I do. Take a look through my posting history! And that doesn’t answer my question.
Here are some crazy Canon EOS R1 specifications [CR0]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
There's 8K (as consumers see it, i.e. 7680x4320) and DCI 8K, which is 8192x4320. DCI 8K, like DCI 4K (which is 4096x2160) is a studio mastering and digital projection format that is used in movie theaters. In the home, it FullHD, UHD, and 8K, each at 1920x1080, 3840x2160, and 7680x4320.
Why would Canon call a 90 million photodiode sensor a 45 million pixel sensor if that was how they were looking at it?
A 21mp quad sensor would have 84 million photodiodes but according to Canon themselves, in it's current format/definition, would still only be a 21mp sensor.
Like I have said across threads now it isn't me that is splitting hairs on the terminology but we are going to have a whole load more threads on this if that is what they are doing.
Personally I never fully appreciated the distinction Canon have made, but they have, so now we might be looking at an interesting time of backpedaling and re-education on the finer points and definitions of pixels vs photodiodes.
Probably because to date, all raw processing software (at least that I know of) only sees Bayer arrays, and that would be Canon's default output. Even now, with being able to save dual pixel raw, Canon only uses that info so you can do AF micro adjustments after the fact, not actually generate a file with more resolution from the two sub-pixels.
Going to quad pixel AF still allows very easy bayer output, and if done, does allow very easy spatial resolution bumps by not combining the sub pixels, but does significantly bump up the post processing requirements. I suspect part of the reason why canon went to the CR3 file format over the CR2 format is to make it easier to store non-standard pixel arrays. You can save dual pixel raw files in CR2 files (like the 5DIV does), but it basically stores it as two bayer array images in sub-chunks. The CR3 format stores each color discretely in it's own chunk and the raw processor has to then read each color chunk, then combine it into a bayer array, then demosaic it. The CR3 format is a pretty big deviation to how Canon stores its sensor data over the CR2 format.
I also suspect Canon has very good reason to go quad pixel AF because it allows them to have more than 2 output gains. This is how they were able to get the DR increases and noise improvements in recent dual pixel bodies. Each sub-pixel is actually 1 stop different than the other one. The way they store it in CR2 files, again, is less than ideal, as they store the first bayer array as they normally would with both sub pixels combined, and the second bayer array with just the output of the second sub-pixel. With a quad pixel array, they'd have pretty good reason to store each sub-pixel by itself if saving quad-pixel files as it would mean a lot more flexibility when generating a full color image. That, and they could have quad gain structure where each sub pixel had 1 stop more gain than the next, giving a combined 4 stop spread between the sub pixels with which to generate an image from. This would be how they could get to 15.5+ stops (if outputting a ~24MP bayer array where all the sub pixels are combined). They could keep a 12 or 14 bit AD, and have 4 gain outputs. If they stored each sub pixel separately, they don't even have to store 16 bits per pixel, they could still do 12 or 14 bits, then when generating the full color image after the fact in their DPP software, store the full resulting RGB as a 16 bit TIFF file. I wouldn't be surprised in the least if it was just a straight 12 bit ADC (for speed), and they just use the multi-gain to get the DR.
Without an OVF very few professionals are going to make the investment in multiple bodies and glass.
Canon might want to go after sports that use a gimbal in not so bright light where there is less erratic movement. OVF and EVF hybrid?
Canon might want to go after sports that use a gimbal in not so bright light where there is less erratic movement. OVF and EVF hybrid?
Quad Bayer array sensors have been available for years.
Of course it makes sense for AF as at a very minimum, depending on how Canon algorithms are written it will vastly improve detect for horizontal and vertical lines regardless of the camera orientation.
But none of your technicalese, that if you had looked at my previous postings on Dual Pixel Sensors would have shown you I already knew, addresses the only question I had. If Canon differentiate between a photodiode and a pixel under their own definition the R5 is a 45mp camera NOT a 90mp camera. Canon state unequivocally it is a 45mp camera with 90million photodiodes. Similarly an 84 million photodiode quad sensor would have 21 million pixels.
