alundeb wrote:
There is nothing happening in this area, it hasn't for many years, and it will not in many years. If you compare the general image quality of all FF camera from the major manufacturers from the recent years, there is so little between them that it is not worth a thought. The factor that differentiates most is resolution. What kind of improved image quality do you expect? General ISO noise is settled near the theoretical minimum for Bayer sensor cameras. Dynamic range? Maybe a tiny bit better than the 5D IV but that's it.
The R5 is all about the combination of resolution and speed. If you need none of them, it will still be a great camera, but money might be better spent on something else....Show more →
Yes, I would expect at least the same IQ being it has more MP, but hopefully better IQ in regards to DR and RAW pliability. With that said, if this is what they deliver but don't increase the fps speed in AI servo then it's just a 5DIV with more MP IMO and not worth it.
artsupreme wrote:
Didn't the 6DII go backwards with IQ?
Is that myth still alive? If you measure IQ as one specific parameter associated with a small part of the image in very few images, it went backwards wit 0.0001%. Ok I am exaggerating. Said in a different way. If you miss the optimal exposure with as little as 1/3 stop, you have completely overshadowed the difference.
alundeb wrote:
Is that myth still alive? If you measure IQ as one specific parameter associated with a small part of the image in very few images, it went backwards wit 0.0001%. Ok I am exaggerating. Said in a different way. If you miss the optimal exposure with as little as 1/3 stop, you have completely overshadowed the difference.
Yes but like you said comparing IQ is like splitting hair right? With that said, didn't the IQ of the 6DII go backwards? I don't care if it went backwards .00001% or not. If it did, it shouldn't have. It should always get better with time and technology.
artsupreme wrote:
Yes but like you said comparing IQ is like splitting hair right? With that said, didn't the IQ of the 6DII go backwards? I don't care if it went backwards .00001% or not. If it did, it shouldn't have. It should always get better with time and technology.
That's not how it works these days. Different cameras are optimized for different aspects of image quality. There is no more general improvement to be had. People don't get that.The majority of new cameras now show a small dip in some corner of the image quality, compared to the previous model.
But no, the IQ of the 6DII did not go backwards, in a general sense.
alundeb wrote:
That's not how it works these days. Different cameras are optimized for different aspects of image quality. There is no more general improvement to be had. People don't get that.The majority of new cameras now show a small dip in some corner of the image quality, compared to the previous model.
But no, the IQ of the 6DII did not go backwards, in a general sense.
I'm sure one could say it didn't go backwards like yourself and comment on areas where IQ did improve, but I remember months and months of complaints about the DR of the 6DII being worse than the 6D at low ISO, so there's definitely something there. My point is IQ should always be improving over time, hair splitting or not.
artsupreme wrote:
I'm sure one could say it didn't go backwards like yourself and comment on areas where IQ did improve, but I remember months and months of complaints about the DR of the 6DII being worse than the 6D at low ISO, so there's definitely something there. My point is IQ should always be improving over time, hair splitting or not.
In theory that is a valid point, but not in reality. If you use that criterion absolutely, it will not be possible for you to buy a new camera anymore.
The 1DX III has 1/5 stop worse photographic DR than the 1DXII at ISO 500.
The A7rIV has 1/10 stops worse ISO noise than the A7rIII
The Nikon Z7 has 0.05 stops less DR at base ISO than the D850
and so on...
The main complaint about the 6D2 was the lack of improvement in an area it was possible, not that it went hairsplittingy backwards.
AFAIK Canon has not confirmed the rumored pixel count of 45 MP. The only related rumor that was confirmed is that the camera will have some form of 8K video. I think 8K has pixel dimensions of 7680 × 4320. That's not a 2:3 aspect ratio, so you'd take the long side and multiply by .66 to get the minimum required short side for "full frame 35mm", giving 5120 px. That means the minimum sensor pixel dimensions would be 7680x5120, or 39.3 MP. Let's call it 40MP.
The real sensor could certainly be 45MP, but 8K video only confirms 40MP. 45 MP is in the ballpark, but so is 50MP. As long as we're fantasizing we may as well make it a good fantasy!
