Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1 2

4 5 end

Archive 2022 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

dmcphoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #1 · p.3 #1 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

gdanmitchell wrote:
I think we're on the same page here.

Many may not recall that the first Canon FF bodies were the 1Ds series — the only way to get FF at that time was to buy the very most expensive, biggest, and heaviest system. It was a fine camera. All of the other options used Canon's 1.6x cropped sensors.

At the time when state-of-the-art was the 1Ds model with a 16MP sensor Canon introduced the 5D with a 12MP sensor. Even with the lower MP sensor, the 5D took off. Most of the people found that the 12MP FF sensor was a significant...Show more →

The 1Ds came out in 2002 and had 11.1 MP, the 1Ds Mk II came out in 2004 and had 16.7 MP, and the 1Ds Mk III came out in 2007 had 21.1 MP. There were only two or three years between the introduction of these models. The 1Ds Mk III in particular produced very nice files in terms of pixel quality at its base ISO.

I'm still using the Canon 5DsR. I feel like it's time to upgrade. OTOH I'd like to wait another year or so until a big move we're planning is over, and my need to upgrade is not urgent. So I sit and watch what's happening. Barring anything absolutely incredible from Canon I've mentally settled on a Sony A1 system. The camera body is an easy choice, but the system is definitely not.

I feel that the Canon and Sony 600mm F/4 lenses are comparable. I really like Sony's 200-600 mm zoom lens and I don't like the direction Canon has gone with their slower long zooms. At the same time I have reservations about some of Sony's normal range F/4 zooms and think the Canon versions are better.

No system has everything, so countless variables must be weighed before making a guess as to what system would be best overall. Shooting both landscape and wildlife makes it harder. In the past I've photographed more landscape, which nudges me toward Canon due to the lens situation. In the future birds and wildlife could be much more available, nudging me toward Sony. Neither system is awful, but the costs seem to make it obligatory to investigate every nuance.

On the third hand, for something like $1400 I could pick up another 5DsR, just keep using that and all the lenses I already own, and still be pretty happy. Hmmmmm... I don't think anyone could tell the difference in any landscape image, and most images in general, but the "eye AF" for birds and animals would give a newer camera a much higher hit rate in some situations.

May 29, 2022 at 12:33 PM

Methodical
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #2 · p.3 #2 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

I'll sit back and break out the Coke and chips and listen to all the whining about what the camera doesn't have and what Canon did not do and should've done because it would've only cost $1 to do, as if the complainers are the Canon product costs experts.

May 29, 2022 at 06:21 PM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #3 · p.3 #3 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

Methodical wrote:
I'll sit back and break out the Coke and chips and listen to all the whining about what the camera doesn't have and what Canon did not do and should've done because it would've only cost $1 to do, as if the complainers are the Canon product costs experts.

Thank you for sharing.

May 29, 2022 at 06:52 PM

JohnSil
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #4 · p.3 #4 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

May 30, 2022 at 12:02 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #5 · p.3 #5 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

The R5 is listed 1.62 lb, 738g by B&H. That's not bad at all. The RP is the lightest ff camera, literally something like an ounce heavier than a SL2.

So Canon is making relatively light cameras. The regular ones at a pound and a half isn't bad.

May 30, 2022 at 12:27 PM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #6 · p.3 #6 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

JohnSil wrote:
Tradition is a possibility for the size of the pro camera but part of that tradition is two grips which I feel is essential for a pro camera and the other is a large, oversized battery which by default creates the second grip.
Let’s not forget that people are already saying they will NOT get the new R7 because so far it doesn’t appear to accommodate a grip. A grip makes a camera the same size as a Pro body. And complete and effective weather sealing also increases the size of the body.
I know of no industry(I’m sure there...Show more →

The concept of "professional" is the problem here, I think.

For example, it is my understanding that there are quite a few photojournalists working in some pretty tough places who prefer to use smaller and lighter cameras. (That was certainly the case in the day when Leicas were the choice of many folks doing wartime photography, for example.) Some are even using smaller-than-full-frame systems.