The R5 does illustrate the fact that Canon can already process images with 90 million photodiodes 20 times a second so DIGIC capacity for an R1 series should be capable of 84 million photodiodes at 40 times a second without issue.
This would be an example of talking out of the side of your neck.
Indeed.
How do you put an OVF on a mirrorless camera, unless, of course, you're willing to tolerate it being off-axis?
Which, if such a thing were tolerable, would have meant no one would have bothered to invent such a kludgy thing as an SLR.
Quad Pixel sensors have been available for years in phones, the resolution gains so far have proven to be minimal, the true advantages are in noise calculations (that's a turn around from the old days of small pixels are noisy pixels isn't it?) and the ability to digitally 'zoom' particularly for video where pixel numbers are a key factor.
They don't say the R5 is a 90MP sensor because they don't output 90MP. They output 45. The reason they do that is that with dual pixel, there's little image quality benefit to double the horizontal resolution but interpolate the vertical resolution. I said as much on my last reply to you. Whether you consider it an answer is up to you. You can ask the same question about the Canon C100. It has a 4K sensor, but only outputs full HD, and Canon describes it as an HD video camera, not a 4K camera. Why don't they call it a 4K camera? It doesn't output 4K. Same with dual pixel sensors. It's not that complicated.
With quad pixel AF, they can double both directions, so, IF they were to go that route, I described one possible way they could and extract more resolution at little to no cost. We're talking about a CR0, so how it goes is anybody's guess.
The point I was trying to make is even if you're watching in 720 it was likely filmed in higher resolutions. You don't even need to do that for the whole video. If you have a segment that needs the higher resolution you can . Making it easier to do some magic in post.
Locally at the moment it's almost impossible to buy anything but UHD TVs. The few FHD models left are either small or very cheap. Less than €200. Often from no name brands.
The problem with streaming is that the companies often have to pay extra for each version. Locally Amazon at times doesn't even buy the English language rights to Hollywood movies. OTOH if you watch something produced for Amazon like American Gods it's in full UHD.
Finland. Yes, R5 is more expensive here as well but only because of higher taxes (~$5000 including 25% VAT).
On my 4k TV I don't see a difference between them when played locally, but in a few weeks when there are more bugs around I am going to try recording everything macro in 8k so I can crop to hopefully-more-than 4k.
I bet I'll get tired of it after a morning or 3 and start eyeing bigger CFe, an extra disk for the storage array and a non-90 days license for Final Cut
They are only $6,000 if you already own the lenses, batteries, media, cage, monitor, mattebox, NDs, follow focus, proper audio inputs etc. They play the same game as Black Magic when it comes to concealing true cost of ownership.
That's why the Canon C70 is so great at it's price point because you get cheaper media, the same sensor as c300 mkii, built in ND, proper audio etc etc. Not to mention it comes with a battery! Downside is you don't get to be a part of the club. Which let's face it, reds greatest marketing tool had always been the ability to tell clients "we use the same camera they used for (insert blockbuster movie here)"
Jesus Christ, Tony Northrup took the bait and spreads this "leaked info" as factual (and I'm afraid he won't be the only one)
By design the phase pixels (be them dual- or quad-) register the phase information (that is, a shift between H/V half images). The shift is null only if the corresponding part of the image is in focus.
He’s so funny. Was he standing at his “news desk” with the prop camera and/or lens on the counter and the plain text on the flatscreen behind him glaring the “headlines” doing the Northrop ‘eye-roll’ presentation?
Of course he was. Someone needs to tell him that his constant looking at the ceiling in his read-backs isn’t confidence inspiring. I once counted 22 in one segment...
He makes bank though. House and cars are on point.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
- Contains 2 staff post(s)
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
