Canon Crop Sensor Future

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by marvin, Feb 17, 2010.

  1. Who is willing to guess what the next step in the develpment of the Canon crop sensor camera will be?
     
  2. Improved low ISO performance and maybe ISO 50 or even 25.
     
  3. Depends on Nikon's D300s successor...
     
  4. More MP. :-(
    Happy shooting,
    Yakim.
     
  5. I'd love to see it in a body like the G11!
     
  6. Higher and/or lower ISO..
    I don't think the next push will be MP again.. but who knows
    18MP on my 7D is enough for some serious cropping if needed.
     
  7. What I'd like and what we'll see are probably entirely different.
    I'd like to see Canon increase dynamic range. Improving noise can't hurt. I have no desire for more MP.
    Actually there are a number of lenses I'd like to see before a new sensor.
     
  8. Better video autofocus has got to be on its way.
    Much faster (100-1000 fps) video frame rates for cool slow motion effects.
    Some control of RAW output that lets you choose the tradeoff point between resolution and noise. With gapless sensor technology, I don't see why not. I am glad to get more megapixels for situations with adequate lighting. But, for low-light situations, I'd like the camera to give me the option to reduce resolution (by combining pixels and applying noise reduction to them) and make that available as a full, 14-bit RAW-like image, not a compressed JPEG. I think that SRAW is a step in this direction, but I don't believe that you get any noise reduction by using it.
     
  9. I really cannot guess how much more canon would go. Increasing megapixels? I'm no big fan of video in camera. I wish canon would go back to basics.
     
  10. I thought they may actually reduce the number of MPs on the 7D like they did from the G10 to G11. 18MP is grand and all, but its a lot of MP on a small sensor. It may handle noise okay and have the ability to print large, but it seems like Canon was going for an all out sports camera to shoot landscapes. Imagine the noise control if they used the new technology (dual Digic IV's) on a 10MP sensor; and the burst limits would be sky high. Now you're talking about a real all out sports camera. I think everyone knows by now that MPs aren't everything. If you want to print large, get a 5D. Have you noticed how many posts there have been lately regarding the 7D vs. 5D MkII? These cameras should never be in the same sentence, but since Canon packed 18MP onto an APS-C sensor they are. They should have given up pixels so the 7D could really shine for what its meant to do and leave the 5D MKII for the landscapes and large prints.
     
  11. I think everyone knows by now that MPs aren't everything.​
    You mean, everyone but Canon marketing managers, right? :-(
    Happy shooting,
    Yakim.
     
  12. There seems to be a trend among the manufacturers the maintain / reduce the pixel count and focus on noise at higher level of ISO's
    Example - the G10 vs G11 - they actually reduced the pixels to achieve better noise levels.
    Personally I think this makes a lot of sense. Sure, you can stuff 30MP into a cropped sensor, but if it's it so noisy above 1600 that it's not usable, what's the point?
    Tudor ApMadoc
     
  13. exactly, look at Nikon, most of their cameras top out at 12MP, and they haven't lost any business.
     
  14. There have been a bunch of back side illuminated sensor P&S cameras announced for PMA. I have read that it is not as much of a benefit for larger APS-C sized sensors but since it still offers some benefits that will probably be the next thing.
    I don't care for video but the camera companies are spending a lot of R&D on it. The CEO of RED is always talking about how their sensor readout is the fastest which prevents "jello vision" artifacts. I can imagine that the next pro DSLR will have removable finders like we had in the film days. You can use the optical reflex finder or lock up the mirror, swap out the finder with an EVF for video.
     
  15. I sure am glad that you guys who oppose resolution improvements aren't in charge of product management at Canon!
    I, for one, am glad that they continually push the envelope because I find that just on occasion I am shooting in reasonable lighting and I don't need to shoot at ISO 12,800. In those conditions (which are of course the most common) I get hi-res without noise. Great.
    At the risk of pointing out the obvious, resolution is important not just for printing big but for cropping. With a hi-rez sensor you can shoot landscape and crop to portrait. That's fantastic! I am always grateful when I can do creative cropping in post processing and not worry about significant image degradation. (Spare me the anachronistic anti-cropping purism of HCB et al.: it was more a necessity than a virtue because 35mm film of the day didn't enlarge/crop very well.)
    What would be even better would be for the camera to optionally apply noise reduction to SRAW images so that you could shoot at ISO 12,800 with nice (lower-res) results if you wanted to.
    But please, don't take away my megapixels! (Apologies to Paul Simon.)
     
