5D IV then I'm probably not buying in. My nightmare is having a failure on day 3/10 of a big hike and having no way to replace the body. That peace of mind is worth a higher price point to me. I'm just hopeful this won't be a gripped body as the size and weight becomes a different issue then.
That's why I never leave home for longer hikes or trips without a second body. Even a cheap Rebel is better than nothing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
Yep, Fuji GFX has a massive market share and Canon should be worried!

Yes, some landscapers have moved to Fuji and it is a nice system but there are no wide angle lenses for it which would be annoying if I was using it. The biggest advantage that I can see is bit depth. Gavin Hardcastle did a video about the GFX vs his Sony crop camera for the same location and there was definitely differences in the shadow detail but he needed to pixel peep to see them.

Canon held the full frame pixel density record for a long time until the Sony ~60mp bodies arrived. Perhaps they will increase further but I would suggest that the market segment for high resolution bodies is relatively small but very important for that community.

It has been only the last few years that 40-50mp cameras have become more "normal" in the market. I'm still adjusting to the R5 from the 5Div but enjoying the difference :)
Beyond limited lens selection for the GFX is lack of proper weather sealing. Was on a photo tour in Alaska last winter and one of the photographers with the GFX barely made it our of the gate. The body died in temps just below zero F. The R5 performed admirably down to -32. At least for me as a landscape photographer, I want a camera that is going to tolerate a pretty broad set of environmental conditions. Those conditions are where the magic happen!
 
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0
Why has it taken CANON
8 YEARS to update their High Resolution Model ?

So many have Jumped Ship to Fuji GFX system ALREADY

Rumours have it that Fuji and Sony working on 150 MP and 200 MP Models NOW
Seems like a simple answer. Must not have sold that well. If it had sold well, it would have been updated earlier like their other best selling models. Since Canon's market share has been steady, apparently not that many jumped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
Upvote 0
T

That's why I never leave home for longer hikes or trips without a second body. Even a cheap Rebel is better than nothing.
Yeah, I've definitely been gambling. The extra weight has always been my reasoning for going with one body, but on a full re-kit in RF I can find some additional weight savings on the lens and body to make up the difference. My thoughts are when I transition to RF (ideally with this high resolution body) I'd pick up a cheaper R body that takes the same battery to go with it. Time to start saving!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Beyond limited lens selection for the GFX is lack of proper weather sealing. Was on a photo tour in Alaska last winter and one of the photographers with the GFX barely made it our of the gate. The body died in temps just below zero F. The R5 performed admirably down to -32. At least for me as a landscape photographer, I want a camera that is going to tolerate a pretty broad set of environmental conditions. Those conditions are where the magic happen!
That's really interesting - I wasn't aware that the Fuji MF bodies were so sensitive! I'd written the GFX system off because of the lack of lenses - no really wide and no long ish. Ideally, I'd want flexibility in focal length from maybe ~15mm-400mm covered in my kit, and I just don't see that realistically happening in GFX any time soon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Seems like a simple answer. Must not have sold that well. If it had sold well, it would have been updated earlier like their other best selling models. Since Canon's market share has been steady, apparently not that many jumped.
I always find Lens Rental’s annual ‘top ten’ most rented gear of the year lists interesting. There’s never a ‘high resolution’ model of the various camera ranges on it. As someone who’s owned two 5DS cameras for the past five years I can understand why.
 
Upvote 0
OK, but don't forget the Apo Summicron Leica M lenses...or Canon's RF 50 and 85mm.

