Both, Canon and Sony are rumored to launch new 50 megapixel Full Frame sensor cameras within the next months. And I guess Nikon will follow the trend and use 50MP (Sony) sensors too. As pointed out by Diglloyd:
50 megapixels vs 36 is 1.18X the linear resolution. In other words, you can make a 42-inch wide print instead of 36-inch wide, all other things being equal, which they most definitely will not be. That’s your best case, barring some other kind of improvement.
So the questions is. Does the extra resolution increase really matter for you?
[poll id=”210″]
544 Responses
Canon rumors say NDA expires on Friday, February 6, 2015 for Canon. I guess they will draw first blood.
Probably. But how many will rush and buy and how many will say: “Let’s see what Sony have to offer and what it will cost.”
Canon’s sales will be just fine.
Canon professional shooters have known that a high megapixel body was in the pipeline for several years now, and even those pros who bought an A7r to tide them over and adapt their Canon glass onto, might buy a Canon high megapixel DSLR when it comes out and use that for “serious work”, keeping the A7r for going on hikes and taking pictures of the family.
DSLRs still have advantages over mirrorless. Especially in autofocus performance for reportage.
Probably all true.
But if it is priced at or above 1D C prices, I bet some will look around. Especially those that want hi-rez but doesn’t require extremely fast AF.
Many dreaming about a 50MP Canon may continue to dream after the announcement.
Yes, announced Feb 6th available 2016 😉
it is marketing…
75 is a good number. 🙂
Eliminating aliasing requires more pixels. Many more. With finer pixel pitch a weak AA-filter may also be used.
Before 120MP I don’t even *think* about taking pictures anymore. It is just too much fun to view them on 5MP screen, 8MP printout — with my 3MP eyes.
You have very bad eyes…LOL
And you never zoom in on photos or crop them in post?
Many people actually need or want more resolurion…if that means buying new cameras and new lenses we will gladly do so just to get that higher res.
As always some people dont…or dont yet realize that they will want or need it when everyone else has it.
This is exactly the same debate we had when I had a 3mp camera …I wanted more resolution and hordes of people were complainig no more mp.
We had the exact same debates at 8, 12, 16, 18, 24, and 36mp .
Personally I am quite anxious to continue this debate at 200mp and will enjoy every mp of it.
By the way…where are those 3mp and 8mp fans now,…and are they still usin 3 and 8 mp cameras?
There are many people who happily opt for the 12mp solution right now.
And they are free to do so…I am not aware of any opposition to the existance of 12mp cameras.
People that want higher resolution are not opposed to lower res alternatives for those that want them.
Are there any rumors about the ISO? I’d like to see a 7s-mk2 24mp 500k-ISO
Just a kind reminder. 50MP means 2 X 24MP APS-C CMOS combining into one. You can expected the image quality from A6000 already. What really making me curious is that why Sony never tries the 24MP sensor without AA-filter. I am still not quite satisfied with the image quality of A6000, especially in JPG
You just don’t have to shoot in JPG with any Sony camera. It’s the worst jpg algorithm today. Even my old Minolta 7D made better JPGs with 6 MP than my A77 or A6000. You better just shoot RAW and convert the average images to JPG/DNG lossy in afterwards if space is your concern.
7D made better jpegs than A6000? Could you please post a side-to-side comparison?
Sony JPEG algorithms are matched only by Samsung LOL.
The size difference in area is the crop factor squared. So 1.5^2 = 2.25 for Sony sensors and 1.6^2 = 2.56 for Canon sensors
Sony have said PDAF (for them) requires an AA-filter, which is why A7 (II) have both and A7R has neither.
Makes sense. Interesting.
I’ll start shooting when they reach the 100 megapixel. Wake me up then.
Canon brought 50MP sensor from Sony; Double Killed for Sony!
Canon is not using Sony 50mp sensor.
If as rumoured they are using a FF sensor based on the 7D2 sensor…They should be…
Yes..therefore the rumor is 52 or 53 mp.
If Sony were to scale up the a77II sensor to ff it would be about 56mp.
Thanks. That’s interesting. I would love to have a FF A-mount camera that preforms as well as my A77II. If 50MP can out-resolve some of my current glass, that’s good thing! I already use DxO to process my RAW images. It won’t change my work flow, just improve the results.
Then, their cameras will s..ck!
Canon claims thier sensors are better than Sony.
