Lee Jay said:
What I meant of course is the quality of the image. I would love a 20.000 iso performance with the same result as 400 iso nowadays.
Upvote
0
Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
What I meant of course is the quality of the image. I would love a 20.000 iso performance with the same result as 400 iso nowadays.
Light_Pilgrim said:
We are looking at the same category of cameras... Nikon, Sony's high MP professional cameras vs. Canon's high MP professional cameras. Unless you want to say, hey... Canon has won that race, and we can still release a 36MP camera below the 50.6MP???
Lets face it, 30MP and above is really for specific users... its not an all rounder... exemplified by the D750.
Many people want a camera that is able to do everything, not just to create a huge file that pixel peepers are happy with... You want high MP and low light capabilities (what are the chances thats going to happen?). The 5DIII can't do low light as well as 1DX, and the 1DX can't do low light as well as a7s. Guess why that is? Clue: higher MP is not going to make it better.
You want 2 stops more DR... also not going to happen... DR problem has been with Canon long before 2008 (when the Mark 2 was released), Nikon has won that area year after year... for who knows how long.
EDITTED TO ADD: In fact, I dont' think Canon can make a D810 at this point in time and say "hey its better"... in fact, I see it being a whole lot worse if they did create it. So instead of creating a 36MP with 12 stops of DR and 6400 ISO, they created a 50 MP camera with 12 stops of DR and 6400 ISO.
Upvote
0
Lee Jay said:scyrene said:
How about a test?
Pixels that would give you a 208MP full-frame sensor on the left, a 13MP full-frame sensor on the right. Same ISO, same f-stop, same shutter speed, same lighting, same focal length, both processed from raw using the same settings on the same converter.
Ah I know you've posted supporting evidence before, so I respect your view more. However, I've seen both sides argued by seemingly respectable parties, and since I'm no technical whizz, I'm still left confused.
Personally, I'd rather have more MP, as I can downsize if I want, or crop if needed. Better of both worlds.
Upvote
0
scyrene said:
Lee Jay's supporting evidence is rarely what it seems, or he claims it to be. For instance, that comparison uses two completely different kinds of sensor tech so is entirely redundant.
If you are going to 'compare' one metric then all else must be equal, in that comparison nothing is equal so the comparison is not just of pixel size.
Upvote
0
It sounds like an interesting idea, but then you have the dark OVF, too. This could only be done with an optional EVF... Furthermore the AF_Modul would be rated at f5.6, too. The AF is not good at f5.6 (no double cross etc.).
Believe me, there were a lot of ideas back in the last two decades of DSLRs
Fast Mirrormovement @12fps and more with Liveview and Global Shutter seems to be the best solution for me.
Upvote
0
If these are the specs of the 5D mkiv I hope there will be two versions: this one and one with 2X (36mp) the resolution and half the FPS (5-6fps).
If this is true and only one 5D MkIV exists and this is it then i'm one huge step closer from picking up a D810 for landscape and keeping my 5D mkiii for everything else.
If this is true and only one 5D MkIV exists and this is it then i'm one huge step closer from picking up a D810 for landscape and keeping my 5D mkiii for everything else.
Upvote
0
Every time there is a megapixel advance some people claim "no one needs that many pixels etc. etc. etc."; they said this at 3 mp, 5mp, 10mp etc. More pixels is always better if you don't have to give up anything (not sure yet what the 5ds will require us yield). The best advances, like the 5dI --> 5d2 double the megapixel count without harming DR, high iso performance etc. Nikon did this as well when they took d700 12mp sensor to the d800 with 36mp while improving DR and minimally impacting high iso performance.
I shoot both a 5d3 and a d810; I shoot a variety of subjects and I can tell you, having 36 mp and then going backwards by 50% to 18 mp would be hurtfull. Both the 5d3 and d810 are great balanced cameras and I would much rather see smooth symmetric increases in mp, dynamic range, frame rate/buffer, high iso performance and features rather than creating highly divergent specialized camera lines.
I shoot both a 5d3 and a d810; I shoot a variety of subjects and I can tell you, having 36 mp and then going backwards by 50% to 18 mp would be hurtfull. Both the 5d3 and d810 are great balanced cameras and I would much rather see smooth symmetric increases in mp, dynamic range, frame rate/buffer, high iso performance and features rather than creating highly divergent specialized camera lines.
Upvote
0
CG photography said:
There is a huge difference between somebody saying 'nobody needs more than x MP' and saying 'I don't need more than x MP'
I'd love a Pentax 645Z, but I just don't need it. I'd probably like a 5DS, but again, I have no need for it.
Upvote
0
RLPhoto
Gear doesn't matter, Just a Matter of Convenience.
I like the idea of a 24-32mp sensor as it gives the flexibility of both resolution and of ISO performance. The 1Dx2 would be the high ISO champ in the future lineup, the 5Ds studio camera, and 5D4 as a general purpose all rounder.
I'd probably keep my 5D3 with a spec list like this.
I'd probably keep my 5D3 with a spec list like this.
Upvote
0
Famateur said:I think I'm in the camp of others on this thread suspecting the body (and specs) in question is a test bed for specific technology and not a prototype destined to become an actual product as-configured.
What stands out to me is the fact that as I read the rumor, I was thinking, "This sound like a 1DX," and then read this: "It was stressed that the above is NOT the EOS-1D X Mark II. There will be a quantum leap in fps, dynamic range and a bump in resolution for that camera."
