Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
I keep seeing 120 mp mentioned.
We should take in to account all of the negative posts about the 5Ds that say the additional mp introduce more camera shake, worse noise and it can only be used on well let days with only the best glass made.
At 120mp the new body would only be able to take pictures on a very rigid tripod and only if it is taking a shots of a solar eclipse.
I keep seeing 120 mp mentioned.
We should take in to account all of the negative posts about the 5Ds that say the additional mp introduce more camera shake, worse noise and it can only be used on well let days with only the best glass made.
At 120mp the new body would only be able to take pictures on a very rigid tripod and only if it is taking a shots of a solar eclipse.
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
hyperbole much?
it would be around 1EV different from the 50MP DSLR, or you use it with oversampling in mind. at the same print sizes, the 120Mp sensor will certainly look better than 50mp and have the same influence of camera shake.
not to mention that most full frame shooters apparently don't have the discipline for APS-C cropped sensors that are a higher pixel density because they are losing their minds at 50mp.
A cropped 24mp APS-C camera is the full frame equivalent for shake and blurr at the same actual focal as a 60MP full frame sensor.
somehow it's ONLY an issue with full frame cameras :
Then lenses. at the same print / view size the 120mp sensor will make any lens look better than the 50MP at the same dimensions, unless the lens is from Sony.
takesome1 said:
hyperbole much?
it would be around 1EV different from the 50MP DSLR, or you use it with oversampling in mind. at the same print sizes, the 120Mp sensor will certainly look better than 50mp and have the same influence of camera shake.
not to mention that most full frame shooters apparently don't have the discipline for APS-C cropped sensors that are a higher pixel density because they are losing their minds at 50mp.
A cropped 24mp APS-C camera is the full frame equivalent for shake and blurr at the same actual focal as a 60MP full frame sensor.
somehow it's ONLY an issue with full frame cameras :
Then lenses. at the same print / view size the 120mp sensor will make any lens look better than the 50MP at the same dimensions, unless the lens is from Sony.
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
Can you please show us your calculations and how you derive these figures?
It is an often repeated mantra that as you increase resolution within a given format this increases diffraction. However, this is how you get diffraction of light as it passes through a slit (diagram from Canon Japan website):
The only variable that can increase or decrease the amount of diffraction is the width of the slit. If you placed a sensor on the other side of the slit (or hole), it matters little whether the pixels on it are large or small, it cannot change the amount of diffraction.
I use f/8-16 on my 5DsR all the time, and have not noticed any more reduction in sharpness over a 6D using the same lens. So when I see these repeated claims that Canon's engineers don't even know what diffraction is, and that increasing resolution to 120-250MP in a 35mm format sensor will cause devastating degradation with diffraction ruining images at apertures as wide as f/2.8-4, I am left curious how these people derive such calculations (these are never shown when such categorical statements are made). It seems a fundamental assumption is that diffraction increases as pixel size decreases...which is nonsense. I would love to see the maths, so we can all check them over. Until then, I am calling BS on this one, although in lieu of showing us the calculations I am sure people will continue to repeat the myth over and over again until it becomes The Truth.
This is not to say that diffraction limited optics is not a hard limit. Diffraction occurs with all lenses, at all f stops, irrespective of what the pixel size of your sensor is. The amount of diffraction for any given f stop is the same whether you have a 3MP sensor or a 300MP sensor. Increasing resolution merely makes the diffraction that was always there more divisible, just it makes minute handshake more visible.
A couple of useful articles debunking the "diffraction myth":
https://jonrista.com/2013/03/24/the-diffraction-myth/
http://community.the-digital-picture.com/showthread.php?t=809
SirSam said:
Can you please show us your calculations and how you derive these figures?
It is an often repeated mantra that as you increase resolution within a given format this increases diffraction. However, this is how you get diffraction of light as it passes through a slit (diagram from Canon Japan website):
The only variable that can increase or decrease the amount of diffraction is the width of the slit. If you placed a sensor on the other side of the slit (or hole), it matters little whether the pixels on it are large or small, it cannot change the amount of diffraction.
