I don't understand

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I guess I don't understand.
Are we only supposed to speculate and talk about Canon Rumors, and only talk about Nikon and Sony products released on the market.
Or is it that it is a waste of time complaining that Canon's Rumors about a FF mirrorless are behind Sony and Nikons rumors.

I am confused now about which rumors we can spread and which we can't.

Its perfectly acceptable to post rumors of other brands, there is a section called third party manufacturers under rumors to do it in.

If its posted as a Canon Rumor, then its is either trying to stir up people, or someone can't read.

 

[takesome1]

I guess I don't understand.
Are we only supposed to speculate and talk about Canon Rumors, and only talk about Nikon and Sony products released on the market.
Or is it that it is a waste of time complaining that Canon's Rumors about a FF mirrorless are behind Sony and Nikons rumors.

I am confused now about which rumors we can spread and which we can't.

Its perfectly acceptable to post rumors of other brands, there is a section called third party manufacturers under rumors to do it in.

If its posted as a Canon Rumor, then its is either trying to stir up people, or someone can't read.

I seldom look at sections and just watch the new posts. Did this thread start out in Canon Rumors and then was moved?

 

[Sporgon]

Sony and anyone else are welcome to their 36mp sensor. Canon will continue to do that they are good at: producing cameras for photographers. Any more than 24 mp on a FF sensor and I would want a larger format to go with it.

Just out of interest, is there anything in the Sony sensor fabrication that makes it more feasible to have and use 36 mp on a FF sensor size compared with the Canon process ?

 

[Halfrack]

Yes, I also fail to understand... why we need 40+ MP cameras. Sigh...

You don't need it, but it sure is nice when you have it. The only way to get it right now is MF. There are trade offs for MF - and they are huge:

Lens options - let's be honest, there are 10x more in the 35mm world than in the medium format world
Lens length - 200-400mm zoom, 800mm lenses - 35mm has this covered, 645 shooters just got a 2x extender
Shots per second - up to 14fps - need I say more? Phase does a dark frame equal to your exposure, and Hasselblad does 1fps
Speedlites - TTL is your friend, and doesn't exist in in the MF world, so your wireless remotes are just 'pop'

So, for people who want these high MP images in the 35mm format, the ability to use these advantages is huge.

But, 40/50/60/80mp images are AMAZING to work with, and when printed are a whole different ball of wax. There is a market for it, but there is an associated cost to it. I can do a 24x36 print, and my resolution is 300 pixels per inch - off of a native file. Yes, you can interpolate up to this, and even higher, but side by side, a MF image at size will look better.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

Yes, I also fail to understand... why we need 40+ MP cameras. Sigh...

You don't need it, but it sure is nice when you have it. The only way to get it right now is MF. There are trade offs for MF - and they are huge:

Lens options - let's be honest, there are 10x more in the 35mm world than in the medium format world
Lens length - 200-400mm zoom, 800mm lenses - 35mm has this covered, 645 shooters just got a 2x extender
Shots per second - up to 14fps - need I say more? Phase does a dark frame equal to your exposure, and Hasselblad does 1fps
Speedlites - TTL is your friend, and doesn't exist in in the MF world, so your wireless remotes are just 'pop'

So, for people who want these high MP images in the 35mm format, the ability to use these advantages is huge.

But, 40/50/60/80mp images are AMAZING to work with, and when printed are a whole different ball of wax. There is a market for it, but there is an associated cost to it. I can do a 24x36 print, and my resolution is 300 pixels per inch - off of a native file. Yes, you can interpolate up to this, and even higher, but side by side, a MF image at size will look better.

Halfrack - Thank you so much for such an insightful and enlightening explanation why I would want high MP technology in a 35mm FF camera. No sarcasm or insults, just a good set of reasons from someone who sounds like they have real experience with something that is indeed rare and out of the norm. I thought I knew why high MP could be important but even though I understand the theory behind what benefit high MP offers, you presented a well supported answer to my basic question. You sold and explained it in a way that makes me respect high MP more and not see it as a mere marketing ploy to take my money.

If I understand your explanation and read it correctly, you are saying that a high MP FF 35mm format sensor (done well) would offer/allow someone the ability to crop in and get a medium format ratio while using the wealth of technology and lens choices that only the 35mm cameras currently offer. Even though medium format cameras currently have good sensors, the current state of MF camera technology and lens choices is frustrating to work with. I was not aware of this because digital medium format is so far out of reach for just about everyone, esp amateurs. The ability to crop from a high MP 35mm sensor would allow you to "cheat" with good results, use better technology and possibly save money at the same time?

