Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Medium Format / Film / Digital Backs – and Large Sensor Photography => Topic started by: eronald on September 08, 2015, 06:12:48 pm
-
The announcement is here (http://www.canon.com/news/2015/sep08e2.html). Goodbye MF, I don't think Sony will have time to put out updated MF sensors anymore, they are going to be locked into a full speed race with Canon, where 35mm sensors would be outresolving the last generation MF.
Edmund
-
Intriguing for sure.
However lets wait and see what really transpires.
Until we know exactly how these new technologies actually perform and what the costs are it is difficult to know exactly what this announcement really means.
Tony Jay
-
Considering the DR level of their brand new 50mp body, I fail to see why I should be excited about a 120mp version or why it should be considered a threat to MF solutions or to anything else in fact.
I don't do video, but to my eyes 4K is already very far from being a reality today for 99% of video consumers and full HD is already so incredibly good on a 46 inch plasma TV when done well... that I just don't understand what 8K brings to the table.
The real question, IMHO, is what upcoming real product announcements from their competitors is urging Canon marketing to release such an unprecedented stream of would be future products stories... ;) The a7rII is certainly part of it, but my guess is that there is something else to it...
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Why is it that with ever announcement of the next and greatest in 35mm that the first comment is always how MF is now doomed? If you dislike the format that much simply don't use it.
As for the Cannon announcement - great if you like smaller sensors.
-
Why is it that every time Edmond rattles the cage people react? Can't they tell when they're being "had"? ;D
Later,
Johnny
-
Why is it that with ever announcement of the next and greatest in 35mm that the first comment is always how MF is now doomed?
I love announcements like this because you can then pick up a Hasselblad for less than the price of a Jap 35mm semi-pro/consumer camera. There are other threads here asking why their 50MP looks so crap. I'm sure if they upgrade to 120MP it will be better.
When Apple announce something they say it will be on the shelves in 3 weeks. Let's compare that to .....
"Canon Inc. announced today that it is DEVELOPING a Cinema EOS System 8K camera and professional-use 8K reference display that WILL SUPPORT the production of next-generation 8K video content, along with a still-image single-lens reflex camera equipped with a CMOS sensor featuring approximately 120 million effective pixels."
-
Why is it that every time Edmond rattles the cage people react? Can't they tell when they're being "had"? ;D
Later,
Johnny
Yep, this.
-
I think the DR of the current Canon 50MP is fine, although not class leading. Actually for my shooting style I prefer 120MP over class-leading DR. My current 50MP CCD is not even class-leading among the CCDs, but what I want more of is foremost megapixels. Remains to be seen when this new Canon appears though, it can be more than a year away.
I would not worry about Sony not having time to make MF sensors, those are just trivial(?) scaleups of their 24x36mm sensor tech anyway.
It's nice to see Canon moving, at last. I'm also excited by their new lens tech (blue spectrum refractive lens element) which allows sharper lenses. All 135 lens manufacturers are moving forward to meet the new high res sensor demands. It shall be interesting to see how far they can reach, especially at the difficult wide end.
And yes this release will probably affect second hand MFD pricing, it was quite clear that the lower end backs dropped a bit when the 50MP Canon was announced. The second hand market seems to be very megapixel-driven, the MFD backs that no longer outresolves the smaller format loses their sexiness (noone seems to care about the lenses), so perhaps we'll see a significant drop of IQ180 and such backs this time around.
Here in Sweden there was a major bump in Hasselblad second hand sales up to 50MP during the spring, very good prices too, but now it has settled, not much out in the market right now. I bought my H4D-50 a bit too early and sold my Aptus a bit too late to make the best use of the situation, but I managed quite okay anyway.
I'm sure we'll see 645 full-frame CMOS "soon", and it will surely be up there at 120MP.
Personally I'm waiting for the next generation MFD CMOS, which I hope will be able to do tech wide angle much better than the current, and hopefully have quite a bit more megapixels. If they can't, my current MFD system is probably the last. I have no problems holding out a few more years though.
-
In any case I think the recent years pressure on MF companies is good. As long as they don't break from it it's only positive. We can already see more attractive prices in the entry level range. Even Leica lowered their prices. Of course there's a risk that they end up with industrial/institutional as the only professional niche and then luxury consumers, but I don't think we're close to there yet.
I hope for a situation where prices are more normalized, like they were in the film days. And I think it's moving in that direction. High res 135 is becoming quite expensive, due to the new more complex lenses, and MFD is becoming cheaper by reducing the super-high margins.
-
I'll admit, the first thing I thought when I saw the develop release was how it will affect the commercial / fashion photography market and the subsequent suppliers of cams to it.
I mean 120mp, hoo-ey that's a lot of pixels.
-
Personally I think it's a stupid announcement. all it says is we're working on something better, which every company is. There is no time frame, no information other than a premise. All it says to me is don't leave us for Sony, we'll try and get our act together.
Given the questionable quality (IMO) of the 5DS, I can't see how 120MP of slush and noise will be warranted or corrected. Of corse, I would love to be surprised.
In any case, I don't believe that Phase has been resting on laurels. They have just had no reason to launch anything bigger than 80MP.
What this does show is the impact that Sony has had on the industry. Wether you like the a7 cameras or not, there is no denying that sony's innovation has bought welcomed growth.
-
Wow! A 120 MP sensor; I must buy one, 'cos I always want to print those 150"x50" images. Anything smaller is just too small.
If it means someone is going to sell-off their MF kit nice & cheap, then who am I to complain?
-
Personally I think it's a stupid announcement. all it says is we're working on something better, which every company is. There is no time frame, no information other than a premise. All it says to me is don't leave us for Sony, we'll try and get our act together
"In development" announcements have started to become a standard in the industry. I think the reason is partly because it's becoming harder to keep things secret, and rather than having rumors going and problem with leaks they "leak" it themselves well ahead. If I would guess Sony/Canon/Nikon etc knows pretty well what the other company is doing, much more than the public does.
