Off Brand: Sony 36mp full frame sensor capable of 4K at 480fps leaks

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,592
1,909
Hamburg, Germany
So if we downscale from 4K/480 to VGA (640x480) we should get almost 8000 fps (did I do that math correctly?)

Now that is something I would like to have at an affordable price.
I don't think that's how it works, even if the math is right. The article shows the supported read out modes, right? The one with the highest framerate that I can see has 960 fps at 768 X 54 resolution, which is a 16 : 1,125 aspect ratio (Yeah, I know that's not how ratios work mathematically). And this 480 fps mode everybody mentions also only has a 16 : 8 (Edit: I messed up, this should have been 16 : 4,5) aspect ratio unless I'm missing something? If that is the case, I don't find it that practical. Now, the 30 fps at full 33 MP resolution sound quite impressive.

And everybody questioning the need for high framerate video might find it helpfull to take a look at the Youtube channel The SlowMo Guys. I find some of their videos to be amongst the coolest content on the site.
 
Last edited:

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
A mirrorless camera starts capturing video the moment you turn it on regardless of whether you chose to permanently record it. What do you think you are seeing in the EVF? It's a video camera that has advanced capabilities to save individual frames of video as stills.


Today's EVFs are HD rez at best. It does not need any significant CPU power, advanced codecs, no oversized-heat sinks, no audio, no mics, no stereo speakers, no headphone jacks, no amps, no zebras, no video-polluted and cluttered menus, no red "record video" button in the most prominent of all locations, NONE of all that video FLUFF those freaking videots are whining for all the time.

PURE STILLS for me please.

No problem with video feed solely for EVF. But i want NO RECORDING. No 4k. No 8k. No problem if it is in many cameras. But i want a choice of good stills cameras without any of it.
 

privatebydesign

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
9,975
4,731
Today's EVFs are HD rez at best.

That is 100% wrong.

HD = 1280×720p: 923,600 pixels
Full HD = 1920×1080p: 2,073,600 pixels

Sony A7R III EVF = 3.69-million-dot
Canon R EVF = 3.69-million-dot

Pretty much all 'FF' EVF's exceed Full HD and dwarf HD.
 

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
That is 100% wrong.
HD = 1280×720p: 923,600 pixels
Full HD = 1920×1080p: 2,073,600 pixels
Sony A7R III EVF = 3.69-million-dot
Canon R EVF = 3.69-million-dot
Pretty much all 'FF' EVF's exceed Full HD and dwarf HD.

3.69 MEGA "dots" have to be divided by 3 (RGB) = 1.2 mega PIXELS = some cr*ppy 1990's style low rez like e.g. 1440 x 900 ... or thereabouts. Those megadeath Mega-DOTS are nothing but marketing-confusion pills. Nowhere near ("full") HD.


Those camera makers should really be ashamed. Late 2018 I'd consider 4k EVFs as "adequate". 3840x2160 PIXELS x 4 colors [RGB + extra black] = 33.2 mega DOTS. :)
 

ajfotofilmagem

EOS 5D Mark IV
Aug 23, 2013
2,382
83
Bahia Brazil
That is 100% wrong.

HD = 1280×720p: 923,600 pixels
Full HD = 1920×1080p: 2,073,600 pixels

Sony A7R III EVF = 3.69-million-dot
Canon R EVF = 3.69-million-dot

Pretty much all 'FF' EVF's exceed Full HD and dwarf HD.

The DOT, in fact, is each colored dot (1 red 1 gren 1 blue) forming the pixel. Right?
Thus, 3 mega dot, is equal to 1 megapixel.
 

bhf3737

---
CR Pro
Sep 9, 2015
642
1,376
Calgary, Canada
www.flickr.com
3.69 MEGA "dots" have to be divided by 3 (RGB) = 1.2 mega PIXELS = some cr*ppy 1990's style low rez like e.g. 1440 x 900 ... or thereabouts. Those megadeath Mega-DOTS are nothing but marketing-confusion pills. Nowhere near ("full") HD.