Depending on how you interpret it the same data can be interpreted to many differrent conclusions.
Yes, they are better because they have more noise and banding in the shadows ;). “More is better” LOL.
Actually they claim to have betterlow light performance and lessnoise than Sony..but as I said there are more than one way to interpret the same info.
They pretend many things but once you start recovering some shadows on any Canon camera, things get messy very quick.
All camera manufacturers by now, have better sensors than Canon, even Samsung.
Canon main flaw was low DR at low ISO, the resolution increase — oversampling — reduces effect of flawed ADCs on DR.
The thing is about the structure of the noise, even at high ISO. Try to lift some shadows on ISO 3200 or 6400 on any Canon camera and then you will understand…banding and blotchy uncorrectable color noise.
I’ve read some rumours that say it will be a Sony sensor and others saying it will be a scaled up 7D2 sensor made by Canon.
Canon has specifically publicly stated this will be a Canon sensor and not a Sony sensor.
I’ve been following the Canon rumour websites pretty closely and have seen no such public statement, only second hand information.
Stated in interviews
Hmmm not stated as far as I an aware. The only direct quote was to say that Canon uses the best sensors available….Pretty ambiguous
Nikon anh Fuji said they use their own sensor as well…
Nikon does use their own sensors in some cameras, Sony sensors in others, and Toshiba sensors in still others. As well as Aptina sensors in the Nikon 1.
Fuji use Sony chips, but with their own CFA on top.
As for Canon, they have their own fabs and R&D budget for sensors. They only put Sony sensors in some of their compacts.
I hope what this eventually means is that you can use the 32MP 16:9 crop of the 50MP sensor to do 4 pixel binning in video mode, giving you 4K in video mode and 50MP 3:2 photos in the one camera!
Almost a guarantee that this will happen, essentially you are asking for an 8K sensor.
Only if it’s possible to read and digitise 32 million photosites per frame. At 30FPS, that’s approaching 1 billion reads per second. In comparison, the A7S manages a maximum of around 250 million per second (as 30FPS is the limit of full frame readout).
It would be an enormous stretch to quadruple basic read rates and would undoubtedly lead to a big issue with power consumption and overheating. Even the fully pro specialist video cameras can’t achieve this sort of readout rate, let alone something to go in a compact still frame body.
Sony has been making Exmor ..frontside illuminated sensers for thier A and E mount cameras.
By switching to Exmor R ..backside illuminated, they can easily scale up to around 200mp without any really new technology. BSI offers improved sensetivity at smaller pixel sizes.
The current high end cybershot sensor would scale up to around 200mp in ff.
Of course it’s technically possible to develop a 200MP 24 x 26mm sensor, but there will be big issues in processing that much data for every frame (about 6 times what the A7R requires). It’s likely to be prone to excessive power consumption and overheating issues and, unless that’s dealt with, excessive thermally induced noise too.
Personally, I don’t see it happening. For ultra-high resolution cameras, MF is likely to be the way to go. Very expensive of course, but then that’s what niche products are about.
This is an argument that will never be resolved, as two sides of it are actually arguing about different things: If one party says they need the highest resolution possible, then they need it. If the other side says that there is no appreciable difference, then there is no appreciable difference!
The plain truth is that both will be right, or wrong, depending upon perspective.
Certainly, as far as detail and resolution are concerned, higher MP count would be demonstrably better and there will be a few people who would actually make good use of that. However, the vast majority of the public will never notice. That, though, does not mean it should not be available.
Of course, many will use the fact that such resolution will never be noticed by the majority to argue that it is pointless and that effort should be directed elsewhere (would it mean more development in lower resolutions???). Given the small numbers that can genuinely take advantage of high resolution, I have some sympathy with this view.
Personally, as I have said before, I think the main stumbling block is data storage and handling, which is the main reason I’d be loathe to get such a camera. If, however, your workflow is similar to the old 8×10 style (of one shot every few hours!) then that simply won’t be a concern.
Ultimately, why should one photographer be annoyed that another photographer has different needs and prefers different equipment? I’m pretty sure that Sony won’t scrap all their other models if they brought out a 50mp ‘monster’!
“why should one photographer be annoyed that another photographer has different needs and prefers different equipment?”
Why should one person be annoyed that another person has other religious beliefs, votes for another political party, or supports another soccer team? No reason at all, and yet…
Ah yes, therein hangs all the troubles of the world for all to agree, but no-one to stop.