Am I right? Did I correctly understand your explanation?

Thanks again for bringing light to an otherwise lost thread.

 

[Drizzt321]

Yes, I also fail to understand... why we need 40+ MP cameras. Sigh...

You don't need it, but it sure is nice when you have it. The only way to get it right now is MF. There are trade offs for MF - and they are huge:

Lens options - let's be honest, there are 10x more in the 35mm world than in the medium format world
Lens length - 200-400mm zoom, 800mm lenses - 35mm has this covered, 645 shooters just got a 2x extender
Shots per second - up to 14fps - need I say more? Phase does a dark frame equal to your exposure, and Hasselblad does 1fps
Speedlites - TTL is your friend, and doesn't exist in in the MF world, so your wireless remotes are just 'pop'

So, for people who want these high MP images in the 35mm format, the ability to use these advantages is huge.

But, 40/50/60/80mp images are AMAZING to work with, and when printed are a whole different ball of wax. There is a market for it, but there is an associated cost to it. I can do a 24x36 print, and my resolution is 300 pixels per inch - off of a native file. Yes, you can interpolate up to this, and even higher, but side by side, a MF image at size will look better.

Halfrack - Thank you so much for such an insightful and enlightening explanation why I would want high MP technology in a 35mm FF camera. No sarcasm or insults, just a good set of reasons from someone who sounds like they have real experience with something that is indeed rare and out of the norm. I thought I knew why high MP could be important but even though I understand the theory behind what benefit high MP offers, you presented a well supported answer to my basic question. You sold and explained it in a way that makes me respect high MP more and not see it as a mere marketing ploy to take my money.

If I understand your explanation and read it correctly, you are saying that a high MP FF 35mm format sensor (done well) would offer/allow someone the ability to crop in and get a medium format ratio while using the wealth of technology and lens choices that only the 35mm cameras currently offer. Even though medium format cameras currently have good sensors, the current state of MF camera technology and lens choices is frustrating to work with. I was not aware of this because digital medium format is so far out of reach for just about everyone, esp amateurs. The ability to crop from a high MP 35mm sensor would allow you to "cheat" with good results, use better technology and possibly save money at the same time?

Am I right? Did I correctly understand your explanation?

Thanks again for bringing light to an otherwise lost thread.

My reading from his (pretty good) post was that the lens choices & accessories are much more varied, and often more advanced than in the MF world. True enough.

But with a high MP FF 35mm format you can either blow it up a lot bigger and avoid interpolation (which will result it better viewing close up) while retaining a fairly small physical size and wide lens & accessories that are available. Or, you can crop in as much or more which gives you a narrower effective Field of View and 'zoom' in digitally while letting you still print at acceptable sizes without interpolation.

However, the one thing that 35mm can never do is simulate the look of MF based on sensor size. Just a fact of physics, the physical sensor size can't give quite the same look that MF can give. I haven't ever used MF digital, but over the past year I've gotten heavily into MF film (6x7 & 6x6). While it's film and then needing to scan it does result in a different look, at lot of it is also the perspective difference that using such a relatively large physical size results in.

Now, in theory, you could have a format that is between 35mm & 6x4.5. Sorta like APS-H was in between APS-C & FF. However you then lose compatibility between all those 35mm accessories, which makes it unlikely Canon would do that. They'd either just go right up to 6x4.5 or 6x6, or go 40+MP on 35mm FF. However, there will still be plenty of people that want 18MP 1DX type body. File sizes, processing time, number of images per card, and especially max frame rate are all important to many different photographers. However there definitely is a place for a high MP FF body, either 5D or 1D style body, but definitely with 1D build quality & functionality.

 

[Don Haines]

Rumours from other companies are fine. Canon does not exist in a vacuum, they compete in a global market. What other companies are doing and planning provide clues as to where the industry is heading and that gives us clues as to where Canon might go.

As to "high megapixel" cameras.... remember when 18 Megapixels was a high number? Remember when 10 was big? Remember when 4 was big?

My first digital camera was 320x200 pixels.... I now have a 16Megapixel p/s and an outdated 18 megapixel DSLR (and a 10Mpixel DSLR..... and an 8....) The number of pixels has been steadily growing over the years... the curve seems to be slowing down, but you can be sure that in a few years everyone will have a model over 30 megapixels... right now 20 or 21 is nothing special.

