High Megapixel Camera Coming in 2015 [CR3]

[Don Haines]

Remember that 120 megapixel APS-H sensor....
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/news/120_megapixel_apsh_format_cmos_sensor.do

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

A Canon sensor with the same technology 7D Mark II, but "stretched" up to 50 megapixel, would get much better score when DXO down convert to 8 megapixel, and the theoretical DR would overcome any camera that Canon has released to date.

nope, that's not how DR from Canon sensors scales, it's about the same at any scale

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Admin - have you excluded the possibility that this is a 23-25 mp DPAF sensor? I believe we were previously led to believe that Canon was launching a high MP APSC sensor (which later turned out to be a 40 million photosite 70D which takes 20 megapixel pictures). Just checking to see if that's the same thing here. If it's a 5D model, the line Canon is known for video, I could absolutely see this being the case.

No, it will be "pure" (no DPAF) high res sensor body. Possibly build around Sony sensor (not sure).
From technical point of view it would be better to put that sensor into mirrorless body, but I don't think they are going to do it.

Could you explain why the sensor would be better in a MILC, rather than a dSLR (from a technical point of view)?

1. No mirror = no vibrations = better use of high res.
2. CDAF for more precise autofocus

High res body surely won't be an action camera, so mirrorless would be just right

just go to liveview mode

(and the mirroless a7r has more vibration than 5D3 does in liveview silent mode 2)

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

There are many articles about the AA filter out there, so it's use is no mystery. It is there to reduce moire, but it's drawbacks are less detail, sharpness and lower resolution. That is why the newer high MP cameras have no filter. Put the AA filter back on, and you lose the advantages of the higher MP count. Pretty simple really.

no, almost everything you wrote there is incorrect

 

[Ryan85]

A 6D with >40MP, faster focus and faster fps would be fine with me. I'd buy it.

+1 that'd make a very nice landscape camera

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

yes , and it is regarding Canon sensor layout and read out, more Mp means also higher dynamic range due lower read out noise from the individual pixel, more Mp is a easy way to increase Canons dynamic range, but the analog signal path way can never be as short as, for example in the Exmor and it depends on the early AD conversion in Sony lay out

In other words, no. There are many other factors you mention above. Just increasing sensor resolution alone isn't going to absolutely increase DR.

Taking current type Canon tech going to more MP tends to very, very slowly lower SNR and very, very slowly increase DR. The gains in DR going from 23MP to 50MP won't be a whole lot and SNR loss won't be a whole lot. In more extremes like 8MP vs 250MP it can matter more.

 

[The Flasher]

Can we at least agree that we are using words to offer an opinion on an image-quality related metric? How about some pictures to suss this out as a group?

Agreed. When I return home next week, and I'm still motivated, I will dig up and post my architectural test shot for your scrutiny. In the meantime there's a few >gasp!!< youtube videos that illustrate the issues I am having with the 6D and other Canon bodies in general.

This one, (sorry for posting a Tony Northrup video) clearly shows the lack of shadow detail and noise on the 5d3 vs 810. Skip to the 15 minute mark https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR7Kjeq2aH4 I found similar results using the a7r vs 6d

 

[Don Haines]

A Canon sensor with the same technology 7D Mark II, but "stretched" up to 50 megapixel, would get much better score when DXO down convert to 8 megapixel, and the theoretical DR would overcome any camera that Canon has released to date.

nope, that's not how DR from Canon sensors scales, it's about the same at any scale

I don't think he is talking about real scaling..... he specifically said DXO down convert, which increases DR on non-Canon sensors and decreases it with Canon sensors

 

[dash2k8]

Some people are excited, some are denouncing this. One thing is for certain: this is a huge buzz that will not just affect Canon shooters but shake up the market for other brands as well. Studio/landscape shooters will be flocking to this 50MP body if all goes well, and suddenly Nikon and Sony will have to have something like this.

 

[Don Haines]

Some people are excited, some are denouncing this. One thing is for certain: this is a huge buzz that will not just affect Canon shooters but shake up the market for other brands as well. Studio/landscape shooters will be flocking to this 50MP body if all goes well, and suddenly Nikon and Sony will have to have something like this.

+1

I think we all knew it was coming.... it was just a matter of time. With Canon being so conservative, it means waiting until they can do it right....

Ten years ago we were at 6 or 8 megapixels and high ISO meant 3200.... Now look at the 7D2 or the 1DX... they are a LOT closer to any new 50 megapixel camera that the cameras of 10 years ago.... probably 95 percent of the way there.... although it sounds like a big deal, going from a 7D2 to a 50 megapixel FF camera is really just a small increment... just a matter of scaling a sensor yet using the same tried and true geometry.

 

[BozillaNZ]

Good news, just in time for a decision.

I will hold on to my 7D and 1Ds2 which don't worth much, and sell the 1Ds3 soon.