I believe there are two versions of 8K. One is a bit longer than 8000 pixels wide and would be closer to 45MP 3:2 ratio sensor resolution.
Regarding sensors going backwards in newer cameras: don't forget the one-stop loss of base ISO DR of the Nikon D5 vs. the D4...
artsupreme wrote:
But if this thing actually performs at 12fps in AI servo like a sports body and has 40+MP with equivalent or better than 5DIV IQ then they'll have my money as long as it's not priced too high.
I would like this too, but can't think of a prior example where Canon has released a lower priced camera that competed favorably with the 1D series. (I tried the 7DII and it just didn't work effortlessly at following action like a 1DX/1DXII). Therefore I remain somewhat skeptical...
Mike_5D wrote:
I suspect it'll launch at $3500 for the body only like the last two 5D's. Hopefully everybody b*tches and moans about every little shortcoming and it hits $2500 on grey market Black Friday 2020 deals.
I think you're right, around $3500. If the A7R IV is any indication, the price will drop when people realize it's not perfect.
EB-1 wrote:
Oh, I hope it is more than that, around $3500 MSRP.
Canon needs to make better and more expensive cameras.
The cheapitude of the R really turns me off.
artsupreme wrote:
Given Canon's history, do people really think they are going to release a screamer that knocks everyone socks off with 12fps in AI servo at 40MP+?
lighthound wrote:
Based on Canon's history? I say yes, it will certainly "knock our socks off".
And also based on Canon's stated intentions in FF mirrorless market.
Go Tokura (Canon's Image Communication Business Operations Chief Executive) stated during an interview last year at the 2019 CP+ show in Yokohama, Japan.
"As you may know, Canon has a history of not always being first in the market with new technology, but we are very good at catching up, going beyond and becoming the leader."
Exciting times!
EB-1 wrote:
Tokura needs to shoot that 100-500L in low light and see how Canon is the leader in blur and noisy images.
EBH
lighthound wrote:
I wasn't aware that there were any RAW files out there shot with this lens. Do you have any you could share that proves your claim?
rscheffler wrote:
I believe there are two versions of 8K. One is a bit longer than 8000 pixels wide and would be closer to 45MP 3:2 ratio sensor resolution.
...
I can only find one online:
"8K resolution refers to an image or display resolution with a width of approximately 8000 pixels. 8K UHD (7680 × 4320) is the highest resolution defined in the Rec. 2020 (UHDTV) standard."
However Canon needs a bit of wiggle room for that so the overall sensor will be a bit larger. The 5DS has its lowest resolution setting for 8K possibilities at over 8000 on the long end. I suspect the resolution will be over 8100 on the long end with the R5, putting its resolution around 39Mpx or higher.
rscheffler wrote:
I believe there are two versions of 8K. One is a bit longer than 8000 pixels wide and would be closer to 45MP 3:2 ratio sensor resolution.
...
dmcphoto wrote:
I can only find one online:
"8K resolution refers to an image or display resolution with a width of approximately 8000 pixels. 8K UHD (7680 × 4320) is the highest resolution defined in the Rec. 2020 (UHDTV) standard."
Some sites reference 8192x4320 as another format. In fact, Canon developed an 8K sensor at that resolution:
DCI has not yet published a specification including 8k, as a result the 8192x4320 resolution is not yet a “standard”. However, that would be the doubling of DCI 4K, and so logically an 8k cinema camera would have a sensor of this format.
rscheffler wrote:
Whining about whining.
---------------------------------------------
I agree with Mike. It will be priced higher than the competition because that is what Canon always seems to do. And it's probable the R5 will experience very strong demand for a considerable period. I don't think Canon's aim is to undercut the competition on price. Rather, imply a premium value over the competition. In this case they'll also leverage demand from Canon users who have held off switching systems until now, who will grumble at the higher price, but wish to remain in the Canon ecosystem and the benefits it entails.