Probably customer churn has increased too compared to 5-10 years ago, and maybe these type of announcements help reducing that?
-
A very intriguing announcement, indeed.
My first question would be how all those skinny pixels will render. Seems to be a march away from the fax pixel magic that served MFD so well, for so long. We shall see.
In any case, I wish Canon (and Sony and Nikon) well. It's clear that it's 35mm digital tech that subsequently trickles 'up' to MFD. Even as a new and very happy entrant in the MFD arena (just bought a CFV-50c), I'm happy to see those advances. Let the chips fall where they may.
I do find it interesting that Canon chose to make this announcement apparently well in advance of any kind of shipping product. Normally you'd only reveal your hand like that to keep customers from going to a competing product.
-
The other announcement is a print system that can do texture as well as color. That's cute.
Edmund
-
I do find it interesting that Canon chose to make this announcement apparently well in advance of any kind of shipping product. Normally you'd only reveal your hand like that to keep customers from going to a competing product.
Canon has been announcing outlandish sensors for a long time now.
Very few have made it to a shipping product.
-
"In development" announcements have started to become a standard in the industry. I think the reason is partly because it's becoming harder to keep things secret, and rather than having rumors going and problem with leaks they "leak" it themselves well ahead.
Development announcement are IMHO only a standard among companies that have no actual products to ship.
The real trend among successful companies in consumer electronics is the exact opposite and it is to shorten to zero the lead time between announcement and product availability.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
Pixel pitch would be about 2.7um. A Sony RX-100 III has 2.4um, so I guess the pixel peep quality will be about what you get from such a camera, but probably with a bit less DR as it's Canon.
-
Development announcement are only a standard among companies that have no actual products to ship.
The real trend among successful companies in consumer electronics is the exact opposite and it is to shorten to zero the lead time between announcement and product availability.
Cheers,
Bernard
They are called "preannouncements", and IBM did so much damage with them that they got hit with an antitrust suit, which they lost. They create "FUD".
As for "trends", in the semiconductor market the trick has always been to announce, ship samples and wait for the yield to rise so you can make a profit; this is what Apple has been doing for years.
Edmund
-
Canon has been announcing outlandish sensors for a long time now.
Very few have made it to a shipping product.
They do a lot of concept stuff too yes, like the 250MP APS-H, and they do speciality stuff like sensors ending up in telescopes, all those things result in press releases. But this is an announcement for an EOS product, so it's different. They've made in development announcements several times before, and they eventually come out, but it can take a lot of time.
-
They do a lot of concept stuff too yes, like the 250MP APS-H, and they do speciality stuff like sensors ending up in telescopes, all those things result in press releases. But this is an announcement for an EOS product, so it's different. They've made in development announcements several times before, and they eventually come out, but it can take a lot of time.
I think this is basically a hit against RED and ARRI. Everybody knew they were going to fight back in stills in some way, but Canon have been very conservative in video.
Edmund
-
They've made in development announcements several times before, and they eventually come out, but it can take a lot of time.
As far as I recall their past 100 mp sensor announcement never turned into a shipping product. That was announced 5 years ago maybe?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
As far as I recall their past 100 mp sensor announcement never turned into a shipping product. That was announced 5 years ago maybe?
Yes they make announcement for concept stuff, but if you actually read the press releases you can see the difference of what is concept stuff and what is an "in development" announcement for a planned product release. This is an "in development" announcement.
For example the recent APS-H 250MP press release ends with "Canon is considering the application of this technology in specialized surveillance and crime prevention tools, ultra-high-resolution measuring instruments and other industrial equipment, and the field of visual expression."
This press release it says: "Featuring a resolution of approximately 120 effective megapixels, the SLR camera now being developed will incorporate a Canon-developed high-pixel-density CMOS sensor within the current EOS-series platform, which will realize compatibility with the Company’s diverse interchangeable EF lens lineup"
You see the difference?
-
You see the difference?
I see the difference, but I still lack historical data telling me how this difference translates into an actual product availability. ;)
For me, sorry, it remains a marketing move lacking any significant substance.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I see the difference, but I still lack historical data telling me how this difference translates into an actual product availability. ;)
For me, sorry, it remains a marketing move lacking any significant substance.
They've done this several before, I think more in their Cinema range than in the EOS range though, and as far as I know always delivered. I can agree though that the details on the "approximately 120MP" EOS SLR is more muddy than usual though, and this could be a first(?) in-development announcement they do for an EOS DSLR. But I personally, having followed Canon announcements for quite some time, would be very surprised if they don't deliver in the end. If they're muddy on details because it's really long time before they will release, or if they just don't want to say more is unclear.
-
Continuing the tradition of this forum (And the threadstarter), if Phase can be chastised for a "Vaporware" body for years until it was launched (And then chastised afterwards also because this is Lula), then a fair share of scepticism until Canon actually ships the camera is warranted.
-
Continuing the tradition of this forum (And the threadstarter), if Phase can be chastised for a "Vaporware" body for years until it was launched (And then chastised afterwards also because this is Lula), then a fair share of scepticism until Canon actually ships the camera is warranted.
you have a point ;D
I believe it comes though, and I hope it's soon, but based on earlier stuff I think it's at least 8 months and possibly more than 12. I'm interested in it from a tech development and competition aspect, I don't plan to buy it myself. I'm currently in a dead-end stage of my MFD system though -- from my perspective there exists no attractive upgrade path, I have the best I can get for my needs (50MP 49x37mm CCD that plays well with my SK Digitar range). I want a CMOS back that can do wide angles with movements well, at a reasonable price. That may very well happen (most likely as a followup on the current CFV-50c), but maybe it won't. The MFD makers are in the hands of Sony. Anyway, heavy competition from below makes reasonable prices more likely, and if it doesn't end up well there's at least a decent alternative in the 135 range.
