-
UPDATE
The forum will be moving to a new domain in the near future (canonrumorsforum.com). I have turned off "read-only", but I will only leave the two forum nodes you see active for the time being. I don't know at this time how quickly the change will happen, but that will move at a good pace I am sure. ------------------------------------------------------------
Sony to unveil a 50 MP new A7 body at Photokina?
- Thread starter ahsanford
- Start date
tomscott
Photographer & Graphic Designer
Gantz said:tomscott said:
2 TB drives cost 70 euro, that is less what i have spend in a month for film.
harddrive space should not be a problem, especially not for a working pro.
i backup to 4 hard drives for each of the 3 storage drives in my PC (automatically to a NAS and a second PC).
then i have a sharkoon docking station to do extra backups to harddisks i store offline.
harddrive cost is nothing i worry about... as i have not worried about film cost.
processing power... well when i do the surface blur filter i will sure hate a 50 MP file.
but then, i keep my systems up to date.
but of course when someone spends 1000$ on a tripod, or 2000$ on a lens but still works with a 3 year old celeron, he should think about upgrading his PC too.
at least when he wants to edit 30+ MP files.
and let´s not forget, MF owners have to deal with such kind of data for a while.
Were not talking about the same thing you are working with consumer grade hardware, 3-4 drives of 2TB, I'm talking back ups of 15TB per year over a 5 year span not 15TB total, you don't just add another drive as and when you need it you have to have some sort of contingency and then double it for a safe backup. Im talking rackable server grade systems.
http://store.apple.com/uk/product/HE155ZM/A/promise-pegasus2-r8-32tb-8-x-4tb-thunderbolt-2-raid-system?fnode=1597ea08b4818b25cb21c5ba72b87b4d0d6ddab3e2699ec45f6da6e7ee44455736582815946e8c9747dae63d034ecfcc00256cd81ca2e3b77144751317d06785ac75fb316a0d7ed7f06da7bc61f7e4ed5d875e4aa144aa7b3973eab81e40b0fbc1a860980f4573a959f0adbece8b7cc6
Thats £7000 worth of back up storage on its own, to me thats not a small amount of money and if you overlooking this respect is a huge mistake and can ruin a photographers reputation if the worst should happen. Add a decent machine and 2 high quality colour correct monitors and you are easily looking at £15000 for the set up. Pros need proper storage solutions that large data is accessible quickly without a lot of small little raid drives knocking around, or spreading data across an old PC or random drives. These are very expensive, when your dealing with someones wedding and memories you need to ensure its safe incase of unforeseen events. If you don't take it seriously you shouldn't take on the responsibility.
That storage will only last 2 years with at 50mp with a commercial event and wedding photographer. With a camera with half the output your effectively doubling your timescale and saving money and still delivering incredible quality with the 5DMKIII.
Medium format isn't really suited to wedding work, the cameras are slow, heavy and expensive. Although not unheard of MF isn't overly popular in the professional event photography. The likelihood of a photographer shooting 1500 frames per wedding is fairly slim with MF. Medium format is much more suited to Landscape work and no chance they are shooting anywhere near that amount of data per shoot, its not just the data of one image import 1500 50mp files into lightroom and see how long it takes for it to create previews… good luck with that! Which is why full frame cameras are much more suited, smaller files, smaller system, high quality.
This is one of the reasons a lot of wedding photographers who picked up the D800 switched to the 5DMKIII after it came down in price, Data! It sounds ridiculous but it really is one of the biggest factors when you need to manage peoples events.
Upvote
0
G
Gantz
Guest
tomscott said:
3 drives + 4 backup drives for each make 15 drives.
plus the other drives i have offline as mentioned.
some are seagate constellation or hitachi enterprise drives.
i am just an amateur but im serious about backups.
i have spend too much time cataloging and scanning my images.
i also backup to blu-rays and woud love to get M-disc blu-rays here.
but if a pro does not make enough money to backup 15 TB a year... he maybe has the wrong job, sorry. he sure does not NEED a 50MP camera then.
as you wrote a wedding photographer has other needs than a landscape photographer.
a 50MP camera is sure not the best choice for everyone, nobody said that.
but i prefer having the choice over not having.
a analog large format camera is a bad choice for a wedding photographer.
yet other photographer use them and love them.
anyway as i wrote for me 28-32MP are fine.
i guess the photographer i know MAKE money with storing client data (*).
when the clients want their images stored over a longer period they pay a fee.
(*) at least the money they want seems to be a rippoff.
i will not deny that buying apple thunderbird backup storage is expensive.
but what about to offset against tax? how much do you really have to pay?
and you don´t know my hardware so how can you make assumptions?
it´s a bit bold don´t you think?
