Discussion
Hmm - maximum 6400 ISO - quite a departure from the recent trend of progressively higher (and less noisy) ISO. No mention of the dual pixel CMOS either.
I thought the megapixel wars were over - is 50mp really needed? I doubt even the best L-series lens is sharp enough to warrant a 50mp sensor.
Personally I was looking forward to an even higher ISO camera - perhaps with an out of the box function that supported dual (or multiple) ISO HDR shots - much like the Magic Lantern firmware hack allows you to now do.
I wonder if we will ever see a light field type sensor in a Canon DSLR body - or even the touted quantum dot type sensors with much higher quantum efficiency.
I thought the megapixel wars were over - is 50mp really needed? I doubt even the best L-series lens is sharp enough to warrant a 50mp sensor.
Personally I was looking forward to an even higher ISO camera - perhaps with an out of the box function that supported dual (or multiple) ISO HDR shots - much like the Magic Lantern firmware hack allows you to now do.
I wonder if we will ever see a light field type sensor in a Canon DSLR body - or even the touted quantum dot type sensors with much higher quantum efficiency.
Edited by Moonhawk on Monday 2nd February 13:45
Simpo Two said:
ISO seems to be the new Megapixels. This camera seems to be about quality not ISOs.
In the case of this camera - megapixels is the new megapixels.I thought the "s" designation stood for "sport" (i.e. faster more responsive auto focus allowing you to shoot fast moving sport action) - it certainly seemed to be the case in the 1Ds.
If that is the case - is 50mp really necessary. I used to shoot sports photography with my 5D mkII and in many cases I dialed the image size down from its "out of the box" 21mp because the images were far too large for their intended application.
Moonhawk said:
I thought the "s" designation stood for "sport" (i.e. faster more responsive auto focus allowing you to shoot fast moving sport action) - it certainly seemed to be the case in the 1Ds.
It stood for Studio I think, and the 1D (without the s) was the body aimed more at sports photographers.From what I've seen, this looks quite interesting and may be the body that finally tempts me to upgrade from my 10 year old 1Ds II!
Moonhawk said:
I thought the megapixel wars were over - is 50mp really needed?
Nikon and Sony seem to think so. Presumably the market response and where sales are happening across the broad spectrum of equipment have persuaded Canon they need to join in. Plus they have been introducing some new lenses that probably make a difference to both image quality and turnover potential. More in the pipeline too I suspect.
Is 50Mp really needed? Not for me but there seem to be a lot of people out there who as pros or dedicated amateurs are more than willing to jump on the latest release from day one so we will soon find out.
A 5DsR would be right up my kilt, I keep fancying selling my current MFD kit and going down the Pentax 645Z route but a 5DsR would work well alongside my current Canon kit, 5D3 for high ISO, sell my current 1Ds2 backup camera, keep the same lenses and not have to restock on Pentax gear.
rottie102 said:
Depends.The rumour industry seems to have a 5DS and a 5DR followed by a 5D Mk4 later in the year which would seem to be the thought of as the direct replacement for the 5D3.
So maybe the S and R are intended to be marketed against the lower priced "medium format" cameras that may or may not be appearing (Pentax for example) rather than as mainstream FF bodies.
FF users contemplating going MF might be swayed into staying with the smaller sensor if the Mp count was a big enough number to persuade their clients that the images produced would be competitively sized to MF.
markmullen said:
A 5DsR would be right up my kilt, I keep fancying selling my current MFD kit and going down the Pentax 645Z route but a 5DsR would work well alongside my current Canon kit, 5D3 for high ISO, sell my current 1Ds2 backup camera, keep the same lenses and not have to restock on Pentax gear.
I'm curious to see what difference the R makes to quality and workflow - will be interesting to see what you think.Moonhawk said:
Simpo Two said:
ISO seems to be the new Megapixels. This camera seems to be about quality not ISOs.
In the case of this camera - megapixels is the new megapixels.There was a rumour doing the rounds that Canon were splitting their full-frame line in to two; one high-resolution and one high-ISO. Will be interesting to see if that's the case.
For those saying 6400 is low though, that's the max ISO of a D800 as well. Everything above that is "extended".
For those saying 6400 is low though, that's the max ISO of a D800 as well. Everything above that is "extended".
Elderly said:
/\ This.
DR has been very slow to develop;
8 years ago the Fuji S5Pro (a Nikon D200 with a Fuji sensor ) had a dynamic range
that is far greater than the Canon 5D3 today and has only recently slightly been exceeded by the Nikon D7100 for example.
I was hoping Canon would use the dual CMOS sensor to push DR in much the same way that Fuji did with their super ccd a few years back.DR has been very slow to develop;
8 years ago the Fuji S5Pro (a Nikon D200 with a Fuji sensor ) had a dynamic range
that is far greater than the Canon 5D3 today and has only recently slightly been exceeded by the Nikon D7100 for example.
Elderly said:
DR has been very slow to develop;
8 years ago the Fuji S5Pro (a Nikon D200 with a Fuji sensor ) had a dynamic range
that is far greater than the Canon 5D3 today and has only recently slightly been exceeded by the Nikon D7100 for example.
It handled DR with small and large pixels interspersed but I think the reason it didn't take off was the relatively low res once the two sets were combined. In other words you could have DR or Mp but not both. I looked at it but there were other shortcomings that made the D200 better overall. 8 years ago the Fuji S5Pro (a Nikon D200 with a Fuji sensor ) had a dynamic range
that is far greater than the Canon 5D3 today and has only recently slightly been exceeded by the Nikon D7100 for example.
Talking of great ideas, what happened to the Foveon sensor? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foveon_X3_sensor
RobbieKB said:
I think I read that the 5D IV will have 4k and the 5DS won't. That seems a little odd to me. I must be missing something because that seems as if they're outdoing their own new model extremely quickly.
Pretty sure the rumours are that the 5D4 later oin the year will be the continuation of the 5D3 and not have 50+ MPix on offer.So the body style splits into high res with specific market objectives that head towards MF territory - and a lower res. version aimed at where the 5D3 is aimed now. More or less.
I would guess Mark's comment above is pertinent. They won't want sales eroded by the likes of the relatively low cost Pentax. If the Pentax succeeds photographically and financially that will set some challenges for MF pricing and suddenly DSLR FF could come under pricing (and therefore margin and volume) pressure. That would probably not be good for sales and the add-on sale of expensive lenses.
Sales of digital cameras in the form of cameras are dropping sharply and have been for some time. The whole market looks like it needs to reinvent its business model and this may be a step in that direction for Canon.
Well, that and some large price cuts on certain existing kit.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7580337258/canon-...
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff