Still waiting for high MP canon while Nikon is coming out with new 800

[3kramd5]

If they release a digic 6+ with the same kind of performance gains the 5+ saw, it will be very capable.

True, and then I would have been proven wrong. So that is why I am very interested to see what Canon puts inside the upcoming 7D2 camera.

As I recall, they didn't develop a new processor for the 7D, but rather used the same configuration as the 1D4. So maybe a new 7D would use the same config as the current pro sports model (dual digic 5+). However, those cameras came out really close to one another so that could have simplified the decision.

They may want to use a 7D as a test bed for new tech, or they may want to use the economy of scale and leverage of the existing production infrastructure.

In any case, my suspicion is that getting a capable core is the lowest hanging fruit in the higher resolution tree. Developing a line of great lenses is the biggest hurdle, and they've crossed it. The sensor unit is somewhere in the middle, and that's the biggest question in my mind from a tech standpoint, whereas the market is the overarching driver in all of this (if they don't think they can sell sufficient higher res cameras, they won't bother making them).

 

[100]

The 1Dx does 12 fps raw or 14 fps jpeg and is 18mp.
So 36mp at 6 or 7 fps is no problem with a 2 year old dual processor.

(1) Processing data is not quite linear; (2) stills might be fine, but what about video (the more photosites the sensor has, the more photosites must be processed to downscale the video ... very processor intensive); (3) if it really was this simple, then why haven't we seen a 36MP FF camera from Canon (as they certainly do have the sensor technology for it).

What about video?
The 1Dc (same processors as the 1Dx) does 4K video at 24p and 25p
4k = 4096 x 2160 = 8.84mp at 25 frames per second…

The fact Canon doesn’t have a 36mp camera has nothing to do with the processors they use. They are faster than anything Nikon has. The brand new Nikon D4s does 11fps with 16mp, the 2 year old Canon 1Dx does 12 fps with 18mp, so more megapixels and faster.

The new generation processors will probably have no problem with 8 or 10 fps at 36mp so why do you think they need quad processors?

This was directed at the current DiG!C 5+ processor and high-MP sensors.

The 1Dx and 1Dc both have dual DiG!C 5+ processors.
They are 2 years old and have more than enough power to process 36mp data files up to 6 fps unless you think a 36mp data file is substantially lager that two 18mp files.

 

[Sella174]

What about video?
The 1Dc (same processors as the 1Dx) does 4K video at 24p and 25p
4k = 4096 x 2160 = 8.84mp at 25 frames per second…

Obviously the setup of dual DiG!C 5+ processors with an additional DiG!C 4 clapping hands is sufficient regarding the 1DX and 1DC cameras. That is not the issue. The issue in question is whether this setup is sufficient for what the future brings ...

 

[Jeffrey]

I'm not looking for more megapixels because I am very satisfied with my 1D-X and trying to get better and better at shooting birds in flight. If you are a hardware collector and want to spend more money, then sure, bring on more megapixels. I probably will not buy a new camera body for the foreseeable future. In that regard, I am far from alone.....

 

[3kramd5]

What about video?
The 1Dc (same processors as the 1Dx) does 4K video at 24p and 25p
4k = 4096 x 2160 = 8.84mp at 25 frames per second…

Obviously the setup of dual DiG!C 5+ processors with an additional DiG!C 4 clapping hands is sufficient regarding the 1DX and 1DC cameras. That is not the issue. The issue in question is whether this setup is sufficient for what the future brings ...

Why is that the question? I still can't quite get why you are evidently assuming that digic5+ is the best core canon can make. The issue in question is whether what the future brings is sufficient for what the future brings, not whether what they released 2 years ago is.

 

[100]

What about video?
The 1Dc (same processors as the 1Dx) does 4K video at 24p and 25p
4k = 4096 x 2160 = 8.84mp at 25 frames per second…

Obviously the setup of dual DiG!C 5+ processors with an additional DiG!C 4 clapping hands is sufficient regarding the 1DX and 1DC cameras. That is not the issue. The issue in question is whether this setup is sufficient for what the future brings ...

