Canon Says Higher Resolution Sensors Are Coming Soon

[zlatko]

DSLRs are a pretty mature technology. If mirrorless is advancing faster, it's because they are newer, and still finding their way. DSLRs *don't* need to change fundamentally every year, because in many ways they already work well.

Choose whatever analogy you like. Mobile phones have advanced massively in a generation; home phones much less so. Because one has been around a lot longer than the other. And because one already does what it needs to do.

Good points! The product with the greatest innovation isn't necessarily the one that's best on for the job. Otherwise pro sports photographers would be photographing the Super Bowl with their phones.

 

[tcmatthews]

The 50mp sensor is medium format and Sony does not have a medium format camera system. They have worked with Hassleblad before. I think the state of Hassleblad financially was what lead to Pentax and PhaseOne also getting the sensor. The D800/D800E/D810 are Nikon and it has been proven time and time again that Nikon adds proprietary processing before writing data to the "RAW" file.

This is actually true of Canon now as well. DIGIC 6 processes the data before writing it to the RAW file. The 7D II will probably be fairly impressive at ISO 16000 for an APS-C camera. It'll be impressive because the data written won't really be truly "RAW"...it'll be cooked, just like a Nikon camera. The other thing Nikon does is clip blacks, instead of setting a bias offset. That tends to result in cleaner shadows, but it's discarding a little bit of data that could be useful in certain circumstances (such as astrophotography...which is the reason a hack was created to remove the black point clip and restore the bias offset, as it restores the linearity of the signal in Nikon cameras.)

For what it's worth, the A7s, a powerhouse at high ISO, also cooks the raw data. The BoinzX chip is very similar to the DIGIC 6 (I honestly don't know which has the superior design or approach...we'll have to see.) It too does noise reduction on the RAW data before writing it out to the file.

Cooking the RAW is probably going to be a standard practice now. Even if you reduce read noise, at high ISO, IQ is ultimately going to be photon shot noise limited. You can increase Q.E., but the high end sensors like the one in the A7s are already at 67%. There is maybe a third of a stop of "real" improvement to be made in the sensor itself by increasing Q.E. to 100% (which is doable, but expensive...at least currently...it may become cost effective at some point in the future.) Any other gains are going to have to be made either by increasing the sensor area (i.e. medium format sensor), or by processing the RAW data. For established camera systems, increasing the sensor size isn't an option...hence the reason everyone is cooking their RAWs now.

I did not mean to imply that Sony did not precook their RAW files. Only that Pentax and Nikon are better a precooking their RAW files.

 

[Tugela]

No one is going to buy a Canon camera for video.

I will. My primary application is to shoot videos of the very high speed subjects of which I shoot stills. First, I don't want to have to have two separate systems and, second, dual-pixel focusing should make shooting those movies of the high speed subjects much more doable.

Then you will be shooting substandard footage.

 

[Tugela]

Weasel words like "soon" remind me of the current "year of the lens", only to just hear that new L primes have been moved far into 2015. I do believe Canon will sell a very expensive studio high-mp 1dxs soon, but I don't see them replacing their whole current lineup with 6d and 5d3 anytime "soon" with high-mp updates.

Even if its not a tangible promise I'm more hopeful of the "very near future". The important thing is Canon's admission its customers need more MP.

Since the real competition is a hot selling Nikon 36MP 810 at around 3.200$ I'd be very, very, very surprised if Canon thinks launching a 8.000$ monster MP camera will satisfy their customers.

Meanwhile you can get a D610 (we're not even talking D810 or new Nikon 7xx here) with somewhat better raw files than the 5DIII for 1.700$. Canon understands they need to answer asap.

Come on Canon; give us that killer 5DIV!

But they said the similar things about video features, and look at the junk they gave us in the 7D2. Either they were selling their user base a line or they are completely clueless. Neither option is a good one.

I think they will say anything to stop you from jumping ship to competitors and instead wait for "stuff coming soon". Things like "we are working hard on it", "we see the importance of it" or "it is coming soon" are meaningless drivel.