In some areas of photography, we'll find larger tools due to the nature of the work. That could be for some of the situations you describe in which the ability to fire a lot of frames quickly while using a really large lens and operating the camera in any orientation might be critical. (On the other hand, as a person who has "done photography" for decades, I learned that if I'm switching between portrait and landscape orientation, it is faster to keep my hands in the same position on the camera and mover everything 90 degrees...)

I also don't deny that that for some photographers who are used to big equipment such things continue to be attractive. It is what you are familiar with, and anything different will feel less familiar and may require learning new instincts. (I went through that when I moved to a much smaller system for street photography, but I ended up liking the smaller system for that much more.)

For my part, when I carry stuff into the backcountry for a week of photography I count every ounce and sometimes struggle to squeeze things into the pack. I choose, for example, to carry a f/4 70-200 rather than a f/2.8 model, even though I own both.

While there will always be a market for bigger gear, but companies today from Sony to Fujifilm to Olympus are demonstrating that highly capable cameras can also be smaller than what we are used to.

Dan

May 30, 2022 at 01:52 PM

JohnSil
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #7 · p.3 #7 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

gdanmitchell wrote:
The concept of "professional" is the problem here, I think.

For example, it is my understanding that there are quite a few photojournalists working in some pretty tough places who prefer to use smaller and lighter cameras. (That was certainly the case in the day when Leicas were the choice of many folks doing wartime photography, for example.) Some are even using smaller-than-full-frame systems.

In some areas of photography, we'll find larger tools due to the nature of the work. That could be for some of the situations you describe in which the ability to fire a lot of frames quickly while...Show more →

Dan, I think a bit of what we're saying is the same.
BUT, I'm not so sure the concept of "professional" is the problem here. I'm not so sure that having the same abilities in itself is what makes a pro camera. Maybe the R3 and the future R1 can be made smaller than a Sony A1 but maybe Canon's ideals take over more so than philosophy. For example a car could be made as small a a little red wagon and get amazing mileage but may never catch on since it would carry no passengers/cargo and if you were over 4 foot tall you couldn't drive it anyway.
We ARE dealing with the human hands here. Just because a camera is small doesn't make it ideal. Ideal for certain situations like pack packing but not for using it fast and furious at an event. Already people are complaining that the R7 doesn't have a wheel in the back because the camera has less real estate. I've read the same about the Sony, that some things have to be done from the menus because it lacks the physical buttons on the body, again, I assume, because of a lack or real estate.
Maybe Canon's studies have found that very small isn't the ideal, I don't know.
I to have certain non-L lenses I use for travel too. Like you I'll never get rid of my 70-200 f4 non IS because of it's portability. Nor would I travel with a 2.8 zoom because of size, ditto for the 50 1.4.
And for any given photographer a given camera may get the job done for them in a better way but every company will always build its' interpretation of what it considers to be, for them, the ultimate interpretation of what a professional camera should be and it will be up to that companies user base to decide if that's what works best for them in those shooting situations that many pros find themselves in.
Every company will put forth its flagship model and it's up to its user base to use it or not.
John

May 31, 2022 at 12:10 AM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #8 · p.3 #8 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

JohnSil wrote:
Dan, I think a bit of what we're saying is the same.
BUT, I'm not so sure the concept of "professional" is the problem here. I'm not so sure that having the same abilities in itself is what makes a pro camera. Maybe the R3 and the future R1 can be made smaller than a Sony A1 but maybe Canon's ideals take over more so than philosophy. For example a car could be made as small a a little red wagon and get amazing mileage but may never catch on since it would carry no passengers/cargo and if you were over...Show more →

Arguing the absurd doesn't really work for me. And the point about making a car so small that no one could fit in it is in that category. If you stop for a moment I think you'll see the absurdity of it. Here, I'll illustrate: "You say a car is more comfortable if it has more space inside, but if we follow your logic cars would all be the size of buses!"

I would not propose making a camera that is too small to use. But "too small to use" is a complicated concept.

