New Canon full frame?

[ElDude]

I said this on TP and I'll say it again. The only reason CR and NR get the bad rep they do is because people keep reporting on forums what they say as gospel and then being disappointed when they don't come to fruition.

" take it with a large grain of salt as it is a new contact. I’m still on the fence as to whether or not we’ll see another DSLR for Photokina, lots of conflicting information"

Indeed. Since I've been watching that site, it seems the only things that are true, are the reports from people testing the new kit, and only around a month or so before release. Most is at best guesswork.

Personally if I was any camera/lens maker, I'd give specific people specific items. If rumours appear about that item, you know not to use that person again. This is why I never believe anything I read until some pretty solid info pops up.

 

[D.P.]

Indeed. Since I've been watching that site, it seems the only things that are true, are the reports from people testing the new kit, and only around a month or so before release. Most is at best guesswork.

Personally if I was any camera/lens maker, I'd give specific people specific items. If rumours appear about that item, you know not to use that person again. This is why I never believe anything I read until some pretty solid info pops up.

The rumours of the D800 were basically spot on months before the camera was released.


One fo the issues is the manufacturers make several different version of a camera which go out and get tested, only 1 of them will make it to the market, and maybe not even be the same as the tested cameras.

E.g. Canon may have had a prototype 5DMKIII with a 38MP sensor and the 22MP sensor leading to mixed rumours. Canon finally chose the 22MP sensor (likely with the aim of a higher res body in the future), this decision might have been towards the end of the R&D close to manufacturing.

 

[D.P.]

Like most of the other stuff that comes from that website, utter ****. the EOS 3D has been speculated and supposedly coming out for the last decade. Squeezing 46mp out of a FF sensor is verging on impossible without having diffraction showing at even large apertures, making it useless.

If canon make a 46MP sensor, it'll be a medium format one, not FF.

While 46MP is very high, it might be manageable. The 24MP crop sensor in Nex 7 and D3200 do OK just about with care. 46MP FF is like 20MP crop, not too different to the current Canon crop cameras.

I do think it is a bit far but they likely will need that for marketing purposes (e.g. a full 10MP more than Nikon's top of the line).

Even 36MP is more than I really need (24MP final image would be fine for my landscape work) , but I need the pixel density for wildlife photography (16 MP for a crop seems optimal, o 36MP FF it is).

 

[James J]

While 46MP is very high, it might be manageable. The 24MP crop sensor in Nex 7 and D3200 do OK just about with care. 46MP FF is like 20MP crop, not too different to the current Canon crop cameras.

I do think it is a bit far but they likely will need that for marketing purposes (e.g. a full 10MP more than Nikon's top of the line).

Even 36MP is more than I really need (24MP final image would be fine for my landscape work) , but I need the pixel density for wildlife photography (16 MP for a crop seems optimal, o 36MP FF it is).

Still can't see it personally as they'd need to find a way of getting around diffraction. You'd have an even less usable aperture range on a 46mp sensor than on the current 36 mp ones unless it went MF.

 

[Ksanti]

Still can't see it personally as they'd need to find a way of getting around diffraction. You'd have an even less usable aperture range on a 46mp sensor than on the current 36 mp ones unless it went MF.

Not true at all. You don't need to outresolve the sensor in every image you take. Fine, you might not get the full use out of the resolution, but at any point inside the 'usable aperture range' of the 36MP that isn't within the 46MP's range, you'll still end up with more resolution or equal resolution as the with the 36MP sensor.

Higher resolutions aren't more demanding on sensors, they have a higher ceiling for image quality. Any time a 22MP sensor is outresolved, but a 36MP or 46MP isn't, the 36 or 46 is still resolving more than the 22, unless it's slap bang on the resolution limit of the 22.

In any case, there are 24MP crops which have higher pixel densities than a 46MP camera would.

 

[jonneymendoza]

if u was to crop to 1.6x on a 36 or 42mp shot, how many mp will u retain? if u still retain around 20ishmp then thats brilliant

 

[D.P.]

if u was to crop to 1.6x on a 36 or 42mp shot, how many mp will u retain? if u still retain around 20ishmp then thats brilliant

The Nikon 1.5x crop from the 36Mp d800 gives a sweet 15.5MP Image, about the same as the d7000. That is what interests me because until the d800 was released I would need a crop camera with sufficient pixel density for my wildlife work and would still like a FF camera for landscapes the d800 is 2 cameras in me for nature photographers.

The d800's 1.2x crop mode still gives a whopping 24mp at 5FPS.

 

[CameraObscura]

The Nikon 1.5x crop from the 36Mp d800 gives a sweet 15.5MP Image, about the same as the d7000. That is what interests me because until the d800 was released I would need a crop camera with sufficient pixel density for my wildlife work and would still like a FF camera for landscapes the d800 is 2 cameras in me for nature photographers.

The d800's 1.2x crop mode still gives a whopping 24mp at 5FPS.

The Mark III has just over 6 fps, probably a shade faster with a UDMA7 Compact Flash card.

 

[CameraObscura]

From canon Rumours: (a pathetic list of nonsense products)

http://www.canonrumors.com/

Next Week
Canon will be announcing new product next week in the lead up to Photokina. A few people have received invites to various press conferences around the globe.

So what can we expect to be announced?

Printers
At least two new “pro” Pixma printers. These will be direct replacements for the Pixma 9000 Mark II & Pixma 9500 Mark II. They’ll be be a smaller Pixma Pro-1, one with dye and the other with pigment.

There will be no 17″ Pixma printer announced this go around, but there are murmurs we will finally see one in the near future.

