Small Eos 5D IV comparison to Nikon, Sony, Fuji...

[9VIII]

I sit up all night dreaming about a 120mp APS-H sensor and a steel I-beam tripod to keep away the camera shake (anchored in concrete). I have a commission to make a billboard to cover Mt. Rushmore. : I wonder if lenses will also be released to go along with that?

A 120 mega pixel hand held camera would be like driving a monster truck: Terrible road manners and only good for running things over. Not pretty at all. Worse than that: It's like the guy who'll never take his 4x4 off road. He bought it just in case and for hoots.

The great thing is that I don't have to properly frame anything. That is enough mp that I can just shoot away and worry about composition in post.

The never ending drive for more and more mp goes on and on, whether we need them or not. I can think of dozens of other things other than megapixels that would be far more useful.

Did my petition suddenly get changed to “Sign here to make Canon abandon low resolution sensors”?

I’m sorry to say it CanonFanBoy but your post is slanderous. It’s really sad.
Everyone shooting focal lengh limited scenarios right now needs more resolution to get better pictures. I have a tripod that holds 50lbs+, I have the biggest ballhead available, and any high quality Macro lens today is giving oodles more resolution than modern cameras can see, but for whatever reason a brooding dark swarm of belligerent “Photographers” such as yourself feel so threatened by what you don’t understand that you run out to scream “Nobody needs this!” Just because you have no interest in the subject.

 

[9VIII]

CanonFanBoy, Shame On You!
Mikehit, Shame On You!
neuroanatomist Shame On You!

Why don’t you all run off and tell some Landscape photographer that more dynamic range is bad, or go whine to a Portrait shooter about how choosing lenses for Bokeh is useless, or go argue with an Astro shooter about how pointed stars look fine, or go troll a Sports shooter about how Manual Focus is better.

 

[neuroanatomist]

:

 

[Jack Douglas]

Quite the thread. All over the map. This request is not going to find favor with Canon so there is no need to get worked up about it.

Jack

 

[Mikehit]

But that’s all totally beside the point, You guys are all running around screaming “APS-H is dead” when I don’t even think it’s necessary, it’s not the point ot the petition, the point is pixel density.

Forget APS-H exists and make this all about a 97MP APS-C sensor.

What are you on about. If your petition is about pixel density why the hell does it talk about a long-dead format?

Because that is the sensor that Canon has been demonstrating!

For their security cameras :

 

[Ozarker]

I sit up all night dreaming about a 120mp APS-H sensor and a steel I-beam tripod to keep away the camera shake (anchored in concrete). I have a commission to make a billboard to cover Mt. Rushmore. : I wonder if lenses will also be released to go along with that?

A 120 mega pixel hand held camera would be like driving a monster truck: Terrible road manners and only good for running things over. Not pretty at all. Worse than that: It's like the guy who'll never take his 4x4 off road. He bought it just in case and for hoots.

The great thing is that I don't have to properly frame anything. That is enough mp that I can just shoot away and worry about composition in post.

The never ending drive for more and more mp goes on and on, whether we need them or not. I can think of dozens of other things other than megapixels that would be far more useful.

Did my petition suddenly get changed to “Sign here to make Canon abandon low resolution sensors”?

I’m sorry to say it CanonFanBoy but your post is slanderous. It’s really sad.
Everyone shooting focal lengh limited scenarios right now needs more resolution to get better pictures. I have a tripod that holds 50lbs+, I have the biggest ballhead available, and any high quality Macro lens today is giving oodles more resolution than modern cameras can see, but for whatever reason a brooding dark swarm of belligerent “Photographers” such as yourself feel so threatened by what you don’t understand that you run out to scream “Nobody needs this!” Just because you have no interest in the subject.

I never said, "Nobody needs this." What I am saying is that if some people are having problems with camera shake with a 50mp 5DSR that a 120mp camera will be a hoot for people like that. It would sure be a problem for me. BTW: I have tripods too. That ain't the point.

Notice one thing, Bubba: Security cameras tend to be mounted to an immovable structure. At 120mp, that will be very important. Then again... maybe 480mp would be a better target, or how about 960mp, 1920mp?