-
For me, sorry, it remains a marketing move lacking any significant substance.
Cheers,
Bernard
My thoughts exactly.
-
Hi,
Yes, I think we go that way. I still think MF has advantages, but it is way overrated, especially with smaller formates. Canon is of course on the go regarding lenses, too.
The winners are of course we, photographers.
Best regards
Erik
The announcement is here (http://www.canon.com/news/2015/sep08e2.html). Goodbye MF, I don't think Sony will have time to put out updated MF sensors anymore, they are going to be locked into a full speed race with Canon, where 35mm sensors would be outresolving the last generation MF.
Edmund
-
Pixel pitch would be about 2.7um. A Sony RX-100 III has 2.4um, so I guess the pixel peep quality will be about what you get from such a camera, but probably with a bit less DR as it's Canon.
A bit less?
Canon's latest FF sensor has less DR than Sony's 1" sensor. It's so bad that Canon is now sourcing the Sony 1" sensor so they can release a competitive compact camera (the G3X).
-
The fact that this camera is using an APS-H sensor (which Canon stopped putting into new cameras after 2009) tells us that it's almost certainly a technology development announcement, not a real product announcement.
There is no reason to build this sensor as APS-H for production release.
-
Interesting product announcement, but I think someone earlier said it best when they talked about "mush and noise" coming out of Canon's current hi res sensors.
I have to wonder exactly how are they planning on getting people to replace all of their lenses with ones that will resolve the light enough for that small of a pixel. Also, how expensive are these lenses going to be; will they be less than current MF lenses, which only need to resolve light to 5 microns?
Maybe they will not upgrade their lenses and hope no one notices.
Not to mention, lens cast is going to start to be a problem since the pixels are so small but the wells have not shortened, presumably. How will they deal with that?
So many questions, so little answers. But hey, lets get excited for a sensor with very little support from what is placed directly in front of it.
-
There is no reason to build this sensor as APS-H for production release.
You're mixing up with the previous recent press release about the 250MP APS-H concept sensor. This is about a full-frame camera, probably a followup on what will become the "1D" version of the 5Ds.
-
Canon's latest FF sensor has less DR than Sony's 1" sensor. It's so bad that Canon is now sourcing the Sony 1" sensor so they can release a competitive compact camera (the G3X).
Canon doesn't have the linear "iso-less"-like behavior like the Sony sensor has, so it's more noisy on the base ISO level, but keeps up quite well in higher ISOs. The big change is that their latest sensor tech in 7Dmk2 and 5Ds got rid of the dreaded pattern noise, which was the major limiting factor before. Now you can say it's about at the same performance level as a P45+, or my own H4D-50.
Yes for some shooting styles where you tonemap a lot the P45+ was not good enough and the 5Ds is not good enough either. However, for many other shooting styles where you don't push shadows the current achievable DR is quite fine. Actually some claim that the extra stops you get from the Sony sensor does not help that much as you generally have bad lighting in those areas anyway, ie no idea to push shadows that much.
I have a shooting style myself where I actually prefer high pixel count over high DR if I have to choose (having both is best of course).
One reason why Canon might be pushing it to 120 megapixels is that they see that they can have a lead in that area (together with high shooting speed too), while they consider the DR battle lost for yet some time. Sony is incredibly hard to beat on that metric.
-
Why are they announcing a camera without a model name, delivery date, or price?
Because it's not a real product announcement, it's just an attempt to stem the tide of defections away from their platform and stop people from going to Sony.
-
Canon doesn't have the linear "iso-less"-like behavior like the Sony sensor has, so it's more noisy on the base ISO level, but keeps up quite well in higher ISOs.
Well, the base ISO is where you get the highest quality images possible on any camera, so saying that Canon is competitive at IQ at high ISO is tantamount to saying that ultimate Canon IQ is less than you can get with Sony and Toshiba sensors.
The fact that Canon is buying a Sony sensor for 2.4 micron pixels instead of making their own suggests that their 120MP dSLR image quality with the same pixel size is likely to be a big question mark.
I would bet that Sony (who almost certainly has similar products in the pipeline) greatly appreciates the heads-up on what Canon will be releasing in a few years though, so they can plan their own product timelines and rollouts.
-
Why are they announcing a camera without a model name, delivery date, or price?
Because it's not a real product announcement, it's just an attempt to stem the tide of defections away from their platform and stop people from going to Sony.
btw, you disappeared from the other topic ("Canon sows FUD") - any raws with 11 or more stops of DR from cameras based on Sony sensors ? I am itching to resurrect the topic @ http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=102203.0
-
btw, you disappeared from the other topic ("Canon sows FUD") - any raws with 11 or more stops of DR from cameras based on Sony sensors ? I am itching to resurrect the topic @ http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=102203.0
It's not relevant whether or not there are any raw images with 11 or more stops of DR from Sony cameras.
What is relevant is to take two images, one with a Canon and the other with a Sony sensor, using the same lens, at (essentially) the same time, and see if the Sony sensor image has much better shadow details.
That test has been repeated dozens of times, and always shows the Sony with far better shadows.
-
Why are they announcing a camera without a model name, delivery date, or price?
Because it's not a real product announcement, it's just an attempt to stem the tide of defections away from their platform and stop people from going to Sony.
Yes that's probably part of the idea. But what will happen if they don't deliver a product in the end? Not good strategy. So far they have delivered on these type of announcements where they actually mention a product. I think this one is a first for a SLR body, and is looser on the details than they use to be. We'll see.
I also agree that the performance of the ~2.7um pixel is a question mark, but my best guess is that the overall DR performance will be very similar to the current 5Ds. I don't think they would launch a sensor that would move them significantly backwards in a metric where they are struggling to keep up.
Quite often in these threads people just say what they want to happen, not trying to figure out what is most likely. I try to do the latter here the best I can.
-
It's not relevant whether or not there are any raw images with 11 or more stops of DR from Sony cameras.
