EOS 5D Mark IV To Use EOS C300 Mark II Technology? [CR2]

[CarlMillerPhoto]

If it uses it, it will be for stills, not video. No way is Canon putting their video DR from their $16,000 offering on a $3,500 offering.

 

[Woody]

... or as I read on FredMiranda, Sony patents prevent Canon from doing on-chip ADC.

I do not buy the Sony patent explanation. Samsung did it on the NX1, didn't they? Obviously there are many ways to achieve the same goal.

 

[mackguyver]

I wonder if it is just some upgraded version of the HDR movie mode from the new T6s, which seems to have been overlooked by just about everyone. I have no idea how well it works but here's a brief bit about it - from this page:

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_rebel_t6s_ef_s_18_135mm_is_stm_lens_kit#Features

 

[Stu_bert]

Any chance of Canon implementing this on the 5DS/5DSR?

Most likely not. The Westfall videos released when the 5DS/5DSR were released indicated that DR will be similar for 5DIII.

If it really is a simple matter of firmware implementation like ML, then I don't see why they wouldn't. There is also the possibility that at least in part, this is why the delay between announcement and release is so long. It seems the capability is there UNLESS of course this is something geared towards DPAF, which the 5DSR will not have so far as we know. I would expect the 5D4 however to be DPAF. Since they say "its a hardware issue" I suspect it IS directly related to DPAF.

Canon could indeed do the same as ML through firmware.

There's little info on how they do the 15 stops on the C300 II - there are 2 Digic DV 5s, but hardware could just mean using these, could mean 2 off-chip ADCs reading them in parallel, one digic aligned to an ADC.

I think there were previous discussions about using DPAF to do dual ISO and I believe the consensus was the technology did not allow this. But that might have been a hallucination...

 

[raptor3x]

Question for the chip-heads: can Sony sensors do dual readout, or is that precluded by the on-chip A/D, or something else...?

Even if they could there wouldn't be much point. The dual readout only helps mitigate the read noise issue which isn't present to nearly the same degree in the Sony sensors.

 

[raptor3x]

Any chance of Canon implementing this on the 5DS/5DSR?

Most likely not. The Westfall videos released when the 5DS/5DSR were released indicated that DR will be similar for 5DIII.

If it really is a simple matter of firmware implementation like ML, then I don't see why they wouldn't. There is also the possibility that at least in part, this is why the delay between announcement and release is so long. It seems the capability is there UNLESS of course this is something geared towards DPAF, which the 5DSR will not have so far as we know. I would expect the 5D4 however to be DPAF. Since they say "its a hardware issue" I suspect it IS directly related to DPAF.

This is almost certainly related to DPAF. One of the downsides with the Magic Lantern DualISO implementation is that, at least with the initial somewhat naive implementation, you lose half of your resolution in direction that you're alternating exposure. DPAF gives you twice the pixel density in one direction, which should be able to overcome the resolution issue, as well as the interpolation problems, without resorting to computationally expensive interpolation techniques. Whether the 7D2/70D/5Ds(?) DPAF architecture is actually capable of alternating exposure for pixels is another matter entirely. It's possible that Canon developed DPAF without realizing it's potential for improving RAW dynamic range and required a hardware revision to make it possible.

 

[Stu_bert]

... or as I read on FredMiranda, Sony patents prevent Canon from doing on-chip ADC.

I do not buy the Sony patent explanation. Samsung did it on the NX1, didn't they? Obviously there are many ways to achieve the same goal.

Didnt realise they had... concur therefore, unlikely to be a patent issue...

 

[Stu_bert]

Any chance of Canon implementing this on the 5DS/5DSR?

Most likely not. The Westfall videos released when the 5DS/5DSR were released indicated that DR will be similar for 5DIII.

If it really is a simple matter of firmware implementation like ML, then I don't see why they wouldn't. There is also the possibility that at least in part, this is why the delay between announcement and release is so long. It seems the capability is there UNLESS of course this is something geared towards DPAF, which the 5DSR will not have so far as we know. I would expect the 5D4 however to be DPAF. Since they say "its a hardware issue" I suspect it IS directly related to DPAF.

This is almost certainly related to DPAF. One of the downsides with the Magic Lantern DualISO implementation is that, at least with the initial somewhat naive implementation, you lose half of your resolution in direction that you're alternating exposure. DPAF gives you twice the pixel density in one direction, which should be able to overcome the resolution issue, as well as the interpolation problems, without resorting to computationally expensive interpolation techniques. Whether the 7D2/70D/5Ds(?) DPAF architecture is actually capable of alternating exposure for pixels is another matter entirely. It's possible that Canon developed DPAF without realizing it's potential for improving RAW dynamic range and required a hardware revision to make it possible.

Wouldnt that require separate circuitry for each pair of sub-pixels? I'd assumed (no idea!) that they'd be on the same currently.

 

[LOALTD]

But, but, all these friendly folks on the forums insist that more than 12-stops isn't necessary.