For example, we know with certainty that when small cameras using 35mm film were first introduced, "serious photographers" panned them as being too small, too fragile, and incapable of producing good photographic quality. (From what I understand, there were those with similar objections to the earlier transition from sheet film to roll film.)

My point is that a lot of what we regard as true in these things is a complicated mix of ergonomic reality, perceptions, and what we are already comfortable with. In my experience, the camera size issue is one such issue.

While my personal experience, taken alone, his hardly definitive, it altered my perspective on the whole camera size issue. A decade ago I got a very small camera as an alternative to my rather large DSLR system — not to replace it but to augment it. In my case it was a little Fujifilm XE1. After the first time I actually used it I feared that I had screwed up. The small size was indeed a problem. I couldn't find a comfortable way to hold the thing, the buttons were in the wrong places, I accidentally changed controls without knowing it, and more.

If I had picked the thing up in a camera store and tried it, there's a good chance I would have rejected it out of hand for these reasons.

But, good thing I ordered it sight unseen! I wasn't about to send it back, so I continued to use it anyway... a lot. Over a period of weeks the ergonomic interface that seemed impossible at first began to seem natural as I developed new instincts for it. I figured out that I couldn't hold it like I hold a big DSLR with a large lens. I learned some new settings that took care of some of the handling problems.

In short, after about a month of use the thing started to feel as "right" as my larger cameras. I've previously mentioned a definitive moment when I returned from weeks of travel on which I used only the small camera. I picked up the big Canon again and... IT now felt awkward and uncomfortable!

I don't doubt that there are some situations where folks will prefer (or at least be used to) larger gear, but it is useful to think outside that box, too. In the same way that some folks have been unable to let go of shooting film and take advantage of the extraordinary pluses of digital photography, or in the way that some are utterly convinced that Brand A is the Only Good Brand and that Brand B and Brand C are bad (and Brand D is an affront to human dignity!), we can easily get stuck with comfortable preconceptions and presume them to be truths.

In my personal experience, the one about the value of bigger camera bodies doesn't hold up.

YMMV.

Dan

May 31, 2022 at 10:34 AM

jwolfe
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #9 · p.3 #9 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

This is not a knock on Canon - more about the market in general.

I think there comes a point where you just can't stuff more megapixels onto a sensor and make a better image. I don't know where that practical limit is, but 100 mp on a 35mm sensor seems to me at least, to have way to small of pixels to render better detail than a 50 mp sensor would.

Maybe technology has truly changed, but between resolving detail and noise performance, I don't see an advantage in just stuffing more and more mp into sensors in the future. I am open to different opinions but based on 25 years of shooting digital, everything we've been told would go against this being a better product than the sensor in the Sony A1 (or a Canon equivalent).

May 31, 2022 at 11:22 AM

Mike_5D
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #10 · p.3 #10 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

jwolfe wrote:
This is not a knock on Canon - more about the market in general.

I think there comes a point where you just can't stuff more megapixels onto a sensor and make a better image. I don't know where that practical limit is, but 100 mp on a 35mm sensor seems to me at least, to have way to small of pixels to render better detail than a 50 mp sensor would.

Maybe technology has truly changed, but between resolving detail and noise performance, I don't see an advantage in just stuffing more and more mp into sensors in the future....Show more →

More pixels gives more detail, given enough light. But does that actually translate to a better image? If you made a list of what makes a great image, where would resolution rank? Does detail trump subject, composition, or lighting? I thought through this when deciding between the R6 an R5. Sure, the R5 has over double the pixels (only about 50% more in each direction though) but I concluded that for my needs, more pixels weren't going to help me make better images.

May 31, 2022 at 11:44 AM

jwolfe
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #11 · p.3 #11 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

Yes exactly.

But more precisely on the tech side - jamming that many small pixels on a sensor will probably not resolve much more detail and will probably significantly worsen the high iso performance, making this really a landscape or portrait camera. Which is fine, but my sense is if you printed a 50 mp image and a 100 mp image at 24x36" there would be no discernible difference.