I am annoyed because of my views are in the minority and the market players want to satisfy the majority. I lose because many others prefer something which isn’t mine.
It’s no help to you, but that is simply economics and the way of the world.
I think the same. Some will need it (as a light, flexible medium-frame-like solution) for like landscape or studio photography – or just as a gadget- and pixel-lover-thingy. And the rest of us is just fine with their <24-MP-APS-C camera. Same like with the 36 MP of the A7R last year. And the vast majority of users only need 4 MP to post their images (not necessarily crap) on Flickr, Behance, 500px … The discussion is pointless – but fun.
I think one of the problems is that the ‘normal’ ‘Resolution’ and ‘Senstitivity’ model that we have at the moment is a relatively new thing, traditionally speaking a lot of the time people want one particular sensor (good for particular things) in a particular body type and often those things don’t occur together. Look at the D800, lots of people wanted a 24MP D800 yet still cant buy one. Lots of people wanted a 36MP A99, same again. So when we hear that the new model we have been waiting for is going to have a 50MP sensor some people are quite annoyed by this. I think one of the strengths of the A7 series is having different sensors for different tastes in the same body, but what if we only get a 50MP A9 (a body many are waiting to see) but not a lower resolution version? I think that is what gets people up in arms, not the availability of choice but the potential lack thereof. How many people are hoping for an A7R II with IBIS or A7S II right now?
Yes, that’s why many D700 users don’t consider the D800/D810 as true replacements for their old camera. It has a different purpose, and excels at different use cases. And the D610/D750 don’t have the pro body and controls they want.
I think the A7 series is a very good idea. You can switch to another body for a different use case, but you don’t have to suddenly remember a new control layout and user interface.
Exactly!
“Lots of people” is rather a loose generalisation that doesn’t necessarily reflect the true position. It may simply be that the numbers would not make it economic, however fervently people want something.
Also, your suggestion that many people want to see the A9 is a little vague. I suspect that those who have issues with existing models want to have what I described in another thread: a camera without a ‘but’. As in, ‘this camera is great, but…’
Sometime the ‘but’ in cameras is very frustrating and often totally perplexing (why on earth did they do THAT?). However, to get ‘up in arms’ about anything that hasn’t even appeared is a bit extreme, don’t you think?
There are lots of people, whether it is economically viable… I don’t know, I would have to do an actual study which I have no interest in doing. Sony seem to have made it work though and Nikon released the D750 in response to this. Maybe they thought people wouldn’t spend just slightly less for a 24MP D800, I don’t know.
Who is up in arms? I’m not. I was simply trying to explain what I think most people think when they hear that a new camera is going to have a lot more MP’s is all. Some are overjoyed and some are not, the main reason being that they might think they wont have a choice, if they want THAT body they have to have high MP. Obviously Sony is changing this strategy and I think this is an extremely positive move personally, but you cant Chang people’s behaviour overnight.
Didn’t they just release the a7ii for those people wanting a more moderate mp camera?
The current projection is 8k will be available by 2020.
These new 50ish mp cameras will actually be the minimum necessary just to match the tv screen resolution.
And 36 mp will not even be enough for that.
Agreed…Zooming 100% on a 1Dx file on the new 5K Imac. Is not much of a zoom…
I have never looked at a photo on a tv screen.. I do it on my iMac, but personally I prefer them to be printed.
There are many people who only look at pix on thier screens or email or small prints and they have no usefor anything more. Nor do they want anyone else to have more.
There are also many people that practice a certain way of life and will not tolerate anyone that wants anything else.
Sure, but as you put it, it seems that by 2020 people will need at least a 50 megapickles camera because there will be 8k tv screens.
There are already people wanting higher mp cameras just to crop at will and have that detail or part of a scene. I’m an old fashioned kind of photographer and I mentally hit my hands if only I think of cropping a photo 😀
If you have the time and a controled environmend then of coures it is foolish to crop if you can shoot multiple persectovess, rotate the camera, change lenses etc.
In the field however ..especially for wildlife or sports..things happen quickly and you only get one chance.
There are many times were getting the perfectly composed shot is not an option…and attempting to get the perfectly composed shot will result in missing parts.
I typicall shoot for composition first and then zoom in for close up details.
Sometimes I can stitch my closeups into a single high res picture…more often however I work from multiple photos that are too different to stitch.