Well, you said (and I quote) “So to get a decent frame rate with a 36MP sensor they'll need to quad-configure 'em ... 'cause who's gonna buy a 36MP FF camera that can only do 2 frames per second?”

To me that sounds like you weren’t aware of the performance of the current (2 year old) processors because they are able to do 3 times what you thought they could do (6 fps instead of 2 fps)
If rumors become reality the 36mp Nikon D800s or D810 will max out at 5 fps or 6fps with the grip (they up the voltage that way to squeeze everything out of their EXPEED 4 processor). There will be no D5 or D900 before 2016.

So the answers is easy. Yes the current DIGIC 5+ will do just fine for the next 2 years.
DIGIC 6 is already used in the PowerShot G16, PowerShot N100, PowerShot S120, PowerShot SX280 HS and PowerShot SX270 HS.
The next pro body will probably have a dual DIGIC 6+ processor and if Moore's law still applies they will have a lot more power than the DIGIC 5+

 

[100]

What about video?
The 1Dc (same processors as the 1Dx) does 4K video at 24p and 25p
4k = 4096 x 2160 = 8.84mp at 25 frames per second…

Obviously the setup of dual DiG!C 5+ processors with an additional DiG!C 4 clapping hands is sufficient regarding the 1DX and 1DC cameras. That is not the issue. The issue in question is whether this setup is sufficient for what the future brings ...

Why is that the question? I still can't quite get why you are evidently assuming that digic5+ is the best core canon can make. The issue in question is whether what the future brings is sufficient for what the future brings, not whether what they released 2 years ago is.

I never said or implied DIGIC 5+ is the best they can make, I just say it’s fast enough for a 36mp body like the Nikon D800. DIGIC 6 has been used in a number of cameras already and improves on DIGIC 5 so it’s safe to assume a DIGIC 6+ will improve on DIGIC 5+ or do you think future processors will be slower than the current ones?

It seems to me you are discussing a non-existing problem unless you think a high megapixel body will have a 100+ mp sensor and it will need 8K video at 120fps. Wait a minute, Canon did a 120mp APS-H sensor in 2010 already with an output speed of 9.5 frames per second http://www.canon.com/news/2010/aug24e.html if they put that in the next body DIGIC 6+ will be too slow I guess…

 

[Aglet]

Data processing is not likely as much of a bottleneck as their dirty little off-sensor ADCs.
(i know, more than just the ADC is at issue there)
They already suffer stripes when dualed in previous bodies, upping the BW in their existing architecture will likely bring more shadow noise without a significant change in readout method

 

[3kramd5]

What about video?
The 1Dc (same processors as the 1Dx) does 4K video at 24p and 25p
4k = 4096 x 2160 = 8.84mp at 25 frames per second…

Obviously the setup of dual DiG!C 5+ processors with an additional DiG!C 4 clapping hands is sufficient regarding the 1DX and 1DC cameras. That is not the issue. The issue in question is whether this setup is sufficient for what the future brings ...

Why is that the question? I still can't quite get why you are evidently assuming that digic5+ is the best core canon can make. The issue in question is whether what the future brings is sufficient for what the future brings, not whether what they released 2 years ago is.

I never said or implied DIGIC 5+ is the best they can make

I was replying to Sella

 

[100]

What about video?
The 1Dc (same processors as the 1Dx) does 4K video at 24p and 25p
4k = 4096 x 2160 = 8.84mp at 25 frames per second…

Obviously the setup of dual DiG!C 5+ processors with an additional DiG!C 4 clapping hands is sufficient regarding the 1DX and 1DC cameras. That is not the issue. The issue in question is whether this setup is sufficient for what the future brings ...

Why is that the question? I still can't quite get why you are evidently assuming that digic5+ is the best core canon can make. The issue in question is whether what the future brings is sufficient for what the future brings, not whether what they released 2 years ago is.

I never said or implied DIGIC 5+ is the best they can make

I was replying to Sella

Oops…
Sorry about that, I should listen more and talk less, that’s what my primary school teacher said 40 years ago and I still haven’t mastered it completely :-[

 

[Sella174]

The question is why has Canon not released a 36MP'ish FF camera when both Nikon and Sony have done it.