Until now Uncle Rog did not test these lenses at 240 lp/mm (or did not show us the results), so we do not know. What we know for sure is that most modern high quality primes (whether Sigma or Canon or Leica is completely irrelevant) are able to deliver good 8k results when it is about resolution. And if they can do this, they can do more (Michelin tyres on a Lada), which you can see, when shooting any good prime on a 32 Mpx Crop-Camera, which means 80 Mpx FF. But when we enter the territory way beyond 100 Mpx, the situation changes and this will be exciting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Beyond limited lens selection for the GFX is lack of proper weather sealing. Was on a photo tour in Alaska last winter and one of the photographers with the GFX barely made it our of the gate. The body died in temps just below zero F. The R5 performed admirably down to -32. At least for me as a landscape photographer, I want a camera that is going to tolerate a pretty broad set of environmental conditions. Those conditions are where the magic happen!
Thanks for the info, since I was more than mildly interested in a GFX as a landscape camera. Neither the 5 D3, nor the 5 D4, not even the R ever let me down.
Many good pictures are made under "extreme" conditions, whether temperature or humidity. R.I.P. GFX for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
News flash. Canon itself has now rebuked any and all rumors of the M-series being discontinued. And that the new cameras are NOT for young people. Maybe CR will stop peddling such garbage for another decade. Canon has confirmed what we already know, that the M-series accounts for 30% of all it's sales. It would be a foolish business blunder to discontinues sucha a profitable line of products with nada to replace it. The R10 certainly as we now know can NOT replace the M6 mk 2. Canon doesn't want any of it's ambassadors trumpeting and peddling any of that other nonsense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
News flash. Canon itself has now rebuked any and all rumors of the M-series being discontinued. And that the new cameras are NOT for young people. Maybe CR will stop peddling such garbage for another decade. Canon has confirmed what we already know, that the M-series accounts for 30% of all it's sales. It would be a foolish business blunder to discontinues sucha a profitable line of products with nada to replace it. The R10 certainly as we now know can NOT replace the M6 mk 2. Canon doesn't want any of it's ambassadors trumpeting and peddling any of that other nonsense.

Of course, every company says that. Not discontinued until there is a demand - but they won't release new lenses or new bodies (or with very minor updates) until there won't be any demand left.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
One thing I've never really explored much is Canon's diffraction correction that it provides as a post-processing solution, using lens data communicated through the R mount. That always fascinated me, but I've not had much use for it. In this context, it may become more relevant. I wonder how much of a dent something like DLO can make in any introduced diffraction. When first introduced, it required the use of DPP in post. Later, it was included in-camera if you shot JPEG. Wonder if folks have experience with it and can comment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
100+ megapixels on FF would be a 1st and A LOT for the sensor size. Be interesting to see what ISO performance is like and which of the RF lenses can resolve those megapixels and resolve them well.
Just hope for potential buyers there’s no AA filter.
As a potential buyer I hope it includes the AA filter (specially the R5 tech-like one). Just because image quality matters me THE MOST. Fortunately, sigma did included the AA filter in its 61MP latest camera, and explicitly mentioned the reasons. All of this AA-filter-removal nonsense started when Leica removed the AA filter because their particular limitations (filter stack thickness causing trouble with their old expensive lens designs) and their expert marketing people finally managed to foo the whole Internet forums about the supposedly advantages.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
As a potential buyer I hope it includes the AA filter (specially the R5 tech-like one). Just because image quality matters me THE MOST. Fortunately, sigma did included the AA filter in its 61MP latest camera, and explicitly mentioned the reasons. All of this AA-filter-removal nonsense started when Leica removed the AA filter because their particular limitations (filter stack thickness causing trouble with their old expensive lens designs) and their expert marketing people finally managed to foo the whole Internet forums about the supposedly advantages.
Not so sure.
By comparing results obtained using the same lens (Zeiss 100mm macro planar) on a Leica M 240 (24MP) and on an EOS 5D4 (30MP), it becomes obvious that the Leica picture is sharper.
Leica had to use microlenses on their sensor, not because of "old" designs, but because most of their WAs are no retrofocus designs, an optical choice! The microlenses were needed to get sharper picture sides, compared to a conventional sensor ("guiding" light rays).
Many Leica WAs "plunge" deep into the body.
They removed the AA filter explicitly to get a better definition.
I too hope for a sensor without AA filter, even though, at 100MP +, will that really matter?
And, Leica's "marketing experts" never gave a damn about the internet, and never tried to influence it. This is a pure conspiration theory!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Oh yes please! I have many questions, but if it comes in closer to price/form factor of R5 than say a 1DX, I'd be very likely to pre-order. To be fair, I may still pre-order if it was more 1DX than R5.
I would never, ever, ever, in a million years pre-order again. I was stupid enough to be a very early adopter of the 1D3, the high-end camera notorious for its utter inability to focus. Having learned an expensive and disheartening lesson, I'll sit back and let others be the guinea pigs. Only after both the first major firmware update and the first permanent price cut are rolled out worldwide will I order a camera body. YMMV
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0