 

[Lee Jay]

No one is going to buy a Canon camera for video.

I will. My primary application is to shoot videos of the very high speed subjects of which I shoot stills. First, I don't want to have to have two separate systems and, second, dual-pixel focusing should make shooting those movies of the high speed subjects much more doable.

Then you will be shooting substandard footage.

Well, I could have great footage that's out of focus or substandard footage that's in focus.

 

[roby17269]

I'm curious to understand who wouldn't benefit from higher DR?

Obviously people shooting "low"-dr scenes <11ev @low iso or <8ev @very high iso ... that would include a lot of indoor shots or any shots with controlled lighting. And if you can bracket the scene, "high" dr is just a convenience, but most landscape will have more than 14ev anyway. The central issue fixed by higher dr are scenes with movement in high contrast natural lighting.

I do fashion photography mostly in studio (hobby) and it is often a high-contrast affair with plenty of latitude. I could certainly use better shadow recovery at ISO 100 than what my 1D X offers.

 

[privatebydesign]

I'm curious to understand who wouldn't benefit from higher DR?

Obviously people shooting "low"-dr scenes <11ev @low iso or <8ev @very high iso ... that would include a lot of indoor shots or any shots with controlled lighting. And if you can bracket the scene, "high" dr is just a convenience, but most landscape will have more than 14ev anyway. The central issue fixed by higher dr are scenes with movement in high contrast natural lighting.

I do fashion photography mostly in studio (hobby) and it is often a high-contrast affair with plenty of latitude. I could certainly use better shadow recovery at ISO 100 than what my 1D X offers.

Why? It is a studio, you have complete control over the light and contrast!

 

[roby17269]

The important thing is Canon's admission its customers need more MP.

I wouldn't interpret it this way, imho Canon just stated the obvious - *some* (select) applications like studio or maybe landscape work might need higher resolution, just as higher dynamic range only benefits just a part of photogs. In no way they're up to questioning their past product policy, so certainly no killer 5d4 in sight.

I'm curious to understand who wouldn't benefit from higher DR?

Everybody can benefit in certain situations. But there is a difference between wanting it and needing it. Some people need it, some just want it, and some don't care. It's like having a car that can do 110 miles per hour. If the fastest you ever drive is 65 miles per hour, then you're all set as your car does a splendid job of going 65 miles per hour, and it's reliable and has a bunch of other features you like. Now your neighbor comes along and he says his car can do 150 miles per hour. Wow, that is an awesome spec, clearly better right?! So you start to feel jealous and think about buying the same car as your neighbor. But will it make a difference in your life such as when you drive to work? Well, there are in fact situations in which it may be a benefit to have the neighbor's car. But you may also rationally conclude that your car serves you extremely well and will continue to do so, even though it's "limited" to just the old-style 110 miles per hour.

Fine - what if I do fashion photography (which I do - hobby) and what if I need to see details in a black dress (which happens).
Also... circumstances do change, you know? I was into wildlife/macro before I realized I could not afford frequent African safaris and moved to fashion photography. Needs do change. What was good time ago may not necessarily be good enough anymore.
I hope Canon does respond because I am too invested in their lenses (which I like a lot), I like the ergonomics / AF of my 1D X, I dislike adaptors and lossy RAW compression (so no Sony A7r unless they improve it) and I have not enough money to switch to Nikon (and in any case if I had the money I'd buy a MF digital back, but an older model with a CCD sensor)

 

[roby17269]

I'm curious to understand who wouldn't benefit from higher DR?

Obviously people shooting "low"-dr scenes <11ev @low iso or <8ev @very high iso ... that would include a lot of indoor shots or any shots with controlled lighting. And if you can bracket the scene, "high" dr is just a convenience, but most landscape will have more than 14ev anyway. The central issue fixed by higher dr are scenes with movement in high contrast natural lighting.

I do fashion photography mostly in studio (hobby) and it is often a high-contrast affair with plenty of latitude. I could certainly use better shadow recovery at ISO 100 than what my 1D X offers.