Upvote
0
surapon
80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
Dear Friends.
Well, I am Ready for my Sony new camera 50 MP, I Just spend my $ 99 US Dollars to buy The Best ( ?) Canon Printer PIXMA MX 922 from Amazon---- To Print the 8X 10 Photos from Sony 50 MP Camera.Yes, Next two weeks, I must buy 5 Ink Tanks =$ 25 US Dollars ea. = 125US Dollars to replace the empty ink tanks, Or Buy a new MX 922 printer and throw the old one away= Cheaper to do that.
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-MX922-Wireless-Printer-Scanner/dp/B00AVWKUJS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1409845539&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+pixma+mx922
"Superior 9600 x 2400 ( 23,040,000 DPI) maximum color dpi4 and 5 individual ink tanks means incredible business document printing and efficiency with the option of a high yield pigment black ink tank to print more documents without changing the pigment black ink as often."
Have a Great Day, Sir/ Madam.
Surapon
Well, I am Ready for my Sony new camera 50 MP, I Just spend my $ 99 US Dollars to buy The Best ( ?) Canon Printer PIXMA MX 922 from Amazon---- To Print the 8X 10 Photos from Sony 50 MP Camera.Yes, Next two weeks, I must buy 5 Ink Tanks =$ 25 US Dollars ea. = 125US Dollars to replace the empty ink tanks, Or Buy a new MX 922 printer and throw the old one away= Cheaper to do that.
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-MX922-Wireless-Printer-Scanner/dp/B00AVWKUJS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1409845539&sr=8-1&keywords=canon+pixma+mx922
"Superior 9600 x 2400 ( 23,040,000 DPI) maximum color dpi4 and 5 individual ink tanks means incredible business document printing and efficiency with the option of a high yield pigment black ink tank to print more documents without changing the pigment black ink as often."
Have a Great Day, Sir/ Madam.
Surapon
Upvote
0
RLPhoto said:
That's not how resolution works. The final value is a result of the combination of all components (lens and sensor or film) and is always lower than the weakest component. But strengthening any component leads to an increase for the entire system, even if that specific component is "past" the resolution of the weakest component, i.e. the weakest component is not a hard limit in the way you're imagining it to be.
At any rate, you can discern plenty of lenses on 24 MP APS-C sensors which means they will show an advantage on 50 MP FF.
That said, it would be difficult to see any difference between 24/36/50 MP except on the very largest prints. We're hitting the point of diminishing returns with respect to even 36" prints.
Upvote
0
tomscott
Photographer & Graphic Designer
No offence, your missing the point.
A 50mp camera vs a 23mp camera you are effectively doubling your storage needs. Its not an issue of whether you can afford it as a professional, its a given if that is your choice, its the fact that its overkill and unnecessary and people don't take this into consideration, buying a system and not realising that their PP set up is woefully underprepared for serious professional work.
For me switching from my 5DMKIII to a 50mp camera would mean completely rethinking my whole set up, which means the cost for an upgrade isn't just 3-8k for a new camera system.
For my field wedding and events doubling the MP doubles my storage needs and in turn double my cost. That is the issue it will cost you double for the same amount of pictures. Are you going to start charging more because your using a larger MP camera because of storage needs?
Its not about backing up just 15tb, if 15tb is the end data use per year, no point buying a system which will only last you a year its a contingency for a 5 year plan. If it is 15tb per year your total needs to be over 75tb instead of adding drives and buying more as needed, then doubling it for an effective safety net. This method gives you a better safety than a NAS and backing up to another machine. Talking huge data usage. whereas its more like 7TB with the 5DMKIII for me.
Even if you are backing up with BR discs at 25gbs each you would need 6 for one wedding!!! How long are you going to spend waiting for discs to rip? grasping what I'm saying?
Thats why the 5DMKIII is a great camera because its files are a good size, the camera is quick and the IQ is great. 23mp is more than enough for prints up to A2 and thats as big as I print for clients generally. I hope that Canon don't go in the same direction stick with the lower MP and make a camera more like the A7S but at around similar mp to the 5DMKIII or 1DX
Just not suitable for commercial work, wedding, event and advertising photography is where 90% of pros make their living, including myself. Again wedding photography is the most data intensive which is where my point has come from.
A 50mp camera vs a 23mp camera you are effectively doubling your storage needs. Its not an issue of whether you can afford it as a professional, its a given if that is your choice, its the fact that its overkill and unnecessary and people don't take this into consideration, buying a system and not realising that their PP set up is woefully underprepared for serious professional work.
For me switching from my 5DMKIII to a 50mp camera would mean completely rethinking my whole set up, which means the cost for an upgrade isn't just 3-8k for a new camera system.