When the new Canon comes out there will be a decision to make:

1. It has the best sensor in the world, better than Exmor: Get the Canon and be happy, stay in Canon camp.
2. It has the same old 11-bit sensor only more pixels (i.e. FF 7D2): Get a Sony body and dump many of the L lenses, gradually move away from Canon camp.

Canon, many of your long time customers are giving you the last chance to redeem yourself.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Having bought a D800 and some pro level Nikon Glass, my big issues were post processing high ISO images. It was taking a minute for Lightroom to run the NR on a image, and that was a modern i7 pc at the time.

I've upgraded computers twice since, and those old D800 images process reasonably fast now. However, I still am uncertain about having to process 2500 images.

The big Use I get out of high MP images is the ability to crop, but that's only if they are pixel sharp, and the Nikon images were very noisy when severely cropped, while I can crop my 5D MK III without that concern.

Still, if there is a high ISO improvement, and dual pixel technology, I'll be very interested, and will likely pre-order, if only just to get a place in line.

If the 1D X drops a bunch in price, I'll jump and buy a used one.

 

[JonB8305]

Can we get a higher shutter speed than 1/200, leaf shutter perhaps? Also, can we get a lower ISO than 100.

These things combined with no AA filter would make me happy.

 

[ahsanford]

Some people are excited, some are denouncing this. One thing is for certain: this is a huge buzz that will not just affect Canon shooters but shake up the market for other brands as well. Studio/landscape shooters will be flocking to this 50MP body if all goes well, and suddenly Nikon and Sony will have to have something like this.

Sony (and by extension, Nikon) will likely beat Canon to market with a widely-rumored 46 MP sensor. So I don't think people will flock to this solely because of resolution -- they'll flock to it if it breaks new ground in IQ.

- A

 

[Berowne]

Only two weeks ago or so Eldar asked for ideas relating a optimal processing platform. The discussion was realistically based on the existing Canon-Sensors. But what will happen with a 50 Mp-Sensor, how large will a RAW-File be? What will this mean for the work with complex Data (Stacking) in PS. Does anybody have experiences with medium-format RAW-Data from 50/60 Mp Sensors?

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=23951.0%20optimal%20processing%20platform.

Greetings Andy

 

[Woody]

If Chipworks is right, then the jump to a high megapixel camera probably means a new sensor design approach:

"Given the geometric constraints of 0.5 µm design rules, Canon seems content to hang around the 21 Mp resolution for recent FF sensors through the use of shared pixels. Jumping to a higher resolution generally requires more advanced design rules and pixel sharing architecture...

It is worth noting that September 2012 marked the 10 year anniversary of Canon’s announcement of the world’s first CMOS FF sensor, the EOS 1Ds. While Chipworks didn’t analyze that camera, every Canon FF sensor analyzed since has used the same 0.5 µm design rules."
- http://www.chipworks.com/en/technical-competitive-analysis/resources/blog/full-frame-dslr-cameras-canon-stays-the-course/?lang=en&Itemid=815

Let's hope it all works out.

 

[plam_1980]

Since 3D is really confusing, what do you think about 2D? 2D is the way we see things actually, especially on photos and prints. And 2D is below 1D line but way above 5D, it will work from marketing point of view?

 

[Bruce Photography]

Some one earlier wrote:
[/quote]
No AA filter = not positive for anything but the company making the camera (AA filters are very expensive optical devices). Removing it does not help image quality, and it does hurt image quality of still images.
[/quote]

Do you use cameras with and without the AA filters? I shoot the D800, 5DIII, D800E, D810 and the D7100. In ALL cases, for my most detailed landscape work at low ISO, the cameras without the AA filter produce superior IQ Images to ones that have the AA filter and I have the large prints (3 feet by 2 feet average size) to prove it.

 

[keithcooper]

The 3D

Call it a 3D - anyone confused should take it as a hint that it is not for them... ;-)

 

[Lee Jay]

Some one earlier wrote:

No AA filter = not positive for anything but the company making the camera (AA filters are very expensive optical devices). Removing it does not help image quality, and it does hurt image quality of still images.
[/quote]

Do you use cameras with and without the AA filters? I shoot the D800, 5DIII, D800E, D810 and the D7100. In ALL cases, for my most detailed landscape work at low ISO, the cameras without the AA filter produce superior IQ Images to ones that have the AA filter and I have the large prints (3 feet by 2 feet average size) to prove it.
[/quote]

I've seen tons of shots from AA-less cameras from owners who were showing them to me to prove their superior IQ. The shots are always crunchy and covered top to bottom with artifacts. Some people just don't see those artifacts while to others they are obvious and nasty. Generally the first group is obsessed with sharpness.

I'm very sensitive to that crunchy artifact filled look, and absolute sharpness means very little to me.