My obsesion with resolution however is only partly for croppin…more importantly I require BOTH a good composition AND fine details which current cameras do not provide.
For those who want to tell me to go medium form for wildlife…try it first..then you wont waste our time suggesting it.
It may well be that you are correct, but my point still remains (I think your post actually highlights it) that the arguing for the purpose of one against the purpose of another is futile and a waste of time.
Should your prediction come true, what proportion of photographers do you think will be supplying the bulk of their output tp supply the need of those viewing with 8k? Indeed, ordinary HD has been available for years, but though there are those who will use their cameras for HD movies, the vast majority of output will be photographs, rarely used for anything other than monitors or small prints.
Please don’t think I’m suggesting that is the best way to view them, rather it is simply the reality.
Maybe. But if your point is buying Sony’s rumored 50MP camera is future-proofing your investment I’d be a little wary of that. Technology marches on. Jump on board when you have a need realizing it’ll all change rather quickly.
I realize a lot of photo nerds here will churn equipment like the herd of iPhone owners I know who quickly dump their old model for each new model whether or not there’s a compelling need. This is the reason, if I jump on board this wave (doubtful), I’ll go used/refurbished after the glow is off and the mad rush has shifted to some other new, shiny toy. ;^)
SAR seems the most confident 50MP is coming out. Canon Rumors gives 2 high mega-pixel cameras a meh CR3 and even less of a chance they’ll be 53MP. I don’t recall Nikon Rumors mentioning this at all and CP+ rumors are only pointing out to an APS-C 7100 replacement. Do we assume Sony is playing politics and isn’t sharing its new toy or is Nikon by-passing this sensor?
It never made sense to me Nikon would come out with a 24MP D750 full-frame then turn around and come out with a 50MP D810 replacement unless there’s more to the picture than gets speculated on SAR.
I’m in no hurry for a new body so my interest in this rumor is minimal and I can wait for the reviews. If it obsoletes all my lenses because it out-resolves them (speculation I’ve never really bought) obviously that’d deflate any enthusiasm regardless of how well it’s implemented.
Nikon did in one interview confirm …without any details…that a high res Nikon is comming.
Considering the fact that it will be a Sony sensor, and that Sony has not yet made an official statement..Nikon cannot possibly allow news of thiers to leak prematurely.
This isn’t the vague article claiming it’s based upon a 46MP Sony sensor yet when you go to the supporting 46MP link the rumor says Sony will release a high megapixel camera based upon the same sensor this month? Really? ;^)
Sony now implements a Sony first policy when it come to pushing out new technology……They are no longer a charity.
I’ve watched a show about 8K on NHK world (NHK lab is the leader in the 8K development) and they were talking of 2025 time frame for it.
By judging of the availabilty of 4K contents even 2025 seems too optimistic.
8K= less than 34MP.
Panasonic predicts before superbowl 2020
Forget television sets, let’s talk about computer monitors.
With Apple’s latest 27″ iMac, boasting a 5K (15MP) display, all of you who say that 12MP is all you’ll ever need to make a good print when viewed from a reasonable viewing distance will run into a very different problem…
You won’t even be able to view your images full screen on an iMac!
And while you might not care, as you’re not interested in viewing images on screens; you’re a photographer after all, you make prints… Your customers will care.
So for those of us who are shooting commercially, the days are numbered where it’s considered good enough to deliver a 12MP image.
Not to mention that it’s also rather hard to precisely retouch an image when you have to zoom to viewing sizes of 200% and 400% and 800% just so that you’re able to make out what you’re looking at and manipulate your brush.
High resolution cameras are not only a welcome advancement in technology if you ask me, but they’re also a necessary one.
Again, it doesn’t make a difference. Even if you had a “5K DSLR,” whatever that might be, you wouldn’t be seeing your images on the Retina iMac the same way they were captured. See my point, above. We do not capture input the same way we display output. ALL images you’re going to see on that iMac are going to be interpolated in some way.
That’s true Thom, I suppose. Especially when talking about the rendition of colour there’s always translations that occur in the RAW conversion and there’s the issue of what the display’s gamut can reproduce faithfully…
That said, where sharpness is concerned I’d rather have more megapixels than 5K and then scale down to 5K for displaying a screen saver or for using in a scaleable, full-screen images style of templated website, than have a camera that shoots images that are less than 5K get scaled up for display on an end user’s computer screen.
