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

[gdanmitchell]

This is one of the reasons that I'm continuing to use my (excellent) 5DsR instead of jumping on the (fine) R5.

I'll be interested to see the characteristics of this cameras when/if it arrives.

 

[koenkooi]

Yes, I would imagine that is the case. It certainly "seems" that the magnified view in crop mode makes it easier to, say, select the eye rather than simply the head. Whether it is the camera or the photographer I don't know.

The AF system has 1.6 times fewer rows to process, which speeds things up a bit.

 

[landscaper]

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

 

[Berowne]

Currently, Leica are developing new improved lenses for their M11's 60 MP, on the basis of already extremely sharp ones.
What about Canon?
100 MP need extreme definition lenses, like RF 1,2/50-85. But the rest of the RF line???
Which lenses can actually take FULL advantage of the 100 MP?

As always i refer to the nice contributions of Uncle Rog:
* Experiments For Ultra High Resolution Camera Sensors
* More Ultra High-Resolution MTF Experiments
and Brandon:
* The 8K Conundrum – When Bad Lenses Mount Good Sensors

What can we learn in short? Meaningful MTF-Results for a 150Mpx-Sensor are only obtained with measurements in the Range of 200-240 lp/mm. Currently Canon, Sony, Nikon, Zeiss and Leica show us MTF-Charts with max 50 lp/mm. So these Charts are useless, when it comes to the next generation of high-resolution sensors. The question is, whether the lenses you can buy now, are fit for the future sensors and the answer is: superior contemporary primes like the Sony 135 G-Master or the 100 mm Otus are ok.

Of all the rest we dont know.

 

[steen-ag]

Agreed

Or 2x digitX

 

[SNJ Ops]

No AA filter would be fine for landscape but wouldn't be okay for portrait and video usage. I know that some people don't use cameras for stills and video but you can't get away with this now.

12K DCI resolution is 12288 x 6480 for a total of 79,626,240 pixels (~80 MP) which would mean ~102mp stills at 3:2
This fits with the rumour and would be a first for Canon to both have the first 8k MILC and the first 12K MILC

Such a body would be heading into megapixel territory of Fuji GFX and Phase One. Medium Format aims for still image quality as a priority which is what I think Canon should do in this instance. Increasing the bit depth of the RAW files to 14 would also make quite the statement.

 

[David - Sydney]

Or 2x digitX

Sure but that is twice the heat to get rid of. It could distribute the heat more evenly as each would possibly run less than full pace

 

[David - Sydney]

The AF system has 1.6 times fewer rows to process, which speeds things up a bit.

I can't find any information about whether the sensor read rate increases in crop mode and hence rolling shutter decreasing. This would show that only the crop lines on the sensor are read vs the full sensor. If the sensor read rate doesn't change from full to crop then the AF system can't be faster - or have I misunderstood?

 

[Joules]

Faster frame rate may be possible (and theoretically lower rolling shutter and flash sync) only if the sensor is clever enough to only read the crop portion of the sensor. Do we have any evidence that Canon sensors have done this in the past?

The Canon M6 II has a 32.5 MP sensor with 14 FPS shooting, but also features an 18 MP 30 FPS burst mode that uses a small crop. So yes, we know Canon has the ability to only partially read the sensor in order to enhance speed.

I don't think I have seen this feature on the R7 yet, so perhaps the will to implement it isn't there. The R7 did inherit the pre-burst mode from M6 II though, so perhaps they can other features later.

 

[David - Sydney]

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

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

 

[Joules]

I can't find any information about whether the sensor read rate increases in crop mode and hence rolling shutter decreasing. This would show that only the crop lines on the sensor are read vs the full sensor. If the sensor read rate doesn't change from full to crop then the AF system can't be faster - or have I misunderstood?

The AF system could still be faster even if the full image is read. After all, for tracking use cases, the AF system would know that it can rule out searching the motive in the cropped area, resulting in less than half the pixels to be analyzed.

 

[MrToes]

My wallet has been waiting for a long time for this

 

[Birdshooter]

Funny Stuff....
People that want a 100 megapixel camera for Nature photography.... and 30fps... Really ahahahahahaha 30x100 megapixels in a second.
But, maybe you can dummy down that 100 megapixels in crop mode.. another gaffa.... ahahahaha
What are you people smoking?