  16. I am not opposed to cropping, a lot of times it is essential to get perfect composition, but an APS-C sensor is already a pretty hefty crop from 35mm and gives you significantly more reach, how much more do you really need to crop. The sensor is small enough, I generally try not to make it any smaller.
     
  17. I will never understand the "fewer megapixels" meme when it comes to the 7D.
    Within a certain range, pixel size is not the primary factor in image noise. Total sensor size is. You can get to a point where pixels are so small that noise escalates and degrades the image, which we've seen in some P&S models. But we're clearly not there in the 7D.
    What does this mean? It means that a 10 MP 7D would have roughly the same noise as the 18 MP 7D because they would both be APS-C with the same basic sensor technology. The 10 MP version would look cleaner and sharper while pixel peeping (Photoshop 100%), but that's only because people forget to equalize magnification when pixel peeping. Equalize magnification and the 10 MP image will not look better, it will look worse because it will have similar noise but less detail to work with.
    In print the differences would be small, but would favor the 7D, which would have roughly the same amount of noise but more fine detail.
    We went through this with the 50D. To this day there are people who compare 40D and 50D images at 100% in Photoshop then cry online that the 50D is too noisy. But when you print, or resize for web display, the 50D is not magnified as much and it looks at least as clean, if not cleaner. The 7D goes further by better controlling noise so it doesn't look bad even at 100%, though it's silly to analyze images that way.
    You could argue that larger pixels would increase dynamic range, which is driven primarily by pixel size and not total sensor size. But the 7D has greater DR than the 5D, and the 5D mkII only beats the 7D by about a stop. I don't believe a 10 MP sensor would have significantly better DR.
    I also do not get comments that Canon should have left printing large or landscapes to the 5D II. How would this have improved the 7D as a sports camera? Dropping to 10 MP does not mean the frame rate would be any higher. It's already within 2 fps of the 1D series, and is clearly more capable in terms of AF, speed, and responsiveness than the majority of "sports" SLRs ever used to photograph major sporting events. Canon would not have changed the mirror mechanism to push fps past the 1D series just because of smaller images. It would still be an 8 fps camera.
    So what's the point of complaining about an improvement in resolution? Why should Canon have hobbled the 7D by limiting it to 10 MP? To increase 5D mkII sales? Why should I have to have two bodies, one for sports and one for landscapes, along with duplicate lenses for some FoV ranges to cover both APS and full frame? I like the 7D the way it is. It's just about perfect in terms of balancing image quality, features, and performance. It literally quenched any thirst I had for 5D or 1D series bodies.
    Canon made the right decision in flexing their sensor design and manufacturing muscle and pushing to 18 MP.
    As to the future: that depends on what the competition does. If Nikon / Sony / Pentax push their APS bodies to 18 MP, Canon will likely push past 20 MP. If not, there may be a break, a generation or two, where resolution stays at 18 MP but Canon focuses on other improvements, DIGIC V and wider DR.
     
  18. I expect more out from the video side of canon. Video seems to be driving sales right now. Every person that I know that does video for TV is grabbing up canon bodies like crazy. Everyone from the lowely film student to a lot of commercial directors. The last commercial that I watched being shot (Gregg Biffle census commercial) had a lot of shots being done with 5dMkIIs and a 7D. I talked with the director and he was waiting to get his 3 1DMK4s. I think that this so called hybrid market is the future and although I don't shoot video it's an important factor to many people out there.
    If you look at many of the kids growing up today they and several of the kids I deal with in film school don't even bat an eye at video from DSLRs and have come to expect it.
    This is just speculation on my part but I honestly think canon is pushing the video side right now with the slight detriment to the photo side. Once the pendulum swings back the other way canon will once again be the juggernaut of both the photo and video markets.
    I also foresee Sony getting better glass and putting a serious hurting on Nikon since they are already putting out the same sensors for significantly less money.
     
