Canon 1DX and implications for MF

[ptomsu]

I am not so sure if there will only be the 1DX in the future and not also a 1DS with maybe 36MP. Would this make sense? Marketing wise, if Nikon moves down that path yes. IQ wise I doubt, both because limitation of even pro grade 35 lenses and also noisy images because of small pixel size.

But I still think that everything is possible.

One other observation I have is, that we obviously reach some technology limitations, as it takes so long time spans to introduce the next significant jump in resolution (and IQ). Some years ago we saw a doubling in MP count every 2 years, now it takes much longer, if achieved at all.

Coming back to the 12MP of my E5 and the advanced processing Olympus does in the E5 to achieve highest quality IQ with rather lower resolution, maybe Canon has adopted that way of thinking for their D1X. Anyway I must say that my E5 experience tells me every day it is better to have less resolution but stellar processing and lenses than the other way round in order to achieve great IQ

 

[pophoto]

I think a this thread/forum has brought up a lot of smart comments and arguments for want and need. I was also looking forward to this announcement, being the latest and greatest from Canon, makes me eager to leap, but I'm not convinced. I was shooting the M9, Nikon D700 and Canon 5D2, having sold the previous two so I'm definitely still in 35mm land!

I think ultimately if you're not shooting sports or Wildlife, then you can almost certainly cross off the list 61AF points and 12/14fps. I personally think the biggest gain here is in its sensor with the increased pixel pitch and high ISO, low noise handling. Being FF, it will satisfy hardcore photogs who dislike the Crop factor for their wonderful L-lenses. Personally the physical size will be a downer for me.

If the 5D MarkIII was to be release with higher bit depth and MP and better high ISO, that would personally be my camera of choice. Even if Canon only decided to give ONE amazingly accurate AF point. The decision to remain with Canon myself, I definitely prefer the colors I get and I think the L-lenses are just better than what Nikon has to offer (subjective I know). Although I would love to see improved Dynamic range similar to MF, I might be dreaming (or am I missing something here). I don't think any manufacturer has given more MPs without the delivering the quality at this level, so I am not worried about that aspect. However, Guy made a point about the market and business to keep it down and I can certainly see why. I have a lot of friends who already do own these cameras and lenses but would quickly complain about the size of the files, while the rest of US won't! Not all of us have tens of GB server storage spaces, or computers to handle large files.

I certainly know a lot of people who would want to be shooting 4K RAW video files and have 16MP stills to choose from that, so definitely another argument FOR larger MP besides those who understand super-sampling and like it. I think it's quite clear what the 1DX market is for and what it has to offer, the question is, will the 5D3 be delivering the rest of it. If NOT, I will certainly still be saving up for my MF cam

Oh, another thing, there were rumors a while back of a 3D range of cameras!

 

[Graham Mitchell]

What I like about this camera is that it's not trying to compete with the medium format cameras. It's doing what they can't do, and doing it very well, e.g. 61 point AF versus 1 point, very high ISO, very fast frame rate, and of course video. Basically it is MORE useful now to supplement medium format cameras, instead of trying to be everything to everyone and not being the king of anything.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Well said. Most of us have the king of the hill here anyway from 40 mpx up in any flavor. This is a compliment to that

 

[lowep]

"One oft-used strategy is to pre-announce a flagship, wait for all the big-$$ orders to be made, and only announce the little-sister product after that..."

so if this is the flagship what will the little sister product be? :watch:

 

[Jack]

What I like about this camera is that it's not trying to compete with the medium format cameras. It's doing what they can't do, and doing it very well, e.g. 61 point AF versus 1 point, very high ISO, very fast frame rate, and of course video. Basically it is MORE useful now to supplement medium format cameras, instead of trying to be everything to everyone and not being the king of anything.

Well said Graham!

 

[Lars]

Bit-depth refers to the number of luminance levels an image is binned into. It has nothing to do with dynamic range which is related to how much signal can a photo site absorb. So a 16-bit image does not automatically give you more dynamic range. It just means your signal will be divided into 65,000 luminance levels rather than 16,000 luminance levels (for 14 bit), but the dynamic range is not determined by this. If you can't get what you want out of 16,000 levels, then you are going to need something more than extra bit depth.

Actually that's not entirely correct. Since the processing pipeline from sensor to raw image is linear, bit depth in the processing pipeline clips effective dynamic range regardless how good the sensor is.

 

[fotografz]

Well said Graham!

+1.

-Marc

 

[Graham Mitchell]

Actually that's not entirely correct. Since the processing pipeline from sensor to raw image is linear, bit depth in the processing pipeline clips effective dynamic range regardless how good the sensor is.