OK, so you don't have anything about the __DR__ - that explains
PS: I understand that you try to switch the topic from DR you can really get to readout noise, but it is so obvious for everybody.
-
Those tests always show crazy post-processed pushed shadows.
I think the DR thing is a little silly, to some it seems like it's the only metric that matters. I think that's more about fanboyism than actual broad photographic needs. That is if you like Sony and don't like Canon, then all of a sudden DR is super-duper-important. We have all seen how the DR got super-duper-important in this forum when Nikon D800 showed better performance than Dalsa-based digital backs. Sure there are special situations where it is a serious advantage, but I think most users actually care more about where the buttons sit, how it feels in the hand and how effective it feels to shoot, than how noisy the shadows are when you push them hard. And indeed I also think resolving power can be more selling than the extra stop in DR.
With 120MP and a high speed crop mode, huge flexibility in wild life for example, where you shoot higher ISO too. For studio photography you light the scene well and don't need to push shadows, the extra range you get is 100% meaningless. That is for the main MFD-style pro use you don't need more, but having the resolving power to make those billboards can be pretty attractive.
For tonemapped landscapes it has some impact though, but I don't think it's an important enough genre for the camera to be a fiasco if they can't compete with Sony, which they most likely will not be able to do.
-
Those tests always show crazy post-processed pushed shadows.
I think the DR thing is a little silly, to some it seems like it's the only metric that matters. I think that's more about fanboyism than actual broad photographic needs. That is if you like Sony and don't like Canon, then all of a sudden DR is super-duper-important. We have all seen how the DR got super-duper-important in this forum when Nikon D800 showed better performance than Dalsa-based digital backs. Sure there are special situations where it is a serious advantage, but I think most users actually care more about where the buttons sit, how it feels in the hand and how effective it feels to shoot, than how noisy the shadows are when you push them hard. And indeed I also think resolving power can be more selling than the extra stop in DR.
With 120MP and a high speed crop mode, huge flexibility in wild life for example, where you shoot higher ISO too. For studio photography you light the scene well and don't need to push shadows, the extra range you get is 100% meaningless. That is for the main MFD-style pro use you don't need more, but having the resolving power to make those billboards can be pretty attractive.
For tonemapped landscapes it has some impact though, but I don't think it's an important enough genre for the camera to be a fiasco if they can't compete with Sony, which they most likely will not be able to do.
The DR issue to me is real. For anyone who large prints it should be also. Canon, simply stated, just can't capture the same results, at base iso in one exposure. I see it all the time with files taken, from the 5D MIII, MII, 6D and of course 1ds MKII. I feel you do gain a specific amount of high iso advantage with Canon, but that's not where I tend to shoot. Also except for the 6D, I find that Canon noise in shadows is very destructive, full of red blue banding. So bracketing is a requirement if you want a full range in your shot. I prefer to see life in shadows, not a pure black. It's an individual style. I would prefer not to bracket just my style. (However I am finding a lot of luck with older Canon shots with the new LR HDR merge). The DR advantage was enough for me back in 2012 to quickly make the move to Nikon, however Nikon IMO did not get it totally correct till the D810.
As for 120MP in a 35mm chip, all I can say is good luck with that. Canon has yet to prove much with their current 35mm lineup besides the 50MP cameras, which do seem to show a considerable improvement. I don't feel Nikon or Canon or anyone current has a range of glass that could resolve to this size pixel in a 120MP or 250MP chip anyway. And I really can't see such a chip being any type of advantage to higher iso, it anything a hindrance as the pixels will be extremely dense, and not lending to a low light environment. The current leader in high iso seems to be 12MP in the Sony A7r, due to mainly much larger pixels thus better low light capture.
Paul
-
I don't feel Nikon or Canon or anyone current has a range of glass that could resolve to this size pixel in a 120MP or 250MP chip anyway.
now you can mount FF lenses that on 20mp m43 ( that is 80mp density ) and see if that resolves... now you might argue about the borders, but center alone is important for quite some applications... and you also miss the fact that having oversampling is good - you can have 4->1 binning with full color and still get 30mp or 60mp
-
If Canon releases a 120MP camera it also has to renew (again) most of its lenses. I see in practice some of my lenses can do over 100MP in the central area but for 100MP in the corners we need Otus type of lenses.
Also depth of field will show that this 120MP will be reached only in a very shallow area, especially when this is only reached @ F2,8-F4… Diffraction will kick in @ f5.6 probably …
We need a very accurate autofocus as well…
Ergo… i do not see much improvement, apart from downsampling the bayer pattern and lack of moiré.
-
The announcement is here (http://www.canon.com/news/2015/sep08e2.html). Goodbye MF, I don't think Sony will have time to put out updated MF sensors anymore, they are going to be locked into a full speed race with Canon, where 35mm sensors would be outresolving the last generation MF.
Edmund
I think that Leica will answer with a 37.5mp 45x30 sensor...
-
All mentioned above is peanuts and waste of time discussing about it
Look here http://tinyurl.com/who-is-Canon-Nikon-PhaseOne
-
All mentioned above is peanuts and waste of time discussing about it
Look here http://tinyurl.com/who-is-Canon-Nikon-PhaseOne
It's CCD too.... :D
-
It's CCD too.... :D
<--- Awaiting the posts arguing that the D810/A7RII with Sony CMOS would have given them superior DR at a fraction of the cost, LOL.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yNHpfzX7GEM/VDS7GPf2nEI/AAAAAAAAeRI/CPte_KTUNGY/s1600/brought%2Bsome%2Bfor%2Beveryone!!!.jpg)
-
<--- Awaiting the posts arguing that the D810/A7RII with Sony CMOS would have given them superior DR at a fraction of the cost, LOL.
(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-yNHpfzX7GEM/VDS7GPf2nEI/AAAAAAAAeRI/CPte_KTUNGY/s1600/brought%2Bsome%2Bfor%2Beveryone!!!.jpg)
...me too!!! ;D Goes with the thread!