  19. Daniel,
    you are correct, the 5D would not improve the 7D as a sports camera in any way, but the 7D is designed to be a sports camera, but with a sensor for landscapes. I didn't say less MP would increase the burst rate, I said it would increase the limit, meaning the buffer could handle more files, especially useful for RAW shooters. Also, the sensor size is the primary factor in noise BECAUSE it allows for larger pixels. Pixel size does affect noise, it just seems that larger sensors handle noise better because those pixels are larger than on smaller sensors. I guess we could go on all day on here, and everyone has their opinion, which is why we're here anyways, and I respect that. I'm just saying that if you really want to take full advantage of ridiculous amounts of MPs, get a 5D MkII, no contest. If you want an APS-C camera that is completely geared for sports, the 7D is amazing, but I personally think it could cater to the specific needs of sports photogs just a little better with less MP. (less noise, limitless buffer, and 10MP is still plenty for large prints)
     
  20. The next set will likely have a backlit sensor like the G11 and S90, but bigger. I am still waiting for Canon's answer tot he Nikon 35 1.8 DX. A 28mm f1.4 EFS would be nice.
     
  21. I would like a professional 1.6x camera with the following features added or subtracted:
    Add: Low ISO setting such as 25 to enable me to blur water with only a CPL and not an ND filter
    Add: Capability to autofocus at f/8 allowing me to use my 400mm f/5.6L lens with a 1.4x TC
    Add: Wireless tethering capability without extra attachment
    Add: Wireless trigger capability without adapter
    Add: Vertical shutter release button without needing a battery grip
    Substitute extra "User Settings" for the "Dummy Basic Zones"
    Wireless trigger for off camera flash without built-in flash
    Eliminate print from camera button
    I blow hot and cold regarding video. I would never use it unless I was standing in the midst of an earthquake or some other newsworthy event and wanted to earn a few bucks with the video.
    IMO, these changes would result in a professional 1.6x camera. Let the xxxD and xxD models have the basic zones, etc. And, NO I DON'T WANT A 1dXX CAMERA. They are just too big and too heavy for my style of shooting with two cameras.
     
  22. My question is can they still increase megapixels above 18 for a crop sensor? I think they are getting to the limit in terms of how many mp they can cram into an APS sized sensor, while keeping noise down. I suspect the new Rebel t2i will be the max they go. So in that respect, does APS-C sensors have a future after what has been released in the 7D and T2i? All they can do now is focus on dynamic range improvements.
     
  23. Well I also hope for less MP, thats why I no longer own a 1.6x, and wont until Canon improves low iso noise, you should be able to get a perfectly clean image at base iso and a nicely clean image at 1600, I dont need 25-100k iso, I also would like to see about 12mp on a killer sensor rather than 18mp on a good sensor
    Ross
     
  24. Maybe a smaller body, smaller than the Rebel, ala Olympus E-450 so instead of the G10 we can have APS-C body not that much bigger than a G10.
     
  25. I wish they would add the technolgy Sony had with there F505V. The one that has night vision and almost got recalled because you could see through peoples clothes when they had on white shirts. Sony declared this a feature and not a bug :). I think night vision video would be incredible espeacially if they could get rid of that green tint.
     
  26. The futures so bright I gotta wear shades
    The 7D is a serious 1.6 crop camera. Excellent image quality and focus.
    plenty of affordable 1.6 crop cameras for new owners (digital rebels)
    1.6 crop is thriving
     