For my field wedding and events doubling the MP doubles my storage needs and in turn double my cost. That is the issue it will cost you double for the same amount of pictures. Are you going to start charging more because your using a larger MP camera because of storage needs?
Its not about backing up just 15tb, if 15tb is the end data use per year, no point buying a system which will only last you a year its a contingency for a 5 year plan. If it is 15tb per year your total needs to be over 75tb instead of adding drives and buying more as needed, then doubling it for an effective safety net. This method gives you a better safety than a NAS and backing up to another machine. Talking huge data usage. whereas its more like 7TB with the 5DMKIII for me.
Even if you are backing up with BR discs at 25gbs each you would need 6 for one wedding!!! How long are you going to spend waiting for discs to rip? grasping what I'm saying?
Thats why the 5DMKIII is a great camera because its files are a good size, the camera is quick and the IQ is great. 23mp is more than enough for prints up to A2 and thats as big as I print for clients generally. I hope that Canon don't go in the same direction stick with the lower MP and make a camera more like the A7S but at around similar mp to the 5DMKIII or 1DX
Just not suitable for commercial work, wedding, event and advertising photography is where 90% of pros make their living, including myself. Again wedding photography is the most data intensive which is where my point has come from.
Upvote
0
surapon
80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
Gantz said:
Thanksssss, Dear Gantz .
Next 2 weeks, After the ink tanks are empty, I will throw away this Canon Printer and Buy New Epson 3880---Ha, Ha, Ha, Yes The Japanese Companies and Chinese companies ( Made in China) will get our money any ways.
Have a great day, Sir.
Surapon
PS, Dear Mr. Gantz ---I just change my decision, No more Epson 3880 = $ 1200 US Dollars, and just = Maximum Print Resolution: 2880 x 1440 dpi ---ONLY---I will keep my Dear Cheapo Canon $ 99 US Dollars = Superior 9600 x 2400 DPI., ( 23,040,000 DPI) ---And buy 10 set of 5 Ink tanks for next 12 months,
Upvote
0
G
Gantz
Guest
tomscott said:
why?
im well aware that 50MP files will need more processing power and more storage space.
what you miss is that not everyone who wants a 50MP camera shoots 1500 frames a day....
if it doesn´t fit your needs.. don´t buy it.
simple as that.
that does not mean nobody will need or want such a camera.
but if someone says i NEED 50MP files, he sure will make enough money to backup the data?
i mean there is not other option.
when you think you need 50MP files you need more storage space.
it´s not the wedding photographer, i agree to that.
maybe i came across as if i think everyone should buy a 50MP camera.
that´s not what i meant!
Upvote
0
mb66energy said:
Do many people still buy 4x6 prints ??? Do young people/families have albums ??? Or are many/most photos now stored in an iDevice instead of an old shoebox ??? BTW 12Mp is overkill for cat photos
Here in the USA I'm sure many people would buy a 100Mp camera to be able to get the very best shots of their jacked-up 1 ton pick-up truck 
Upvote
0
mb66energy said:
Very well said! Certainly NOTHING would improve my photography more than (1). No sensor, AF system, frame rate etc etc would be more valuable than that.
My feeling is that I should have spent the last six months training to be a counselor. If Canon do announce a great camera at Photokina it's going to leave a massive gap in some people's lives that they can't complain so much any more! (Actually it won't, they will find something).
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
SwampYankee said:neuroanatomist said:50 MP, 16 stops of DR. Canon must respond to that!!
:
No, they don't. This is land of the Canon fanboy. Don't you understand that in the world sensors don't matter. They never mattered since Camon had the best sensors. Now the lens line up is the only think that matters. DxoMark says other company's have better lenses? Then DXOMark doesn't matter. This is Canonland and the only thing that matters is our stuff is the best
You got one thing right – "No, they don't."
In the world sensors do matter, but people don't buy bare silicon sensors, they buy cameras. I'm really not sure why people have so much trouble grasping that and/or accepting it.
I suppose some people just find it challenging to deal with reality. They'd rather live in their own personal version of reality, where their personal opinions are the most important drivers for the development plans of all companies. It's sad.
Upvote
0
preppyak said:
You're right, the selection of Sony e-mount lenses is relatively poor and overpriced. Fortunately better optics are coming, driven in part by the 7* series but I would like to see more aps-c stuff too because the smaller sensors and optics are what really drives the compact camera system. I recently splurged on an a6000 with the Zeiss 16-70 which is a great lens, kind of like a small 24-105L but still feels overpriced for what it is (no weather sealing, no distance scale). Alas, I had no other choice within the Sony system...
Upvote
0
Aglet said:
Yeah, that would really be the question. My money is on Sony these days...just to get something to market first. I'd bet that if/when Nikon does a 50mp part, it's probably done better.
