Canon preparing a 75mp full frame body?

It is a bit silly on the phone front IMO. Squishing so much onto so little.

That article though, is just mostly guessing - no proof or actual fact that I can see.
 
Maybe they are increasing the sensor size to double-FF? Or they are planning to use one of these two new sensors types we saw reported in the last weeks? Or are they planning to extrapolate or use another trick?

That said, it is not such a big problem to squeeze 70 Mp on an FF sensor - the question is, what will the image quality be. For example, how much do you have to sacrifice on the DR, ISO / Noise side. And how big will the pixels be - will diffraction kick in at f1.4 ? :)
 
Last edited:
Having seen the difference when I moved to medium format digital I'd rather they produced a camera with a moderate increase in MP, say 35-40 and a much bigger medium format sized sensor.

That would of course cause issues with legacy lenses not having the sufficient image circle to be usable but some do (the TS-E range for example, see the Hartblei HCam and Alpa FPS) and it wouldn't be beyond Canon's capacity to create an automatic reduction in resolution to suit the lens mounted (eg masked to the image circle available).
 
It seems to be that as soon as MP is mentioned, people get angry...

I think it would be a great option to have. If IQ is compromised to a 12.5 EV DR and ISO only useable to 1600...doesn't really matter...

If it is true, it will be aimed at studio folk to compete with medium and large format anyway.
 
Phil Young said:
It seems to be that as soon as MP is mentioned, people get angry...

I think it would be a great option to have. If IQ is compromised to a 12.5 EV DR and ISO only useable to 1600...doesn't really matter...

If it is true, it will be aimed at studio folk to compete with medium and large format anyway.
Click to expand...

If it was the right price, and performed well at reasonable ISO levels, and gave extreme detail you'd expect, of course I'd love one! I never write off buying any make or model, even a Canon :D
 
I think this is easily possible, but in marketing terms Canon doesn't have to go that high right away - 50-ish mp would be a big step forward.

But 75mp on FF is exactly the same pixel density as a Nikon V1, but with 10x the image area. I use a V1 for DSLR lens testing, via a custom adapter, so I know for sure that the very best lenses will be able to make use of it (just!). If you blow them up to the size of a house, and realising that kind of resolution in normal shooting will be extremely difficult.
 
pmac said:
What!!!
I though most canon owners thought the D800 MP was over kill and 22MP was more than enough :eek:
Click to expand...

Haha It is!

My guess is that Canon has an eye on the high-end pro/studio market, where Hasselblads still hold sway. If the lenses are good enough, then that's feasible.

75mp is completely useless for sport/action though. Nothing but a bottleneck in the processing chain.
 
pmac said:
What!!!
I though most canon owners thought the D800 MP was over kill and 22MP was more than enough :eek:
Click to expand...

At the end of the day, we all need to respect that whether it's our pool or not, there is a market for high MP.

Is 22mp enough for uncle bob? Yes.

Is 22mp enough for billboards? Not so much.

So for anyone to say that xxx isn't needed is only referring to their own needs...and there are so many websites and reviewers doing that.

Bottom line is that if canon can make money from an idea that doesn't infringe upon it's existing money making, they should capitalize on it.
 
Phil Young said:
At the end of the day, we all need to respect that whether it's our pool or not, there is a market for high MP.

Is 22mp enough for uncle bob? Yes.

Is 22mp enough for billboards? Not so much.

So for anyone to say that xxx isn't needed is only referring to their own needs...and there are so many websites and reviewers doing that.

Bottom line is that if canon can make money from an idea that doesn't infringe upon it's existing money making, they should capitalize on it.
Click to expand...

That was meant to be tongue in cheek...

Just saying all the Canon users will be defending this if its true, after all the bashing they gave nikon users over the D800's high MP count.
Im sure it will go the same way with nikon users bashing canon.

But your right, if theres a need or they think they can make money they will make it, for the average 99% of photographers I think it will be over kill.
Similarly like the d800 is but with it ,how ever people argue it was the d700 upgrade.
This I'm not sure how it fits in canons line up did they have a high MP range before?