-
I just don't get why they didn't use a D810a/a7rII technology for this telescope, it would have been much cheaper with much better DR.
;D
Cheers,
Bernard
-
excuse me, did anybody miss the news?
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/9255490800/canon-turbo-boosts-the-pixel-race-with-250-million-pixel-aps-h-sensor
-
How many of the "leaks" on the web are actually well-thought-out marketing? Do you really think that a company like Apple cannot keep their production lines sealed off prior to iPhone release (or at least force their workers to not carry cameras)? I think that leaks are a way of "announcing without announcing". I.e. test out customer response, keep customers loyal, while being able to miss targets without loosing face.
Now, actually announcing products early, that is another thing. To me, that seems like underdog behaviour. If you have a hard time competing, you need to throw in promises of future stuff to keep competitors back.
Why would Canon say that "soon(tm), we will have best-in-class resolution DSLRs", when they just released a "best-in-class resolution DSLR"? Beats me. If people really want more megapixels in 24x36mm, the 5Ds/R is the obvious current solution, noone else can compete. By saying that they will bump that sensel count by >2x within one product development span (?? years), they are basically saying to some potential customers "please don't buy our 5DsR now, we will do a lot better in a couple of years". That seems like a strange message?
Or is this a message about how committed they are to high-resolution usage of the EF line? "Buy the 5DsR now, buy a bunch of mk2 lenses and in a few years things will only get better"?
As a Canon user, I think it is great that they feel competitive pressure from Sony & friends. I'd rather have 5 manufacturers fighting vigorously over my money than one monopoly getting complacent.
-h
-
It's CCD too.... :D
10 microns: The size of each pixel.
And fat pixels ;D
-
Hi,
I would agree that more megapixels may be a good thing. I have a Sony A7r now and I don't think the pixels are small enough to avoid aliasing, even with less than excellent lenses.
On the DR issue, it doesn't matter that much. Increasing MP will reduce DR, especially at the actual pixel level. But that reduction is minor and there are some advances, even at Canon. I very much doubt that Canon would release a product that would dissatisfy their customers.
Just to say, what we would need are lens sensor combos that look awfully soft at at actual pixels but make beutiful prints.
Best regards
Erik
I think the DR of the current Canon 50MP is fine, although not class leading. Actually for my shooting style I prefer 120MP over class-leading DR. My current 50MP CCD is not even class-leading among the CCDs, but what I want more of is foremost megapixels. Remains to be seen when this new Canon appears though, it can be more than a year away.
I would not worry about Sony not having time to make MF sensors, those are just trivial(?) scaleups of their 24x36mm sensor tech anyway.
It's nice to see Canon moving, at last. I'm also excited by their new lens tech (blue spectrum refractive lens element) which allows sharper lenses. All 135 lens manufacturers are moving forward to meet the new high res sensor demands. It shall be interesting to see how far they can reach, especially at the difficult wide end.
And yes this release will probably affect second hand MFD pricing, it was quite clear that the lower end backs dropped a bit when the 50MP Canon was announced. The second hand market seems to be very megapixel-driven, the MFD backs that no longer outresolves the smaller format loses their sexiness (noone seems to care about the lenses), so perhaps we'll see a significant drop of IQ180 and such backs this time around.
Here in Sweden there was a major bump in Hasselblad second hand sales up to 50MP during the spring, very good prices too, but now it has settled, not much out in the market right now. I bought my H4D-50 a bit too early and sold my Aptus a bit too late to make the best use of the situation, but I managed quite okay anyway.
I'm sure we'll see 645 full-frame CMOS "soon", and it will surely be up there at 120MP.
Personally I'm waiting for the next generation MFD CMOS, which I hope will be able to do tech wide angle much better than the current, and hopefully have quite a bit more megapixels. If they can't, my current MFD system is probably the last. I have no problems holding out a few more years though.
-
How many of the "leaks" on the web are actually well-thought-out marketing? Do you really think that a company like Apple cannot keep their production lines sealed off prior to iPhone release (or at least force their workers to not carry cameras)?
There are 300K people working for Foxconn directly, at least, plus the subcontractors. Gossip is practically the national sport in China. Do the maths.
What Apple do is bribe and sue the western media outlets so they don't publish.
But I agree that many "leaks" are marketing.
Edmund
-
CMOSIS released a 70MP, 36x24mm CMOS sensor back in 2012 (announced in 2011) so I'm not really surprised that someone managed to cram 120 megapopsicles into one in 2015.
Frankly I'd take a sensor with "bad" specifications on paper but capable of delivering great RAW files (thanks to good software and profiles) over any monster sensor that boasts 42 stops of dynamic range and a utility knife for each pixel.
-
Frankly I'd take a sensor with "bad" specifications on paper but capable of delivering great RAW files (thanks to good software and profiles) over any monster sensor that boasts 42 stops of dynamic range and a utility knife for each pixel.
Right, so actual raw file quality cannot be great with large DR CMOS sensors?
Does that apply to all CMOS or only those fitted in some cameras?
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I love announcements like this because you can then pick up a Hasselblad for less than the price of a Jap 35mm semi-pro/consumer camera.
Really, Bob Shaw? You still use the pejorative term "Jap."
-
Really, Bob Shaw? You still use the pejorative term "Jap."
Perhaps best to stick to answering the topic and save us from the moral high ground. Glass houses and so on.
If you imply that "Jap" is derogatory then not so. I love the country and have been there. Give me a Jap car any day.
The Japanese arguably make the best consumer products in the world.
However, they are cheaper than say a Leica 35mm, which is anything but a consumer product.
The fact is that top of the line Nikon or Canon is around $7000 body only. Add an 85 f1.2 or similar top line lens and you aren't much short of $10K, but you still only have a 35mm camera.