Now that sound exciting! I might never own a 1 Series body, but a new breakthrough in that series is good news, nonetheless. I'm surprised these odd-ball 5DIV "specs" are even being talked about when a "quantum leap" in FPS and dynamic range is rumored to be in the pipeline.
Of course, if the source is the same, then it might be as bogus as this 5DIV spec list.
Like I said ... getting riled up over a Crash-Test-Dummy camera. And yes, more FPS and DR with a modest MP bump is much more DX2-ish. If the descriptor comes from a decently reliable source the "quantum leap" in DR has me curious. We haven't seen what an enlarged pixel 7D2 DPAF sensor will do. the 20.2 on the 6D (same pixel count as 7D2) looks very nice, but no DPAF. The new 5DS is an upsclaed 7D2 pixel sensor, but also no DPAF. We now see 24MP crop sensors coming on the new Rebels... So will we see a 20.2 or 24MP DPAF 1DX2? IF IF IF the word quantum leap is reasonably accurate in terms of DR (FPS, yes, Canon has the win without question) ... but could this suggest that Canon may be trying to employ their patent for the ON sensor ADC?
This is what makes Sony sensors so great at DR:
http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/cx_news/vol47/pdf/featuring47.pdf
Canon also has a design of their own:
http://image-sensors-world.blogspot.com.es/2013/08/canon-files-for-dual-range-column.html
This is precisely the type of major fabrication advancement Canon would want to introduce in a new 1 series body. In addition to all but eliminating read noise (and boosting DR) with the on sensor analog-to-digital process, working with what we would assume to be Dual Digic 7 chips, and an even faster mirror assembly.... how many more FPS could all this bring? 18FPS? hmmm... very feasible if you have a third Digic 6 chip doing nothing but commanding the AF system full time like they do with the single Digic 4 in the current 1DX. Could Dual digic 7 chips slinging 24MP also support a 16bit RAW instead of 14? Cant pass more 14 stops of DR in a 14bit file...
I'm wildly speculating, but it's all in the realm of reason and plausibility because Canon has the Tech to do this. Now whether they can cost effectively fabricate this right now is another question... Gonna be a fun year!!
EDIT: I'll add to this by suggesting it could also FINALLY be the employment of a Dual ISO function using DPAF which seems so perfect to do such a thing with. If so, I wonder if they will also make a firmware update for the 7D2 if they put it in the 1DX
Upvote
0
tomscott
Photographer & Graphic Designer
I think I speak for a few current 5D owners that if they reduced the mp then I would just stick with the 5D even if it improves DR by 1/2-1 stop. Resolution is important too. Recently been using mine a lot for wildlife and the ability to crop a little more would be most welcome. 26-28mo would be great
Upvote
0
tomscott said:
I've said this before, but....
I'd really like it if the 7DII were 24 or 32MP instead of 20MP. However, I'm fine with my 5D classic's 12.8MP.
Why?
Well, I usually use full-frame when I can properly frame images, and properly framed images having 12.8MP are just fine with me, even for large prints.
I usually use the crop camera when I can't properly frame, due to focal length (or, to a lesser extent, magnification) limits. In that case, I often end up cropping like crazy and that's where high pixel counts help.
I would have been interested in the 5DS for both applications (it has about the same pixel density as the 7DII) but for the ISO 6,400 limit.
Given that Canon isn't going to give us a high-ISO camera (I'd have been happy with the 5DS having the same ISO range as the 7DII + the 1 1/3 stops it has inherently just due to the larger sensor) and a high pixel count camera in one, I'll stay with shooting high ISO with full-frame, properly framed, and high pixel density with crop when I can't properly frame with a full-frame camera. So, for full-frame, I'd be happy with 18MP, 20MP, 24MP or whatever, since I'm happy now with 12.8MP from a pure resolution perspective.
Upvote
0
Famateur said:PureClassA said:
Speculating on juicy stuff like this is the whole fun of this site, so carry on!
Agreed on the possibility/plausibility. It comes down to product positioning, internal road maps and manufacturing hurdles. I'm excited!
They obviously have the fabrication in place now to produce the pixels they want, but I just don't know how much of an overhaul it is to retool to get the signal flow they designed in their patent and get everything on ONE die. I'm sure it's expensive, but is it so expensive as to make it non-feasible. We can only assume that's why we haven't seen it to this point yet. The original 1DX was announced in 2012. That patent appeared in Aug 2013. Things like that are in the works long before it's filed and made public.
Upvote
0
PureClassA said:Famateur said:PureClassA said:
Speculating on juicy stuff like this is the whole fun of this site, so carry on!
Agreed on the possibility/plausibility. It comes down to product positioning, internal road maps and manufacturing hurdles. I'm excited!
...I just don't know how much of an overhaul it is to retool to get the signal flow they designed in their patent and get everything on ONE die. I'm sure it's expensive, but is it so expensive as to make it non-feasible.
My hunch is that there is a new process (hopefully on-die ADC of some kind), and it's taken Canon a bit longer than anticipated to bring it up to production-ready status, especially if DPAF is involved. For some reason, I get the feeling DPAF is proving more challenging to produce (yields). Still not sure if it's that or just product differentiation that has kept it from the M (a natural recipient) or even the newer Rebels.
The recent downward movement in price for the 1DX and 1DC sure seem to signal that successors will arrive (or be announced) this year (e.g. 1DXII and 5DC?). This would point to the process being ready, whatever the chip technology is. I hope it's something cool!
Upvote
0
:
