Canon to release a 100mp EOS R system camera next year [CR2]

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,743
1,307
Or even photoshop 2* resolution feature on a 24MP picture vs 100MP picture.

For all the press hype I have to agree with Tony Northrup: it doesn't seem any better than Preserve Details 2.0. Maybe I just haven't thrown the right RAW file at it yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fischer

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
428
519
Orewa , New Zealand
I’d expect the R7 sensor to be a revised/updated version of the 32.5MP sensor in the 90D, with faster readout, lower noise, and enter DR, though the 90D is already pretty good IQ.
Yes , that's probably what Canon will do but hoping they'll go that bit further and use their latest sensor technology rather rehashing existing sensors
However if they just fit the 90D sensor in an R6 body it'll certainly be a great camera anyway and I'll buy one for sure
 

Fischer

EOS RP
Mar 17, 2020
313
228
Well probably because eventually there is nothing left for them to buy other than high mp ! However I think that’s going to change as mp becomes extreme, and we’ll see lower mp versions of cameras that are still featured like the high end models, maybe as we are seeing with the R6 & R5. Personally as someone who has two 5DSs I’m really missing a good up to date 20mp body.
R6 is excellent, if you like good colors. Its the best Canon sensor for noise and colors as far as I can tell - I use my own color profile which of course also helps.
 

Czardoom

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2020
347
734
I did meant A7R II.
The comparison is straight to the point - two cameras sold in the same time to the market to the same group of people. and Nope Canon did not catch up fast. Their DSLR sensor was lagging by more than one generation for 3-4 years until EOS system reaches the market. It is long enough that I was seriously evaluating possibility to switch side. There were real doubt that Canon will never be serious about mirrorless as the first few crop models also failed miserably
This has been answered before, but I don't think you got it. The cameras you were comparing (Sony and Canon) used a different sensor architecture, where Canon was lagging behind. With the 5D IV and all of their other cameras since (with the exception of the 6D II and the RD) they switched to on-sensor ADC technology. As soon as they switched to the new architecture, they essentially caught up. So, yes, it was fast and has continued to today.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pzyber and dtaylor

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
CR Pro
Nov 11, 2012
4,301
975
Yorkshire, England
This has been answered before, but I don't think you got it. The cameras you were comparing (Sony and Canon) used a different sensor architecture, where Canon was lagging behind.
Even so, to say that the 5DS/r has "no sensor performance" is a pretty asinine statement, unless of course English is not the poster's first language, and what he/she meant to say was "no sensor performance for me as I habitually and unnecessarily underexpose by at least two stops every time".
 

CanonGrunt

C70
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2012
218
140
This is why I got the R6 over the R5. I intend to pair it with one of these. Should be an awesome combo. I have a c70 for filming anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fischer

adrian_bacon

EOS M6 Mark II
Aug 12, 2020
89
86
Yes I know the market is probably there, my point was that as far as I can see the market is being driven by photographers personal desires not a technical requirement necessary for customer work (except for possibly a tiny fraction of a very small niche).

Which to me begs the question what is driving photographers to ask for 100mp 135 format sensors? So I asked, and so far one person has said they’d like it because they’d like it.
I want a 100MP sensor for a variety of reasons. Foremost, even though my default output for most images is down in the 8-12MP range, 100MP capture gives me more breathing room to shoot a little wider and crop in post without taking much of a total resolution hit. Secondly, 8-12MP output Looks better when capturing a 18MP, better at 24MP, better at 30MP, even better still at the 45MP of the R5. I have no doubts that 100MP will look even better still. What that upper limit is, who knows, all I know is when I normalize my output to -8x12 inches at 300PPI, capturing at ever higher resolutions looks better In terms of fine image detail, micro contrast, overall sharpness, and tonal gradiations. And lastly, I just want it.
 