I have seen Hasselblad kits for $14K brand new and have bought and H3D for less than the price of a 5D3 body.
-
Right, so actual raw file quality cannot be great with large DR CMOS sensors?
Does that apply to all CMOS or only those fitted in some cameras?
Cheers,
Bernard
Dynamic range is only one part of the equation when it comes to making a good image. Some cameras have both things, but that is not always the case. My point is that DR alone doesn't make a good picture, just like extreme photo realism doesn't make a good painting.
A 120MP Canon sensor will have its own drawbacks, but photographers will find a way to take amazing photos with it like everyone did throughout history with the gear they had at he time.
-
Yes that's probably part of the idea. But what will happen if they don't deliver a product in the end? Not good strategy. So far they have delivered on these type of announcements where they actually mention a product. I think this one is a first for a SLR body, and is looser on the details than they use to be. We'll see.
Correct, and as the press release says "Canon developing next-generation imaging devices". It's a development report for the direction they are doing their research in, it's not a product announcement (as the thread title wrongly suggests). They are, admittedly, relatively concrete on things like compatible lenses and such, but that has more to do with the lens technology that they already know of that it will not be supported (chips/wiring in the lens do not record/transmit data that is needed).
I also agree that the performance of the ~2.7um pixel is a question mark, but my best guess is that the overall DR performance will be very similar to the current 5Ds. I don't think they would launch a sensor that would move them significantly backwards in a metric where they are struggling to keep up.
Indeed, but more importantly (and apparently overlooked by most) is that they seem to have found faster methods of reading out all that data from the sensor without hurting the quality as it is known now. They also mention in their development reports that it's a result of their own research/development.
Cheers,
Bart
-
Perhaps best to stick to answering the topic and save us from the moral high ground. Glass houses and so on.
If you imply that "Jap" is derogatory then not so.
From:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jap
"Jap is an English abbreviation of the word "Japanese." Today it is generally regarded as an ethnic slur among Japanese minority populations in other countries, although English-speaking countries differ in the degree to which they consider the term offensive. In the United States, Japanese Americans have come to find the term controversial or offensive, even when used as an abbreviation.[1] In the past, Jap was not considered primarily offensive; however, during and after the events of World War II, the term became derogatory.[2]"
"Later popularized during World War II to describe those of Japanese descent, "Jap" was then commonly used in newspaper headlines to refer to the Japanese and Imperial Japan. "Jap" became a derogatory term during the war, more so than "Nip."[2] Veteran and author Paul Fussell explains the usefulness of the word during the war for creating effective propaganda by saying that "Japs" "was a brisk monosyllable handy for slogans like 'Rap the Jap' or 'Let's Blast the Jap Clean Off the Map.'"[2] Some in the United States Marine Corps tried to combine the word "Japs" with "apes" to create a new description, "Japes", for the Japanese; this neologism never became popular.[2]
In the United States the term is now considered derogatory; the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary notes it is "usually disparaging".[5][6] A snack food company in Chicago named Japps Foods (for the company founder) changed their name and eponymous potato chip brand to Jays Foods shortly after Pearl Harbor to avoid any negative associations with the name.[7]
Spiro Agnew was criticized in the media in 1968 for an offhand remark, intended to be jocular, referring to reporter Gene Oishi as a "fat Jap".[8]
In Texas, under pressure from civil rights groups, Jefferson County commissioners in 2004 decided to drop the name "Jap Road" from a 4.3-mile (6.9 km) road near the city of Beaumont. Also in adjacent Orange County, "Jap Lane" has also been targeted by civil rights groups.[9] The road was originally named for the contributions of Kichimatsu Kishi and the farming colony he founded. And in Arizona, the state department of transportation renamed "Jap Road" near Topock, Arizona to "Bonzai Slough Road" to note the presence of Japanese agricultural workers and family-owned farms along the Colorado River there in the early 20th century.[citation needed]
In 2003, the Japanese deputy ambassador to the United Nations, Yoshiyuki Motomura, protested the North Korean ambassador's use of the term in retaliation for a Japanese diplomat's use of the term "North Korea" instead of the official name, "Democratic People's Republic of Korea".[10]
In 2011, following the term's offhand use in a March 26 article appearing in The Spectator ("white-coated Jap bloke"), the Minister of the Japanese Embassy in London protested that "most Japanese people find the word 'Jap' offensive, irrespective of the circumstances in which it is used."[11]"
-
The latest rumor says a real product based on the prototype is at least 2 years away. A fair bit longer than for previous in-development releases, but those has been more concrete too. So assuming the rumor is true I guess the naysayers gains one point here ;D
There are still lenses that need updating though and a high resolution camera is not much worth without matching lenses so hopefully they manage to crank out a few more high res lenses during that time period.
-
There are still lenses that need updating though and a high resolution camera is not much worth without matching lenses so hopefully they manage to crank out a few more high res lenses during that time period.
In principle all lenses would benefit from the higher sampling density (the System_MTF benefits from the Lens_MTF x Sensor_MTF), but better lenses would also factor in to the overall quality. That of course also firmly creates an image stabilization challenge.
And some of the folks here could also use a bit of stabilization it seems ;)
Cheers,
Bart
-
In principle all lenses would benefit from the higher sampling density (the System_MTF benefits from the Lens_MTF x Sensor_MTF), but better lenses would also factor in to the overall quality. That of course also firmly creates an image stabilization challenge.
And some of the folks here could also use a bit of stabilization it seems ;)
As Bart and others have pointed out in these threads, oversampling does have its benefits, but there is such a thing as an optimal pixel size as discussed in this link:
Stanford paper: (http://web.stanford.edu/~pcatryss/documents/2000_SPIE-EI_PixelSize.pdf)
"For a typical O.35p CMOS technology the optimal pixel size is found to be approximately 6.5,am at fill factor of 30%. It is shown that the optimal pixel size scales with technology, but at slower rate than the technology itself."
