Is a 150mp Canon EOS R camera on the way? [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
I think their exclusivity and a portion of their market could go to Canon regardless of format. Large agencies will adopt with a vendor like Canon because of the support. Hasselblad nor Fuji can compete with Canon there. Hasselblad will not be dethroned at the top of their game. The H6D-400c is an amazing tool and Hasselblad's Color System is probably the best in the industry. New Hasselblad as 50MP for under $6,000 USD. I do think Hasselblad saw an opportunity here the x1D proves it. I see no reason why Canon can't compete if they can get "Color". Look at the C500 Mark II and the color rendition, any doubt that Canon could replicate that? I don't. An advantage to Hasselblad with workflow for still photography. Any doubt Canon could standardize workflow? Why not? I do think Canon could monetize the enhanced systemic workflow with stills the way they have with cinema.
I would not hesitate to look at a Canon 100MP product regardless of format. Give me focus, DR, Color and resolution at a fair price with support and I'm there!!!
Upvote
0
According to my calculations, an 8x10 inch has a 0.142 crop factor in width and 0.118 in height relative to 24x36 mm. By diagonal, the crop factor is 0.129. So, which is the correct crop factor to use? I believe it is 0.129.
Upvote
0
The camera market is shrinking, and MF camera manufacturers aren't doing any better than 35mm camera manufacturers. Canon is invested in the RF line of lenses. I think it unlikely Canon would venture now into a new camera line.
Possibly. IIRC, Canon demonstrated a 250 MP APS-H sensor, maybe it plans on putting it in an EOS-R camera.
Upvote
0
Either way 10x8 is a bloody big format and puts agonising over 50,80 or 150 mp into perspective !
It's also a good example of how larger formats bring restriction in practically and why FF is such an incredibly flexible format in this digital age. It's a bit like the successful evolution of Homo sapiens - small enough to be warmed by fire, big enough to control it.
Upvote
0
These threads blow my mind every time.
As long as you are taking only a single picture and your sensor doesn't have a resolution so high that your aperture is 'diffraction limited', you are literally throwing detail away. How can people spend multiple thousands on fast lenses like the RF 28-70mm 2.0, 70-200mm, or worse, big white primes and be like "I'm fine getting only a portion of what I've payed for". For the first two lenses, there are obviously reasons other than detail to buy them. But the big whites are all about reach, are they not?
Given perfect optics, a 200 mm f/1.4, 400 mm f/2.8 and 800 mm 5.6 will all deliver the same amount of detail if your sensor resolution is so high that it is diffraction limited at all these f-numbers. They all have an identical aperture size. But the wider lens is easier to carry and makes subject framing easier thanks to the ability to change the framing later more freely.
Of course we don't have perfect optics and 150 is not enough to be diffraction limited at f/1.4. But each step in the direction of better corrected lenses and higher resolution sensors is a step closer to this world where each fast lens you own can be used instead of an additional longer, slower lens you would have to pay dear money for otherwise.
And that's without considering the better color detail, easier noise reduction, reducing or eliminating moire drastically and other advantages people have already mentioned.
Saying "I don't need it" is absolutely valid. Failing to see that there is a point in going to these higher resolutions is strange but understandable. But there are use cases that benefit from more resolution and the technology that enables them is not some marketing BS.
On a completely different note: Could it be that this camera will come be the successor to the high resolution R camera with the rumored ~ 80 MP? So, nothing that will materialize any time soon? Canon seems to really like the 1.33 times resolution increase as a step they take currently:
18 * 1.33 = 24 (60D* -> 80D)
24 * 1.33 = 32 (80D -> 90D)
20 * 1.33 = 26 (6D -> 6D II)
22 * 1.33 = 30 (5D III -> 5D IV)
30 * 1.33 = 40 (5D IV -> R5 ?)
84 * 1.33 = 112 (High Res R -> High Res R II ?)
112 * 1.33 = 150 (High Res R II -> High Res R III ?)
* The 70D and 7D II are an exception because the used the first Dual Pixel sensor generation and therefore probably have special constraints. The 1D X series not matching the pattern has obvious reasons.
As long as you are taking only a single picture and your sensor doesn't have a resolution so high that your aperture is 'diffraction limited', you are literally throwing detail away. How can people spend multiple thousands on fast lenses like the RF 28-70mm 2.0, 70-200mm, or worse, big white primes and be like "I'm fine getting only a portion of what I've payed for". For the first two lenses, there are obviously reasons other than detail to buy them. But the big whites are all about reach, are they not?
Given perfect optics, a 200 mm f/1.4, 400 mm f/2.8 and 800 mm 5.6 will all deliver the same amount of detail if your sensor resolution is so high that it is diffraction limited at all these f-numbers. They all have an identical aperture size. But the wider lens is easier to carry and makes subject framing easier thanks to the ability to change the framing later more freely.
Of course we don't have perfect optics and 150 is not enough to be diffraction limited at f/1.4. But each step in the direction of better corrected lenses and higher resolution sensors is a step closer to this world where each fast lens you own can be used instead of an additional longer, slower lens you would have to pay dear money for otherwise.
And that's without considering the better color detail, easier noise reduction, reducing or eliminating moire drastically and other advantages people have already mentioned.