So, if according to you, the ability of the processor(s) to handle the data is not the issue, then what is the excuse? Crummy lenses without the resolving power? No. Slow SD and CF cards? No. Inability to actually make such sensors? No. What then?

Or has Canon simply decided that absolutely no photographer actually needs 36MP in a FF package?

To those chucking Moore's Law around ... yes, possibly the DiG!C architecture can handle the data, but at what cost in terms of power consumption and thermal management? Both these factors can negatively impact on the actual use of the chips ... which leads to the same conclusion.

 

[danski0224]

The question is why has Canon not released a 36MP'ish FF camera when both Nikon and Sony have done it.

So, if according to you, the ability of the processor(s) to handle the data is not the issue, then what is the excuse? Crummy lenses without the resolving power? No. Slow SD and CF cards? No. Inability to actually make such sensors? No. What then?

Or has Canon simply decided that absolutely no photographer actually needs 36MP in a FF package?

To those chucking Moore's Law around ... yes, possibly the DiG!C architecture can handle the data, but at what cost in terms of power consumption and thermal management? Both these factors can negatively impact on the actual use of the chips ... which leads to the same conclusion.

Nikon and Sony use the same sensors, correct?

How well does the 36mp Sony sensor hold up at say 3200 ISO and up compared to Canon? I know that a 12,000 ISO image from a 1DX is pretty much usable right out of the camera. The 5DIII does pretty good too.

I would guess that Canon will deliver their answer when they are good and ready. I do not understand the details of sensor fabrication, but I bet that Canon doesn't want to release a 36mp sensor that performs like the current 7D. Some like the 7D, some don't.

There is also the possibility that all of the people on photography forums screaming for a 36mp Canon sensor may not actually buy one when it is released (measurebators) or the sales lost to Sony/Nikon are insignificant in the bigger picture.

The people wanting 36mp so they can crop at 400% must be a small part of the market, certainly not enough to support a camera line.

I have done 11 x 14 prints from a Canon 1D with a whopping 4.2mp and those look pretty damn good to my eyes without a stand alone program like Perfect Resize (I just used DPP and tried out Qimage with the jpegs). I just got the 17 x 22 paper to try that out. So, do people want a 36mp camera to make 4mp crop prints of the image? ;D

I don't have any inside Canon info, but I suspect that when their answer to the 36mp Sony comes out, it'll be a knockout punch (I bet they have bought 36mp cameras at retail and looked inside very intently). Even if it isn't a knockout but a step forward, Canon is a pretty diverse company. The measurebators wanting the 36mp sensor are eclipsed by the pro's wanting a system that works or the hobbyists that don't care.

I wonder what it will cost when/if it is released...

I wonder if people inside the Canon skunkworks laugh at these threads

 

[Loswr]

Or has Canon simply decided that absolutely no photographer actually needs 36MP in a FF package?

I'm not sure why people have such difficulty grasping this concept, but Canon has no intention to meet the needs of absolutely every photographer. Their goal is to meet the needs of the majority of photographers. Perhaps Canon simply decided that 22 MP @ 6 fps would be better than 36 MP @ 4 fps? The fact that the 5DIII has outsold the D800 suggests Canon understands the needs of the majority of photographers very well.

 

[Sella174]

How well does the 36mp Sony sensor hold up at say 3200 ISO and up compared to Canon? I know that a 12,000 ISO image from a 1DX is pretty much usable right out of the camera. The 5DIII does pretty good too.

You are probably right, but then again there are many people like me who don't really care about "high-ISO" performance and are instead always griping about the lack of 50 ASA and ... ... 25 ASA equivalent. Plus it now seems that even 100 ASA/ISO is biting the dust. :'(

 

[Sella174]

Or has Canon simply decided that absolutely no photographer actually needs 36MP in a FF package?

I'm not sure why people have such difficulty grasping this concept, but Canon has no intention to meet the needs of absolutely every photographer. Their goal is to meet the needs of the majority of photographers. Perhaps Canon simply decided that 22 MP @ 6 fps would be better than 36 MP @ 4 fps? The fact that the 5DIII has outsold the D800 suggests Canon understands the needs of the majority of photographers very well.

So the answer to my question is then ... YES ... ???