Numbers sell, if it has more then it must be better , particularly with the introductory cameras. Would an introductory Canon camera with 30Mpixels outsell an introductory Nikon with 24Mpixels? Probably... it has more so it must be better. Remember that most users do not understand what makes a good camera.... they buy an introductory camera with a kit lens and they are happy.... and this is the bulk of the market, the people who keep the manufacturers in business.

High end cameras are about quality. Low end cameras are about numbers. If I compare my p/s to a 1DX it looks pretty good.. The 1DX is weathersealed, my p/s works underwater... the 1DX has 18Mpixels, my p/s has 16.... the 1DX has a burst rate of 10 or 12, my p/s has a burst rate from 20 to 60 (depending on image size), my p/s shoots 240hz video.... and my p/s even has a dedicated program mode for taking cat pictures, a necessary feature for facebook

 

[brett b]

I'm waiting for the 75mp camera from Canon, everything else is just for amateurs. Once I get that, I can FINALLY take the special shots that are locked away in my mind that none of my current sad gear can achieve. Oh I can't wait for that day.

Not me! I'll wait for the 2nd gen version of the body you are waiting for.
By then they'll have the bugs worked out!
Really looking forward to the day I can finally take those good pictures!!

 

[Ewinter]

I'd like a high MPix 1 series body for landscape and portrait but you can prise my 1DX from my cold dead hands for what I use it for, 18 MPix is enough, and I don't want to deal with anything over 20 megapixels when I'm shooting over 1000 images a night and have to pp them next day.

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

I'd like a high MPix 1 series body for landscape and portrait but you can prise my 1DX from my cold dead hands for what I use it for, 18 MPix is enough, and I don't want to deal with anything over 20 megapixels when I'm shooting over 1000 images a night and have to pp them next day.

I agree with you. I desire nothing more than 18 megapixel on a camera for my use. However, I understand that Canon should offer different options to meet the needs of various types of photographers. Surely there will be a Canon over 36 megapixel, which will be helpful for some people. If I was a Nikon user, I would be pissed about having no camera option now under 24 megapixel. Thank you Canon for offering cameras and lenses more flexible.

 

[TAF]

and my p/s even has a dedicated program mode for taking cat pictures, a necessary feature for facebook

Humm...that sounds like something that I would find quite useful - what's the model number?

I've noticed that the facial recognition focus mode in my EOS-M won't 'do cats'.

Perhaps Magic Lantern will offer a version that turns the C3 position on my 5D3's main dial into just such a function...it should be popular.

 

[eml58]

I'd like a high MPix 1 series body for landscape and portrait but you can prise my 1DX from my cold dead hands for what I use it for, 18 MPix is enough, and I don't want to deal with anything over 20 megapixels when I'm shooting over 1000 images a night and have to pp them next day.

Completely agree.

There is in my mind a definite need for Canon to produce a high MP Camera, Medium Format but I hope in a 1D Body. Would they survive as a Company if they continue with the current Sensor Line ?? I don't think so, Companies like Canon need to continue to innovate to survive in the Market, there are loads of examples where companies that stagnate innovation tend to Die, Nokia & Black berry spring to mind, Apple now changing their own long held view on producing only for the Market what Apple feel the Market needs, Samsung have clearly provided the impetus for Apple to rethink that view, and they (Apple) have reacted to what the Market wants (Not needs, wants).

I believe Canon were wrong footed when Nikon brought to Market the D800 @ 36MP, I'm not into arguing one Camera company versus another here, only that Nikon jumped a step up on it's competitors with the D800, exactly the way Canon did when they brought to Market the 5DMK II and the Higher MP Sensor with Video ability. This is all a part of the Business of Innovation and a Companies ability to look forward to what the Market will buy, Steve Jobs being in my mind the supreme forward thinker in this area.

Do we need High MP Cameras, not really.

Would I buy one if Canon released one, in a New York second, because I would like a MF Camera, in a 1D Body, that takes the Lenses I currently use, shoots at 6 or 7 fps, and gives me a huge file that I can work on whenI shoot Landscape, Portraits etc. I would buy a Phase One, but I just don't want to get into another system, tried that with the D800, didn't like the experience, tried it with Leica M9, wasn't keen on that either.