I use f/8-16 on my 5DsR all the time, and have not noticed any more reduction in sharpness over a 6D using the same lens. So when I see these repeated claims that Canon's engineers don't even know what diffraction is, and that increasing resolution to 120-250MP in a 35mm format sensor will cause devastating degradation with diffraction ruining images at apertures as wide as f/2.8-4, I am left curious how these people derive such calculations (these are never shown when such categorical statements are made). It seems a fundamental assumption is that diffraction increases as pixel size decreases...which is nonsense. I would love to see the maths, so we can all check them over. Until then, I am calling BS on this one, although in lieu of showing us the calculations I am sure people will continue to repeat the myth over and over again until it becomes The Truth.
This is not to say that diffraction limited optics is not a hard limit. Diffraction occurs with all lenses, at all f stops, irrespective of what the pixel size of your sensor is. The amount of diffraction for any given f stop is the same whether you have a 3MP sensor or a 300MP sensor. Increasing resolution merely makes the diffraction that was always there more divisible, just it makes minute handshake more visible.
A couple of useful articles debunking the "diffraction myth":
https://jonrista.com/2013/03/24/the-diffraction-myth/
http://community.the-digital-picture.com/showthread.php?t=809
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
Oh c'mon, that's just wrong. It really depends on how large you want to print. Printing a large 90x60cm picture with a 20MP 6D will look like the same as taken with a future 120MP FF sensor and same settings with same lens. You wouldn't notice much difference. The difference would only come into play if you stand very close to the print, pixel peep at 100%, or print much larger or crop a lot (which is generally a bad idea). Keep in mind the viewing distance, as the human eye also has its limits.
takesome1 said:
Oh c'mon, that's just wrong. It really depends on how large you want to print. Printing a large 90x60cm picture with a 20MP 6D will look like the same as taken with a future 120MP FF sensor and same settings with same lens. You wouldn't notice much difference. The difference would only come into play if you stand very close to the print, pixel peep at 100%, or print much larger or crop a lot (which is generally a bad idea). Keep in mind the viewing distance, as the human eye also has its limits.
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
Cant wait!
But what will the crippling factor(s) be to make it not beat the 5D Mark IV in every aspect?!?!?!
Low framerate?
Worse Video?
Or just priced much higher?
Would prefer the higher price and have a decent frame and 4k video
Cant wait!
But what will the crippling factor(s) be to make it not beat the 5D Mark IV in every aspect?!?!?!
Low framerate?
Worse Video?
Or just priced much higher?
Would prefer the higher price and have a decent frame and 4k video
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
I doubt it will have 4K video.
Most cameras are passively cooled devices so they run with extremely low thermal limits, they're generally not designed to run a given component at 100% all the time.
Sony has heat issues because they just run the processor until it fails, the hardware is capable enough, but not within the thermal limits of the body design. What they need is active cooling, but that would be a huge compromise for a camera design. That would basically turn it into a big dedicated movie camera.
Until mobile processors become two or four times more powerful than they are now (able to do the same processing at half or a quarter the energy cost) the only things that will be able to do proper 4K are dedicated units with much more substantial cooling solutions.
Hellish said:
I doubt it will have 4K video.
Most cameras are passively cooled devices so they run with extremely low thermal limits, they're generally not designed to run a given component at 100% all the time.
Sony has heat issues because they just run the processor until it fails, the hardware is capable enough, but not within the thermal limits of the body design. What they need is active cooling, but that would be a huge compromise for a camera design. That would basically turn it into a big dedicated movie camera.
Until mobile processors become two or four times more powerful than they are now (able to do the same processing at half or a quarter the energy cost) the only things that will be able to do proper 4K are dedicated units with much more substantial cooling solutions.
Upvote
0
L
Loswr
Guest
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
It's often repeated because it's true. However, many people misunderstand the specifics. Lens diffraction is certainly independent of pixel size, but pixel size determines the spatial frequency at which the light on the other side is sampled. Consider an analogy – take a picture of a wall of Lego bricks from two meters away, the 120 MP sensor will not enable you to resolve the blocks any better than a 10 MP sensor. Take a picture of sand on a beach from two meters, the 120 MP will have a significant resolution advantage.
Fact: diffraction softens images.
Fact: narrower apertures result in more diffraction.
Fact: smaller pixels deliver higher spatial resolution.
