Canon 50D @ 15MP

[SeanBK]

$1400us. New sensor - higher ISOs, Live view..not bad
 Love the competion.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controll...9&modelid=17499

[Quentin]

$1400us. New sensor - higher ISOs, Live view..not bad
 Love the competion.

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controll...9&modelid=17499
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217272\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Interesting your choice of thread title:  "Canon 50D @ 15MP".  It suggests its the mp that matters above all.  I suggest that is not the case.  Having said that, are we closing in on the 20mp budget dslr before too long?  Where does the high end dslr evolve to after that?  Are we stuck with an unwanted megapixel race or is the dslr market sophisticated enough not to go down that path like the compact camera market has?

Quentin

[tgphoto]

Are we stuck with an unwanted megapixel race or is the dslr market sophisticated enough not to go down that path like the compact camera market has?

It sure does look that way, doesn't it?  The switch in the lower end dSLRs from CompactFlash to SD was/is a clear sign the compact market is saturated to the point the manufacturers are now trying to get them to "step up" to a dSLR.

15MP on an APS-C sensor?  Isn't that overkill?  Didn't Canon learn their lesson with the 1DSMK3?

My guess is as long as the manufacturers can convince the lemmings they need more megapixels, they'll continue down this silly path, while real improvements will trickle in slowly.

You bring up an interesting question regarding the high end, though.....just where does Canon (and Nikon and the others) go from here?  If we're lucky, we'll start to see advances in lens design (at a price, of course) that will (hopefully) be able to resolve all that those sensors are capable of capturing.

[BernardLanguillier]

Where does the high end dslr evolve to after that?  Are we stuck with an unwanted megapixel race or is the dslr market sophisticated enough not to go down that path like the compact camera market has?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217275\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

For me, it is all about SQRT(MP/1.000.000)*SQ(DR*10). Meaning that MP is exponentially less important than DR.

Unfortunately, I think that most DSLR manufactuers will probably listen to their marketing dpt that will most probably convey the message that the average buyer having only 3 neurones, and needing 2 to use his credit card, can only look at one figure with the remaining neurone, and that figure is going to be MP... Funny that they would expect at the same time these customers to be able to use more and more complex features at every release... go figure.

What is the power of 12 stop DR vs 11 stop DR when you can do 15 MP vs 12 MP at a fraction of the developement cost? You are "3.000.000 something" better vs only "1 something" better.

This being said, the 50D might have excellent DR as well, these comments are not directed specifically at Canon.

Cheers,
Bernard

[woof75]

For me, it is all about SQRT(MP/1.000.000)*SQ(DR*10). Meaning that MP is exponentially less important than DR.

Unfortunately, I think that most DSLR manufactuers will probably listen to their marketing dpt that will most probably convey the message that the average buyer having only 3 neurones, and needing 2 to use his credit card, can only look at one figure with the remaining neurone, and that figure is going to be MP... Funny that they would expect at the same time these customers to be able to use more and more complex features at every release... go figure.

What is the power of 12 stop DR vs 11 stop DR when you can do 15 MP vs 12 MP at a fraction of the developement cost? You are "3.000.000 something" better vs only "1 something" better.

This being said, the 50D might have excellent DR as well, these comments are not directed specifically at Canon.

Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217283\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Lets wait to see some testing before we say it has less DR, technology changes, my P21 has no more DR than the P45 which has smaller photosites. Technology changes, by most peoples accounts the 1ds mark 3 has the highest image quality of all the canons, with the smallest photosites. Less of the uninformed armchair technological analysis posing as real technological understanding.

[BruceHouston]

DR-enhancing sensor technology is not standing still.  Take a look at the schematic of the new microlenses associated with the new sensor used on the 50D on the DPReview website.

[BernardLanguillier]

Lets wait to see some testing before we say it has less DR, technology changes, my P21 has no more DR than the P45 which has smaller photosites.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217288\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, but the point is that with a given technology larger photosites will basically always result in more DR. So if the DR of a 15MP is OK, you could have had an OK+ DR had they sticked to 12MP.

Cheers,
Bernard

[lovell]

Yes, but the point is that with a given technology larger photosites will basically always result in more DR. So if the DR of a 15MP is OK, you could have had an OK+ DR had they sticked to 12MP.

Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217291\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I would not make those generalizations.  The 5D's DR is not much wider then the DR of any of the other DSLR models up and down the ladder, regardless of MP, and sensor size.