Then please explain ... Canon spent several millions over several years brainwashing us consumers that more megapixels are better; and now you're saying they're just chucking that huge investment away? Only, hey, no, in fact, Canon has just simply built Sony's and Nikon's marketing foundation for them, because in order to actually get the more megapixels we are conditioned to crave, us consumers have to switch to Sony or Nikon! :

 

[100]

The question is why has Canon not released a 36MP'ish FF camera when both Nikon and Sony have done it.

So, if according to you, the ability of the processor(s) to handle the data is not the issue, then what is the excuse? Crummy lenses without the resolving power? No. Slow SD and CF cards? No. Inability to actually make such sensors? No. What then?

Or has Canon simply decided that absolutely no photographer actually needs 36MP in a FF package?

To those chucking Moore's Law around ... yes, possibly the DiG!C architecture can handle the data, but at what cost in terms of power consumption and thermal management? Both these factors can negatively impact on the actual use of the chips ... which leads to the same conclusion.

Canon as market leader don’t need an excuse to not bring a 36 mp camera to the market.
My guess is they thought they wouldn’t make enough profit with a 30+ mp FF camera on top of the 1DX, 1DC, 5DIII and 6D. High mp 135 format cameras are a niche market (landscape, advertising, architecture) with competition from Nikon, Sony and from the medium format manufacturers. Canon has been market leader for 11 years in a row, so they know they can rely on their market research people.

The Canon 1Dx with dual DIGIC 5+ and 100,000 pixel RGB AE metering with a dedicated DIGIC 4 processor handles 12 fps of 18mp files and there is no reason to believe this setup can’t handle 36mp files at 6 fps. Power consumption and thermal management is something every camera maker has to deal with and has been dealt with by Canon this far, so I can’t see any immediate reason to think Canon won’t be able to handle these things in future cameras.

You are right about one thing though, it all leads to the same conclusion.
Processing power, power consumption and heat management are most likely NOT the reasons Canon hasn’t brought a 30+ mp camera to the market. I think you focus too much on technical aspects. They do play a part, but in the end it’s the commercial aspects on which decisions are based about what to bring to the market and what not.

 

[Loswr]

Or has Canon simply decided that absolutely no photographer actually needs 36MP in a FF package?

I'm not sure why people have such difficulty grasping this concept, but Canon has no intention to meet the needs of absolutely every photographer. Their goal is to meet the needs of the majority of photographers. Perhaps Canon simply decided that 22 MP @ 6 fps would be better than 36 MP @ 4 fps? The fact that the 5DIII has outsold the D800 suggests Canon understands the needs of the majority of photographers very well.

So the answer to my question is then ... YES ... ???

Read my response again. I'm sure you can understand that the word 'majority' does not mean 'everyone' but rather implies (and affirms) there is also a minority.

Then please explain ... Canon spent several millions over several years brainwashing us consumers that more megapixels are better; and now you're saying they're just chucking that huge investment away? Only, hey, no, in fact, Canon has just simply built Sony's and Nikon's marketing foundation for them, because in order to actually get the more megapixels we are conditioned to crave, us consumers have to switch to Sony or Nikon! :

If that were true, the D800 should be outselling the 5DIII. But it's not.

It could be argued that Canon 'skates to where the puck is going to be'. Nikon/Sony tried playing the MP game, but maybe it was too much and too late. Nikon's entry level APS-C cameras have been at 24 MP for some time, while Canon remains at 18 MP....and Canon is still selling more entry-level dSLRs than Nikon (and more FF dSLRs, too).

You can make statements like 'brainwashed' and 'consumers have to switch to Nikon/Sony' all day long, it doesn't change the fact that Canon has sold more interchangeable lens cameras than Nikon (and far more than Sony) every year for the past 11 years, and if forecasts by Canon and Nikon are accurate, Canon will sell more ILCs in 2014, too.

 

[Sella174]

Canon as market leader don’t need an excuse to not bring a 36 mp camera to the market.

Canon sells the most camera, thus Canon makes the best cameras. How about: the majority of people live in cities where they breathe polluted air, thus air-pollution is good for us?