Why? It is a studio, you have complete control over the light and contrast!

Having control does not mean that I want low contrast. Usually it is the opposite

 

[privatebydesign]

I'm curious to understand who wouldn't benefit from higher DR?

Obviously people shooting "low"-dr scenes <11ev @low iso or <8ev @very high iso ... that would include a lot of indoor shots or any shots with controlled lighting. And if you can bracket the scene, "high" dr is just a convenience, but most landscape will have more than 14ev anyway. The central issue fixed by higher dr are scenes with movement in high contrast natural lighting.

I do fashion photography mostly in studio (hobby) and it is often a high-contrast affair with plenty of latitude. I could certainly use better shadow recovery at ISO 100 than what my 1D X offers.

Why? It is a studio, you have complete control over the light and contrast!

Having control does not mean that I want low contrast. Usually it is the opposite

You can have very high contrast and no issues with shadow detail, you are in control!

It is like people who blast two lights at full power onto the background and then have all kinds of scatter and pollution to worry about, make the blacks just black and create an import profile with a touch of the "Blacks" slider and you are done. Very high contrast and as much shadow detail as you want with zero noise.

Stop thinking camera exposure, start thinking light for the optimal exposure to get the look I want when combined with an import profile, it will save you a shitload of time and money and get you the results you want with the gear you have.

 

[roby17269]

You can have very high contrast and no issues with shadow detail, you are in control!

It is like people who blast two lights at full power onto the background and then have all kinds of scatter and pollution to worry about, make the blacks just black and create an import profile with a touch of the "Blacks" slider and you are done. Very high contrast and as much shadow detail as you want with zero noise.

Stop thinking camera exposure, start thinking light for the optimal exposure to get the look I want when combined with an import profile, it will save you a shitload of time and money and get you the results you want with the gear you have.

This is what I do
http://robertodemicheli.4ormat.com/
I know my light modifiers and I've played with high end equipment (profoto and broncolor)
I'd rather not be patronized thanks

 

[Marsu42]

I do fashion photography mostly in studio (hobby) and it is often a high-contrast affair with plenty of latitude. I could certainly use better shadow recovery at ISO 100 than what my 1D X offers.

It's true that the 1dx doesn't have superior iso 100 performance, actually the data says that the infamous read noise problem produces even *more* dr at iso 200: http://sensorgen.info/CanonEOS-1D_X.html

The newer 6d has a bit better dr and (even) less pattern noise, but nevertheless, to really get into trouble with 11+ stops even after proper postprocessing and best exposure you have to have really difficult conditions like shooting wedding dresses?

Edit: Saw your website, your post crossed mine. Your shots are definitely tricky, at what print/view size are you getting problems with shadow noise? Or is it realyl that your in-studio lighting exceeds the sensor's dynamic range? I'm not trying to contradict you, just out of curiosity.

 

[Steve]

Obviously people shooting "low"-dr scenes <11ev @low iso or <8ev @very high iso ... that would include a lot of indoor shots or any shots with controlled lighting. And if you can bracket the scene, "high" dr is just a convenience, but most landscape will have more than 14ev anyway. The central issue fixed by higher dr are scenes with movement in high contrast natural lighting.

When you say "high" dr is just a convenience, you realize that you could say that about almost any technological improvement in photography ever, right? AF, metering, TTL flash control, whatever, its all just convenience.

Anyway, I have a whole lot of photos of whiteheaded woodpeckers shot in 3/4 sunlight that I would love to have cleaner shadows. Black and white birds, shot to preserve the highlights, means I have to lift the shadows to get any detail in the black feathers and there is just a ton of noise, even at ISO200. Its pretty much exactly the situation you touched on at the end there. When I messed with a .NEF and realized how much additional latitude is present on the Sensor That Shall Not Be Named I was kind of bummed that Canon isn't interested in improving shadow latitude. I'm holding out hope that the 7DII has some improvement there, and I'm definitely going to try it side-by-side with my rig when it makes it to stores.