True, I’d rather have more pixels if I’m having to deal with interpolation, as more sampling is always better. However, as I’ve noted in several articles, even a D810 doesn’t exactly resolve to a 4K video display. You’re essentially interpolating upwards on one axis and downwards on another.
Say what? Well, we only have 3680 luminance (green) values on a D810 across the horizontal, though we have 3960 to populate on a 4K display. On the vertical side we have 4912 samples, and need to put them into 2160 values. Note that we’re getting math that will produce rounding problems. The problem is worse if we look at what we use to produce color values (red and blue).
In essence, we’re fighting yet another of the “good enough” problems that keep cropping up. I’d argue that a 24mp camera is good enough for 4K displays; I’m not finding that a 36mp gains you anything, because by the time all the interpolation and rounding is done, both 24mp and 36mp are sub-optimal.
Oh, and let’s not forget that the camera captured at 3:2 and the display is 16:9. So in all that we have to do to get capture “pixels” into output “pixels”, we have to crop, too.
Not a chance. I’d bet that most people wouldn’t even be able to watch the 2020 Super Bowl in 4K.
I have absolutely no 4k content available to me…however I have already purchased a 60″ 4k tv to display refference photos on my studio while I paint.
When 8k comescout I will purchase one and retire mY 4k tv to the living room.
It is inadequate, and I still use big prints too…but still it is usefull, and the best yet available.
Incorrect..you need to compensate for aspect ratio.
I have not done the math , but I believe the actual number is somewere in the 40s, .mayby around 42mp or 46mp…hopefully someone who has done the math will respond with the correct number.
Technically, 8K would be something like 7680 x 4320 (there are no absolute standards yet even for 4K; we have several competing ones). On a display, that would be 23,040 horizontal rectangular dots (RGBRGBRGB) in 4320 rows.
As I’ve tried to point out time and time again, the Japanese are just getting this all wrong and screwing us all over: there is no way to input data for the output! We MUST demosaic our data and then reinterpret it (resize it). There are always losses in that process.
Even with video recorders for current HD video, we do the same damned thing: we record in one set of data, reinterpret it, then compress it, and then and only then output it for 1080P or 720P or whatever you’re shooting in. Gee, you think there might be artifacts? ;~)
Actual 4k is 3820×2160 for 16:9 Tv (real 4k is 4096×2160 for 19:10 ratio)
8k tv will probably stick with the 16:9 ratio which mean a 7640×4320 which give a little more than 33mp.you do the math.
HD was available in 1990 ;~). Actually, I seem to recall first seeing it in the late 70’s at NAB shows.
The problem with television resolution is the same as with sensor resolution: what are you going to do with it? It’s nonsensical to push too high with either if (a) you don’t have the bandwidth and standards to deliver 8K TV content; and (b) you don’t have an appropriate output for a 100mp sensor. If you don’t believe (b), you might ask yourself why the MF CMOS sensor didn’t press into 100mp. Simple answer: even the MF folk don’t need 100mp or have a use for it at the moment.
Ironically, we’re back to the argument that started it all in digital: what can you hear? With no doubt, the original CDs were terrible. But there’s currently a renewed belief going around that you don’t need to record beyond 48KHz sampling at 16-bits. That we can’t actually hear anything beyond that. Yet we’ve got plenty of folk using higher sampling rates and chewing up storage while doing so.
At the risk of oversimplification…
A chain is only as strong as its weakest link..and there you are absolutely correct..
However you can only build a stronger chain one link at a time, so there will certainly be times when not all the links are strong enough…yet.
You forgot viewing distance. Most people won’t be able to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p if screen size is less than 40” and viewing distance more than 3m.
So at what size and viewing distance does 4k make sense? 8k?
The problem will be compression. If we have to compress the 4K signal more, that viewing distance where “it makes a difference” will change.
If you want a real eye opener, stop watching cable TV for a week and use an over-the-air digital signal instead. The broadcasters are using weaker compression, and over-the-air HD looks dramatically better than over-cable HD.
The problem for 8K for sure is simple: “good enough” tends to win in the market. This may also be a problem for 4K unless someone really unlocks a high quality signal for it. I hear a lot of folk buying 4K TVs getting them home and saying “it doesn’t look as good as it did in the store.” Well, duh. The store is using a more optimized signal to demonstrate with, but you hooked up to a 500-channel cable system that can only deliver that by compressing the heck out of the signal.
and even if we have enough bandwith for 4k, why not use it for less compressed 10bit 4:2:2 kind of 2k?