Far as I can tell you are the only one running around screaming. :'(

CanonFanBoy, Shame On You!
Mikehit, Shame On You!
neuroanatomist Shame On You!

Why don’t you all run off and tell some Landscape photographer that more dynamic range is bad, or go whine to a Portrait shooter about how choosing lenses for Bokeh is useless, or go argue with an Astro shooter about how pointed stars look fine, or go troll a Sports shooter about how Manual Focus is better.

Tell people that DR isn't important? That's my point! There are a dozen things more important to the vast majority of us than 120mp. 120mp has nothing to do with photo quality unless one is printing huuuuugggggeeeee! On a 20x30 print I don't believe a person is going to see the difference between a 50mp and 120mp photo. You ain't shooting billboards are you?

I'd rather see better DR, deeper buffers, faster FPS, better lenses, etc. Right now you seem to think 120mp APS-H sensor is the holy grail. For what? Bragging rights? Because it would be considered exotic?

After all this, I have to wonder what your drive for an APS-H sensor is all about.

 

[Ozarker]

I sit up all night dreaming about a 120mp APS-H sensor and a steel I-beam tripod to keep away the camera shake (anchored in concrete). I have a commission to make a billboard to cover Mt. Rushmore. : I wonder if lenses will also be released to go along with that?

A 120 mega pixel hand held camera would be like driving a monster truck: Terrible road manners and only good for running things over. Not pretty at all. Worse than that: It's like the guy who'll never take his 4x4 off road. He bought it just in case and for hoots.

The great thing is that I don't have to properly frame anything. That is enough mp that I can just shoot away and worry about composition in post.

The never ending drive for more and more mp goes on and on, whether we need them or not. I can think of dozens of other things other than megapixels that would be far more useful.

I’m sorry to say it CanonFanBoy but your post is slanderous. It’s really sad.

Slanderous? Really? So sue me. Good luck with that.

My post had to do with me. It wasn't about you. The race for more megapixels DOES keep going "whether we need them or not."

 

[neuroanatomist]

After all this, I have to wonder what your drive for an APS-H sensor is all about.

 

[9VIII]

I'd rather see better DR, deeper buffers, faster FPS, better lenses, etc. Right now you seem to think 120mp APS-H sensor is the holy grail. For what? Bragging rights? Because it would be considered exotic?

It’s incredible that you can be so dedicated to your willful ignorance.
I’ve explained it half a dozen times, the petition explains it perfectly, but you run around blindfolded, screaming that the world is coming to an end because you absolutely refuse to hear anything but your own delusional voice.

 

[neuroanatomist]

So, in light of that, let's consider consumer feedback on APS-H. You launched your petition over 24 hours ago, and in that time well over 1,000 people have viewed this topic. So far, a grand total of four people have signed your petition. Four.

And here we are, two more days and >3000 more topic views later. Four.

 

[9VIII]

But that’s all totally beside the point, You guys are all running around screaming “APS-H is dead” when I don’t even think it’s necessary, it’s not the point ot the petition, the point is pixel density.

Forget APS-H exists and make this all about a 97MP APS-C sensor.

What are you on about. If your petition is about pixel density why the hell does it talk about a long-dead format?

Because that is the sensor that Canon has been demonstrating!

For their security cameras :

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/latest/photo-news/watch-canon-show-off-a-120mp-sensor-eos-5ds-in-photokina-tech-demo-95831

check out Canon’s tech demo with AP where they show off the sort of thing they hope to achieve in the future, in the shape of a Canon EOS 5DS kitted out with an impressive 120-million-pixel APS-H size imaging sensor.

Additionally, Canon didn’t buy the Swedish security company Axis until 2015, and they’ve been showing this sensor since 2010: https://www.dpreview.com/articles/2773376832/canon120mpsensor

This was never about security products until they bought their way into that market a few years ago.

 

[YuengLinger]

Anyone who can't take world class photos with the 5DIV is an overmedicated dullard.