Actually Shashin was correct. You can have a 16-bit image with only 1 stop of DR, or an 8 bit image with 16 stops of DR. The DR of the sensor is independent of the number of bits used.

 

[fotografz]

"One oft-used strategy is to pre-announce a flagship, wait for all the big-$$ orders to be made, and only announce the little-sister product after that..."

so if this is the flagship what will the little sister product be? :watch:

Mirrorless with EVF?

At some point it seems that Canon will have to step-up to emerging technologies ... no matter what some of may feel about it, it is coming ... maybe faster than we may think.

-Marc

 

[jagsiva]

Could it be possible that Canon is making room for a new camera line focused in IQ - larger sensor,higher MP, 16bit processing etc., so now you end up with a top dog 35mm SLR, and a IQ king at the lower end of the MF market, aka Pentax 645 or S2...

 

[wentbackward]

Despite more favourable colours and lens choices from Canon, I still bought into Nikon for three reasons. CLR Flash system, High ISO'ability and that absolutely incredible 3D AF. At the time I thought 12MP was already sufficient and full-frame, cleaner files was more important. Canon already have their flash system and have addressed the remaining two items. They're clearly targeting D3/D700 owners (trying to win them back). I guess it's choice to upgrade to 18Mpix and presumably some tricks in their new AF. After what, 15 years of development (?) my feeling is (like CPU clock speeds) the market has plateaued, Nikon realised this earlier. Canon continued the MP war, whilst Nikon looked at their system.

 

[fotografz]

Could it be possible that Canon is making room for a new camera line focused in IQ - larger sensor,higher MP, 16bit processing etc., so now you end up with a top dog 35mm SLR, and a IQ king at the lower end of the MF market, aka Pentax 645 or S2...

As mentioned earlier, there probably isn't a big enough market for that kind of Canon camera ... especially considering who is already there competing for market share in a niche area of photography.

I think Leica pulled it off so far based on the strength of their lens making prowess, but like others have said, the Canon lens line-up would have to be revamped (especially if the sensor is larger than 35mm FF). Pentax could do it because it already had a user base for 645 cameras.

I think what they have done with this camera is to be commended ... a real 35mm digital camera that does what 35s should do.

-Marc

 

[doug]

I think what they have done with this camera is to be commended ... a real 35mm digital camera that does what 35s should do.

Pretty much my thoughts too. OTOH several wildlife photographers have pointed out that there are no AF points that work at f/8 so an f/4 lens with 2x TC is manual focus.

 

[BobDavid]

My hunch is that Canon will introduce an entirely new FF line within the next year. The new camera will be geared towards still photography. I think the pixel count will be around 60 MP.

 

[Thierry]

Absolutely.

Thierry

Actually Shashin was correct. You can have a 16-bit image with only 1 stop of DR, or an 8 bit image with 16 stops of DR. The DR of the sensor is independent of the number of bits used.

 

[Graham Mitchell]

My hunch is that Canon will introduce an entirely new FF line within the next year. The new camera will be geared towards still photography. I think the pixel count will be around 60 MP.

Which lenses would you use on such a beast? Canon won't produce a low-volume, high quality, expensive line of lenses just for their top end camera. That's not how they operate.

In fact I'm not even sure you could use 60MP when you take diffraction into account. What's the point?

 

[pophoto]

Which lenses would you use on such a beast? Canon won't produce a low-volume, high quality, expensive line of lenses just for their top end camera. That's not how they operate.

It makes a lot of sense, although Canon did show off a 50MP sensor in one of their expos in recent years, however, showing their know-how doesn't always materialize into production for what you suggest. Although it is very interesting, DXO mark suggests their L-primes also have better resolution than Nikon or Zeiss equivalents.

 

[ptomsu]

What I like about this camera is that it's not trying to compete with the medium format cameras. It's doing what they can't do, and doing it very well, e.g. 61 point AF versus 1 point, very high ISO, very fast frame rate, and of course video. Basically it is MORE useful now to supplement medium format cameras, instead of trying to be everything to everyone and not being the king of anything.

+1, very true!

 

[Graham Mitchell]

It makes a lot of sense, although Canon did show off a 50MP sensor in one of their expos in recent years....

The sensor isn't the issue. A 60MP sensor in a full frame 35mm camera would be usable up to about f5.6 before it is diffraction limited. And most lenses can't resolve the necessary 130 line pairs per mm anyway. Not even close. So tell me again why this makes sense.