Saying "I don't need it" is absolutely valid. Failing to see that there is a point in going to these higher resolutions is strange but understandable. But there are use cases that benefit from more resolution and the technology that enables them is not some marketing BS.
On a completely different note: Could it be that this camera will come be the successor to the high resolution R camera with the rumored ~ 80 MP? So, nothing that will materialize any time soon? Canon seems to really like the 1.33 times resolution increase as a step they take currently:
18 * 1.33 = 24 (60D* -> 80D)
24 * 1.33 = 32 (80D -> 90D)
20 * 1.33 = 26 (6D -> 6D II)
22 * 1.33 = 30 (5D III -> 5D IV)
30 * 1.33 = 40 (5D IV -> R5 ?)
84 * 1.33 = 112 (High Res R -> High Res R II ?)
112 * 1.33 = 150 (High Res R II -> High Res R III ?)
* The 70D and 7D II are an exception because the used the first Dual Pixel sensor generation and therefore probably have special constraints. The 1D X series not matching the pattern has obvious reasons.
Upvote
0
I'm sure I remembered some years back when Canon were displaying the experimental APS-H 150mp sensor, that they actually said this would appear in a camera in the near future i.e. the resolution, not the format.
It also fits with Canon's apparent new business strategy as regards FF mirrorless cameras. That is to very aggressively try to win back market share with cameras that have higher specifications than that of the competition.
It also fits with Canon's apparent new business strategy as regards FF mirrorless cameras. That is to very aggressively try to win back market share with cameras that have higher specifications than that of the competition.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
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.
Upvote
0
It is a rumor. How would you determine the sensor resolution when nobody tells you what it is, you look at the image size. If this image was created using pixel shift tech, one could be confused to think it was the sensor size. As we have no clue on either way, my guess is on sensor shift tech in stead of a 150Mpix sensor.
Upvote
0
Architect1776
Defining the poetics of space through Architecture
Google the Canon 250 mp sensor and photo of an airplane at 11 miles away. PS an L lens was used.
Upvote
0
Around about f/5
So f/4.5 is the most sensible limit assuming you're just going for max resolution.
If your eventual aim is to resize down to a smaller image and you're only interested in using the higher resolution source to produce a cleaner final lower megapixel output without bayer filter colour confusing pixels (which can be important when you have very fine detail) then you can use much higher f stops without worry.
A 150mpx camera isn't a general purpose camera by any means. But it's certainly not just for producing poster -sized prints.
Upvote
0
That is just wrong. A lens could easily be capable of resolving more detail at f8 than f4.5 so in that case f8 would give you the most resolution, the fact that the sensor can resolve detail with a shorter wavelength than the airy disc diameter is irrelevant.
Upvote
0
Are they? Not with the GFX 50R selling for $3499 new. They are not different markets, they are different use cases.
The biggest surprise moving to a 80-100mp sensor will be the more apparent shallow DOF. Since you'll be able to zoom in so much farther, all of a sudden DOF seems too thin even at f/16. Already seen photographers try the GFX 100 and fall back to full frame because they don't want to focus stack.
Upvote
0
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
Image.
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 :-(
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
Image.
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:
Experiments For Ultra High Resolution Camera Sensors
GEEK ALERT!! Let's be absolutely clear; this is not a useful article in regards to your technique. It won't help your photography or videography become better. It won't help you choose equipment any time in the next couple of years. It won't provide any fodder for your next Forum War. It's just...
www.lensrentals.com
More Ultra High-Resolution MTF Experiments
GEEK ALERT!! Let’s be absolutely clear; this is not a practical or useful article. It won’t help your photography or cinematography become better. It won’t help you choose equipment any time in the next couple of years. It won’t provide any fodder for your next Forum War. It’s just a geek...
www.lensrentals.com
PS: I don't even wanna see how bad wide angle lenses would be on this test :-(
Upvote
0
Incredible how people can take something like that serious. R5S is most likely going to be around 75MP. Can't imagine anything above 80-100MP, it would be scifi from a technical perspective and a business perspective as well.
Upvote
0
as much as I agree having Canon options available would be nice in the current market it'd be crazy to think they'd do it because it means developing another mount, set of bodies, lens line up and pile on all research specific to that market both tech and marketing wise. All while hassy and phase are covering the top with already fleshed out lines and the likes of fuji and pentax on the lower side of medium format. The markets are shrinking and that area is firmly in niche use pro camp that is already established so is a slow growth slow release cycle one as it is. Not that I'd not be nice to see Canon in that arena but given how conservative their track record is going in on such a gamble seems unlikely.
Upvote
0
Will it? We haven't seen a correlation between pixel size and DR in a long time. I don't engineer sensors for a living so I'm at a loss as to explain why, but the data suggests something else dominates DR in today's sensors.
Upvote
0
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)
news.mynavi.jp
Meanwhile more R5 pics (i can't have enough of them)
拡大画像 021l | キヤノン「EOS R5」の実機を見た！ 超望遠ズーム「RF100-500mm」も
キヤノンが開発発表をしたプロ向けの高性能フルサイズミラーレス「EOS R5」。初お披露目となる予定だったCP+は残念ながら中止になってしまいましたが、実機をこの目で見る機会に恵まれました。100-500mmの超望遠ズームレンズも！
news.mynavi.jp
Upvote
0
Similar threads