 

[Mikehit]

But that’s all totally beside the point, You guys are all running around screaming “APS-H is dead” when I don’t even think it’s necessary, it’s not the point ot the petition, the point is pixel density.

Forget APS-H exists and make this all about a 97MP APS-C sensor.

What are you on about. If your petition is about pixel density why the hell does it talk about a long-dead format?

Because that is the sensor that Canon has been demonstrating!

For their security cameras :

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/latest/photo-news/watch-canon-show-off-a-120mp-sensor-eos-5ds-in-photokina-tech-demo-95831

check out Canon’s tech demo with AP where they show off the sort of thing they hope to achieve in the future, in the shape of a Canon EOS 5DS kitted out with an impressive 120-million-pixel APS-H size imaging sensor.

And of course you forgot to quote the important bit:

They stress that this is not a camera in actual development, just an indication of where imaging technology could go

Absolutely no indication they are looking at APS-H for DSLR. It was demonstration of technology, not sensor size.

 

[Don Haines]

I guarantee if Canon were to release two versions of the 7DMkIII, one APS-C, and one APS-H, with the same pixel density across both, charging $300 more for APS-H, no one would buy the APS-C version.

How sure are you about that? The 7D2 is the fastest crop camera in the Canon lineup.... make it APS-H and all of a sudden you have a bigger mirror, and that means a slower mirror..... and there goes that 10FPS burst speed....

Put in an APS-H sensor at the same density and you just made all the files 1.5 times larger..... now your buffer does not hold as many files, it takes more time to process those files, and as a result, your camera slows down.

More photocells in a larger sensor, a heavier mirror, and more processing time required means reduced battery life....

oh.... and the lenses..... forget that 17-55 at F2.8..... you want a fast walk around lens? better start saving up for a 24-70F2.8.... you can't use any of those reasonably priced crop lenses any more because your camera now needs FF lenses.... better save up a lot more money!

Canon could have done this at any time they wanted to. Yes, it would be a trivial problem..... Now ask yourself if maybe there is a reason why they didn't....

 

[9VIII]

I guarantee if Canon were to release two versions of the 7DMkIII, one APS-C, and one APS-H, with the same pixel density across both, charging $300 more for APS-H, no one would buy the APS-C version.

How sure are you about that? The 7D2 is the fastest crop camera in the Canon lineup.... make it APS-H and all of a sudden you have a bigger mirror, and that means a slower mirror..... and there goes that 10FPS burst speed....

Put in an APS-H sensor at the same density and you just made all the files 1.5 times larger..... now your buffer does not hold as many files, it takes more time to process those files, and as a result, your camera slows down.

More photocells in a larger sensor, a heavier mirror, and more processing time required means reduced battery life....

oh.... and the lenses..... forget that 17-55 at F2.8..... you want a fast walk around lens? better start saving up for a 24-70F2.8.... you can't use any of those reasonably priced crop lenses any more because your camera now needs FF lenses.... better save up a lot more money!

Canon could have done this at any time they wanted to. Yes, it would be a trivial problem..... Now ask yourself if maybe there is a reason why they didn't....

Read our discussion on lenses over the last few pages. EF-S does not save money.

The speed of the mirror would change a bit, all depending on how much Canon wants to invest in the mirror box, but that’s not really much of an issue. 7/8fps is fine.
Filling the buffer 1.5x faster is not a problem, the buffer sizes today are quite generous.

Memory Card Speed is the Primary Issue. If they give it UHS-II no-one would care about the smaller buffer.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Canon could have done this at any time they wanted to. Yes, it would be a trivial problem..... Now ask yourself if maybe there is a reason why they didn't....

Spoilsport. Isn't it more fun to ask why they should?

 

[Mikehit]

The speed of the mirror would change a bit, all depending on how much Canon wants to invest in the mirror box, but that’s not really much of an issue.

So you are agreeing then that the price difference will be more than the $300 you originally claimed?

As for 7/8 fps being 'fine' - for you maybe. But this is the top of the line APS-C sports /wildlife camera you want to replace. Who is going to take a hit on the frame rate for those? You may as well pay a little more and get the 5DIV with its (even better) full frame sensor. After all, spending $500 more when to get the 5DIV over the mythical APS-H is far less of a leap than getting the APS-H over the putative 7D3.