Mike_5D wrote:
More pixels gives more detail, given enough light. But does that actually translate to a better image? If you made a list of what makes a great image, where would resolution rank? Does detail trump subject, composition, or lighting? I thought through this when deciding between the R6 an R5. Sure, the R5 has over double the pixels (only about 50% more in each direction though) but I concluded that for my needs, more pixels weren't going to help me make better images.

May 31, 2022 at 01:20 PM

TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #12 · p.3 #12 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

You will get more detail IF the lenses you use can resolve that kind of detail down to that kind of pixel density. Also, these days with the current sensor technology, gone are the days that dense sensors are leaving photons on the floor (hitting areas between cells, etc). If you are going to use something like an older EF lens like the 100-400 MKI, there would be no advantage at all between all these mega sensors.

Egregious noise comes about more (at least in Canon's history) from the design of the sensor, A/D converter and the rest of the electronics adding noise where there wasn't any. Sony licked this issue early on, it took Canon quite a bit of time to reach the same level of shadow/electronic noise.

May 31, 2022 at 01:24 PM

jwolfe
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #13 · p.3 #13 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

I agree! I'm sure the new R lenses are fine up to a certain limit. But any EF lens would probably be pushing it even at 50 mp.

Noise is also a function of the size of the pixels. Smaller pixels always equate to more noise. Which is why press cameras have always been lower mp (D5/1DX). The Z9 was the first camera to break that trend (and some would argue the A1) and has had good results. But there is a physics limit at some point where the pixels become too small to offer any added benefit.

TeamSpeed wrote:
You will get more detail IF the lenses you use can resolve that kind of detail down to that kind of pixel density. Also, these days with the current sensor technology, gone are the days that dense sensors are leaving photons on the floor (hitting areas between cells, etc). If you are going to use something like an older EF lens like the 100-400 MKI, there would be no advantage at all between all these mega sensors.

Egregious noise comes about more (at least in Canon's history) from the design of the sensor, A/D converter and the rest of the electronics...Show more →

May 31, 2022 at 02:08 PM

Mike_5D
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #14 · p.3 #14 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

jwolfe wrote:
Yes exactly.

But more precisely on the tech side - jamming that many small pixels on a sensor will probably not resolve much more detail and will probably significantly worsen the high iso performance, making this really a landscape or portrait camera. Which is fine, but my sense is if you printed a 50 mp image and a 100 mp image at 24x36" there would be no discernible difference.

Yes, prints are far more forgiving of pixel count than many people think. The Internet is full of comparison articles and videos where even the experts can't tell the difference between cameras in large prints.

I find that tiny pixels can work well if you give them enough light. Even my 5 year old phone can take tack sharp images with good dynamic range in hard golden hour light. It's when the light is less than awesome that they start to fall apart quickly. I agree that this will likely be a tripod camera with a lower top ISO than lower megapixel cameras.

May 31, 2022 at 02:26 PM

Methodical
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #15 · p.3 #15 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

gdanmitchell wrote:
Thank you for sharing.

Speaking the truth.

Edited on May 31, 2022 at 04:42 PM · View previous versions

May 31, 2022 at 03:45 PM

Peter Figen
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #16 · p.3 #16 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

Diffraction, anybody?

May 31, 2022 at 03:45 PM

jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #17 · p.3 #17 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

I'll raise, anti-aliasing?

May 31, 2022 at 03:48 PM

Peter Figen
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #18 · p.3 #18 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

Who knows if I'll spring for one of these when they finally come out and who knows what the actual spec will be, but two things is for certain, no matter what lenses you use, the optimum aperture is going to be wider than on the previous cameras and there will be greater falloff in lens performance the further you move from the center axis. I'd love to be surprised but the older I get the more surprises turn into disappointments.

May 31, 2022 at 04:50 PM

gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.3 #19 · p.3 #19 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

Peter Figen wrote:
Diffraction, anybody?

Yeah, at some point we run into limits on image resolution that are not determined by photo site density. If one is really going to make a lot of really gigantic prints it is perhaps time to consider a larger format... though the 33x44 format doesn't get you that much larger at equal resolution — at least not the ratio between old school 35mm and MF film.

There are some other potential values in higher MP that I mention below.