Unless Canon were to develop a whole new sensor technology rather than tweaking current designs, I would not be interested in their 120 MP chip.
Regards,
Bill
-
The higher sampling density should also improve color. I mean, there has been a LOT of tech advancements in digital imaging but most sensors still use a bayer color filter array (or some variation of it) to get color information. Color gradients are rendered much better with the higher resolution sensors. At least that has been my experience. I am no scientist or engineer. It is not all about resolution.
-
In the United States the term (Jap) is now considered derogatory;
Really?
" Now" is exactly what I mean by glass houses. I would love to hear your explanation of the US history on civil rights. How did you get Hawaii? What was the "Yellow Peril"?
I'm an Ozzie and proud of it. My friends from New Zealand are Kiwis and proud of that.
I'm sure you would describe yourself as an American which is pretty derogatory to people in Brazil, Mexico, and a whole pile of other countries in one of the two continents that are America.
It is just a common abbreviation so lets move on.
-
As Bart and others have pointed out in these threads, oversampling does have its benefits, but there is such a thing as an optimal pixel size as discussed in this link...
I guess that would be an "optimal pixel size for a given process technology", not "an optimal pixel size". As process tech change over time (and over manufacturers strategies), the "optimal pixel size" would also change.
An alternate definition of "optimal pixel size" would be the size that, given practical OLPF and color filtering, is sufficient to capture every concievable bit of detail rendered by any ideal/available lens at any setting and any wavelength. My impression is that we are far away from that limit yet.
-h
-
Really?
" Now" is exactly what I mean by glass houses. I would love to hear your explanation of the US history on civil rights. How did you get Hawaii? What was the "Yellow Peril"?
I'm an Ozzie and proud of it. My friends from New Zealand are Kiwis and proud of that.
I'm sure you would describe yourself as an American which is pretty derogatory to people in Brazil, Mexico, and a whole pile of other countries in one of the two continents that are America.
It is just a common abbreviation so lets move on.
Relax, Mate.
As an American (born and raised) of Japanese descent who grew up in a predominantly white neighborhood, I know what it's like to be picked on every day, beat up weekly, and what it feels like to be called "Jap" in a derogatory sense to the point it was almost a nickname. Maybe it was because I was the shortest, scrawniest, and the easiest target, who knows? I got a lot bigger, a lot stronger and learned to fight, and while I'm not proud of parts of my youth, calling me "Jap" usually ended up a painful and embarrassing regret to he who uttered it, even if it wasn't meant in a derogatory sense. I grew up to be fairly thick-skinned, and in college, learned that JAP also stood for Jewish American Princess. BTW, I don't now how it is Down Under, but I have never heard the terms Ozzie and Kiwi used in a negative way, at least not here, nor among the international racing circles with whom I rub shoulders.
It no longer bothers me, however, I believe that this is a US-based forum, with a majority of US-based members -- it's not surprising that your "common abbreviation" will draw some criticism. One of my kids (who is half European) recently got called "Jap" and "Chink" because he stole someone's starting position on the football team. I do understand it's the context in which something is said, and I certainly didn't take your comment offensively in any way, however, saying that in certain circles here probably wouldn't bode well for you. Just sayin'
-
Really?
" Now" is exactly what I mean by glass houses. I would love to hear your explanation of the US history on civil rights. How did you get Hawaii? What was the "Yellow Peril"?
I never made a defense of the way the United States treated ethnic minorities.
Jap is offensive in the United States as well as in many other countries. Kiwi and Ozzie are not offensive in any countries AFAIK.
-
Terrific, let's move on.
-
Forum threads always seem to degenerate into some form of one-upmanship, slander, ultra fanboy, and negativity.
Who really cares if Canon had a pre announcement that seems to threaten certain Nikon / Sony fanboys, (you know who you are). They will either come up with something or they don't. Product lines will evolve for all competitors. Telling people over and over that Canon has shitty sensors indicates you have nothing better to do or contribute to advancing the art of photography. Have you actually shot with a 5Ds, rather than reviewing some test site with cryptic data? The 5Ds produces great usable images day in and day out, a very nice camera. Is it the best or does it suck compared to all else? All I know is I get great images for me and I push my files quite a bit. I agree that past bodies could produce unwanted pattern noise at low ISO if really pushed, but I am not seeing it any more and I am very satisfied with the results I am seeing. Canon does seem to be on the right path, bodies and lenses.
Few people will ever need 120MP. I print quite large and find it unlikely to want more than the 50 I now have. In fact, I use the Olympus EM-1 with a crop of their pro lenses for over seas travel such as my current couple of months in Italy right now. It makes great 20x30 prints on my Epson. Just saying as I am not a Canon fan boy per say and would switch to anything if I felt it would strongly advance my needs and art overall. Right now the micro 4/3 has great advantage as a travel photography platform and will likely improve even more over time. The Canon is becoming my medium format when the weight of all those L lenses is not an issue.
It was a rainy day in Italy today, otherwise I do not think I would waste my time reading all this crap and adding my own thoughts. Back to some image editing for now.
Dr D White
-
Dr White,
FF talk being strongly discouraged in these MF parts, you are one daring man to further bring up 4/3 cameras! Way to go, please tell us about your iphone 6 photography next time! ;)
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/727/20762081973_e1248f3d95_o.jpg)
Besides, I am not sure why you choose to use brand loyalty as the driving force to explain what is only amusement at Canon marketing's moves. Wouldn't true fanboys feel a lot more threatened by real and useful product annoucements (such as the fascinating blue lens elements or the amazing new 600mm f4 DO) rather than by what can only be described as marketing wind?
(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/612/21391493201_8d63d5f391_o.jpg)
Finally, congratulations for your new 5Ds, certainly a very competent camera. I am sure that you'll soon post amazing photographs demonstrating us how irrelevant those DR talks are to good photography (no irony here).
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I did not start the FF 35 thread here in the MF forum. Once started, anything goes.