  27. 3D. Don't know how they will do it, but lots of 3D (capable) TVs were out at CES this year. Maybe it's something you neither want nor need, but advertising and marketing is going to eventually feel like you're missing out of you don't have it.
    More pixels. You may neither want it nor need it, but that doesn't mean you won't buy it.
    More wireless capability. Built in Wi-Fi. Maybe direct phone type connection so you can transfer your images to your home PC whenever you are in range of a cell tower.
    Built in GPS. Trivial technology so they must be saving this one for when they run out of other stuff.
    Active AF tracking in video modes. It has to come. Camcorders have it. DSLRs will too.
    Tilt, swivel and swing out LCD screen. Maybe even a detachable screen. Easy to do, so it's another one they are saving to part you from your money at some future date.
    There's really no end to the crap they can stuff into a camera that you don't need but that it's possible to convince you that you want.
    Of course they can lower noise, increase ISO, expand dynamic range etc. , but those things don't really sell cameras to the public as well as extra bells and whistles do.
    Personally I want to see a B&W DSLR, maybe with a removal IR blocking filter, but that wouldn't sell cameras either.
     
  28. I would guess within five years, perhaps less, we'll see so-called prosumer cameras, such as the 7D, being able to shoot 4K video. This will attract more film and video shooters as commercial digital cinema moves to 4K and even 8K resolution.
     
  29. At some point, probably in the next couple of years...Canon and Nikon will realize that the market is out there for a $1000 Full frame sensor body. At that point the APS sensor will be a moot point. They have already squeezed more megapixels into that APS sensor than it can handle. With the economy down, people are beginning to see that there is just not enough improvement between the new 50D and the older 40D, or even the 30D. So they are waiting and lusting after the full frame sensors which are out of the prosumers price range for now. Very soon Canon will learn how to make an affordable full frame body and then people will line up.
     
  30. I agree with Nirza David's last comment regarding Canon going back to basics. As Bob says, manufacturers are hell-bent on stuffing cameras full of unecessary crap in order to create a need and to push up sales.
    What I would really like is a full-frame fully manual camera (the size of the 5D) with split prism focusing screen (or one with 19+ cross sensor AF points) with black and white capability and the option to use bulb mode without the need for battery power.
    As others have said, I suspect we have reached the limit of the amount of pixels that can be crammed in on any given sensor and I only wish Canon improved on the basics rather than inventing new gimmicks. Mind you, if it made the tea whilst out on location, I wouldn't mind...
    Just my tuppence worth...
     
  31. Russ, your point is exactly why I wont buy any lenses intended for APS-C sensors only. I want to go full frame but I simply cannot afford to. I could do with an ultra wide lens like the 10-22mm but instead I will go for the 17-40 (similar price) and put up without the wider end until they do bring out a full frame cam which doesnt cost the price of second hand car.
     
  32. I didn't say less MP would increase the burst rate, I said it would increase the limit, meaning the buffer could handle more files, especially useful for RAW shooters.
    The JPEG buffer is already so deep, and card write times so fast, that it's effectively endless.
    In RAW the 7D can shoot 15 frames (roughly 2 seconds). In MRAW, which is 10 MP, the buffer is 24 frames (roughly 3 seconds). If the 7D sensor were 10 MP you would have what you have now in MRAW, a 3 second buffer at 8 fps. I'm rather happy I can choose MRAW or RAW, because generally speaking the 18 MP means more to me than the extra second.
    Pixel size does affect noise,
    What I'm trying to get across is that smaller pixels are not enlarged as much. If a smaller pixel has 2x the noise but is only enlarged 0.5x as much to achieve the same print/screen size, then the noise is essentially equal for the image. A 10 MP 7D would not have any noise advantage over the 18 MP one. In print the impression of noise would be the same, but the 18 MP version would have more fine detail.
    You only get away from this at the extremes. So if Canon made a 3 MP APS sensor with modern technology I might expect a clear noise advantage in print. Or if they shoved 50 MP on the same sensor I might expect worse noise in print. But 10 vs. 18? The noise would be the same unless you're obsessed with studying images at 100% all the time.
    And if you are obsessed with that, reduce your images to 10 MP and view the reductions on screen at 100%.
    I'm just saying that if you really want to take full advantage of ridiculous amounts of MPs, get a 5D MkII, no contest.
    If it was no contest I would have a 5D2. I have a 7D because I can't see any difference between 30" prints from a 7D and a 5D2, and the 7D handles action as well as landscapes.
    A better sports camera? Right now I'm not sure what justifies the $3,200 difference between a 7D and a 1D. What could be better?
     