 

[9VIII]

But that’s all totally beside the point, You guys are all running around screaming “APS-H is dead” when I don’t even think it’s necessary, it’s not the point ot the petition, the point is pixel density.

Forget APS-H exists and make this all about a 97MP APS-C sensor.

What are you on about. If your petition is about pixel density why the hell does it talk about a long-dead format?

Because that is the sensor that Canon has been demonstrating!

For their security cameras :

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/latest/photo-news/watch-canon-show-off-a-120mp-sensor-eos-5ds-in-photokina-tech-demo-95831

check out Canon’s tech demo with AP where they show off the sort of thing they hope to achieve in the future, in the shape of a Canon EOS 5DS kitted out with an impressive 120-million-pixel APS-H size imaging sensor.

And of course you forgot to quote the important bit:

They stress that this is not a camera in actual development, just an indication of where imaging technology could go

Absolutely no indication they are looking at APS-H for DSLR. It was demonstration of technology, not sensor size.

You and everyone else are dead wrong about Canon not advertising APS-H in consumer photography applications. Stop trying to weasel your way out of it.

The statement that “this is not a camera in actual development” is not a direct statement on sensor format.
Could it be inferred that they are opposed to using APS-H in consumer products? Yes, but that’s still just your assumption, and even if they outright said “Everyone at Canon hates APS-H and we’re glad it’s dead”, that wouldn’t stop them from putting it in a camera if consumer demand were there.

Neuro is really the only one who brings up the only valid point, the petition is DOA, so the entire discussion is really moot, regardless of how good the 120MP APS-H sensor actually is.

 

[Don Haines]

Read our discussion on lenses over the last few pages. EF-S does not save money.

The speed of the mirror would change a bit, all depending on how much Canon wants to invest in the mirror box, but that’s not really much of an issue. 7/8fps is fine.
Filling the buffer 1.5x faster is not a problem, the buffer sizes today are quite generous.

Memory Card Speed is the Primary Issue. If they give it UHS-II no-one would care about the smaller buffer.

OK..... EF-S does not save money..... but I can walk into B+H and come out with a 7D2 and 17-55F2.8 for $2300, or I could walk out with your APS-H 7D2 (If canon made it and if it was only $300 more) and a 24-70F2.8 for $3500..... no savings there!

7/8FPS is fine? perhaps for you, but I wanted 12 and settled for 10..... If I wanted 7Fps I would have bought an 80D and saved even more money.....

 

[9VIII]

Read our discussion on lenses over the last few pages. EF-S does not save money.

The speed of the mirror would change a bit, all depending on how much Canon wants to invest in the mirror box, but that’s not really much of an issue. 7/8fps is fine.
Filling the buffer 1.5x faster is not a problem, the buffer sizes today are quite generous.

Memory Card Speed is the Primary Issue. If they give it UHS-II no-one would care about the smaller buffer.

OK..... EF-S does not save money..... but I can walk into B+H and come out with a 7D2 and 17-55F2.8 for $2300, or I could walk out with your APS-H 7D2 (If canon made it and if it was only $300 more) and a 24-70F2.8 for $3500..... no savings there!

7/8FPS is fine? perhaps for you, but I wanted 12 and settled for 10..... If I wanted 7Fps I would have bought an 80D and saved even more money.....

1. Just about everyone will take the 50% better high ISO performance of APS-H at almost any framerate.
2. You suck at buying lenses: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/898652-USA/Canon_6313b002_EF_24_70mm_f_4_0L_IS.html/SUB/photoprice
The 7DH+Standard Zoom Lens would come out to $2700
F4 isn’t f2.8 you say? APS-H is 50% larger, so it’s only a half stop difference in light gathering, BUT THEN:
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Canon/EF-S-17-55-f-2.8-IS-USM
https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Canon/Canon-EF-24-70mm-F4L-IS-USM

The 17-55f2.8 has a terrible T-stop value. You’re actually getting far superior light gathering out of the F4 lens on APS-H.