Fact: higher spatial resolution allows the effect of diffraction to be detected at wider apertures.
If I compare the 100/2.8L on my 1D X at f/5.6 and f/14, the image at the narrower aperture will be slightly softer, all else being equal. If I compare the 100/2.8L on a 5Ds at f/5.6 and f/14, the difference between the two will be more noticeable than on the 1D X.
Where the myth comes in is when people start comparing across sensors. When someone suggests that the 100/2.8L at f/14 will be less sharp on the 5Ds than on the 1D X because of diffraction, that's wrong – the 50 MP sensor will outresolve the 18 MP sensor at any aperture setting, on either side of the cameras' respective diffraction-limited apertures.
Sator said:
It's often repeated because it's true. However, many people misunderstand the specifics. Lens diffraction is certainly independent of pixel size, but pixel size determines the spatial frequency at which the light on the other side is sampled. Consider an analogy – take a picture of a wall of Lego bricks from two meters away, the 120 MP sensor will not enable you to resolve the blocks any better than a 10 MP sensor. Take a picture of sand on a beach from two meters, the 120 MP will have a significant resolution advantage.
Fact: diffraction softens images.
Fact: narrower apertures result in more diffraction.
Fact: smaller pixels deliver higher spatial resolution.
Fact: higher spatial resolution allows the effect of diffraction to be detected at wider apertures.
If I compare the 100/2.8L on my 1D X at f/5.6 and f/14, the image at the narrower aperture will be slightly softer, all else being equal. If I compare the 100/2.8L on a 5Ds at f/5.6 and f/14, the difference between the two will be more noticeable than on the 1D X.
Where the myth comes in is when people start comparing across sensors. When someone suggests that the 100/2.8L at f/14 will be less sharp on the 5Ds than on the 1D X because of diffraction, that's wrong – the 50 MP sensor will outresolve the 18 MP sensor at any aperture setting, on either side of the cameras' respective diffraction-limited apertures.
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
I've already said that when I added that diffraction always occurs at all apertures of any given lens, and the magnitude of diffraction is always proportional to the slit width/aperture size. Increasing resolution merely makes the diffraction potentially more visible. It is like minute handshake degrading IQ—it is already there even at lower resolutions. What I am questioning are what the magic numbers that repeatedly pop up are based on unequivocally stating that on a 50MP sensor diffraction meaningfully and visibly degrades resolution past f/6.7, beyond f/4 on a 70MP sensor, and past f/2.8 on a 120MP sensor etc.
My challenge is what the calculations are for determining where the tipping point lies at which diffraction limited optics start to meaningfully and visibly limit 35mm format sensor resolutions to such an extent as to render increasing resolution further futile. Please note the emphasis on the words meaningfully and visibly. There are reasons for suspecting that even at 120-250MP, we may not yet have hit the wall of diffraction limited optics. I expect Canon would already have had all of this data in their lab before proceeding to develop a commercially viable 120-250MP sensor, and are not as stupid as some seem to think they are.
This is another interesting article at least suggesting that we are currently nowhere near hitting the wall of diffraction limited optics:
https://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2014/12/36-megapixels-vs-6x7-velvia/#/
Once again these articles are also of interest:
https://jonrista.com/2013/03/24/the-diffraction-myth/
http://community.the-digital-picture.com/showthread.php?t=809
neuroanatomist said:
I've already said that when I added that diffraction always occurs at all apertures of any given lens, and the magnitude of diffraction is always proportional to the slit width/aperture size. Increasing resolution merely makes the diffraction potentially more visible. It is like minute handshake degrading IQ—it is already there even at lower resolutions. What I am questioning are what the magic numbers that repeatedly pop up are based on unequivocally stating that on a 50MP sensor diffraction meaningfully and visibly degrades resolution past f/6.7, beyond f/4 on a 70MP sensor, and past f/2.8 on a 120MP sensor etc.
My challenge is what the calculations are for determining where the tipping point lies at which diffraction limited optics start to meaningfully and visibly limit 35mm format sensor resolutions to such an extent as to render increasing resolution further futile. Please note the emphasis on the words meaningfully and visibly. There are reasons for suspecting that even at 120-250MP, we may not yet have hit the wall of diffraction limited optics. I expect Canon would already have had all of this data in their lab before proceeding to develop a commercially viable 120-250MP sensor, and are not as stupid as some seem to think they are.