Those camera makers should really be ashamed. Late 2018 I'd consider 4k EVFs as "adequate". 3840x2160 PIXELS x 4 colors [RGB + extra black] = 33.2 mega DOTS. :)
Not exactly true. Many manufacturers use Pentile GRGB pattern for EVF and back LCD, meaning that they count each RG and BG as a pixel. Therefore, 3.69 mega-dots is roughly 1.85 mega-pixels, which is close to FHD resolution.
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
1,141
1,186
That is 100% wrong.

HD = 1280×720p: 923,600 pixels
Full HD = 1920×1080p: 2,073,600 pixels

Sony A7R III EVF = 3.69-million-dot
Canon R EVF = 3.69-million-dot

Pretty much all 'FF' EVF's exceed Full HD and dwarf HD.
And don't forget Leica SL's 4,4 million dot !
 

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
And don't forget Leica SL's 4,4 million dot !

is also a joke in late 2018.

I'd like all manufacturers to drop "fuzzy megadots", ambiguous monikers like "HD" and other markting-dribble pseudo-specs and provide clear pixel count numbers for resolution of sensors, EVFs and rear screens on their cameras: xxxx pixels by yyyy pixels (e.g. 1920x1080). it would make life much easier for them and for us.
 

preppyak

EOS R
Oct 18, 2011
1,024
78
Today's EVFs are HD rez at best. It does not need any significant CPU power, advanced codecs, no oversized-heat sinks, no audio, no mics, no stereo speakers, no headphone jacks, no amps, no zebras, no video-polluted and cluttered menus, no red "record video" button in the most prominent of all locations, NONE of all that video FLUFF those freaking videots are whining for all the time.

PURE STILLS for me please.

No problem with video feed solely for EVF. But i want NO RECORDING. No 4k. No 8k. No problem if it is in many cameras. But i want a choice of good stills cameras without any of it.
And you're willing to pay more to leave out video? Because that's what is gonna happen as sales shrink and they still need to recoup R&D and tooling costs. In fact, its exactly what happened with the Nikon DF, which was a D600 with a few features of the D800 + D4, in a new body, and priced at D800 prices. Not surprisingly, Nikon has never followed up with a second model, and its under 50% of its MSRP on the used market.

What you're really asking for is exactly what Canon is delivering (weakened video specs, but enough to not jurt resale and overall market), as compared to say Sony or Panasonic, who are wildly over-delivering on video specs in a way that certainly increases the camera's price.
 

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
no. Nikon Df flopped because of its totally absurd retro approach, totally botched UI, totally sub-par functionality combined with a totally overcharged price.

had Nikon made a true D700 successor (D4 sensor in a more compact, much more affordable package), it would have become a bestseller. Without any video recording.


I bet an EOS R without any video recording could be made and profitably sold for USD/€ 999,-
All the video (+audio) crap costs a lot: R&D, engineering, components, manufacturing, quality control, software, licenses (codecs) etc. etc. ... video is NOT for free. It is just mostly paid for by stills users being taken hostage.
 
Last edited:

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
1. i am better than my gear and always will be. :)

2. specs do matter. especially having enough of the right ones for what you want to do rather than too much of the wrong ones.

eg: more DR would be helpful at times. having a viewfinder on my EOS M would be very helpful at times. my 5D3 being smaller, lighter and less conspicuous would also be helpful often. video capture not. lol.

3. my critique of imaging gear is valid, irrespective of my own images. a gourmet critic does not have to be a chef cook himself.

4. now chill. take a walk in the park with me in an inch of pristine, freshly fallen snow. :)
http://www.nimbifer.eu/images/#14822489178800

6fad58131f89839d8a1e5d30c4c937ae.jpg


5. or let's take a walk along fields of poppies on a glorious summer day. Each blossom is only there for one day. Don't worry, farming papaver somniferum is legal here and it is safe to inhale the air.
http://www.nimbifer.eu/images/#15325406081600

71a1b64eb43049c537a2c3af437959da.jpg


PS. for a number of reasons i rarely share images on open platforms/in public, especially not images of persons.
 