Would I get rid of my 1Dx, only when Canon develops a similar frame rate Camera, I actually need the 12fps in my wildlife Imaging, I don't really mind if it's 18MP or 1800 MP, as long as it's 12fps or better and as long as Sandisc continue to develop CF Cards etc with large enough capacity & with fast enough transfer speed to handle the Larger size Files, and as long as Apple keep producing better Computers to allow me to Post Process as I do now.

Look forward to a Canon 1D with +45MP and 7FPS.

 

[Don Haines]

and my p/s even has a dedicated program mode for taking cat pictures, a necessary feature for facebook

Humm...that sounds like something that I would find quite useful - what's the model number?

I've noticed that the facial recognition focus mode in my EOS-M won't 'do cats'.

Perhaps Magic Lantern will offer a version that turns the C3 position on my 5D3's main dial into just such a function...it should be popular.

It is an Olympus TG-830. I got it for use in the kayak and for in the rain. The camera is waterproof to about 40 feet and works underwater.... Makes it kind of hard to accidentally destroy... And it really does have a cat mode... I am serious.... I am not kidding! The picture is of the camera display in the mode selection menu...

 

[surapon]

.
I don't understand. It's a chronic condition -- and not always intolerable.

Surapon,
Does your Canon engineer friend ever give you any more "secret information" that you can share with your other friends here at CR ;D. :-X P.S., I always enjoy reading your posts, and admire your politeness, which is something I could improve on myself.

PS, sorry distant.star and Surapon, I quoted the wrong post, :-[ :-[though I like yours also distant.star

Dear Sir, my friend " ME".
Sorry, He , my Japanese friend never tell me his Company secret, Ha, Ha, Ha---My dear Japanese friend might do " Harakiri" by use the long / sharp knife stab in to his gut and kill him self first before open the company secret ---ha, ha, ha -- Well , YES, Before I buy new Canon Camera bodies or Canon Lens, I call him and ask him " is this time that I should but---So & So ?"-----And He might say Yes, or Say = Just wait another 4 more months. , And I just wait another 4 more months. Yes, in 1974, We both went to study English in LSU for 1 semester. and After that I went to NCSU, in Raleigh to study M. ARCH, And He went to NY, to study Engineer.
Nice to talk to you, Sir.
Have a great week end.
Surapon

 

[surapon]

Yes, I also fail to understand... why we need 40+ MP cameras. Sigh...

Can someone please enlighten me? All I see is a future with a 40+ MP camera where I can only fit a small number of large megabyte RAW image files on an expensive CF card that takes longer to write. Then I have to deal with my expensive lenses not resolving as well on the higher res sensor. I also have to worry that the sensor itself will or will not render a high quality image with such a high pixel density. There are other issues but in general, unless I am printing a billboard, I fail to see what super high megapixels really gains me.

FWIW, I was ecstatic when I learned that the 5D3 was NOT going to have a high megapixel sensor.

What I care about is greater exposure abilities and IQ from a sensor, not higher megapixels. Better low light, dynamic range, etc. Greater MP seems to always make obtaining better quality that much harder.

Dear Sir, Mr. RustyTheGeek.
Try to answer your great question " why we need 40+ MP cameras "---And I am not the REAL PRO/ Professional Photographer, BUT, I am American architect---Yes, We do the presentation, when we have ground breaking ceremony, and try to print the posters of the Building site + the Proposed Building how it look when we finish the project. Yes that 42 inches X 65 Inches Poster , that wide as my 8 years old ,42 Inches HP. Designjet 800 Plotter that can print. No I still do not have enough Pixel 21.5 of my old Canon 5D MK II for looking good poster, at the 5-8 feet away from the photo/ poster.
Yes, I start to think, How about the Bill board on the Street, That Huge size bill board---How can they take the photos to do that great looking bill board ?---Do they/ the Graphic designers want bigger MP. Cameras to shoot that Photos ??.
Yes, May be the PRO/ our friends in this great CR. can help us to answer your great questions.
Have a great weekend.
Surapon

 

[Pi]

That's a simplistic statement.

No more so than the concept:

megapixels => camera/image/photo quality

Fighting simplistic statements with simplistic statements is a good way to dumb down a discussion and make this forum much less interesting.

Actually, it is a good way to expose the simplicity in the first place.

In this case however, there is nothing simplistic. Higher mp sensors do offer more resolution, and they have their uses.

 

[TAF]

and my p/s even has a dedicated program mode for taking cat pictures, a necessary feature for facebook

Humm...that sounds like something that I would find quite useful - what's the model number?