Are we not getting held back by screeen resolution at this point?
 
pmac said:
That was meant to be tongue in cheek...

Just saying all the Canon users will be defending this if its true, after all the bashing they gave nikon users over the D800's high MP count.
Im sure it will go the same way with nikon users bashing canon.

But your right, if theres a need or they think they can make money they will make it, for the average 99% of photographers I think it will be over kill.
Similarly like the d800 is but with it ,how ever people argue it was the d700 upgrade.
This I'm not sure how it fits in canons line up did they have a high MP range before?

Are we not getting held back by screeen resolution at this point?
Click to expand...

Erm, yes. Have been for a very long time. Work out how many dots on the average VDU and it will mostly be around 2m max.

High perceived sharpness is much more about image contrast than sheer resolution - basically it's a lens thing.
 
pmac said:
That was meant to be tongue in cheek...

Just saying all the Canon users will be defending this if its true, after all the bashing they gave nikon users over the D800's high MP count.
Im sure it will go the same way with nikon users bashing canon.

But your right, if theres a need or they think they can make money they will make it, for the average 99% of photographers I think it will be over kill.
Similarly like the d800 is but with it ,how ever people argue it was the d700 upgrade.
This I'm not sure how it fits in canons line up did they have a high MP range before?

Are we not getting held back by screeen resolution at this point?
Click to expand...

the high resolution camera could be the new 1ds4

if the 1dx is the merging of the 1d and 1ds line then the 75mp sensor could be re-opening the 1ds line (for specific purposes- i.e. studio)

i'd get one- and keep my 1d3 10mp for everything else, shooting a wedding with 75mp files is just ridiculous- no one would do it, canon knows this and they'd focus on low iso IQ rather than high iso/frame rates
 
Last edited:
pmac said:
Are we not getting held back by screeen resolution at this point?
Click to expand...

Held up in what way? Surely a screen display isn't the final output for most people. If it is, a 1MP camera will be plenty.


Steve.
 
Steve Smith said:
Held up in what way? Surely a screen display isn't the final output for most people. If it is, a 1MP camera will be plenty.


Steve.
Click to expand...



When viewing at full size even the biggest screens won't show the full detail thats been captured, even 4K cant match current MP counts.
So what percentage of photographers actually print there pictures? 50% or less I bet. For the majority it really is over kill.

Even for those that do print it wont be until you go very large you would notice the full potential I bet. Look at the comparisons between the 5dmk3 and d800, even at print most people said the difference was minimal/if any until you went over a certain size
 
HoppyUK said:
My guess is that Canon has an eye on the high-end pro/studio market, where Hasselblads still hold sway. If the lenses are good enough, then that's feasible.
Click to expand...

How big is that market, how many Hasselblads are sold a year and why would Canon be investing in what I assume is a small market?
 
ernesto said:
How big is that market, how many Hasselblads are sold a year and why would Canon be investing in what I assume is a small market?
Click to expand...

As well as that, canon also have the issue of perception to overcome if they go for that market. Clients at that end expect digital mf. Turn up with ff and you won't get the job. How do you overcome that?
 
ernesto said:
How big is that market, how many Hasselblads are sold a year and why would Canon be investing in what I assume is a small market?
Click to expand...

Because Hasselblad's latest accounts, frankly, are dire.

If the rumours are true I would have thought Canon see an opportunity to head into that market and grab a large share of it. It would put them in direct competition with Phase One / Mamiya / Leaf who are tiny compared to Canon.
 
wouldn't it be very expensive? Due to the complexity and area?. Also mp counts tend to creep up
 
ernesto said:
How big is that market, how many Hasselblads are sold a year and why would Canon be investing in what I assume is a small market?
Click to expand...

That market is tiny, and not growing, so I don't really understand why Canon might go there either TBH. On the other hand, that hasn't stopped Canon pitching into the professional movie sector that can't be much bigger in volume sales terms.

Perhaps as a marketing 'halo' product, and sold at very high price like £10k-plus, it might make sense.
 
why not just make a reasonable amount of MP but work on the noise handling
frankly I've been disappointed with the noise on my 7D, even at <1600ISO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top