Once again you miss the point or just want an argument.
Your comment clearly implies that without an extra stop of Holy DR at base ISO I will be completely crippled in the creation of good images. Do you have any idea how immature that sounds. Your making a fool of yourself.
D White
-
Your comment clearly implies that without an extra stop of Holy DR at base ISO I will be completely crippled in the creation of good images. Do you have any idea how immature that sounds. Your making a fool of yourself.
Where on earth did you read that?
That's not how I feel at all, nor is it what I wrote... at all (nor in this thread, nor ever before). In fact, I wrote the exact opposite, clearly labeling it as "devoid of irony" to avoid any misunderstanding.
As far as wanting an argument, many reasonable people would just see this as differences in sense of humor... I got your point allright and did answer, but that's the part of my post you apparently choose to ignore.
Cheers,
Bernard
p.s.: does DDS stand for Doctor of Dental Surgery? For what it's worth, I have been spending lots of time in the competent hands of your Japanese colleagues recently. :)
-
Bernard,
I retired from the practice of dentistry at 51 to pursue my photography and travel.
I fully respect your art of photography.
Although the persuit of photographic art requires degrees of technical knowledge, in my opinion many threads end up focusing on minutiae and almost zealous dogma that ultimately contribute little to furthering photographic art. Maybe I need to just ignor threads that deviate from advancing my knowledge of the art form.
Happy shooting.
D White
-
Although the persuit of photographic art requires degrees of technical knowledge, in my opinion many threads end up focusing on minutiae and almost zealous dogma that ultimately contribute little to furthering photographic art. Maybe I need to just ignor threads that deviate from advancing my knowledge of the art form.
David,
I fully agree with you.
To me there are 2, somewhat related, but very different topics. One is photography and the other one is equipment.
Happy shooting as well!
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I would just like to add that "Dr. D. White" is probably the best name a dentist could ever have. It's all the marketing you ever need!
(No sarcasm intended, just to be safe).
-
Hi Bill,
I would say that the paper you quote is a bit dated. A lot has happened in sensel design, making the fill factor larger.
The analysis probably still applies but the coefficients may have been changing.
Best regards
Erik
As Bart and others have pointed out in these threads, oversampling does have its benefits, but there is such a thing as an optimal pixel size as discussed in this link:
Stanford paper: (http://web.stanford.edu/~pcatryss/documents/2000_SPIE-EI_PixelSize.pdf)
"For a typical O.35p CMOS technology the optimal pixel size is found to be approximately 6.5,am at fill factor of 30%. It is shown that the optimal pixel size scales with technology, but at slower rate than the technology itself."
Unless Canon were to develop a whole new sensor technology rather than tweaking current designs, I would not be interested in their 120 MP chip.
Regards,
Bill
-
I guess that would be an "optimal pixel size for a given process technology", not "an optimal pixel size". As process tech change over time (and over manufacturers strategies), the "optimal pixel size" would also change.
"For a typical O.35p CMOS technology the optimal pixel size is found to be approximately 6.5,am at fill factor of 30%. It is shown that the optimal pixel size scales with technology, but at slower rate than the technology itself."
That optimal pixel size changes with technology was an integral premise of the Stanford paper that I referenced so there was no need to reiterate that fact. Changes in lens design and sensor technology would be necessary for a 120 MP 135 sensor to be practical.
Bill
-
That optimal pixel size changes with technology was an integral premise of the Stanford paper that I referenced so there was no need to reiterate that fact. Changes in lens design and sensor technology would be necessary for a 120 MP 135 sensor to be practical.
Hi Bill,
I'm not sure how much influence the (untested) addition of micro-lenses has, on the model's optimal outcome. Since the model mentions 35% fill factor, there should be a significant enough positive effect on the number of converted Photons, thus boosting the DR levels (if well depth / capacitance is maximized per photosite). It also looks like well depth, despite smaller photosite pitch, has increased in recent years from something like 1500 e- per square micron, to some 2500 to 3280 e- per square micron (if the data at sensorgen (http://www.sensorgen.info/) is accurate).
Cheers,
Bart
-
The fact that this camera is using an APS-H sensor (which Canon stopped putting into new cameras after 2009) tells us that it's almost certainly a technology development announcement, not a real product announcement.
There is no reason to build this sensor as APS-H for production release.
I agree that Canon will never again put a 30x20mm sensor (which Canon bizzarely calls APS-H) into a "consumer" camera, but I can see a couple of reasons to make such sensors and more special-purpose cameras that use them. Both are based on the fact that this is about the largest size that can be made without the on-wafer stitching needed to make sensors 36x24mm and bigger. (All steppers with feature size small enough to make pixels this small are limited to a 33x26mm field size, and a mm or two is lost along the edges to non-image recording stuff.) Avoiding stitching reduces costs, and probably makes it easier to get the pixel size down, by avoiding the very precise alignment needed when the wafer is moved part-way through the on-wafer stitching process.
Firstly, it can make sense for prototypes and demonstrations to potential (industrial/scientific) customers: to develop, test, and demonstrate a new higher pixel count technology. The subsequent announcement of a 250MP 36x24mm sensor goes with that.
Secondly, there are other potential markets for Canon sensors besides EOS DSLRs! Canon has previously provided some sensors for astronomy, and there are fields like machine vision, mapping and surveillance where the users might care very little about using exactly the Leica-ordained 36x24mm frame size: total detail resolved, as roughly indicated by pixel count, can be more important in some technical applications.
But if some people wish to believe that no sensor should be developed and no product should be announced that is not of immediate interest to "our sort of photography", please carry on. I instead appreciate any information about longer term research and development plans and directions that the companies are willing to share with me.
-
I too think its more marketing than a actual product that will be shipping in the next 18 months.
I just wish they would get together with Sigma and push the Foveon sensor tech to the forefront. It looks to like a great way to boost major quality and pixel count.