The Canon EOS ‘R5s’ may be in the hands of testers [CR2]

it really depends on the amount of noise and how much data you lose to noise. I haven't seen anywhere that the cameras need 16 bit ADC's yet.

Did some homework and found this, a good discussion on bit depth: https://petapixel.com/2018/09/19/8-12-14-vs-16-bit-depth-what-do-you-really-need/. So yeah, never mind the 16 bits.

But I'd love to see an R5s built purposely for studio and tripod use (architectural). We've got a beautiful camera now (R5) for super versatility, but I think there's more than a couple of us who would buy one that's aimed at super image-quality above all else; meaning speed, video and even the holy IBIS are not required. Sure that's a niche relative to the R5's mass appeal, but it's a niche that Hasselblad and Phase One occupy with some success. I bet Canon could do it AND charge less than $30 grand for one. And isn't that the path a 90MP camera is headed down?
 
Upvote 0
How do you come up with a crop of 1.4 on a 90mp sensor without oversampling? EOS R has a crop of almost 1.8 on a 30mp for 4K
Because starting with the R5, Canon is scaling from 8k or quad binning or line skipping (depending on mode) . The R5 uses the full width of the sensor for 4k DCI and even in crop mode, it does 5:4 scaling. If the RS uses a similar 8k pixel width, with twice the pixels total, then the crop would be sqrt@ or 1.414. Not to say they won't do something different now that they have the scaling power in digicx, but they already have the firmware to do that.
 
Upvote 0
Speaking as someone who primarily shoots landscapes, this would be HUGE. They could take video capabilities out of the camera for all I care. This would be my primary photography camera.
I'd say take the video right out of it just to see EOSHD lose his mind that a stills camera was developed without video ;)
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 6 users
Upvote 0
Are full-frame sensors really this expensive, then? Because from the spec speculation both here and on Tool’s video it seems to boil down to “what if a camera that’s worse in megapixels, frame rate and video options than an old 750D, with no viewfinder at all, and people will give us a THOUSAND DOLLARS for it because they desperately want the full frame RF mount.”
 
Upvote 0
Are full-frame sensors really this expensive, then? Because from the spec speculation both here and on Tool’s video it seems to boil down to “what if a camera that’s worse in megapixels, frame rate and video options than an old 750D, with no viewfinder at all, and people will give us a THOUSAND DOLLARS for it because they desperately want the full frame RF mount.”
I don't take Northrups seriously.

But when I use TS-E 17L, I don't care at all about frame rate and video options, usually don't care much about megapixels or viewfinder... but FF is a must.
 
Upvote 0
So 90D with 32.5Mp crop sensor would have the same pixel density of a 83 mpixel (32.5 X (1.6)^2 = 32.5 * 2.56) FF sensor.
With this pixel density DLA according to TDP is f/5.2 A 90mpixel camera would have a DLA f/4.8 to f/5 tops. Which means it needs f/4 lenses or up to f/5.6 as the worst case. Maybe an 80mpixel would be a better choice?

Or this is the rumor of 500mm f/2.8 is all about :ROFLMAO:
 
Upvote 0