Or did you mean Canon is the market-leader through technological superiority? Sorry to burst that bubble, but even Olympus makes better mirrorless cameras than Canon.

My guess is they thought they wouldn’t make enough profit with a 30+ mp FF camera on top of the 1DX, 1DC, 5DIII and 6D. High mp 135 format cameras are a niche market (landscape, advertising, architecture) with competition from Nikon, Sony and from the medium format manufacturers.

And yet Canon still makes tilt & shift lenses even though the application these lenses are design for, is, according to you, a niche market. And on the flipside, Canon makes a 600mm lens, which is also a niche product. Sorry, but that argument of "niche products" never floated.

Canon has been market leader for 11 years in a row, so they know they can rely on their market research people.

Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!! Then why are sales figures down? And please don't blame the "global recession", 'cause a really decent marketing dept. would still be able to increase sales by tapping into new markets ... using niche products.

 

[Sella174]

Read my response again.

Done.

I'm sure you can understand that the word 'majority' does not mean 'everyone' but rather implies (and affirms) there is also a minority.

Yes, a majority implies a minority. But, as I have also said before on other threads, the majority and the minority are not equal. Perhaps the majority are sheep consumers following the marketing talk, and the minority are professionals who, through picking the best tools for the job, are also exerting influence on the majority ... or on a minority of the majority. Whatever, because we didn't agree then, so we won't agree now.

If that were true, the D800 should be outselling the 5DIII. But it's not.

...

You can make statements like 'brainwashed' and 'consumers have to switch to Nikon/Sony' all day long, it doesn't change the fact that Canon has sold more interchangeable lens cameras than Nikon (and far more than Sony) every year for the past 11 years, and if forecasts by Canon and Nikon are accurate, Canon will sell more ILCs in 2014, too.

Nikon and Sony are making the same mistake that Olympus and Panasonic are making ... lack of product availability. Over here in southern Africa, even computer shops sell (and carry stock of) Canon cameras, but Nikon is only available from really dedicated photography shops and Sony is by special order only. That said, I am seeing more and more people using new-model Nikon APS-C cameras at every event. Reason when asked? The Nikon has more megapixels than the Canon model.

 

[Loswr]

Canon has been market leader for 11 years in a row, so they know they can rely on their market research people.

Bwahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!! Then why are sales figures down? And please don't blame the "global recession", 'cause a really decent marketing dept. would still be able to increase sales by tapping into new markets ... using niche products.

Canon's unit sales of dSLRs are down. Nikon's unit sales of dSLRs are down more than Canon's, and based on 2014 projections, Nikon expects to fall even further behind. Did you have a point other than silly maniacal laughter?

Yes, a majority implies a minority. But, as I have also said before on other threads, the majority and the minority are not equal. Perhaps the majority are sheep consumers following the marketing talk, and the minority are professionals who, through picking the best tools for the job, are also exerting influence on the majority ... or on a minority of the majority. Whatever, because we didn't agree then, so we won't agree now.

"The majority and the minority are not equal," wow, based on the definitions of those words, I'd never have guessed they weren't equal. Thanks for clarifying.

Canon sells more APS-C cameras than Nikon. Canon sells more FF cameras than Nikon. There are more white lenses than black ones at nearly every televised sporting event. By inference, more amateurs choose Canon, and more pros choose Canon. So either Canon makes systems that better meet the needs of the majority of photographers, or the majority of photographers are intentionally choosing to use gear that doesn't meet their needs as well as the alternatives. Are you really suggesting that the majority of photographers are choosing gear that's inferior in terms of meeting their needs?

Nikon and Sony are making the same mistake that Olympus and Panasonic are making ... lack of product availability.

... Not selling more cameras than Canon!

Over here in southern Africa, even computer shops sell (and carry stock of) Canon cameras, but Nikon is only available from really dedicated photography shops and Sony is by special order only. That said, I am seeing more and more people using new-model Nikon APS-C cameras at every event. Reason when asked? The Nikon has more megapixels than the Canon model.

Sorry, but southern Africa is a tiny fraction of the global market. Nikon cameras are widely available in major markets.

What you see in the microcosm of your locality obviously doesn't reflect global sales. You might want to (again) review the definitions of majority and minority.