  33. There are tons of full frame Canon cameras all over ebay and craigslist for less than $100; you just have to put film in them. I hear so many people say they want to go full frame but can't afford it. Get on craigslist and pick up an old Elan for $20, Voila!, now you have a full frame camera and can use your wide angle lenses for their intended purposes. I don't know how we ever made it 10 years ago.
     
  34. I'd like to see two bodies with build quality similar to the current 7D:
    Fewer pixels but much better high ISO IQ and higher speed. With a working AF system, or course. (just grousing; mine didn't have one) And skip the video, swing out LCDs and gimmicks, just give me a body that can focus and shoot at high speeds reliably under adverse conditions. Like that damned game I shot in December with a 35F driving rain that turned to snow.
    Something similar to the current 7D but optimized for situations requiring great detail at low ISOs. Maybe 18MP is enough?
     
  35. I wonder how many decades we are going to hear that APS-C sensors are on the way out and that they can't get any more resolution. The 7D appears to have a lot more resolving power than a 20D (2500 vertical lines for the 7D vs 1850 lines for the 20D according to DPR). The G10 and G1 resolve more than a 20D, for that matter.
    That Canon has weather sealed the 7D and given it a pro AF system seems to suggests that Canon is accepting APS-C as a viable platform for professionals.
    BTW, how long until we get an APS-C electronic viewfinder out of Canon?
     
  36. The JPEG buffer is already so deep, and card write times so fast, that it's effectively endless.
    Right, but who shoots Jpeg? 2 seconds of RAW shooting isn't that long. Sure its 16 shots, but what if you're shooting a 5 second sequence.
    Also, reducing the resolution to 10MP on the 7D will not make a difference b/c it won't change the physical pixel size, it will just use less of the tiny pixels. Like I said before we could go all day, but until we have a real world side by side example, it doesn't really matter. We can recite all the numbers we want, but they're just that, numbers. Maybe less MP would improve noise, maybe it wouldn't, we really can't tell as there is no 10MP dual Digic 4 camera to compare it to. The 40D is 10MP, but doesn't have the same processing power, however, I've used both the 40D and 50D and I do believe the 40D handles noise better at high ISOs. I know this has been argued both ways to no end, but if there was one clear cut answer one way or another there would be no arguement, so maybe both sides are correct. I'm going googling.
     
  37. I couldn't find a side by side high ISO noise example of the 40D vs the 7D, but there were different claims from photographers that the noise of the 7D and 50D were very similar, some favoring the 7D, others favoring the 50D. I think this is a subjective issue so our arguing isn't going to do any good, but for me personally, if a 10 or 15MP camera is claimed to have similar or better noise levels than an 18MP camera with a newer processor, I would have to believe that even a difference of a few MP could have an affect on noise. I'm not saying it certainly makes a difference, but its definitely a possibility in certain situations, otherwise there would be no debates, it would be factual and everyone would accept it.
     
  38. You've already got fine 7D & 5D cameras for serious amateurs and some pros. The next big rage will be smaller no mirror cameras like the EP2 and GF1. Great image quality, quiet and a fine build. Also the EP2's electronic finder is to die for. Cameras like these will be the next big rage.
     
  39. Maybe it's just wishful thinking, but I am with Michael Ferron, a no mirror camera like the the GF1.
    Hopefully, they will include in-body image stabilization. The system should default to in-lens stabilization if available and detected on a give lens mounted to the camera, and then use in-body image stabilization as a backup. They should also provide the ability for the user to over ride in-lens stabilization and switch to in-body stabilization or no stabilization.
     