The camera might cost more by ~$500 but in the grand scheme of things, could save existing Canon users money compared to switching systems and having to re-buy a whole set of lenses. While EF lenses will work on Sony FE, there are compromises. Meanwhile EF lenses work pretty much natively on RF, meaning the transition can be spread considerably longer, lessening the cost/pain and giving time for users to integrate RF lenses as needed and funds allow....Show more →
Hey, Hey, would you take it easy with our pockets, Canon reads this stuff, dont you know Come on you can say it $3-3500, see I saved you a few $$$$
AFAIK in all of Canon's other cameras when they say "4k" they mean "DCI 4k" not "UHD 4k" (as Sony does).
Small chance they now mean "UHD 8k" but it seems 45mp is more likely because:
1. CR has reported the 45mp number outside of this consideration as either CR2 or CR3
2. Can has used the DCI standard in the past and it seems weird for them to change without mentioning it.
I'll be the first to eat my words if wrong but I can't fathom MSRP @ release <3999. I can see the Day 1 street price coming in at 3700 in that case but the EOS R debuted at 2299 didn't it?
I don't really think Sony's pricing has much correlation with Canon. The A7III is, on spec, clearly superior to the EOS R and they had no qualms about pricing the EOS R above it.
I'm Canon's target market for this camera and they know it. At $4000 they are going to have a sale from me (@ street price, not MSRP) but they are going to lose me at 5k.
rscheffler wrote:
I believe there are two versions of 8K. One is a bit longer than 8000 pixels wide and would be closer to 45MP 3:2 ratio sensor resolution.
Regarding sensors going backwards in newer cameras: don't forget the one-stop loss of base ISO DR of the Nikon D5 vs. the D4...
I would like this too, but can't think of a prior example where Canon has released a lower priced camera that competed favorably with the 1D series. (I tried the 7DII and it just didn't work effortlessly at following action like a 1DX/1DXII). Therefore I remain somewhat skeptical...
This was exactly my point of the whole thread, wondering if will we actually get a sports camera and a wedding camera all in one body (R5)? History tells us no, but we'll see if Canon has changed course due to losing tons of customers to Sony.
If this R5 performed similar to the 7DII or better then I think it's a winner for sure if it truly does 12fps in AI servo @ 40MP+. I'm not expecting 1DX type tracking, but it could be close. Or who knows, it could match 1DX tracking for all we know. Can't wait to see how this one plays out.
dmcphoto wrote:
AFAIK Canon has not confirmed the rumored pixel count of 45 MP. The only related rumor that was confirmed is that the camera will have some form of 8K video. I think 8K has pixel dimensions of 7680 × 4320. That's not a 2:3 aspect ratio, so you'd take the long side and multiply by .66 to get the minimum required short side for "full frame 35mm", giving 5120 px. That means the minimum sensor pixel dimensions would be 7680x5120, or 39.3 MP. Let's call it 40MP.
The real sensor could certainly be 45MP, but 8K video only confirms 40MP. 45 MP is in the ballpark, but so is 50MP. As long as we're fantasizing we may as well make it a good fantasy!...Show more →
You are correct in that Canon didn't confirm 45MP in the development announcement. But 45MP is most likely going to be correct if we go off of the CR3 rumour that was posted a week before the announcement.
The spec list was a longer unconfirmed list but the parts that they said were CR3 making them having come from a very trusted source were as follows:
Named the Canon EOS R5
-45mp full-frame CMOS sensor
-IBIS
-12fps mechanical, 20fps electronic
-8K @ 30fps
-4K @ 120fps
-Built-in 5GHz WiFi
Those were all announced except for 45MP and 4K@120. So most likely the unannounced ones will turn out to be correct.
Also of note is that some of the non-CR3 specs turned out correct also:
-Dual card slots
-Scroll wheel added to the back
-No touch bar
There was only one spec in the list (and it wasn't a CR3) one that has been proven incorrect and that is "Liveview/Movie toggle like previous EOS DSLRs". So that means the list is not perfect.
However, everything announced was correct in the rumour and even those few things not CR3.
Bottom line...good chance it is 45MP.