This is another interesting article at least suggesting that we are currently nowhere near hitting the wall of diffraction limited optics:
https://www.onlandscape.co.uk/2014/12/36-megapixels-vs-6x7-velvia/#/
Once again these articles are also of interest:
https://jonrista.com/2013/03/24/the-diffraction-myth/
http://community.the-digital-picture.com/showthread.php?t=809
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
Please re-read your comments, you never presented an argument about why a tilt screen is unnecessary with an "OVF based camera". Further, I know what a right angle finder is and it doesn't have anywhere near the functionality or practicality of a tilt screen (particularly a flippy tilt screen).
How well does that right angle finder work when the camera is over your head? How well does it work when standing at an awkward off angle? How well does it work when you are trying to compose an image in the dark? Hows carrying an extra piece of equipment/adding bulk to your kit?
rrcphoto said:
Please re-read your comments, you never presented an argument about why a tilt screen is unnecessary with an "OVF based camera". Further, I know what a right angle finder is and it doesn't have anywhere near the functionality or practicality of a tilt screen (particularly a flippy tilt screen).
How well does that right angle finder work when the camera is over your head? How well does it work when standing at an awkward off angle? How well does it work when you are trying to compose an image in the dark? Hows carrying an extra piece of equipment/adding bulk to your kit?
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
I bought the angle finder and am disappointed in it for similar reasons. Perhaps I need to persist more.
Jack
j-nord said:
I bought the angle finder and am disappointed in it for similar reasons. Perhaps I need to persist more.
Jack
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
It is theoretically possible to correct for diffraction. Bayer sensors detect red, blue, green at different spatial distances within a given full-color pixel. These different wavelengths will diffract to a different extent, resulting in a pattern on the sub-pixels which should provide quantitative information about the amount of diffraction. It might be complex to extract this information, but some amount of correction for diffraction should be possible.
Sator said:
It is theoretically possible to correct for diffraction. Bayer sensors detect red, blue, green at different spatial distances within a given full-color pixel. These different wavelengths will diffract to a different extent, resulting in a pattern on the sub-pixels which should provide quantitative information about the amount of diffraction. It might be complex to extract this information, but some amount of correction for diffraction should be possible.
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
Lugging around Thousands of dollars in heavy glass and a iPhone user asking: What are you Smoking?
iPhone 7 Photo attaached Below....
- Canon is like a snake which slithers through the grass hunting for pry, unfortunately we are their victims.
- The company trades on the NYSE and only concerned about the maximum amount of blood they can take without killing the victim.
- They don't believe in being leaders in photo technology, only leaders in reliable gear?
- They don't wont to compete, as that's bad for profits, so they follow behind the leaders as not to push them forward.
- Decisions at what pace photo technology progress are discussed in Private Meetings. example: Canon, Nikon & Sony board members having dinner together. I guess none of the cell phone manufactures are dinning with them but SHOULD BE.
Lugging around Thousands of dollars in heavy glass and a iPhone user asking: What are you Smoking?
iPhone 7 Photo attaached Below....
Attachments
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
The other thing people forget is that 'diffraction limiting' means 'limits possible improvements' and it does not mean 'makes the image worse'. Diffraction will limit the point at which adding MP does nothing to add more detail at any particular aperture and that is all it means.
Sometimes I wonder where people learned to speak English.
Sator said:SirSam said:
Can you please show us your calculations and how you derive these figures?
It is an often repeated mantra that as you increase resolution within a given format this increases diffraction. However, this is how you get diffraction of light as it passes through a slit (diagram from Canon Japan website):
The only variable that can increase or decrease the amount of diffraction is the width of the slit. If you placed a sensor on the other side of the slit (or hole), it matters little whether the pixels on it are large or small, it cannot change the amount of diffraction.