Last edited:

Go Wild

EOS RP
Dec 8, 2014
288
344
1. i am better than my gear and always will be. :)

2. specs do matter. especially having enough of the right ones for what you want to do rather than too much of the wrong ones.

eg: more DR would be helpful at times. having a viewfinder on my EOS M would be very helpful at times. my 5D3 being smaller, lighter and less conspicuous would also be helpful often. video capture not. lol.

3. my critique of imaging gear is valid, irrespective of my own images. a gourmet critic does not have to be a chef cook himself.

4. now chill. take a walk in the park with me in an inch of pristine fresh fallen snow. :)
http://www.nimbifer.eu/images/#14822489178800

6fad58131f89839d8a1e5d30c4c937ae.jpg


5. or let's take a walk along fields of poppies on a glorious summer day. Each blossom is only there for one day. Don't worry, farming papaver somniferum is legal here and it is safe to inhale the air.
http://www.nimbifer.eu/images/#15325406081600

71a1b64eb43049c537a2c3af437959da.jpg


PS. for a number of reasons i rarely share images on open platforms/in public, especially not images of persons.



Liked your comment! I believe it is very assertive.

Let´s see....this is the eternal question...Why to make a primarily stills camera a powerful stills+video camera? Well....because they can! :) And because regarding to the future of industry (either amateur or professional) this is the way to go. The majority of the market will prefer to buy a camera that makes stills and video, rather one that makes only stills, or only video. Why? Even if they don´t use it, it´s there and in some point you will use it! I do understand if someone asks for a "only stills" camera (because only video you already have), but nowadays I do believe that is a small market for Canon to invest....This could only be successful if they made a really cheap camera....which of course, cannot happen at all...You just can´t make a EOS R just still camera and pay only 990$. That´s just not realistic. Why? Even if you take off the software part of recording a video, "video" feature must be there! Because, like someone said in prior post, what you see in a mirrorless is a video image that you turn into stills. But Canon already gave you a lot of cameras with "shrunken" video features, like 5Ds!! If you make more stills than videos, well, so video is not a concern to you. Also, the criticism about video specs of Canon, is also a non problem to you! :)

In my perspective....and of course this is my perspective....I am so angry that Canon is taking a HUGE amount of time to equalize market....And I just don´t ask to surpass....just equalize it, damn!

I have already been forced to buy a Sony camera, the A7r3 because that camera just give´s me the best of the 2 worlds with great quality! Just like my 1Dx mkII! At this time, the 1dx mkII is the best camera of Canon and the only one that is prepared to fight in this market of having both stills and video top features! Why is Canon worse than Sony? Because of the damn codec that produces massive files! Otherwise it is a killer camera!! Superb imaging either on video or stills. The Canon 4k (even with the 1.3 crop which is a no problem to me...) is superb!!!

Then, after 2017 i was in the market for another camera, a 2nd body one, smaller so i can use in gimbals. Canon had nothing to offer in this segment and Sony and Panasonic where so strong in the market!! But i didn´t want to abandon Canon. I ended up to buy a Sony a7r3 and wow, what a peace of equipment!!

Well....but i am really a Canon fan, and when Canon turn heads to mirrorless i think to miself: "Yeeaahhh...Canon is back in the game!" So i started to think in selling the Sony to buy a Canon mirrorless...And then.... EOS R came out...And although i think it is a great camera, it stills falling way behind a A7r3. I told to myself...Ok...you just need to wait a little bit longer, and the pro bodies will appear! Then i have the news that maybe only by the end of 2019 we will see the new high end bodies. Say what???!! Have to wait one year to replace my 1 already year Sony??? Then i sit back again and relax and think to myself....well let´s see if i can old back one more year with this one, and then finally back to 100% Canon.
But then...voila....Sony just takes out another bunny from the hat with insane specs of new cameras just arriving (Yes, just rumours, but some ones are starting to feel solid ones). And guess what, they just might be around the corner!!