  40. The JPEG buffer is already so deep, and card write times so fast, that it's effectively endless.
    Right, but who shoots Jpeg?
    In my experience most situations where you want 8 fps don't benefit from RAW. I use JPEG for sports and action.
    2 seconds of RAW shooting isn't that long. Sure its 16 shots, but what if you're shooting a 5 second sequence.
    Then you're out of luck with any body on the market if you insist on smashing the button down for the full 5 seconds and shooting RAW. The new Nikon D3s will do 4.5 seconds. The Canon 1D mkIV will only do 3.
    Also, reducing the resolution to 10MP on the 7D will not make a difference b/c it won't change the physical pixel size, it will just use less of the tiny pixels.
    You said one benefit of a 10 MP 7D would be a deeper RAW buffer. I was pointing out you can have that with the current 7D just by changing to MRAW (15 > 24 frames). I wouldn't expect a 10 MP only 7D to do any better. Canon would not stuff additional RAM in such a machine.
    Like I said before we could go all day, but until we have a real world side by side example, it doesn't really matter.
    ImagingResource.com. Don't forget to equalize the image sizes before judging. I would provide sample crops for you, but photo.net has a restrictive policy when it comes to posting anything you didn't personally shoot such that even tiny test crops from a test site are off limits. You'll just have to do the leg work yourself. Suffice it to say that once equalized to the same size, the noise differences are very minor between the 7D / 50D / 40D, and they go in roughly that order in terms of performance with NR on, and are pretty much the same with it off. If the 40D had the latest processing it would be equal in noise, but still have less detail.
     
  41. If this thread is about what we want with future bodies - rather than what we think will happen - then I want Canon to go MILC (Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Compacts) a-la MFT. Reminder, look at the end of this review. Sadly, next year (2009) is over. :-(
    Happy shooting,
    Yakim.
    00VneU-221645584.JPG
     
  42. Yes Yes.. Go Mirrorles, with adapters for current lenses. I'm sure there's a market for it. Even I have thought of ditching the DSLR and going for the GF1.
     
  43. These r the things that I would like to see from Canon (not what Canon is actually going to do):
    1. A professional grade 55-200mm f/2.8 lens for APS-C (large constant aperture lens, yet portable, unlike 70-200mm f/2.8)
    2. A better quality 18-200mm lens.
    3. Weather sealed APS-C body that is lighter than 7D
    4. Dedicated in body focus assist lamp.
     
  44. I'm done arguing. Although I love a healthy debate, we're just going in circles. As far as what I'd like to see in the future, this isn't just for crop sensors, but all cameras...MIRROR LOCK UP BUTTON! Also, although I never used it, I know some of the Canon film cameras had AF point selection that was determined by where your eye was looking, why haven't they done this with digital?
     
  45. [[Canon film cameras had AF point selection that was determined by where your eye was looking, why haven't they done this with digital?]]
    http://digitaljournalist.org/issue0912/tech-tips.html
     
  46. Probably the back screen could be a touch screen, therefore less push buttons.
    1. Higher MP's? you never now.
    2. Higher ISO? probably.
    3. Better video? most probably.
     
  47. 1 more thing I would like to see: 4:3 mode and automatic masking on viewfinder for this. 3:2 aspect ratio does not look good to me for portraits (in both landscape and portrait orientation). 4:3 makes nice composition for portraits easy.
     
  48. Marvin,
    I do not know what will actually transpire, but it would make sense for Canon to continuing improving sensor response at high-ISO. ISO 1600 on my 450D pales in comparison to the same setting on my friend's 7D. I look forward to the day when I can shoot at ISO 3200-6400, and the results are effectively comparable to today's ISO 100.
    Regards,
    Jason
     
  49. I am in for a mirror lock-up button and eye controlled AF point selection and DOF preview simular to that on the A2E.
    -Dave
     
  50. Regarding the "more MP" thing: What does it help to increase the number of pixels if you can hardly find a lens that delivers a high enough resolution, especially in the low end at that we are looking regarding crop cameras?
    Better dynamic range and lower noise at high ISO seem to be more interesting.
     
  51. The next big innovations from Canon ( i wish):
    AF bracketing mode.
    Where an AF camera takes three shots, the 1st at the selected AF point, the 2nd closer, the 3rd farther.
    This could be a proportion of the focus distance, or a preset distance, or tweakable on the adults cameras.
    Canon may also wish to relaunch A-DEP mode in its original style instead.
    Re-introduce ECF?
    As MPs get bigger the thing I'm finding is that focus becomes more critical. Any extra user switchable assist would be welcome.
     

Share This Page