Kind of like how friendly Nikon folks insisted that more than 12MP wasn't necessary...until the D800 came out.


In all seriousness though, this is exciting. If this camera delivers on DR and video, I may stay with Canon rather than switching to Sony. This is your last stand Canon, make it a good one!

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

wow. Canon desperately wants to avoid creating new sensors at all costs. Dual gain retrofitting of old sensors...

 

[lintoni]

wow. Canon desperately wants to avoid creating new sensors at all costs. Dual gain retrofitting of old sensors...

And Dual Pixel sensors are old tech?

 

[KeithBreazeal]

The C300 Mark II has a 8.85 mega pixel sensor, so I doubt the 5D mark IV will use the same sensor- or maybe I'm missing something here.

 

[Orangutan]

But, but, all these friendly folks on the forums insist that more than 12-stops isn't necessary.

I don't think anyone in the forums believes more DR is bad. The assertion has always been that the Sonikon DR advantage does not make up for Canon's advantages in other areas (lenses, accessories, reliability, resale value, service & support, etc) except in unusual and/or niche circumstances. I'm pretty sure even Neuro would pre-order a 1DX Mk II with 15 stops of DR.

 

[Maiaibing]

If it takes 20.000 USD to get 9.4 megapix of this technology - I cannot see the relevance for a 5D-whatever.

Just does not match up at all.

 

[PureClassA]

If it uses it, it will be for stills, not video. No way is Canon putting their video DR from their $16,000 offering on a $3,500 offering.

There is a ton more to the Cinema bodies than just DR. Don't get hung up on that.

 

[raptor3x]

Any chance of Canon implementing this on the 5DS/5DSR?

Most likely not. The Westfall videos released when the 5DS/5DSR were released indicated that DR will be similar for 5DIII.

If it really is a simple matter of firmware implementation like ML, then I don't see why they wouldn't. There is also the possibility that at least in part, this is why the delay between announcement and release is so long. It seems the capability is there UNLESS of course this is something geared towards DPAF, which the 5DSR will not have so far as we know. I would expect the 5D4 however to be DPAF. Since they say "its a hardware issue" I suspect it IS directly related to DPAF.

This is almost certainly related to DPAF. One of the downsides with the Magic Lantern DualISO implementation is that, at least with the initial somewhat naive implementation, you lose half of your resolution in direction that you're alternating exposure. DPAF gives you twice the pixel density in one direction, which should be able to overcome the resolution issue, as well as the interpolation problems, without resorting to computationally expensive interpolation techniques. Whether the 7D2/70D/5Ds(?) DPAF architecture is actually capable of alternating exposure for pixels is another matter entirely. It's possible that Canon developed DPAF without realizing it's potential for improving RAW dynamic range and required a hardware revision to make it possible.

Wouldnt that require separate circuitry for each pair of sub-pixels? I'd assumed (no idea!) that they'd be on the same currently.

Yeah, I would think so but I'm not an EE so that's way beyond my ability to speak with any authority.

 

[PureClassA]

... or as I read on FredMiranda, Sony patents prevent Canon from doing on-chip ADC.

I do not buy the Sony patent explanation. Samsung did it on the NX1, didn't they? Obviously there are many ways to achieve the same goal.

Canon has had their own patent for column parallel ADCs published since 2013. It's not a patent issue. I don't believe Canon has ever promulgated that myth. Although it does get played on forums like this :

 

[PureClassA]

If it takes 20.000 USD to get 9.4 megapix of this technology - I cannot see the relevance for a 5D-whatever.

Just does not match up at all.

It takes $16k to get a C300 II with a a pixel-for-pixel perfect 4k density with 15 stops of DR, yes..... Plus the bucket loads of other high end cinema dedicated features, XLR and SDI inputs/outputs, recording capabilities, 10 variations of built in ND filters, waveform/zebra/focus peaking/etc displays and all with the capability of recording out in 14 Bit RAW or 4:4:4 ProRes.

I was hoping they would have priced it closer to 10-12k but oh well. Still can't compare the two.

 

[3kramd5]

wow. Canon desperately wants to avoid creating new sensors at all costs.

Have you intelligence that the C300II uses old an sensor? I would bet you sight unseen that it's new.

Canon likely wants to avoid retooling their entire fab if they can, not "at all costs," but to avoid costs.

If they can improve their camera output without a new fab, why shouldn't they?

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

wow. Canon desperately wants to avoid creating new sensors at all costs.

Have you intelligence that the C300II uses old an sensor? I would bet you sight unseen that it's new.

Canon likely wants to avoid retooling if the can, not "at all costs," but to avoid costs.

If they can improve their camera output without a new fab, why shouldn't they?

If it really is a hardware implementation of the ML increase in DR, then it's added DR at the expense of resolution. So instead of coming up with a more sensitive sensor, they are sacrificing one aspect of the image for the sake of the other.