adrian_bacon

EOS M6 Mark II
Aug 12, 2020
89
86
Yes , that's probably what Canon will do but hoping they'll go that bit further and use their latest sensor technology rather rehashing existing sensors
However if they just fit the 90D sensor in an R6 body it'll certainly be a great camera anyway and I'll buy one for sure
That would be nice, but at the same time, they do have the very real problem of trying to make money in an ever smaller market, and if the R7 is meant as a 7D and 7DII replacement just the 90D sensor in an R6 body is a pretty significant upgrade for those users, even if it isn’t the latest and greatest. We tend to forget that a lot of photogs buy a system and shoot with it for a long time. Not everybody buys a new camera every couple of years. I know guys who are still shooting with the 5DII.
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,517
5,771
There's another thing to remember about DP or QP that is not talked about: The very nature of their design is for each "diode" to produce the same value when the image at that point is in focus, and to produce differing +/- values when it is out of focus - that's how they can tell you how much & in what direction it is out of focus at that spot. Regarding increasing MP claims by calling 2 diodes "2 pixels" via extra interpolation: if you're out of focus (eg. for big background blur) then it doesn't matter how many diodes you have at that spot since it's a blur, and if you're in focus at that spot then it doesn't matter either since they produce the same signal. So the DP or QP doesn't really provide for useful higher(2x or 4x) MP claims, but it does provide for excellent phase detection AF which is what it was designed for.
Producing the same signal doesn't mean the sum of the two is useless, you can get different values depending on that sum of equal values. You can do all kinds of clever maths to infer better detail and color by summing different parts of different 'pixels' when they are using multiple diodes.
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,517
5,771
For all the press hype I have to agree with Tony Northrup: it doesn't seem any better than Preserve Details 2.0. Maybe I just haven't thrown the right RAW file at it yet.
It very much depends on the original file and the type of detail within it. I am getting some files with much better detail than Preserve Details 2.0, others not so much. I have already posted example images in a dedicated thread.

Personally I am finding it a real bonus and it saves me going outside PS for other up sizing options.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joules and dtaylor

Chig

Birds in Flight Nutter
Jul 26, 2020
428
519
Orewa , New Zealand
That would be nice, but at the same time, they do have the very real problem of trying to make money in an ever smaller market, and if the R7 is meant as a 7D and 7DII replacement just the 90D sensor in an R6 body is a pretty significant upgrade for those users, even if it isn’t the latest and greatest. We tend to forget that a lot of photogs buy a system and shoot with it for a long time. Not everybody buys a new camera every couple of years. I know guys who are still shooting with the 5DII.
Yep , I'm shooting with my 7D ii and I won't replace it until I can find a camera that gives a very significant upgrade at a price I can afford and the 90D sensor in an R6 (at hopefully a bit lower price than the R6) would be attractive enough for me and many other 7D ii owners , but if Canon makes it a bit more advanced at a bit higher price I'd probably spend the extra money too
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,517
5,771
I wonder if you’d really see much difference between the 50mp interpolated up with the latest software compared with a 100mp camera at normal viewing distances given that you'd need about 140mp to achieve 48" long side @ 300 dpi anyway. To me the angle of diminishing returns is beginning to get pretty steep.
Which of course sends us directly to Kieth who has, of course, already investigated the concept and published it ages ago ;)



 
Last edited:

MarinnaCole

I'm New Here
May 9, 2016
16
22
It makes no difference.
There is an article explaining the differences between EF and RF lens: https://petapixel.com/2019/06/17/canon-this-is-why-rf-lenses-are-outstanding/
Canon took down the video now I am not sure why.
As far as I am concerned, I hope they keep the AA filter. I despise aliasing.
Back in 5DS era, their strategy was to launch two almost identical cameras, one with and one without AA. If you shoot landscape most of time you won't care about about aliasing and likely you don't might slightly lower AF. For sports and indoor aliasing becomes annoying and people usually care AF speed A LOT.

For me a good landscape camera shouldn't have AA filter on the sensor. But that is just me
 

CanonFanBoy

Purple
CR Pro
Jan 28, 2015
5,680
4,113
Irving, Texas
Might be the wrong forum - you might need to ask somewhere that people with Phase one backs post...

... or maybe this rumor is just Canon's way of doing market research on whether or not people will buy it (I won't as it'll be too hard to get good results with hand held photography.)
With lens I.S. and IBIS, I don't think good results handheld will be a problem
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnC and dtaylor

dtaylor

Canon 5Ds
Jul 26, 2011
1,743
1,307
With lens I.S. and IBIS, I don't think good results handheld will be a problem

People get good results with the 90D and M6 mark II. I'll admit that I continue to use focal length x 1.6 on the 5Ds, held over from my crop days. That seems to work fine. A 100mp sensor might need 2x focal length, but then subtract IBIS / IS back out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amorse

Fischer

EOS RP
Mar 17, 2020
313
228
it (I won't as it'll be too hard to get good results with hand held photography.)
More MPIX does not add to the amount of blur as it is a pure optical function. When Nikon released the D800 36 MPIX camera in 2012 reviewers ran amok at the risk of "motion blur" when hand holding - because for the first time they could see it. Here, years later, pro reviewers understand that the number of MPIX does not matter and most reviews have stopped perpetuating this error. But myths live strong on the internet.