I use f/8-16 on my 5DsR all the time, and have not noticed any more reduction in sharpness over a 6D using the same lens. So when I see these repeated claims that Canon's engineers don't even know what diffraction is, and that increasing resolution to 120-250MP in a 35mm format sensor will cause devastating degradation with diffraction ruining images at apertures as wide as f/2.8-4, I am left curious how these people derive such calculations (these are never shown when such categorical statements are made). It seems a fundamental assumption is that diffraction increases as pixel size decreases...which is nonsense. I would love to see the maths, so we can all check them over. Until then, I am calling BS on this one, although in lieu of showing us the calculations I am sure people will continue to repeat the myth over and over again until it becomes The Truth.
This is not to say that diffraction limited optics is not a hard limit. Diffraction occurs with all lenses, at all f stops, irrespective of what the pixel size of your sensor is. The amount of diffraction for any given f stop is the same whether you have a 3MP sensor or a 300MP sensor. Increasing resolution merely makes the diffraction that was always there more divisible, just it makes minute handshake more visible.
A couple of useful articles debunking the "diffraction myth":
https://jonrista.com/2013/03/24/the-diffraction-myth/
http://community.the-digital-picture.com/showthread.php?t=809
The other thing people forget is that 'diffraction limiting' means 'limits possible improvements' and it does not mean 'makes the image worse'. Diffraction will limit the point at which adding MP does nothing to add more detail at any particular aperture and that is all it means.
Sometimes I wonder where people learned to speak English.
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
I'm in if it's an 80-120MP camera, even if the rest of the specs and features are the same old lame ones.
I'm not in if it's the same old 50MP camera that just has the usual Canon-like 5 out of 50 possible improvements.
The 1080p video on the 5DsR was so horrible that it's unlikely they squeeze brilliant 4K out of this high megapixel camera. Especially as Canon doesnt seem to hold necessary patents - or doesnt want to pay for the use, as you can see with the codec choice for 4K on the 1DC, 1DX2 and 5D4.
I'm in if it's an 80-120MP camera, even if the rest of the specs and features are the same old lame ones.
I'm not in if it's the same old 50MP camera that just has the usual Canon-like 5 out of 50 possible improvements.
The 1080p video on the 5DsR was so horrible that it's unlikely they squeeze brilliant 4K out of this high megapixel camera. Especially as Canon doesnt seem to hold necessary patents - or doesnt want to pay for the use, as you can see with the codec choice for 4K on the 1DC, 1DX2 and 5D4.
Upvote
0
photojoern.de
See more in http://photojoern.de
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
I own the 5 DSR and I am very happy with it. In all respects. What limits this camera is the photographer. It´s not the technique. It´s certainly not the Megapixel. Dynamic range and low ISO capability? Yes, more is always better. But it´s already a great camera.
The limit of this camera is not the body, but the lens - and the subject behind the lens.
So, if you think a bout a high resolution camera: do not wait for a mark II version of the 5 DS (R). Buy one now. Get used to the high resolution in your shooting practice (you will need a higher shutter speed to get everything crisp sharp). See what it makes with your lenses: it will reveal the slightest weakness. See what it makes with your focussing technique. Again, it will reveal any minor mistake.
The current 5 DS (R) body is almost certainly not the weakest link in your chain.
I own the 5 DSR and I am very happy with it. In all respects. What limits this camera is the photographer. It´s not the technique. It´s certainly not the Megapixel. Dynamic range and low ISO capability? Yes, more is always better. But it´s already a great camera.
The limit of this camera is not the body, but the lens - and the subject behind the lens.
So, if you think a bout a high resolution camera: do not wait for a mark II version of the 5 DS (R). Buy one now. Get used to the high resolution in your shooting practice (you will need a higher shutter speed to get everything crisp sharp). See what it makes with your lenses: it will reveal the slightest weakness. See what it makes with your focussing technique. Again, it will reveal any minor mistake.
The current 5 DS (R) body is almost certainly not the weakest link in your chain.
Upvote
0
Re: Update to EOS 5DS & 5DS R Coming in 2017? [CR1]
Sorry. I should have explain myself better:
If I were to chose between resolution upgrade from current 50MP to 60MP+ and high ISO performance improvement, I would chose: High ISO performance improvement over resolution increase.
Sorry. I should have explain myself better:
If I were to chose between resolution upgrade from current 50MP to 60MP+ and high ISO performance improvement, I would chose: High ISO performance improvement over resolution increase.
jebrady03 said:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
