Truth be told, I've gone back and forth on that one. But if I recall correctly, I was responding to a comment about a hypothetical R-II with no touchbar and IBIS.
Rs just might get super-cheap too.
The Canon EOS R6 has shown up for certification
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Truth be told, I've gone back and forth on that one. But if I recall correctly, I was responding to a comment about a hypothetical R-II with no touchbar and IBIS.
Rs just might get super-cheap too.
We'll see. I bet if you compare an R6 image and a R5 image downscaled to the same resolution, you won't notice the difference.
If you think otherwise, feel free to provide us with a comparison that shows how a lower resolution sensor outperforms a higher resolution one from the same generation when compared at the same magnification.
Edit: To avoid confusion, here is what I'm talking about:
Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review
Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.www.dpreview.com
The differences between these sensors are pretty marginal, despite wildy different resolutions.
You are referring to photography comparisons not video. The A7S and GH5S both went with lower resolutions to improve low light video performance. The Cinema series has 8.8MP sensors and 15 stops of DR, so yes, smaller sensors with larger photosites for better low light performance is not just a myth; actual camera manufacturers prove it each time they release a video oriented body; they all get smaller resolution sensors.
Sony A7S
Sony A7S Preview – A low resolution marvel for low-light & video?
Sony has expanded its range of full-frame mirrorless cameras with the launch of the Sony A7S. Joining the Sony A7 and A7R, the new A7S offers a lower resolution 12.2Mp sensor with an ISO 50–409,600 sensitivity range, and breaks boundaries for video with its 4K/30p video footage output.
www.dxomark.com
GH5S - smaller sensor to improve low light video performance
Panasonic Cut the Lumix GH5S' Resolution in Half to Get Even Better Low-Light Images
Panasonic’s Lumix GH5 is already one of the top picks for people who want mirrorless camera that captures high quality 4K video. So what could the company possible do to make it even better? Apparently, it seems the answer is to slash its megapixels in half.
gizmodo.com
Two sensors with the same physical size with all else being equal and the lower resolution sensor will outperform the higher resolution sensor in low light scenarios. By dropping down to 20MP for the R6 Canon was probably able to reuse an existing sensor (1DXII or III) and was able to achieve great low light performance for a lower cost. Less data to read from a smaller sensor means cheaper processor required and equal or better low light performance than a higher resolution sensor (i.e. R5). Yes side by side the low light performance of the R5 vs the R6 may be indistinguishable; but I think that would actually be perfect, getting the low light performance or better than the R5 at the R6's price.
Want even more proof? The C500 Mark II is Canon's full frame Cinema camera and retails for $16K...guess what the sensor resolution is: you guessed it 20MP.
Specifications & Features - Canon EOS C500 Mark II - Canon Europe
www.canon-europe.com
Everything about the R6 to me points to a video and low light beast at a very economical price point. The places where Canon cut corners so far do not affect the video performance at all. Of course if we start talking about crop factors, missing codecs, missing DPAF at certain frame rates, etc. then we know the new Canon isn't so new.
Last edited:
Yes. But even for video, since Canon can do 8K 30p full sensor RAW on the R5, downsampling that should give us the same situation as with stills. It should deliver very similar quality to what a lower resolution sensor would, but with the potential for more accurate color detail and better noise reduction.
I'm not denying that Canon must have a good reason for going with the 20 MP sensor here or that it probably helps with cost or that a R5 will be overkill for many. I'm just saying that the negative attitude some still have towards high pixel counts is poorly justified with arguments about low light. Now, take rolling shutter or file size or FPS and you have a good point. Processing as well in theory, although there could also be a significant overlap in parts here to save costs.
The thing is, you are taking my statements out of context. I have never said its low light performance will be better than the R5; in fact I never compared it's low light performance to any other camera. All I've ever said is that at 20MP this camera will be a lowlight beast. That to me simply means minimal noise in lowlight situations where traditionally cameras at its price point would suffer.
Will it outperform xyz camera in low light tests? Personally I couldn't care less, if it meets or exceeds my own personal expectations for lowlight performance that's all that matters. All I've ever said is that with a 20MP sensor it is off to a great start in the low light department.
The touch bar can be disabled or, as I do, assigned a function (iso) but locked so that it isn't activated accidentally. One of those adjustments that you get used to while enjoying the benefits of mirrorless. But then I also shoot with a Leica M so working a bit more slowly doesn't worry me in most situations.
I'm in the same boat haha. I want one camera that I can use for gigs (dual card slots), street (compact), filming shows (4k with good battery life) and the occasional wildlife outing (high fps). The R5 would be overkill for my needs and wallet, but the R6 could be just right.
I just hope it has 4k with DPAF with EF and EF-S lenses. No recording limit would be a bonus but I can live without it.
Way too dear in this segment, same mistake Canon made with the EOS R. It will be up against the A7IV at similar time with talk of that coming around September and set to offer 4K60p as well. It won't have the crippling your worrying about either, although I doubt Canon would cripple the R6 in those ways.
No chance to use RF glass if such a camera is ever made.
I heard there's a few of those EF lenses out there...
That’s exactly how Canon slicing and dicing their customer base within a single product category :
Both grate cameras. One is a fully featured product sold at premium and a second product, still great but missing some of the top shelf features of the premium product but affordable at the same time.
True but right away you are taking away the possibility of using any of Canon's most modern lenses. Some won't care but it is worth considering when making a camera purchase decision.
Or could it be... you know... that lower resolution is (was) perfectly enough for video as 4K is just over 8MP. This gives lower rolling shutter, eases off the load on the processor, and I figure makes manufacturing the sensor somewhat cheaper.
Where have you seen that it dual SD? I personally wouldn't expect them to be the same format.
Last edited:
It can be great, but its implementation varies a bit between cameras, even within Canon.
I take it you did not read the articles in the links where they state the sensors were made with lower resolution to improve low light performance. You are missing the bigger discussion here which is that it is well documented that camera makers pick lower resolution sensors for their video oriented bodies when targeting low light improvements.
Similar threads
- Contains 2 staff post(s)
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
- Contains 4 staff post(s)
- Contains 1 staff post(s)
<-- start Taboola -->