Either way...I'd be pretty intrigued by a 50mp FF camera with Sony DR...
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:SwampYankee said:neuroanatomist said:50 MP, 16 stops of DR. Canon must respond to that!!
:
No, they don't. This is land of the Canon fanboy. Don't you understand that in the world sensors don't matter. They never mattered since Camon had the best sensors. Now the lens line up is the only think that matters. DxoMark says other company's have better lenses? Then DXOMark doesn't matter. This is Canonland and the only thing that matters is our stuff is the best
You got one thing right – "No, they don't."
In the world sensors do matter, but people don't buy bare silicon sensors, they buy cameras. I'm really not sure why people have so much trouble grasping that and/or accepting it.
I suppose some people just find it challenging to deal with reality. They'd rather live in their own personal version of reality, where their personal opinions are the most important drivers for the development plans of all companies. It's sad.
Hands down, Canon has the best DSLR camera system. The sensor is only a small part of that.
INHO Sony has the best potential MILC system, but they have to watch their backs because Fujifilm is a serious threat at least to Sony's aps-c line. As for Canon's half-hearted attempt - I'll give that a FAIL.
Upvote
0
surapon
80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
c.d.embrey said:mb66energy said:
Do many people still buy 4x6 prints ??? Do young people/families have albums ??? Or are many/most photos now stored in an iDevice instead of an old shoebox ??? BTW 12Mp is overkill for cat photos
Dear friend Mr. c.d.embrey
I like all of your Words , Special " I'm sure many people would buy a 100Mp camera to be able to get the very best shots of their jacked-up 1 ton pick-up truck["---Ha, Ha, Ha---That include me too, as shown on the Photos below.
Sir, Just want to have FUN in this serious Day.
Have a great day.
Surapon
Attachments
Upvote
0
dtaylor said:
You said it is always lower than the weakest component. So therefore, the weakest component has to be a hard limit on resolution. Perhaps increasing the resolution of another component causes the system resolution to asymptotically approach the weakest components resolution?
Upvote
0
surapon
80% BY HEART, 15% BY LENSES AND ONLY 5% BY CAMERA
Dear Friends.
This Attachment is the Old News in August 24, 2010 , about Canon New 120 MP sensor = 4 years ago.
BUT, Why, Now 2014, The Best Sensor that on the Market by Canon = only 22.3 MP---- ??, And Top of the Line of Canon = 1Dx only = 18.1 MP..
May Be ( ??) ,Past 10 years, Only 1.23 Billion users of Facebook( Like ME ) have post the Photos on Face book need only 2 MP Cell Phone Camera's photos of Foods that they eat at morning/ Breakfast , to show their friend---NOT 50 MP. Sony Camera, Now.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2773376832/canon120mpsensor
Enjoy
Surapon
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/04/facebook-10-years-mark-zuckerberg
This Attachment is the Old News in August 24, 2010 , about Canon New 120 MP sensor = 4 years ago.
BUT, Why, Now 2014, The Best Sensor that on the Market by Canon = only 22.3 MP---- ??, And Top of the Line of Canon = 1Dx only = 18.1 MP..
May Be ( ??) ,Past 10 years, Only 1.23 Billion users of Facebook( Like ME ) have post the Photos on Face book need only 2 MP Cell Phone Camera's photos of Foods that they eat at morning/ Breakfast , to show their friend---NOT 50 MP. Sony Camera, Now.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/2773376832/canon120mpsensor
Enjoy
Surapon
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/feb/04/facebook-10-years-mark-zuckerberg
Attachments
Upvote
0
dtaylor said:
Prints are certainly the area that gains the most, especially if you print really large.
However, there are two other areas where having a high resolution FF part are valuable. For one, it could pretty much eliminate the reach gap between APS-C parts and FF, assuming you could maintain a high frame rate (and we know that's possible...Canon achieved 9.5fps at 120mp.) You could crop any part of a 50mp frame, and have the same kind of reach as a 20-24mp APS-C camera.
Second, even if you aren't printing, downsampling 50mp means your images sharpen right up without any actual sharpening. Just the act of averaging more information into less space improves your IQ. You could get away with less NR and no sharpening at all when scaling for wallpaper and web sizes.
Third, 4k screens are going to become more common, and eventually common place, within the next few years. At native size (unscaled...currently some browsers scale images along with text DPI), to keep images looking like 4x6, 5x7, and 8x10 prints on screen, they will need a lot more pixels than they currently do. That enhances the second point...starting with more pixels, you can downsample to those relative sizes for native display on a high DPI or 4k screen and still have the benefits of increased sharpness/lower noise.
Upvote
0
