Is a 150mp Canon EOS R camera on the way? [CR1]


CR Pro
Sep 4, 2012
Eastern Shore
It's possible that the 150 mp is just a high resolution mode with pixel shift in the R5 and they got confused with the rumors?

Meanwhile more R5 pics (i can't have enough of them)
Some nice close-ups of the 1.4X and 2X extenders plus the RF 100-500 lens too. The lens must have fairly close focus capability because the focus range button shows 3m to infinity in one position: the other position is “Full”.


CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
Some nice close-ups of the 1.4X and 2X extenders plus the RF 100-500 lens too. The lens must have fairly close focus capability because the focus range button shows 3m to infinity in one position: the other position is “Full”.
Same range selection with 100-400II then. Encouraging but we have to wait for Canon specifications.


Sep 4, 2018
Some nice close-ups of the 1.4X and 2X extenders plus the RF 100-500 lens too. The lens must have fairly close focus capability because the focus range button shows 3m to infinity in one position: the other position is “Full”.
It's written on the barrel 1.2m close focusing distance at tele end (500mm)
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia


EOS M6 Mark II
Feb 22, 2019
I think your memory is faulty. A quick search shows Canon announced a 120 mp sensor in 2010 and a 250 mp sensor in 2015. Neither was targeted to consumer cameras. Rather they were intended for surveillance cameras and to be sold to third party manufacturers.
Yes, you're right that the APS-H working prototype Canon displayed 5 years ago was 250 megapixel, and the sensor they put on sale was 120 megapixels. I'm aware that the latter was not marketed for consumer cameras (for use in surveillance etc). However, there was definitely a Canon official at the time of the demonstration of the working 250mp prototype, there were actual images from it, who said that in several years a sensor like this would find it's way into a camera. The context was a consumer camera. Of course it was vague. However, this and several other pieces of information at the time suggested that Canon envisaged very high resolution consumer cameras in the future. This is significant. It takes a lot of time for things being developed in R&D to work their way into consumer cameras. It doesn't mean this technology will be used, there may be technical challenges or limitations. But again the important point is that Canon has been actively thinking along these lines for quite a long time.

Overall, what this means is that a sensor of this resolution or similar could quite feasibly find it's way into a consumer camera in the near future. It doesn't mean this rumour is correct, or indeed this will certainly happen, but it does mean that it is a real possibility, and not just a fanciful idea someone has dreamed up.
  • Like
Reactions: Sator


Feb 4, 2020
Among all the rumors regarding the R5s, the 83MP sensor seems the most credible one because:
- it corresponds to the size of the FF sensor with same pixel density as the new APS-C in the M6II
- it is a reasonable step up from the 50MP of the outgoing 5DSR without being disruptive i.e. file sizes can more or less be managed without having to buy new hardware.

What appears strange though:
- while rumors on the high-res body were very hot last fall, there are no more concrete rumors
- and this even in a situation where they stopped producing the 5DSR

What do we conclude from this? .... Maybe Canon has a huge surprise for us: When the R5 is officially announced they also announce the R5S and both are available by mid year ...
Last edited:


Aug 21, 2019
Yawn, if it is pixel shift my a7riv already does a 241 MP image. Not very practical.


EF 800L
May 29, 2019
That's a quite important point. One could simply think of a 150MP-sensor camera as a ~38MP-sensor camera that actually has full-resolution rather than half- or quarter-res chroma channels (although the red and blue channels would still have a stop less DR than the green channel).
Actually, the deBayering algorithms work pretty well, but they work better from a false color perspective when there is less detail within the Bayer quad. With 37.5 MP at the quad level, you are already to the point that lens MTF has dropped quite a bit and at the 150 MP level it has dropped a lot. Very few lenses would need an AA filter with this sensor.


Jun 17, 2015
to me it's like this.... being able to do it is one thing. why would you do that is another issue.....

I started off with Canon but I'll give an example with my A7RIV.