 

[privatebydesign]

You can have very high contrast and no issues with shadow detail, you are in control!

It is like people who blast two lights at full power onto the background and then have all kinds of scatter and pollution to worry about, make the blacks just black and create an import profile with a touch of the "Blacks" slider and you are done. Very high contrast and as much shadow detail as you want with zero noise.

Stop thinking camera exposure, start thinking light for the optimal exposure to get the look I want when combined with an import profile, it will save you a shitload of time and money and get you the results you want with the gear you have.

This is what I do
http://robertodemicheli.4ormat.com/
I know my light modifiers and I've played with high end equipment (profoto and broncolor)
I'd rather not be patronized thanks

I am not patronising you, I am giving you a kick up the butt, there is no more than seven stops of DR in your opening page, if you are reaching into shadows to recover detail there is something wrong with your technique, that is just a fact. Take it from me anonymously or learn it in time from somebody in person, I don't care. You have 100% control over everything, hell even your beach shots have so much flash power you can control the blacks and contrast to 1/10 stop.

If you got me to "assist" I'd have you shooting tethered into Capture One and have you dialed in with limitless shadow detail in under an hour, for life.

And don't think I am acting like some internet hero, I am not, I am sure I could learn as much if not more from you, than you could from me, but that doesn't mean either of us will ever know enough.

 

[Marsu42]

When you say "high" dr is just a convenience, you realize that you could say that about almost any technological improvement in photography ever, right? AF, metering, TTL flash control, whatever, its all just convenience.

I disagree here: some shots simply cannot be taken at all w/o the proper technology - like in "never", not like in "sometimes, with a lot of hassle". Af, metering, whatever just help you get more keepers while you simply cannot shoot moving scene with a much higher dynamic range than your sensor can record in one frame.

Anyway, I have a whole lot of photos of whiteheaded woodpeckers shot in 3/4 sunlight that I would love to have cleaner shadows. Black and white birds, shot to preserve the highlights, means I have to lift the shadows to get any detail in the black feathers and there is just a ton of noise, even at ISO200. Its pretty much exactly the situation you touched on at the end there.

Well, use Magic Lantern's dual_iso, problem solved.

 

[Etienne]

You can have very high contrast and no issues with shadow detail, you are in control!

It is like people who blast two lights at full power onto the background and then have all kinds of scatter and pollution to worry about, make the blacks just black and create an import profile with a touch of the "Blacks" slider and you are done. Very high contrast and as much shadow detail as you want with zero noise.

Stop thinking camera exposure, start thinking light for the optimal exposure to get the look I want when combined with an import profile, it will save you a shitload of time and money and get you the results you want with the gear you have.

This is what I do
http://robertodemicheli.4ormat.com/
I know my light modifiers and I've played with high end equipment (profoto and broncolor)
I'd rather not be patronized thanks

Nice work!

 

[Steve]

Well, use Magic Lantern's dual_iso, problem solved.

Cool, let me just install that on my 1DIV....hmmm

 

[Marsu42]

Well, use Magic Lantern's dual_iso, problem solved.

Cool, let me just install that on my 1DIV....hmmm

Sorry to hear that, way too many people with 1d cameras around here ... I'll try to remember to ask next time

 

[Lee Jay]

Well, use Magic Lantern's dual_iso, problem solved.

Cool, let me just install that on my 1DIV....hmmm

Sorry to hear that, way too many people with 1d cameras around here ... I'll try to remember to ask next time

Won't be easy to get on the 70D or 7D Mark II either.

 

[jonjt]

I just wanted to do a full jrista quote at least one time, too ...

... and care to comment that you have to take care of inflation, because when Canon has moved to a smaller process, faveon or quantum sensors it might be 2100 and you're money has gone :->

Lets hope my investments beat inflation over that period.

In any case, if Canon doesnt do something big for the 5DIV, I'll just get a 5DIII and be done with it. The move to FF will give me a big upgrade anyway.