If Sony delivers another killer machine and I hear nothing about Canon, I will finish my wait and dreams to have again 100% Canon equipment and will invest again on Sony. And this time...will start to invest in all the ecossistem...it will be a good bye Canon!

I just can´t believe how long Canon took to react, and i just can´t believe that they can´t follow competition! My complains are not in the stills field, in that field they are equal to Sony (but i must say, Sony files are just impressive!!), my major complains are in video, they are just killing their machines because of the video features!! Of course dpaf is just amazing but it´s now the only thing that surpass competition! They what to protect cinema line?? No man....that´s just not an excuse! Sony have the cinema line FS5, FS7, etc...and they also have A7S and A7R!!! Don´t come with excuses!

And man....we just want from Canon simple things....Good Log, focus peaking, zebras, a GOOD codec...and of course...some inovation! 120FPS at 720P....Reaally Canon???? Come on....1080P was the minimum.

Give me a great mirrorless with 1080p 240fps and 4k 120fps, give me a superb 4k image, give me zebras, focus peaking (well, liked the concept of the EOS R), give me a great 36mp sensor and for god sake, forget that stupid AA filter!! My Sony doesn´t have it and guess what?? Never EVER missed it!!!

Please Canon, be innovative like you where with this new EOS R sistem, but splash your best in the cameras, don´t just give some candies to sweeten our mouth!! Just fill us with sugar!! We wiil be like bees!!! :D:D
 

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
Let´s see....this is the eternal question...Why to make a primarily stills camera a powerful stills+video camera? Well....because they can! :) And because regarding to the future of industry (either amateur or professional) this is the way to go. The majority of the market will prefer to buy a camera that makes stills and video, rather one that makes only stills, or only video. Why? Even if they don´t use it, it´s there and in some point you will use it!

That's what i do not believe. Maybe for pro's in certain areas of imaging. But not for amateurs/enthusiasts. Most of us are no "movie directors" or "video cutters". Because of 1. no interest and/or 2. not enough of the required talents [including "social skills"!] and/or 3. not enough time. It is time-consuming enough having to find and direct models, setup, lighting etc. for stills images. And bad enough to post process a few hundred or 2000 stills RAWs after some event. No desire whatsoever having to deal with moving images. And for short clips of your kids playing or in vacation on the beach, any cameraphone "4k video" will do.

I would really, really like to see a test of it in practice. Say, Canon EOS R in 2 nearly identical versions, 1 with video recording, one without. The one without at about 10-20% lower price for less functionality. . I am willing to bet that 80% of unit sales would be for the non-video version. Unfortunately we don't have unit sales numbers for Sony A7 / R / S models. I think A7S models are less than 10% of total units (per camera generation).
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeenThere

Go Wild

EOS RP
Dec 8, 2014
288
344
That's what i do not believe. Maybe for pro's in certain areas of imaging. But not for amateurs/enthusiasts. Most of us are no "movie directors" or "video cutters". Because of 1. no interest and/or 2. not enough of the required talents [including "social skills"!] and/or 3. not enough time. It is time-consuming enough having to find and direct models, setup, lighting etc. for stills images. And bad enough to post process a few hundred or 2000 stills RAWs after some event. No desire whatsoever having to deal with moving images. And for short clips of your kids playing or in vacation on the beach, any cameraphone "4k video" will do.

I would really, really like to see a test of it in practice. Say, Canon EOS R in 2 nearly identical versions, 1 with video recording, one without. The one without at about 10-20% lower price for less functionality. . I am willing to bet that 80% of unit sales would be for the non-video version. Unfortunately we don't have unit sales numbers for Sony A7 / R / S models. I think A7S models are less than 10% of total units (per camera generation).


