How long till Canon's D800e (or better in terms of color depth)?

<p>Hi,<br /> What's your informed guess, opinion or analyses of the prospects? How much longer?<br /> Why do I ask? For portraits (mainly studio), till now I used a HD4 (which replaced 4x5 for me) and also a 5d2. I have to replace the Hassy in the very near future, and good skin tones, subtle color nuances are essential. I can't afford to replace the Hassy with another MFDB + camera that, IMO, would be better than a D800e in terms of color depth. Something better would be at least a p45+ or even p65+ and equivalents, which, even refurbished, is too expensive. DR, High ISO, fast AF, frame rate are not my concern. In terms of resolution everything from 22-33 Mp is the minimum at the moment. I thought of getting a used fat pixel DB for a 503cw (with the 150 CFi Sonnar!) or a RZ, but, color depth would not be better than with the D800. Skin tones would be easier, for sure. With the 5d2 I already have the 2 or 3 lenses and accessories I need, but the 5d3's abilities in matters of skin tones are unfortunately not better than the 5d2's. I tried to postpone the decision to get a D800 and three lenses for over a year. I'm about to switch to Nikon, and I have everything in my basket ready for checkout ;-) Before I do so, I wanted to inquire about your opinion on the subject, whether you think that Canon will come out with a d800e equivalent in regards to color depth.</p>

<p>Well it was three years between the Canon 5DII and the Canon 5DIII. I'm sure there are lots of rumor-mongers, but I'm also sure that Canon isn't going to rush a replacement to market when they are still amortizing the cost of the 5DIII, which has got pretty good reaction and sales since it came out early in 2012. So my guess in the middle of 2013? Its years away.</p>

<p>If you need certain features now, waiting for a new camera to come to the market, which at this point in time has not even been announced yet, wouldn't seem to do you much good. Just saying.</p>

<p>As others say, speculation is futile.<br>

<br />I went to dxomark.com to check what you say about colour depth, and sure enough the Phase 1 IQ180 scores highest with 26.5 bits. The best 35mm is the Nikon D800e with 25.6 bits, followed by several other Nikon models. Canon doesn't appear in the list until the 5D3 and 1Ds3, which each have 24 bits. The 1DX tests as having slightly less colour depth (23.8 bits).</p>

<p>It does appear that if sensor quality is the most important thing, and you can't afford medium format, the best option at the moment is Nikon.</p>

<p>So, the perceived IQ of the 800e does in your book match (or is better than) the perceived quality from the Hassy, correct? And how all this relates to real life, again, in your book? Have you ran apples-to-apples tests of the Hassy, the Nikon and, say, 1Ds3 (which I believe betters the IQ obtainable from the 5D3.)</p>

<p>Yes Michael, real world against my H4D-40. Sure skin tones are a no hassle with the hassy.</p>

<p>Unfortunately dxomark.com hasn't rated the 'Merrill' sensors from Sigma but their colour depth is said to be very good. The DP3 with its 50mm lens can be picked up fairly cheaply; it might be worth a try? If you like the sensor you could consider buying the much more expensive SD1 SLR and some lenses.</p>

<p>Canon will introduce a big megapixel DLSR within a month after your switch to the dark side. So first of all it's all in your own hands and do the rest of us a favor by switching asap so we don't have to wait any longer :-)<br>

Seriously, the 70D sensor seems to be something special and there are plenty of rumours about big megapixel bodies being tested. Clearly Canon are working on sensor technology but nobody knows how these sensors will perform in real life.<br>

In the meantime: how about alternatives, Pentax 645D, Leica, etc?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I have to replace the Hassy in the very near future</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Why? Surely it would make sense to keep using it.</p>

<p>Jamie, It has nothing to do with the H4D-40 in itself, it would indeed make sense to keep it, but I can't (the arrangements that made it possible for me for all this time, are about to change).<br>

<br />Jos, I'm convinced that that's exactly whats going to happen. Canon will announce the color depth wonder camera as soon as I get a D800e. Even in this forum, a year ago, people were already certain that Canon is about to announce s a big Mp camera immanently. Canon rumors continually brings up the subject... <br>

<br />Ed, thanks for reminding me of the Merrill.<br>

<br />As I said, I also seriously consider a fat pixel, or even 33Mp DB on a 503cw with 150 Sonnar (or on a RZ), but from what I read and hear, the resulting color rendition is said not to be superior to a D800e, though I could not test this for myself. </p>

