Canon U.S.A. Announces New 120 MP Ultra-High Resolution and 2.7 MP Ultra-High Sensitivity CMOS Sensors
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
OK. Does the 100MP sensor have Dynamic Range? Any of it? 
I'm no troll, but since I added an A7R III, I now know what we've been missing out on for years. While Canon lenses area amazing, Canon sensors SUCK. They really do. The difference between a Canon and a Sony sensor is literally day and night (as far as shadow detail is concerned).
Here is hoping Canon will catch up, and I don't need to switch to Sony completely.
I'm no troll, but since I added an A7R III, I now know what we've been missing out on for years. While Canon lenses area amazing, Canon sensors SUCK. They really do. The difference between a Canon and a Sony sensor is literally day and night (as far as shadow detail is concerned).
Here is hoping Canon will catch up, and I don't need to switch to Sony completely.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
The astro rumor originated on this site with members. Nothing from Canon about it, nor from any credible sources as far as I am aware of. Canon mentioned a "head scratcher" that nobody expects, but did not say it would be an astro camera. That idea just came from brainstorming by members here, wondering what the "head scratcher" could possibly be.
Upvote
0
Every single digital camera ever made has a dynamic range. Canon sensors do not suck. My goodness.OK. Does the 100MP sensor have Dynamic Range? Any of it?
I'm no troll, but since I added an A7R III, I now know what we've been missing out on for years. While Canon lenses area amazing, Canon sensors SUCK. They really do. The difference between a Canon and a Sony sensor is literally day and night (as far as shadow detail is concerned).
Here is hoping Canon will catch up, and I don't need to switch to Sony completely.
Upvote
0
I don't know, that sounds a lot like trolling.OK. Does the 100MP sensor have Dynamic Range? Any of it?
I'm no troll, but since I added an A7R III, I now know what we've been missing out on for years. While Canon lenses area amazing, Canon sensors SUCK. They really do. The difference between a Canon and a Sony sensor is literally day and night (as far as shadow detail is concerned).
Here is hoping Canon will catch up, and I don't need to switch to Sony completely.
Technically, wouldn't a camera with literally no dynamic range not be a camera at all? As in it could generate only one on/off response? Could it even do that? Trying to figure out what a camera with no DR would actually be is beyond me.
Upvote
0
OK. Does the 100MP sensor have Dynamic Range? Any of it?
These sensors are very likely not for photography applications - either pro, prosumer or consumer. Those are industrial sensors; and I have no doubt that they have plenty enough dynamic range for what they are meant.
Yes, Canon has had sensors with less than stellar dynamic range, but please don't be one of those lazy whiners. Instead, find ways to overcome the limitations - exposure stacking, mean stacking, natural-looking HDR... Yes, it gives you extra work, but it will make you a more capable image producer, which is not a bad thing, no matter what your next camera is going to be.
There are scenes in which not even the best of Hasselblad or PhaseOne will have enough dynamic range. There is no good substitute for skill.
Upvote
0
A couple of stops more in deep shadows (much less advantage in well exposed areas - and especially if you shoot ETTR - exposed to the right [of the histogram, before clipping useful detail]), but I wouldn't call it day and night. Especially if you compare the 5D4 with the newest of 35mm Sony to date.
Have you ever seen what it does to the resolution of tonal transitions and the resolution of textures if you lift heavy shadows? I suggest you to try this and then you might actually change your mind about how big the DR issue actually is.
If you want really crisp images with great texture and tonal detail across the tonal range, little noise and great colors for pixel peeping (because for ordinarily-sized prints it very rarely matters), you need to apply extra work in postprocessing, often even if you use the newest of Sony sensors including medium format ones. Also, don't forget to color-profile your camera & lenses (extra tip)... using something like the ColorChecker Passport from X-Rite. That will make way more difference to the quality of images than a little improved dynamic range of your sensor.
Let me repeat: THERE IS NO GOOD SUBSTITUTE FOR SKILL.
Lastly, talking about Sony vs. Canon... what do you think is more waterproof, dustproof and shockproof? What do you think is more ergonomical and fun to shoot? (Forget about the weight, because the lens you mount on your camera will effectively eliminate any significant benefits from using Sony's lighter bodies).
Upvote
0
Yes you are a troll. Canon 5D IV sensor dynamic range is excellent. As far as shadow details is concerned. In fact, even superior in DPRAW mode.OK. Does the 100MP sensor have Dynamic Range? Any of it?
I'm no troll, but since I added an A7R III, I now know what we've been missing out on for years. While Canon lenses area amazing, Canon sensors SUCK. They really do. The difference between a Canon and a Sony sensor is literally day and night (as far as shadow detail is concerned).
Here is hoping Canon will catch up, and I don't need to switch to Sony completely.
Upvote
0
Consider that Canon has to remain a viable company if they are to keep producing products that in some cases are not all that profitable, i.e. some of the equipment I enjoy possible wouldn't be available if it were not for Canons involvement in other areas such as copiers and industrial equipment. In other words I take exception to this comment.
Upvote
0
Exactly. If you're going to compare Canon to Sony sensors, you need to know which sensor you're comparing. The Sony A9 vs. Canon 1Dx II? I'll take the Canon all day long. If you're talking about the Sony A73 vs. Canon 5d4, I'd say the Sony is better, but the Canon is respectible. Now if you're comparing the Sony A73, to the Canon 6D2, then I'd say the Sony is significantly better.
In general Sony makes better sensors, but Canon has closed the gap considerably with the 5D4 and 1Dx II.
Upvote
0
True. But it doesn't mean there's a good substitute for good DR. Exposure blending and HDR are not a good substitute for images taken in one shot. I always prefer to minimise the amount of shots needed to produce one image, and ideally it's just one shot.
And no, knowing and using HDR and blending DOESN'T make you a better photographer. If your car often breaks and you know how to fix it and work around its issues, it doesn't make you a better driver on the road.
Upvote
0
The 120MP design is APS-H, so and EOS R sensor based on it would be ~175MP (~16,350h x 11300v)
No far from the S1R ~187MP multishot mode I tried recently with Canon lenses, which held up just fine.
Of course if the 175MP EOS R had similar sensor IS multi-shot, we'd get ~700MP in a shot which comes to an image of roughly 32700h x 22600v
That's too big for jpeg files and would need to use a format like .PSB (300k pixel limit). I'm by no means sure it could be used with any of the current RAW formats - perhaps time to borrow FITS from the astronomers?
I guess we'd still get the customary whinging about needing new cards/computers/disks...
...That and the usual "I don't need it, so no-one needs it" comments ;-)
Not entirely sure what I'd use the images for - perhaps two shifted up/down and stitched to get square gigapixel images... ;-)
No far from the S1R ~187MP multishot mode I tried recently with Canon lenses, which held up just fine.
Of course if the 175MP EOS R had similar sensor IS multi-shot, we'd get ~700MP in a shot which comes to an image of roughly 32700h x 22600v
That's too big for jpeg files and would need to use a format like .PSB (300k pixel limit). I'm by no means sure it could be used with any of the current RAW formats - perhaps time to borrow FITS from the astronomers?
I guess we'd still get the customary whinging about needing new cards/computers/disks...
...That and the usual "I don't need it, so no-one needs it" comments ;-)
Not entirely sure what I'd use the images for - perhaps two shifted up/down and stitched to get square gigapixel images... ;-)
Upvote
0
What type of processing techniques are you talking about? Like stuff beyond what you can do on Lightroom? I want to get really good at postprocessing and will take all the advice I can get.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
