POLL: How many mp do you want anyway?

[sanj]

I wonder: ???
If many here want 36 megapixel, why D800, D810, A7r are not big sales successes? : :-X

I do not know if they are successes or not, but if they were utter failures, there is no way Canon would be coming out with 50 mp camera.

 

[infared]

25MB is fine with me...I just want black blacks, and increase DR.
I have a 5DIII....I will not be buying one of the 50MP cameras...and I doubt that I see a 5DIV in my future.
The camera I own is REALLY quite suitable for my needs. Does it compare to some newer offerings out there...no..but at this point if you have a good photograph...no one is really going to notice!
...but that is no excuse for Canon not to improve.

 

[celltech]

I would not mind something more than what my 5D3 already has, but Lightroom is already slow enough when messing with the raw files.

What can be done to speed up the file manipulation process? I already know my desktop is more powerful than what 95% of the world has.

 

[IglooEater]

Id take the new flagship, but "given the choice" for me means a lot more $ than just the cost of the 5ds, (new computer, better lenses, etc) so it's really not an option. Otherwise I'd say 18 or 22.

 

[JonAustin]

I voted 22, but only because that's what my 5DIII has.

I upgraded from the original 5D more for the AF system than anything else. I still have my 5D and 20D, both of which I still use regularly, and I usually shoot the 5DIII in mRAW mode (10mp), which I find more than adequate for excellent 12x18 prints (I look at those prints, framed and under glass, from a few feet away, not under a loupe).

As others have opined, I don't want more pixels. I do want cleaner and purer pixels (more DR, less noise, sharper, better color fidelity).

I can certainly understand those users who will always want more pixels; I say more power to them. I would just like for the lower end of the FF market to stabilize around 20mp, with continuing improvements in image quality and camera performance, without raising resolution. Given the current tech, what I'd really like is the 6D sensor wrapped in a 5DIII body, with in-camera cropping.

 

[lo lite]

Is Canon being driven into releasing a high-mp camera by Sonikon trolls, or is there an actual demand for more resolution even beyond what the competition delivers?

Vote here how much metapixies you require for your *general* shooting style - either for wall-sized prints, selling stock, zoooooooming in macro, cropping for reach, changing aspect ratio or just for showing off!

Note that the poll is not meant as "get it for free", but as in "pay more for money for it" and "trade-off resolution vs. noise" - so please consider for a moment or we we'd just get a "more is better" result.

6000x4000 or maybe 6144x4096 would be perfect for me since those numbers have nice divisors or factors which is important to avoid artifacts when scaling down.

 

[Maximilian]

I am totally fine with something around 20 mp on FF. Maybe I could also live with up to 30 but not more.

I want very good highISO performance, really low noice all over the place and at all ISO.

A foveon-like design with that would be best (but not easy to design).

 

[c.d.embrey]

Me, I'm waiting for an 18 megapixel APS-C Mirrorless from Canon Meanwhile I'll continue to use my APS-C Sony mirrorless

You just described the EOS M.

The EOS M is a Kitty-Kamera. My Sony is a fully controllable camera that can deliver pro results. When and if Canon comes out with a Pro/Prosumer mirrorless camera, I'll be the first inline.

 

[Sabaki]

MP isn't a feature I want/demand/insist on when I look at a camera. There are certainly other aspects that far outweigh MP.

That being said, I imagine I should distinguish between the MP need for different genres of photography and it does seem that landscape photography may deliver better images with more MP. Just where MP ranks against DR or noise performance at ISO 100, is beyond my experience as a photographer or technical understanding.

 

[Mitch.Conner]

I selected 36 because I wanted more than my current 5d3 provides.

In all honesty, I really only want a modest amount more. I just want to be able to routinely print 13x19 at 300dpi without enlarging. In all honesty, 36 is probably more than I really need. I'm guessing the 5d4 will be on the money with the slight MP increase. 50 megapixels would be awesome if I wanted to really print big, but I don't currently have a need for quite that many pixels. I'm sure others do though.

5D4 is not going to be even close to 50MP, I'd be surprised if it goes even above 30.

Reason: 5DS already exists so 5D4 should compete on the other aspects like high-ISO and fps. Both of those get hit if you increase pixel count -> 5D4 will not have high pixel count.

I'm well aware that the 5D4 will not have 50 megapixels. You misunderstood my post. The 5D4 will probably have ~24 megapixels. That's all I currently need.

 

[rpt]

I want 22/24 and 50. I voted 50 as there was no chance of a multiple choice. I am very happy with my 5D3 and just got a 7D2 (which is 51.2/(1.6*1.6))

I will not be buying another camera for a loooong time...

 

[Zv]

Me, I'm waiting for an 18 megapixel APS-C Mirrorless from Canon Meanwhile I'll continue to use my APS-C Sony mirrorless

You just described the EOS M.

The EOS M is a Kitty-Kamera. My Sony is a fully controllable camera that can deliver pro results. When and if Canon comes out with a Pro/Prosumer mirrorless camera, I'll be the first inline.

I don't know what you mean by Kitty Kamera. Have you even used the EOS M? With the exception of a viewfinder it has the same features and IQ as any Canon Rebel DSLR. It gives you full manual control and a hotshoe which is all I need in a camera to do pretty much anything from a fashion shoot to landscapes. Add ML and you have a tidy little package with full functionality.

 

[9VIII]

I honestly want a Gigapixel camera, but that's probably never going to happen (photo-cells that small might have trouble reading colour). Hopefully we pass the 100MP mark in the next five years, and should have 512MP sensors at some point in the long term future.

 

[Mitch.Conner]

Me, I'm waiting for an 18 megapixel APS-C Mirrorless from Canon Meanwhile I'll continue to use my APS-C Sony mirrorless

You just described the EOS M.