True, the increase of linear resolution isn’t that dramatic. On the other hand, as Thom Hogan often points out, more pixels means more sampling of data, and that is always a good thing.
Unless they are redundant like your points.
Can’t go wrong with having FF sensors from 12mp to 50mp. Surely one will fit.
why not 6 MP too?
Who could possibly need that?? 😀
Its not the resolution that will be most interesting, it is everything else that comes with it that will be of most interest to me.
This will be a real measure of whether Canon is still up to the task in sensor quality. If they get this wrong…..
Without one such 50mpix sensor camera and good lens in hand .. One cannot really say wheter it’s better or not. So once we have them and a good lens + test charts to go with it .. we finally know. 🙂
Wow ok so everyone is going for 50mp
Save for the new Leica s CMOS. The new 007 is probably the camera I will buy next
It is simple, for those who need it for big prints it is the most welcome improvement, why should we care what others think about it??
Despite all the comments, Everyone should care because that number only accounts for some colour and not all the possible colour at 50MP because of debayering which averages: I’m not technical but there you go, i guess you could say, either you assume to know what it is by comparing it to the lossy present resolutions or you consider the MP most likely without the colour complexity as a constituent of that resolution. I guess you are all wrong. That’s an objective matter relating to that given supposed resolution number of MP but it must be a lot less, what do the lenses resolve? hmmm i guess they resolve the colour as well as the light and dark…yes they must be better than even that sensor can reproduce…we therefore need higher MP resolution to capture that colour also…Unless ’50MP’ lenses are actually less than 50MP in reality..technically, therefore none of it should be considered subjective. Again nice try though. With true colour the image would be more lifelike, would people still not notice..actually they would notice whatever they think now, because you cant ignore such colour and such realism because that is objectivity incarnate. Actually those gradations of colour are very very important for that luminous effect i want 😀 and even JUST by reducing the image by downsampling or whatever to equivalent previous cameras MP i get more of those gradations alongside the general increase in real resolution from the lenses and dynamic range in the image or whatever.
So, resident troll, is this MyContentSites persona your latest weapon in your struggle to annoy people here? Don’t you have a job to go to, or school, or at least a hobby? You spend an awful lot of time posting nonsense. If only your posts were humorous, but sadly they aren’t.
Being objective, i guess i saw the real problem here and solved it, sorry.
And this problem that you saw, what was that exactly? Too few comments per thread? Too few words per comment?
Comments only berating high resolution with subjective nonsense or saying nothing at all about it. Hence: being objective myself and finding a solution to the optimal use of the available sensor for most ideal image quality, and consideration of how the limitations may actually be resolved objectively and parametrically from this point on: rather than subjective nonsense and saying nothing at all.
Ha!
TLDR
No profile showing, doesn’t exist.
I really don’t see how – unless you print poster sized images to be viewed from 3 inches away (which nobody does) – you get any practical advantage for *maybe* a few percent increase in theoretical linear resolution and perhaps even a step down in the corners.
Once you’re printing 30″ posters at 150ppi+ (which current tech allows) – I don’t see how you could really be wanting more?
A 50MP Bayer sensor is, in the worst case (shooting under a strong red light), equivalent to a 12.5MP full colour sensor.
Shooting under these conditions wouldn’t even yield a high enough resolution image to use as the wallpaper for one of the new 5K iMacs.
150ppi is ok. But 300ppi is better.
HAhaHAHAHAHAH
yet another 500+ nonsense comments to come today 🙂
Luckily you raised the bar once more.
busted 🙂
Hopefully Sony will put this sensor in the new A7r/A99 before selling it to others instead of waiting a couple years to sell it in a camera of its own. The A99 would have been a big seller if Sony put its top sensor in it and released it before the D800.
I really think Sony should prioritize an a9 over an upgrade like this. It should focus on breakthroughs instead of releasing direct competitors to Canon in the same time frame as Canon. It should avoid head-to-head battles.
It’s not a head to head battle though – canon isn’t in the ff mirrorless game and there’s no sign of an a99ii
I don’t think most people considering the 5DS would think of it this way.
This may be the A9…
It shouldn’t be. How could it be a flagship with slow burst, slow processing, slow AF and the same old battery life, maybe worse.
And I don’t think upgrading to 50MP while upgrading burst, processing, AF and battery is realistic.