Here some of the myth building from DPR: "Back to resolution though. Can the D800 make good on its pixel count and provide a level of fine detail that trumps its DSLR rivals? It can. We emphasize the word can, because if you're truly after 36MP performance, be prepared to do some work. Flawless technique and top-shelf equipment (particularly lenses and a tripod) along with a low ISO are requirements not options. We've spent an inordinate amount of time in the preparation of this review getting things just so in order to reap what we feel the D800 is capable of producing."

Fortunately no such blah, blah, blah when reviewing the much higher MPIX R5. Now they write: "The Canon EOS R5 is well-suited for just about any type of photographer, whether you shoot portraits, events, weddings, sports, family gatherings, and more." And it is. Just like the 100 MPIX R will be.
 
Last edited:

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
CR Pro
Nov 11, 2012
4,301
975
Yorkshire, England
Which of course sends us directly to Kieth who has, of course, already investigated the concept and published it ages ago ;)



They are very good resources and I do like Keith's reviews and articles as he looks at things from a practical photographer's point of view.

To be honest I think that if everyone's main interest was to print pictures we wouldn't see the same drive for higher and higher mp, but of course generally the complete reverse is true and people are getting larger and larger monitors, with higher and higher resolution screens and want to view their images at full size, and good for them if that is what they enjoy. In fact the old adage about not seeing the wood (forest) for the trees is applicable although now you could say 'not see the wood for the bark on the trees' !

I read people who defend the need for higher and higher mp saying 'why wasn't 8mp enough' and then 10, 12mp etc, 'why did we need 20' and so on. Well there is a perfectly reasonable answer to this; given the physical size that we humans are, and our average vision, 8mp is only enough to print very small at a high dpi, and the limit of the resolution means that if you interpolate up to a greater sized output, although the image may be perfectly 'sharp' detail is lacking. 20mp on the other hand is itself very high resolution, has a native output size of a good medium sized print, say A3 super, and has the resolution (assuming a good file) to be interpolated up much larger, to what we would consider to be a big print and still have a high dpi. So as you go beyond 20mp in FF it is diminishing returns IMO. Certainly this is what I have found in using the 5DS for a few years.

All I can say is that after four years of using 50mp cameras my next one will definitely be a lower mp, somewhere between 20 and 30. Then at least as I upgrade by computer systems I can benefit from faster processing whereas at the moment as I upgrade computers to faster machines I also end up lifting the size of the files and so from a processing speed point of view stand still.

I've been shooting digital since 2005 when the original 5D came out, and there isn't one of my 12mp pictures that I've now thought 'what a pity I didn't take that on a 5DS', at least from a resolution point of view.
 

macrunning

Enjoying the Ride
Feb 12, 2021
177
447
WA
I want a 100MP sensor for a variety of reasons. Foremost, even though my default output for most images is down in the 8-12MP range, 100MP capture gives me more breathing room to shoot a little wider and crop in post without taking much of a total resolution hit. Secondly, 8-12MP output Looks better when capturing a 18MP, better at 24MP, better at 30MP, even better still at the 45MP of the R5. I have no doubts that 100MP will look even better still. What that upper limit is, who knows, all I know is when I normalize my output to -8x12 inches at 300PPI, capturing at ever higher resolutions looks better In terms of fine image detail, micro contrast, overall sharpness, and tonal gradiations. And lastly, I just want it.
So are you printing or is this for online? 8x12 would seem to indicate you are printing. Using the term PPI would seem to indicate you are using online in which case 150 would be more than suffice. If print, then the R5 would has more the twice the pixels needed to print an 8x12 at 300dpi. Would seem anything beyond that just get a good telephoto lens and take a good shot to start and avoid having to crop in. I personally would rather have another lens to go with the R5 than spend funds on a new body but if money is no object than I say have at it.