The A7RIV is 61mp. It's got a lot more resolution than I need (there was an insane sale, less than 2k brand new from B&H which is why I got it). The major downside to this resolution for me is the ISO performance. It's not good. If you set ISO to 1600 and you look 1:1 or do an aggressive crop you will see the noise. It is definitely visible, nothing subtle about it. If you leave it at its maximum resolution (so no crop) and if you don't look 1:1 you won't see it. But here's the thing, on a big resolution camera one of the primary benefits is the cropping, which I do make use of. So if a SONY sensor, which the photo community agrees makes great dynamic range sensors, has issues with ISO noise on a 61mp camera, how in the world is CANON going to have great low light ISO performance on a 150mp camera? I don't believe for a sec that they will. It would be very much geared to base ISO 100 duty. Perfect light or studio light and total junk in any kind of less than optimal lighting.

like i said, just cause you can do it doesn't mean you should. they would be much, much better served lowering the resolution (sub 100 for sure) and improving ISO noise performance. just my 2cents.

Jack Douglas

CR for the Humour
Apr 10, 2013
Alberta, Canada
Now this is something I think I can understand: :unsure:

Roger Cicala Mod Carleton Foxx5 months ago
Well, if you assume internal consistency, that would be true. But really, it would be more like "we combine EPA gas mileage, 0-60 times, curb weight, luggage space, cornering ability, subjective attractiveness, and seat comfort as measured by our ideal ass size" and rate this car a 92, so it's the car you should buy. Even if it's valid, are many people really interested in that ideal combination of cornering ability and luggage space? :LOL:

  • Like
Reactions: AaronT


EOS M6 Mark II
Oct 14, 2015
For all who said "L Lenses resolve such high resolutions": No they don't.
Lens Rentals has 2 awesome Articles, where they tested some Lenses at ultra high resolutions,
and only the sharpest Lenses you can get right now (eg Sigma 135mm, Zeiss Otus 85mm)
get in acceptable regions (purple line, 200lp/mm).
To go even further, they only get acceptable at this resolution stopped down, and only in the center of the

I'm quite sure you won't get much more sharpness out of a 150mpx sensor, but what you will get is more freedom
when editing the Image, and that's already an aspect i love about my 5DsR.

The Lensrentals Articles:

PS: I don't even wanna see how bad wide angle lenses would be on this test :-(

Again thank you for quoting these studies by Roger Cicala.

However, at no point does Roger ever state that in order to get meaningful improvements in image quality from a 150MP sensor that you have to get the lens to perform at a particular level at 200lp/mm. Nor should you be quoting Roger as having made such a statement. In fact, what he says is quite different to what you are inferring.

The fact is we do not have experimental evidence from which it can be deduced that in order for a 35mm format sensor of X number of MPs to perform well the lens must resolve a certain amount at X lp/mm. That data doesn't exist. We simply do not know what the practical resolution limit of 35mm format is.


from EOS 1N to R
Dec 9, 2018
Are full frame lenses really resolving much of anything at that pixel density?

I think so. The new 50/1.2 has better 30lp/mm curves than the EF 50/1.2's 10lp/mm curves. That gives it comperable contrast at3x3=9 times the resolution. So this lens should make as good use of 150MP as the old one did of like 17MP.


Feb 4, 2020
I agree. F22? What? I've shot many landscape photos and I never take shots at F22. F16 is my max, F11 is my default.

I do lots of landscapes and as unusual as it sounds, my best landscape lens is the RF 28-70 (sure I am waiting for the RF 24 f/1.2 to be released some day).
While typical shots are f8 to f11, I have done f22 with this lens. The results are incredibly good. While this would be a huge compromise with any EF lens I own, this lens can be used in the whole range from f2 to f22 with little compromise.


Jul 28, 2015
So did anybody here ever see a decent/sharp/detailed image from an iPhone? Good enough to print to 8” x 10”?

I haven't seen one, but I attended a talk only yesterday where the pro giving the presentation now shoots most landscapes with his iPhone and says he can print to A2 at sellable quality. I would prefer to believe him than many I see posting on the subject in many for a.
The problem here is that too many people spout nonsense based on side-by-side comparisons instead of 'how does the image look as an image'. Sometimes I think that an image taken with my 30D would be considered trash based on the theoretically calculated resolution.


Jul 28, 2015
Tiny photosites just don't have enough well capacity. That limits the dynamic range and overall IQ.

Have you ever worked with raw files from phones, before they're processed into jpegs? I have, and they're tear-shedding.

Is that compared to what we have or an empirical statement?
If you were given an image from a DSLR 10 years ago, would you say the same (especially when whose images were selling in the millions and lauded as 'superb')?
  • Love
Reactions: Jack Douglas