As far as I am aware…outside the sensor size…we don’t know any other specs for the up coming camera….You seem to be throwing the baby out with the bath water…
You can’t hope for everything, if the pixel count is set high, almost everything else will suffer, we’d be lucky to get the exact original a7r performance, only with IBIS, other than the increased pixel count.
At the very least we will have 1/250 sync speed with electronic shutter. Much improved AF with phase detect.. IBIS better body as per A7II… XAVC S codec and a 50MP sensor….What is not to like??
I don’t think we’d get that much but let’s see.
This 50 MP sensor will probably outresolve most current lenses..
But not in colour presumably hahahahaha I didn’t even try and well its obvious isn’t it?
But it will in detail I guess.. So much for printing your own XL billboards :p
detail? billboards? but only a fraction of that for colour and not a lot from those ‘luminance detail optimized lenses’….Why bother with expensive over corrected ‘sharp’ ones when you can have ones with better rendering AND actual available colour resolution fit for all round realism in usual display with finest observable details and gradation of luminance+++colour (a little under the supposed 50MP or whatever is next-to match only up to the available colour resolution) VINTAGE ONES! Negations: fails. Or that new Zeiss 35mm m mount 1.4!
Maybe you’re right. I referred to this.. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/resolution.shtml
I used Pentax 645 M lenses on the Nikon D800 and the result was outstanding!!!
The Pentax 645 M lenses are 15 year old!!!! Why do you think it could outresolve? Only that someone has written something?
First you have to try and make your own test!
When the D800 cames out, Nikon haven’t got lenses for the 36MP sensor!
But, now you have Sigma, Nikon and even the new Tamron 15-30 zoom lens are able to outresolve …. and other brand…
That is why I said “most current lenses”. I didn’t mention future lenses or just released lenses 😉 Mind that most photographers already have a bag full of lenses..
Out resolving a lens is not a problem in itself. No lens is actually made worse through a higher spatial sampling frequency. The other thing is that it’s a simplistic view of resolution. Among other things, the colour sampling grid for any one colour channel is coarser than the photosite grid (by 2:1 for the red and blue channels).
Further, if the sensor “out resolves” the lens, then this means the AA filter can be omitted as the lens itself acts as a low pass filter. That’s why AA filters tend to be omitted on the higher resolution lenses.
Good point!
The real problem you all are missing is that 50mp will make the sensor 2 inches wide! How will anyone be able to screw a lens onto the camera when you have this large of a sensor. Also, with 50mp you will not need iso anymore, all the extra pixels can take over that job.
..
Troll you say? You are just jelly because I am a master photographer and you are unable to use a shutter!
Go to bed rookie, it’s time for children to sleep, you have bottled to much nonsense today.
The mp is irrelevant this time around. That said, more is usually better…but af, random soft shots, laggy ass shutter button. These are some of the things which will make me trade up.
Sony does this because they can. Canon does it because they have to.
50 MP will benefit a few who already take full advantage of 36 MP.
For the rest 50 MP will be an incentive to buy new glass.
Great comment 🙂
Sony couldn’t really manage the current 36MP sensor.
Sure, it’s great – but they clearly made a number of design compromises to cram the 36MP onto a sensor. In the center, it outresolves their own lenses – in the corners it can’t outresolve a big bowl of porridge with many of their own lenses.
So, we’ll be even more dependent on lens profiles and cooked RAWs.
The camera companies created bat-cr@p crazy consumers who want outrageous MP cameras – so this is what we get.
Lens profiles and cooked RAWs is the way to the future. Most new developments in digital imaging will be software-driven. Ideally we should capture so much data that we don’t have to worry about exposure and focus at all until we sit down to create our photos at the computer.
Ideally, we should have a sphere-shaped sensor on a stick, that we can wave about in the air, capturing information from all directions. We could then compose our photos, and select exposure and focal plane in post-processing.
I can’t follow the ‘outresolving’ story. All my lenses perform better on a high resolution sensor, like they performed better on a slow film. And the outrageously sharp Kodak Technical Pan showed there still was room for even better performance.
Sony, roll in the HR-sensors!
Some commentors invent reasons to complain..so they complain that you can better see existing shortcomings and ignore the fact that the pictures are just plain better with higher resolution.
Sony wants to sell lenses…in fact that argument is often used against my comments about full lens compatability…
So why would they not want to build and sell higher resolution lenses…and certainly a higher res sensor will still only IMPROVE the perfomancet of current lenses.
