Canon Crop Sensor Future

<p>Who is willing to guess what the next step in the develpment of the Canon crop sensor camera will be?</p>

<p>Improved low ISO performance and maybe ISO 50 or even 25.</p>

<p>Depends on Nikon's D300s successor...</p>

<p>

<p dir="ltr">More MP. :-(</p>

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

<p dir="ltr">Happy shooting,</p>

<p dir="ltr">Yakim.</p>

 

<p dir="ltr"> </p>

</p>

 

<p>I'd love to see it in a body like the G11!</p>

<p>Higher and/or lower ISO..<br>

I don't think the next push will be MP again.. but who knows<br>

18MP on my 7D is enough for some serious cropping if needed.</p>

<p>What I'd like and what we'll see are probably entirely different.<br>

I'd like to see Canon increase dynamic range. Improving noise can't hurt. I have no desire for more MP.<br>

Actually there are a number of lenses I'd like to see before a new sensor.</p>

<p>Better video autofocus has got to be on its way.</p>

<p>Much faster (100-1000 fps) video frame rates for cool slow motion effects.</p>

<p>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.</p>

 

<p>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. </p>

<p>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. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I think everyone knows by now that MPs aren't everything.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You mean, everyone but Canon marketing managers, right? :-(</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

<p>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</p>

<p>Example - the G10 vs G11 - they actually reduced the pixels to achieve better noise levels.</p>

<p>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?</p>

<p>Tudor ApMadoc</p>

 

<p>exactly, look at Nikon, most of their cameras top out at 12MP, and they haven't lost any business.</p>

<p>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. </p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>I sure am glad that you guys who oppose resolution improvements aren't in charge of product management at Canon!</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.)</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>But please, don't take away my megapixels! (Apologies to Paul Simon.)</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>I will never understand the "fewer megapixels" meme when it comes to the 7D.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>Canon made the right decision in flexing their sensor design and manufacturing muscle and pushing to 18 MP.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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. <br>

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. <br>

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. <br>

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.</p>

<p>Daniel,<br>

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)</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>I would like a professional 1.6x camera with the following features added or subtracted:<br>

Add: Low ISO setting such as 25 to enable me to blur water with only a CPL and not an ND filter<br>

Add: Capability to autofocus at f/8 allowing me to use my 400mm f/5.6L lens with a 1.4x TC<br>

Add: Wireless tethering capability without extra attachment<br>

Add: Wireless trigger capability without adapter<br>

Add: Vertical shutter release button without needing a battery grip<br>

Substitute extra "User Settings" for the "Dummy Basic Zones"<br>

Wireless trigger for off camera flash without built-in flash<br>

Eliminate print from camera button<br>

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.<br>

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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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<br>

Ross</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>