The EOS M is a Kitty-Kamera. My Sony is a fully controllable camera that can deliver pro results. When and if Canon comes out with a Pro/Prosumer mirrorless camera, I'll be the first inline.

I don't know what you mean by Kitty Kamera. Have you even used the EOS M? With the exception of a viewfinder it has the same features and IQ as any Canon Rebel DSLR. It gives you full manual control and a hotshoe which is all I need in a camera to do pretty much anything from a fashion shoot to landscapes. Add ML and you have a tidy little package with full functionality.

I'm guessing he means that it's very low end consumer.

I wouldn't know if that's accurate though. I've never even held one. I'm looking forward to the EOS-M3.

 

[Tinky]

The EOS M had two problems:

1. It couldn't be used practically out of the box in green square mode.

2. It was those kind of users who would want one.

This meant poor reviews for what is acutally a decent little camera. AF is pedestrian but there are work arounds..
Use one shot, switch off continuous af, use the centre cell or central group of grids and recompose (bin button before focusing)

The 22mm is as good a lens as canon make. In this format it's a great pocket camera.

But they are now so cheap.. It's basically a 650D but without an OVF. Great for video, especially if travelling and if you aren't scared to take control of a camera it repays with crisp clean saturated shots.

Thank you to every reviewer who slagged it off and thank you to Canon for getting your marketing so badly wrong, and thanks also for fw2.

I have two of these which make a great matched pair for video interviews. The noise is lower than my digic4 cameras and it breaks the 12min recording cap, which is also excellent.

I'm thinking of buying a third to run ML on for timelapse, it's just that trade off between there being stock left and the prices dropping even further.

 

[Marsu42]

I honestly want a Gigapixel camera, but that's probably never going to happen (photo-cells that small might have trouble reading colour).

I guess most people want super-hi-res, even if knowing that they'll seldom require it - even if it would mean using "cooked" m/s-raw modes more often. The poll says otherwise, but might simply indicate people want what they are used to.

Problem is: for my wildlife photography, other sensor specs have to scale with it, esp. noise. If something moves even slightly, you need *significantly* higher shutter speed for a higher res sensor (to gain 100% crop capability), meaning the camera would need *better* sensitivity than lower res models. But of course, as it stands, the reverse is true.

 

[privatebydesign]

So, clearly no educated ppl here then.

70mm Film = ~2,200mp

The most important point is, The Distance between each light sensitive element.
I dont see any point in explaining the math or physics, everything you need to know is out there for you to discover.

Personally, I would be happy with 20mp, if there was no distance between Pixels.
\/ live long and prosper...

Bullshit.

What film? What film speed? What are you using to estimate that figure? Are you scanning with a digital sensor? Resolved film grain is not detail, or are you extrapolating from some fantastical grain figure?

The 36MP Sony 135 format sensor delivers far more detail than all but technical films the same size, that puts a 70mm film in the 100-300MP area.

I have many 135 format Velvia 50 24"x36" Cibachrome prints, they don't have the detail I get from my 21MP sensor and the same lens when printed to the same size.

 

[Zv]

The EOS M had two problems:

1. It couldn't be used practically out of the box in green square mode.

2. It was those kind of users who would want one.

This meant poor reviews for what is acutally a decent little camera. AF is pedestrian but there are work arounds..
Use one shot, switch off continuous af, use the centre cell or central group of grids and recompose (bin button before focusing)

The 22mm is as good a lens as canon make. In this format it's a great pocket camera.

But they are now so cheap.. It's basically a 650D but without an OVF. Great for video, especially if travelling and if you aren't scared to take control of a camera it repays with crisp clean saturated shots.

Thank you to every reviewer who slagged it off and thank you to Canon for getting your marketing so badly wrong, and thanks also for fw2.

I have two of these which make a great matched pair for video interviews. The noise is lower than my digic4 cameras and it breaks the 12min recording cap, which is also excellent.

I'm thinking of buying a third to run ML on for timelapse, it's just that trade off between there being stock left and the prices dropping even further.

Fair point there! If it wasn't deemed a flop by all the reviewers I probably wouldn't have one in my kit today.
Best value for money ever IMO!

They should market the M line to DSLR owners who need a second body instead of handbag space savers and first timers.

I wonder if the M reputation is beyond salvage at this stage regardless of what they do with the next one.

 

[Hillsilly]

I'm still toting a 12mp X100 and a 16mp 1Ds MkII. Never thought there was anything wrong with them...until now. Is this what they call pixel envy?

Re Eos M - I assume you all know that is a high selling, successful camera worldwide? In most placed, the Eos-M outsells all Fuji mirrorless cameras combined and gives Canon a middle ranking in the mirrorless market share. In Japan, one Eos M is sold for every three Sony cameras (with their extensive range). We might see problems, but Canon sees a worldwide hit (ignoring that country between Mexico and Canada). I tend to believe Canon's claim that they will be number one in mirrorless by 2017.

 

[SDFilmFan]

The biggest printer I use (at my local Costco) is 12" by 18" at 300 ppi, for a native 19.4 MP. So, theoretically my 5D3 is already overkill, and my SL1 is almost there. But that assumes no cropping. If I want to cut just 20% off of width and height, I'd need 30.4 MP to avoid interpolating. More than that if I want to run and gun and shoot wide and recompose in post to move the central focus point to a rule-of-thirds node.

That said, I've printed pics from my old 10-MP XTi on that same printer and think they look pretty good despite the enlargement.

What I'm more interested in than more resolution is better low-light quality. A 50 MP camera only good to ISO 6400 doesn't really interest me. A 30-ish MP camera at least as good as my 5D3 in low light, with some of the focus improvements (and the anti-flicker) of the 7D2 might tempt me. Likewise, a FF camera the size and weight of my SL1 would be appealing.