I've noticed that the facial recognition focus mode in my EOS-M won't 'do cats'.

Perhaps Magic Lantern will offer a version that turns the C3 position on my 5D3's main dial into just such a function...it should be popular.

It is an Olympus TG-830. I got it for use in the kayak and for in the rain. The camera is waterproof to about 40 feet and works underwater.... Makes it kind of hard to accidentally destroy... And it really does have a cat mode... I am serious.... I am not kidding! The picture is of the camera display in the mode selection menu...

Wow, a dog mode as well...and waterproof, shock resistant, and affordable.

I think I "need" one for model aircraft use.

I hope Canon does a firmware update to compete.

Thank you very much!

 

[ME]

.
I don't understand. It's a chronic condition -- and not always intolerable.

Surapon,
Does your Canon engineer friend ever give you any more "secret information" that you can share with your other friends here at CR ;D. :-X P.S., I always enjoy reading your posts, and admire your politeness, which is something I could improve on myself.

PS, sorry distant.star and Surapon, I quoted the wrong post, :-[ :-[though I like yours also distant.star

Dear Sir, my friend " ME".
Sorry, He , my Japanese friend never tell me his Company secret, Ha, Ha, Ha---My dear Japanese friend might do " Harakiri" by use the long / sharp knife stab in to his gut and kill him self first before open the company secret ---ha, ha, ha -- Well , YES, Before I buy new Canon Camera bodies or Canon Lens, I call him and ask him " is this time that I should but---So & So ?"-----And He might say Yes, or Say = Just wait another 4 more months. , And I just wait another 4 more months. Yes, in 1974, We both went to study English in LSU for 1 semester. and After that I went to NCSU, in Raleigh to study M. ARCH, And He went to NY, to study Engineer.
Nice to talk to you, Sir.
Have a great week end.
Surapon

Surapon,
I definitely would not want your friend to be placed under that kind of obligation. Besides, he might be designing the next great lens or camera! (which one Surapon?). Just kidding. I know, :-X :-X :-X. I will, however, be scrutinizing your posts more carefully, trying to read between the lines
Hope you are enjoying your weekend also. I am enjoying this wonderful weather we are having a little south of you in South Carolina.
Everett

 

[Sporgon]

Yes, I start to think, How about the Bill board on the Street, That Huge size bill board---How can they take the photos to do that great looking bill board ?---Do they/ the Graphic designers want bigger MP. Cameras to shoot that Photos ??.
Yes, May be the PRO/ our friends in this great CR. can help us to answer your great questions.
Have a great weekend.
Surapon

Those large high street Bill Board posters are never printed at high resolution, and there's more reasons to that than just huge file sizes. There been quite a lot of research done in viewing distance and the best resolution in dpi, and for something that is intended for best viewing from some distance, say fifty feet, you are down to very low resolution; 40 ppi would be high.

With regard to normal pictures, a image rarely becomes better by sticking your nose up against it, unless it is a technical recording of something. Resolution needs to be suited to the picture size and viewing distance; enter the highly versatile 20 mp FF.

The only real justification I can see for much higher mp in the FF format is cropping options. Other than that the most benefit will be to those who like to look at their images at 100% on their computer.

 

[surapon]

Yes, I start to think, How about the Bill board on the Street, That Huge size bill board---How can they take the photos to do that great looking bill board ?---Do they/ the Graphic designers want bigger MP. Cameras to shoot that Photos ??.
Yes, May be the PRO/ our friends in this great CR. can help us to answer your great questions.
Have a great weekend.
Surapon

Those large high street Bill Board posters are never printed at high resolution, and there's more reasons to that than just huge file sizes. There been quite a lot of research done in viewing distance and the best resolution in dpi, and for something that is intended for best viewing from some distance, say fifty feet, you are down to very low resolution; 40 ppi would be high.

With regard to normal pictures, a image rarely becomes better by sticking your nose up against it, unless it is a technical recording of something. Resolution needs to be suited to the picture size and viewing distance; enter the highly versatile 20 mp FF.

The only real justification I can see for much higher mp in the FF format is cropping options. Other than that the most benefit will be to those who like to look at their images at 100% on their computer.

Thanks you, Sir, Dear Teacher Mr. Sporgon.
Thanks for your great infor----Yes, We never get to close to see the Bill Board, And We are Fast Driver too---That why we never observe the Details of the photos on the Bill Board. and I just forget this logic , until you point out.
Thanks again, Sir.
Surapon