Ok....I do understand your point....But what I don´t understand is this....You do realize that you are buying High end cameras! Most of it are Professional cameras or semi-professional, or prosumers!!!! What a heck....You are demanding High end cameras to have enthusiastics level specs but with the same quality of high end cameras....In my perspective that´s wrong! It´s just like to buy a Ferrari but to ask Ferrari not to put so many power in the car because you don´t use it! That´s just not make sense! Come on...Who buys a 3000$ camera? Either is a professional, or someone who has a lot of money! For my point of view, if you are an enthusiastic of photography and you don´t have a lot of money, it´s just no sense at all! You have cheaper cameras that can do stills much better than video at a very lower price!
Make no mistakes, I am not judging you, or anyone! Everybody has the freedom of their choices! But no way you are going to see a professional complain that the cameras make video and stills at the same time with quality! Because nowadays everybody uses video and stills!
I have started as a photographer, nowadays my incoming is 60% photohraphy 40% video and why? Because i can! Because tecnology as evoluted and gave me a 2 in 1! If this cameras don´t exist, i would find it hard that today I was making money with video, because good cameras are really expensive! That´s my point! Again, i understand your point, but it doesn´te make too many sense to ask for high end cameras not to have what the market demands! I wouldn´t be shocked if Canon make a new camera with no video incorporated, but i am quite sure that the price wouldn´t be so different and the market of that kind of camera would be very short.....
 

4fun

picture? perfect!
Nov 19, 2018
181
53
i have no problem, with some cameras being video only or hybrid video+stills. But i also want to have a choice of "pure stills" cameras. Anywhere from entry level to "hi-end / pro grade".

Also: current EOS R is nowhere near "hi end". It is nothing but an overpriced, mirrorfree 6D III, entry level.
 

Go Wild

EOS RP
Dec 8, 2014
288
344
i have no problem, with some cameras being video only or hybrid video+stills. But i also want to have a choice of "pure stills" cameras. Anywhere from entry level to "hi-end / pro grade".

Also: current EOS R is nowhere near "hi end". It is nothing but an overpriced, mirrorfree 6D III, entry level.

Why not? A camera that has a C-log, that has even better specs than the Canon 5d mkIV! Why not a high end camera? What is a high end camera? It´s not a pro body I agree with that, but for me, definitely this camera falls down in the high end, or prosumer body! I do believe Canon will make a cheaper version and that one yes, will be pointed for enthusiastics. Also do believe that they will do 2 more cameras that fit the professional line. But this one, definitely a high end camera! And boy, yes, Canon EOS R is a fantastic camera! I do think it is a little overpriced, and the price should be around 2000$. But is a hell of a camera, Canon did a great job in this! Although it just not fit my expectations or needs, but for stills? Boy, it´s a great camera!

Well, I tell you again, i do respect your opinion and believe me, I do understand it, but I don´t think Canon will make such camera, especially in a lower price perspective... No way we will see a mirrorless EOS R with no video!
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,935
Canada
Think about how a mirrorless camera works. When it is running, it is continuously shooting video and displaying it on a screen. When you push record, it starts recording that data stream. When you take a picture, it stops the video stream, takes a still image, and then starts up the video stream again.

In other words, a mirrorless stills camera is a video camera that can be interrupted to take a still image. To not allow the user to record that video stream is a lot like Apple offering a special iPhone (at a higher price) where you can’t use any phone functions. It is not going to happen!
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

crazyrunner33

EOS RP
Nov 4, 2011
302
121
i have no problem, with some cameras being video only or hybrid video+stills. But i also want to have a choice of "pure stills" cameras. Anywhere from entry level to "hi-end / pro grade".

Also: current EOS R is nowhere near "hi end". It is nothing but an overpriced, mirrorfree 6D III, entry level.

Those days are long gone. Even the medium format photography cameras include video features because the sensor and hardware they're buying is designed to be able to do both. A camera is an image sensor with a recording devices, and the off the shelf recording devices are cheap and powerful thanks to smartphones. If you want a truly photography only device that can't record video, you'll have to rely on used devices or film.
 
<-- start Taboola -->