MP does in fact matter, if one is going to enlarge.  I take the other view in that I do beleive MP does in fact matter.  I'd rather have my frame cut into 15 million "pieces" then just 10 million.  Of course going from 10 to 15mp is not a big jump in resolution however.

Although I do agree that DR is more important then MP count, and DR is perhaps the last "frontier" for all the DSLR makers.

Funny, over the the last 8+ year, DR has not widen much.

[BruceHouston]

Yes, but the point is that with a given technology larger photosites will basically always result in more DR. So if the DR of a 15MP is OK, you could have had an OK+ DR had they sticked to 12MP.

Cheers,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217291\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree completely, Bernard.  That is why I am very excited and anxious to see (and own) today's (50D?) technology spread across a FF sensor, hopefully soon in the 5D replacement.

[fike]

When you print, pixels matter.  When you crop, pixels matter.  When you print big, pixels matter more. I like to print really big images.

In my mind dynamic range is of similar importance.  In landscape photography, blown highlights are the bane of my existence--probably yours too.

I want both specs to improve.

Canon has yet to put out a next generation camera where the image quality wasn't equal or better than the previous.  Their achievements in the XSI as compared to the 40D make me optimistic that the 50D will continue the trend.  

The quality where canon has consistently outclassed most of the other manufacturers has been general image quality, especially high ISO performance.  I hope they will be smart enough not to do something stupid like compromise image quality (clarity/smoothness/sharpness/color/DR/whatever) for more pixels.  

I guess we won't have to speculate and pontificate for much longer.  We should see some real-world samples by October.

I also wouldn't mind if they scaled back the AA filter too. Maybe I will get a 50D and send my 30D off to have its AA filter removed.

[Tony Beach]

For landscape photography the increased MP will be useless.  Stop down to f/11 and compare a 50D file to a 40D file; in terms of resolution there will be no difference.

[Panopeeper]

DR-enhancing sensor technology is not standing still.  Take a look at the schematic of the new microlenses associated with the new sensor used on the 50D on the DPReview website.

How would microlenses contribute to the dynamic range? They do contribute to the "sensitivity" of the sensor, but not to the DR.

[BruceHouston]

How would microlenses contribute to the dynamic range? They do contribute to the "sensitivity" of the sensor, but not to the DR.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217314\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

>SNR => <amplification  for a given ISO => lower noise => >usable dynamic range

[woof75]

MP's are important, you can't scale a canon file up much at all before you get significant degradation. I don't need a lot, really around 15 is fine for most of my needs. DR has never been an issue to me with canon files, the big thing that upsets me is the lack of sharpness. If only they'd back off on the AA filter.

[DarkPenguin]

For landscape photography the increased MP will be useless.  Stop down to f/11 and compare a 50D file to a 40D file; in terms of resolution there will be no difference.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217312\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Why, exactly?

Every increase in resolution I've been given has been visible.  I shoot a lot of prairie shots.  Grass is a bitch.  Pixels help.

[DarkPenguin]

Love the competion.

Isn't that great.  For years we've (canon users) have said we welcomed competition because it would drive canon.  It finally looks like that might be true.

[Panopeeper]

>SNR => <amplification  for a given ISO => lower noise => >usable dynamic range

There is no connection to microlenses.

[Doyle Yoder]

the big thing that upsets me is the lack of sharpness. If only they'd back off on the AA filter.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217316\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

What raw processor are you using? I would not say there is a lack of sharpness with processing Canon files with Raw Developer.

Doyle

[NikosR]

Why, exactly?

Every increase in resolution I've been given has been visible.  I shoot a lot of prairie shots.  Grass is a bitch.  Pixels help.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217317\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I guess Tony is referring to the detrimental effect difraction has on actual system resolution. It is reasonable to expect that difraction will raise its head earlier than on cameras with larger pixel pitch. We will just have to wait and see if the difference will be noticeable.

[lovell]

For landscape photography the increased MP will be useless.  Stop down to f/11 and compare a 50D file to a 40D file; in terms of resolution there will be no difference.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=217312\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Your statement is exceedling far from the truth.  For landscapes, MP matters.  Lots.

Or perhaps you just print 4" x 6" prints?

What does F11 have to do with resolution and/or MP?

Nothing, unless a caca lense provides too early diffraction, yea? Usually that happens at F16 or down from there, lens depending.

For landscapes, one cannot get enough MP.  Of course DR is more important, but lets not throw the MP out with the bathwater.

By the way at 16" x 20" prints, you will see a difference between 40D & 50D.