I know, seeing the rumours

Wondering if an old Canon Shooter's Dreams can come true. New mirroless full frame 70-85 megapixel pro body.

 

LINK LINK

But as all mirroless, it comes with new lens mount:(

The R series can use EF lenses with an adapter.

 

Not what I was hoping for. I don't need 70 MP. What I am waiting for is for Canon to sort out the ergonomics and controls on the R series, which so far seem (to me, it's all a matter of taste) inferior to the those of the 5D series.

 

Yesterday, out of curiosity, I looked up the weights of the 5D IV and the R. I was surprised by how small the difference is: 140 g. Another disappointment for me, as lower weight was one attraction of mirrorless.

I can't see the point of 70-85 MP. If I was a commercial photographer specializing in extra large prints, perhaps, but this is a complete red herring for 99% of us I suspect (almost as pointless as fussing about dynamic range). However, I'm sure it will work those who like to chase "ultimate resolution" into a frenzy of excitement.

I can't see the point of 70-85 MP

"A number, divided by 4, due to low light, leaving us with 17-21MP to show off. Not bad and likely to look significantly better than the result of a camera with that native resolution, shot in the same darkness. OK, our computers will have to sweat a bit, handling that data junk.

Yes, pessimistic figures & approach but while I've been saying "16-24MP seem enough for me" for a while, I also found out shooting mine at max ISO doesn't look that good and publishable untill I print significantly smaller than possible and expose myself to claims about cellphones having more than those 4-6MP...

lower weight was one attraction of mirrorless

Unlikely to become true, until Canon do a 180° turn in lens development. Where is the fantastic plastic 90/4 on their road map?

What about the promised IBIS body, to utilize the freaking fast primes they are announcing & making right now?

Cameras will have to get judged with their price tags in the light of their competition. But insane resolution bodies are a good way to stay alive, as a company. There is no better incentive to buy later greater sharper lenses then them. Keep those customers wanting more!

Jochen,

 

What size do you print?

 

There are people who genuinely specialize in small bird photography where extensive cropping is necessary, but this (despite what chat forums suggest) is not all that common, but maybe it is more than the 1% I was suggesting (plus the people who really must have larger prints) makes for maybe 15% of all photographers. Just because it is not necessary will not mean it will not happen as it surely will, with ever better larger and more expensive lenses, although camera shake, precise focus, and depth of field issues will prevent much of this theoretical improvement from actually making much of a difference in real world usage, unless the photographer is taking excessive care. We have reached a point where most of us have plenty of resolution for our use (and I speak as someone long in the game).

 

As to photographing in ultimate darkness: I suspect there will be many arguments as to whether fewer larger pixels will be superior to more, smaller ones. I think that chasing the last few % improvement here will not be realized in image sizes that non-partisan observers can really notice the difference.

It has always been a MP race in the marketing world.

 

 

Having said that.

By raising the MP, they are saying you don't have to buy the VERY expensive MF cameras and have to learn to use another system.

You can buy the upper end of what you already know how to use, and probably already have the pro lenses for.

 

BTW it is scarry how the resolution and IQ on the high end stuff looks.

I was at a Hasselblad demo many years back, and they projected "I think" a half length model shot.

Then zoomed into the face. You could see the contacts in her eye, and read the printing on the contact lens.

 

So IF you NEED that kind of resolution for your business . . .

Regardless of what people actually and truly NEED,

 

The history of everything is full of wretched excess.

 

It's like the real reason people buy f/1.2 lenses: bragging rights. I know, I bought one.;)

 

bokeh, my ass....:confused:

If Canon can deliver a high MP camera with increased dynamic range, why not? Landscape, portraits, wildlife, and others can always make use of more resolution. You don't have to buy it, after all.

If Canon can deliver a high MP camera with increased dynamic range, why not?

 

For any given sensor technology, higher density=smaller sensels=>lower dynamic range.

 

Right now, Canon is behind in the DR competition, and it has been for quite some time, perhaps because Nikon and Sony use back-side illuminated sensors. For my uses, I would rather see a new Canon in the 30 MPX range with DR improvements compared with the current cameras.

 

I don't print billboards; I usually max out at 17 x 22 (roughly A2). At that size, 80 MPX is a waste. Greater DR would be a help.

There are some of us who would like the resolution and perhaps print shots for billboards and view shots on large UHD monitors. I just spent 40 days photographing from California Southern coast to above Santa Barbara, LA to YosemtiI, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, Yellowstone, Grand Tetons, Wyoming, Jackson to Black Hills South Dakota, Minnesota, Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, New York and PA. I want all the resolution I can get. I would have loved one for Alaska and Danali, Maine and Acadia, New York and Manhattan and Time Square, landscapes, cityscapes, seascapes. Don't need the resolution for portraits so much. I know the file sizes are huge and storage space issues,. But we will get there. Lol. I was talking at a local shop about the new high res cameras coming out from Sony and Nikon, and maybe Canon and there was a concern raised by a salesman , how many current Canon lenses that will resolve to 70 or 80 mega pixels. I don't know. But I would think Canon would introduce some if current lenses were not up to snuff. Would some third part glass be up to the task, Sigma 85 art Art, Ziess? Any thoughts.