PowerShot
More PowerShot announcements are expected, a G12 replacement I’m told is likely, as well as a new fast lens PowerShot.

EOS Body
There is next to no talk about a new EOS body for Photokina. The next camera will be a smaller full frame camera, when is still the question.

Lenses
There has been talk of a new 400 f/5.6L being announced and not much else. I’ve had one other suggestion that a new couple of lenses for the EOS-M system could also be announced. A macro maybe?

 

[mrk]

The Mark III has just over 6 fps, probably a shade faster with a UDMA7 Compact Flash card.

5DIII? The 5DIII has 7FPS on a fast SDXC card (not that the XC part is utilised on a 5DIII but anyway...) so a fast CF (1000x) may well gain beyond 7FPS as by the time the buffer has gone half way to the CF card it's readied half the buffer for continuous shooting again. In perspective, my 40D was writing at 7.8FPS on the Extreme III CF card although that card is old hat now.

In theory... I need a 1000x card to test this with but looking at how fast it writes to a 1000x card that's my estimate based on the SDXC card I've been using in my 5D III.

 

[Energize]

I want FF to die! Crop is superior in many ways plus there are plenty of good DX lenses. You don't need FF lenses on a crop body.

I don't see why you would want full frame to die. It has many advantages over crop inherently due to it's size, more light = lower ISO, narrower aperture and faster shutter speed. Essential for many shooting conditions. Plus all the current full frames have much better ISO performance than crops.

I'm moving to full frame as soon as possible because I don't want to have to use ISO6400 at f/1.8. A 35mm sensor would immediately reduce the ISO to 2400, and that would be equivilent to ISO 1200/800 on a crop.

 

[mrk]

Yeah kind of a bizarre thing to say. FF is superior to crop. Bigger viewfinder, less noise, nicer DOF, images that have greater depth to name a few.

 

[An Exception]

I don't see why you would want full frame to die. It has many advantages over crop inherently due to it's size, more light = lower ISO, narrower aperture and faster shutter speed. Essential for many shooting conditions. Plus all the current full frames have much better ISO performance than crops.

I'm moving to full frame as soon as possible because I don't want to have to use ISO6400 at f/1.8. A 35mm sensor would immediately reduce the ISO to 2400, and that would be equivilent to ISO 1200/800 on a crop.

If your at ISO6400 on a crop, you will also be at 6400 on FF.
The noise it self will be less though on FF.

 

[An Exception]

Yeah kind of a bizarre thing to say. FF is superior to crop. Bigger viewfinder, less noise, nicer DOF, images that have greater depth to name a few.

I CBA to look, but wan't this an old quote from DP a few pages ago?
If so, I think I remember it was more of a flippant comment in response to JM saying he wanted APSC to die.

Not really worth bringing up gain imo

 

[James J]

Yeah kind of a bizarre thing to say. FF is superior to crop. Bigger viewfinder, less noise, nicer DOF, images that have greater depth to name a few.

Crop factor is still an amazing factor for wildlife photography though. Its nice that the D800 for example can use the DX mode to still become a good crop camera with the reach you need for most wildlife photos.

 

[Tachyon]

I don't see why you would want full frame to die. It has many advantages over crop inherently due to it's size, more light = lower ISO, narrower aperture and faster shutter speed. Essential for many shooting conditions. Plus all the current full frames have much better ISO performance than crops.

I'm moving to full frame as soon as possible because I don't want to have to use ISO6400 at f/1.8. A 35mm sensor would immediately reduce the ISO to 2400, and that would be equivilent to ISO 1200/800 on a crop.

I think when it was said it was done just in a tone similiar to what Jonny had said a couple of posts previously. I'd be surprised if he really had meant it. The wanting FF to die that is, I don't mean to take away from the points he was making.

 

[Energize]

If your at ISO6400 on a crop, you will also be at 6400 on FF.
The noise it self will be less though on FF.

The sensor is much larger and takes in much more light so surely the sensitivity of the sensor needs to be lower for the same exposure?

 

[cokebottles]

The sensor is much larger and takes in much more light so surely the sensitivity of the sensor needs to be lower for the same exposure?

No. ISO is ISO regardless of the sensor size. If you need 1/60 F4.0 and ISO 6400 on a crop sensor body to correctly expose a scene, you will need the same settings (including the same ISO) on a full frame body to expose correctly.

The sensitivity behavior of each pixel (regardless of the number of them) is set by the ISO parameter. With a full frame camera, the pixels themselves are usually physically larger, and as such receive more light. So as you increase through the ISO range, a full frame camera will generally give you less noise compared to a crop camera.

i.e. ISO 6400 might look pants on a 600D, but might turn be quite usable on a 5D mkII.

 

[D.P.]

I don't see why you would want full frame to die. It has many advantages over crop inherently due to it's size, more light = lower ISO, narrower aperture and faster shutter speed. Essential for many shooting conditions. Plus all the current full frames have much better ISO performance than crops.

I'm moving to full frame as soon as possible because I don't want to have to use ISO6400 at f/1.8. A 35mm sensor would immediately reduce the ISO to 2400, and that would be equivilent to ISO 1200/800 on a crop.

I think you got the wrong end of the stick. I said is as a joke because someone was saying that crop cameras should die, which as I pointed out, is just as stupid as wanting FF to die.


You area lso seem very confused about the advantage of a FF camera. If you are using ISO6400 at 35mm f1.8 then on a full frame camera you will still need to shoot at ISO 6400 and f1.8 , except you will either have to get closer to the subject or use a longer focal length lens.

 

[mrk]

Woops misread!

Unless..you ninja edited.