To me it is kind of a "100MP isn't going to change my life, but if has equivalent performance and doesn't cost more and might be useful in some situations," why not? ;-)

- - -

jcolwell wrote:
I'll raise, anti-aliasing?

I hope that a 100MP FF camera, if it actually appears, doesn't have an AA filter. Few people would see any advantage from that at all... especially with the diffraction blur issue that Peter mentions.

If I understand correctly, Canon has recently seemed to move in the direction of AA filtering but weakening it. I could see them doing that, but I'm not sure why. We don't hear a lot of complaints about the AA-filter cancellation system in the 5DsR, nor about the absence of AA filtering in the Fujifilm GFX system.

- - -

jwolfe wrote:
But more precisely on the tech side - jamming that many small pixels on a sensor will probably not resolve much more detail and will probably significantly worsen the high iso performance, making this really a landscape or portrait camera. Which is fine, but my sense is if you printed a 50 mp image and a 100 mp image at 24x36" there would be no discernible difference.

A few observations on that.

First, the thing I agree on:

Based on print tests I've done with high MP cameras in different formats. I agree that virtually no one will notice any difference between prints from uncropped 50MP and 100MP originals at 24" x 36". If you really know what you are looking for, and up close at a nose-length distance, and carefully scan back and forth between the two side-by-side images you might, maybe, sometimes, feel like you could see a difference... but in all likelihood you would not be able to consistently pick the better example.

(I have some stories about pretty stark examples of this that I could tell...)

I think that somewhere around 30" x 40" the resolution advantage might begin to have some effect with real world visibility, but it would still be quite small.

(Still, if — and see below — a higher MP sensor comes at the same price point and with equal or better overall camera performance, why not get it? There are potential advantages other than pure resolution: smaller "noise grain" at high ISO, potentially smoother gradients, potential for cropping.)

Second, the thing about which I'd quibble a bit:

"will probably significantly worsen the high iso performance, making this really a landscape or portrait camera"

That simply has not turned out to be the case over the 20 years during which DSLRs and now mirrorless cameras have been evolving. At _every_ point when photo site density increased, there have been those telling us that this would diminish the performance of the sensors and worsen image quality — we'd lose DR and end up with problems with noise.

They said this when we went for 3MP to 4MP, from 4MP to 6MP, from 6MP to 8MP... from 20MP to 50MP, and onward.

If you compare the same generation of sensors, say that in a 5DsR and a 5DIV or so, the lower MP sensor is going to have better noise and DR performance. But typically the next generation of the high MP sensor improves on the performance of the previous one — it doesn't get worse, it gets better. At every upgrade point, the performance of the new, higher MP sensor has otherwise at least equally and usually improved on the previous generation of high MP sensor.

So, to summarize, I can agree that the advantages of the higher MP sensor may be minimal or even nonexistent for many users, but I disagree that a higher MP Canon sensor is going to perform worse than the 5Ds/5DsR generation of sensors.

Dan

May 31, 2022 at 04:55 PM

jwolfe
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.3 #20 · p.3 #20 · Canon Rumors: 100MP+ Canon R5s coming in 2023

Perhaps. I’m not an engineer, but there is a limit we will reach when you can’t outsmart physics anymore. At some point increasing the number of pixels will be of no benefit. What that threshold is, I have no idea.

And honestly who needs 100 mp? I have 20x30” prints from 6 mp sensors that look FANTASTIC. Unless you are a landscape artist printing enormous prints, all this camera will do is cause even more of a headache with file storage.

gdanmitchell wrote:
Yeah, at some point we run into limits on image resolution that are not determined by photo site density. If one is really going to make a lot of really gigantic prints it is perhaps time to consider a larger format... though the 33x44 format doesn't get you that much larger at equal resolution — at least not the ratio between old school 35mm and MF film.

There are some other potential values in higher MP that I mention below.

To me it is kind of a "100MP isn't going to change my life, but if has equivalent performance and doesn't cost...Show more →

May 31, 2022 at 06:12 PM

1 2 3 4 5 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 4 5 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.