The magic number of a sports camera would be great at 30 megapixels, coming from someone that actually has owned at least 5 pro bodies.
With the R3 you can shoot a few thousand frames in a few seconds (which I own) and some of you think it's no problem to shoot at that frame rate with 100 megapixels. That tells me a lot about what it's like to dream the impossible dream.... I think that was a song or something... and your knowledge of photography.

 

[AlanF]

Funny Stuff....
People that want a 100 megapixel camera for Nature photography.... and 30fps... Really ahahahahahaha 30x100 megapixels in a second.
But, maybe you can dummy down that 100 megapixels in crop mode.. another gaffa.... ahahahaha
What are you people smoking?

The magic number of a sports camera would be great at 30 megapixels, coming from someone that actually has owned at least 5 pro bodies.
With the R3 you can shoot a few thousand frames in a few seconds (which I own) and some of you think it's no problem to shoot at that frame rate with 100 megapixels. That tells me a lot about what it's like to dream the impossible dream.... I think that was a song or something... and your knowledge of photography.

"With the R3 you can shoot a few thousand frames in a few seconds (which I own)"
2000 shots at 30 fps = 67 seconds - "a few thousand frames in a few minutes" is the correct maths. A couple of years ago some would have laughed at the thought of 2000 30 Mpx shots in a minute and they were just as wrong as you are laughing at 30x100 megapixels in a second. I don 't want 30x100 megapixels in a second, but some do and that's their privilege and you have no right to mock them.

 

[Otara]

Someone else probably thinks buying a camera that does 30fps at 24 is pretty silly too.

Didnt stop you.

 

[koenkooi]

I can't find any information about whether the sensor read rate increases in crop mode and hence rolling shutter decreasing. This would show that only the crop lines on the sensor are read vs the full sensor. If the sensor read rate doesn't change from full to crop then the AF system can't be faster - or have I misunderstood?

I've seen rolling shutter improvements mentioned in one or two reviews, but I don't recall seeing side-by-side comparisons.

 

[Del Paso]

Not even an f/1.2 will take full advantage of the sensor! What matters is that the overall resolution depends on the resolution of the sensor times the resolution of the lens. So, increasing the resolution of the sensor increases the apparent resolution of any lens.

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.

 

[Del Paso]

As always i refer to the nice contributions of Uncle Rog:
* Experiments For Ultra High Resolution Camera Sensors
* More Ultra High-Resolution MTF Experiments
and Brandon:
* The 8K Conundrum – When Bad Lenses Mount Good Sensors

What can we learn in short? Meaningful MTF-Results for a 150Mpx-Sensor are only obtained with measurements in the Range of 200-240 lp/mm. Currently Canon, Sony, Nikon, Zeiss and Leica show us MTF-Charts with max 50 lp/mm. So these Charts are useless, when it comes to the next generation of high-resolution sensors. The question is, whether the lenses you can buy now, are fit for the future sensors and the answer is: superior contemporary primes like the Sony 135 G-Master or the 100 mm Otus are ok.

Of all the rest we dont know.

OK, but don't forget the Apo Summicron Leica M lenses...or Canon's RF 50 and 85mm.

 

[AlanF]

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.

Uncle's Rog comments in the first link:

"So What Did We Learn Today?​

Well, mostly nothing, but there are a couple of things.
First, let me emphasize again that if we had a 150-megapixel camera and shot today’s lenses on it, the images would have more detail than that same lens on your current 36-megapixel camera."

Putting Michelin Pilot Sport tyres on a Lada is a real investment - it will double the value of the Lada.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

On the other hand, you can always use the camera as B/W. It is not something you can't do right now.

You could, but you lose a lot of light because of the Bayer Filter. Of yourse the Bayer Filter gives you the option to compose your B/W photos out of three channels. So you can decide how dark the sky or the grass get. You lose that option with a monochrome sensor, but in return you get much sharper images and much lower noise. You do not need any demosaicing algorithms to guess the brightness of each pixel based on its neigbours. A normal 24 megapixel camera has 6 million red pixels, 6 million blue pixels and 12 million green pixels. Having 24 million "white" pixels increases the image quality by a lot. That's why Leica and Phase One offer monochrome sensors.