<p>No one who knows is talking, so most of the guessing fails the "informed" test, I'm afraid. If you <em>need </em>a higher MP full frame DSLR right now, your only option is the Nikon D800 and D800e. These are reportedly fine cameras in many ways - though not perfect, as you have perhaps discovered by following Nikon discussions.</p>

<p>When will Canon introduce a high MP full frame DSLR? I have no inside information whatsoever. I watch this stuff and try to guess sometimes. To start with the obvious, Canon will undoubtedly introduce cameras with higher MP sensors - both because that is the way the technology continues to evolve and because they are unlikely to allow Nikon to continue to trump them in that regard. The rumor mill, and the ways that the rumors themselves might be second-guessed, seems to suggest that such a camera will not come out this year, but that it <em>might </em>be <em>announced</em> before the year ends. Continuing along that line of thought, it seems that 2014 is a reasonable time frame to image that we might see something "in the flesh," and perhaps by the end of the first half of the year.</p>

<p>In round numbers... that is a year from now.</p>

<p>As to your concern - and we all understand! - that if you do a "switch" to Nikon you will somehow cause Canon to announce/introduce their newer and better thing a week or two later... that is possible. As always, it comes down to the question of how badly you need to make a move now, versus how much you can continue to do with the equipment you currently use. </p>

<p>There are a few other outlier possibilities to consider. Hasselblad and Pentax and others do produce what I like to call "mini MF" cameras and backs. These have sensors will almost twice the surface area of a full frame sensor and can have higher MP counts as well. The cost of these cameras and backs is less that of the "real" MF digital backs in 645 size, but the image quality potential is significantly higher than that of full frame. In some cases (e.g. - Pentax) the cost is barely more than getting the current high end Canon DSLRs.</p>

<p>Another option to consider would be to lease/rent a full MF digital system for the interim period as you wait for things to play out a bit in the full frame DLSR space...</p>

<p>Dan</p>

<p>Yes, "mini MF", as you call it. Or, why not get a used 1.1 back for H2? 22-33MP resolution would be sufficient for my usage, and, while not getting the same color depth (according to DxO, as was mentioned earlier), I could get portraits with that "MF look" because of the DoF. I could use the Hasselblad 110 f2, or with a back with a Mamiya fitting the Mamiya 80 1.9, or the Sonnar 150... But is it worth while? How does it compare to the latest generations of FF DSLRs, the D800e? Note that, I would (have to) keep the Canon equipment. To my knowledge, you can't rent those old DBs here in Vienna (Austria, where I moved to recently). I also have to add, that my clients actually do like to see brands like Hasselblad in the studio. This "Pro" equipment, along with the studio itself of-course, really differentiates me from their friends with their D800es.<br /> So, while waiting for a Canon D800e with extraordinary color depth (and high DR ;-), I could get one of the cheapest used DBs and mate it to one of the IMO good MF portrait lenses? and skip the "Switch to the dark side".<br /> <br />If I would do landscapes or architectures, the DoF, the "MF lens look" would not come into play, and I would allready have ordered a D800e, I guess.</p>

<p>Is the 'MF look' of shallow depth of field really that significant? Surely a 50mm f/2 lens on a 35mm body would come close enough, or if really razor thin DoF is wanted an 85/1.2.</p>

<p>I ask this in some ignorance, not having shot medium format, but I know that most lenses in that format have a maximum aperture of f/2.8 or narrower. Wouldn't the larger max aperture of the 35mm format lenses get you an equally shallow depth of field if you wanted it? (Of course there are other advantages to medium format, but you specifically mentioned DoF as the main factor in the 'MF look'.)</p>

<p>On a larger sensor the apertures that yield shallow depth of field typically produce better definition (detail) at the same final print size than smaller format camera and lens shot at a correspondingly larger aperture to meet that shallow depth of field.</p>

I own a 5DIII and a D800E. I don't see much difference in the quality of the output in terms of color, but if forced to

choose, I would give a slight nod to the Canon for perceived naturalness.

 

Generally, I prefer the Canon for shooting people. I like the way that it renders skin tones, and the AF is superior.

 

The Nikon wins for resolution (although not always by as much as one would expect - lens quality is frequently a limiting

factor with this camera) and dynamic range.

 

I don't expect a hi res Canon soon. They are going to need to invest a lot of R&D into a product like that, and that takes

time.