Higher resolution also means that you start to see flaws in your lenses, that you didn’t see before. So it’s a double-edged sword.
Higher res will improve the performance of any lens.
But if you want better lenses lots of manufacturers will be glad to make them and sell them to you.
I have good lenses but would like higher res versions if they will result in higher res pictures.
In a time when ilc sales are droping providing consumers a good reason to buy new lenses makes really good sense to me.
Yes, but as I said, you also start to see optical flaws that weren’t visible before. So you gain some and you lose some.
YOU LOOSE NOTHING. Dont you get it?
Obviously, you have little experience of actually using lenses. It’s a well known fact that some lenses that are just fine on cameras with a low MP count, start to show their flaws when used on high res cameras.
More pixels is always good, in the sense that you get more data to creat an image from. But there is also a backside. Don’t you get it?
I’m not inventing this, it’s something that you can see with you own eyes in the images you take.
Over 45 years in every format you can imagine..and some you cant…but I have no experience with actually using lenses lenses?
Its a good thing I can also paint.
Ok, so you’re an experienced photographer. Sorry if I offended you.
But then you should be able to understand what I’m talking about. It’s a real issue, the severity of which depends on the lens. If there are no optical flaws to resolve, then of course none will be visible. But many lenses that weren’t made to be used with high resolution sensors, because such sensors didn’t exist, do have flaws that reveal themselves on modern camera bodies.
No lens produces a lower res image on a higher res lens..you totally dont get it still!
I get the feeling that we are talking about two completely different things here. Who said anything about producing a lower res image? That’s not what I’m saying at all! You get a higher res image, which is exactly why you start to see lens flaws that just weren’t resolved before.
I have several lenses that I was perfectly happy with on my old 12 MP body, but that have shown themselves to not be so perfect on the D800. Do you understand what I’m talking about? Not loss of resolution, but optical aberrations and imperfections that have become more visible, because of the higher resolution.
Indeed.
Ever tried a Minolta 70-210 Beercan on an A77? It’s CA central.
No, but I used one on my a65 which is reasonably close and I wouldn’t call it “CA central.”
No..if ypu want to hide your poor qualityclenses with poor resolution…just res them down.
Your images are of higher guslity with higher res.
If you suddenly relize you want them better than what you were previosly willing to settle for than get better lenses.
A while ago a guy argued against higher res by saying if he put a piece of Jello in for s lens on a low and high res camera the high res camera would not produce a higher res image.
You are sounding a lot like him…was that you?
I think the problem for me is why would resolution mask common problems like CA, pincushion distortion, etc? It might mask common aberrations found on MTF charts regarding resolution but, as Barry said, just res it down. The other problem I have is that, while I don’t have a low-res body like one stuck at 12MP, I have used a lot of old Minolta glass – classics and the cheap stuff – on a 24MP a65 and find the results generally sharp and as good in this regard as modern glass (no, I haven’t done extensive pixel peeping). Where those old lenses don’t hold up are issues usually related to old, inferior coatings like CA and flair which wouldn’t be affected by sensor resolution.
Correct but the resulting high res images start to get softer. Which is why Canon produced a mark 2 for a lot of there L series lenses. As they were going higher in resolution with sensors (1Ds 1Ds II 5D II) their older film lenses were not optically up to it. I had an old 28-70 2.8 which was soft as a babies bum on anything higher than a 1Ds…Higher res sensors show up sharpness limitations of lenses more acutely.
What are the “compromises” on the camera-side?
Reduced frame rate
Thicker cover glass to accommodate more dramatic microlens infrastructure to corner issues
Unable to accommodate silent shutter
Overheating in video mode
Battery consumption
None are showstoppers, but it adds up.
Reduced frame rate should be logical to everybody.
What is it about the MLA corner issues? The pixel density would still be lower than on a 24MP APS-C, and the current sensor types do not have much problems according what I read.
Shutter topic is understandable.
Regarding video I would ask why somebody would like to use 50MP sensor as a prime video camera?
Yes, battery life is indeed an issue. Understandable on a camera with high res display and EVF, but annoying nonetheless.
Wouldn’t allow the body size the usage of the FM500?
test any old manual lens on both Pentax Q and any large sensored camera and you’ll see there are details from image extracted by small Q sensor and not by the large one.
Yes, do you have one of those? i do XD i haven’t tried it with new adapters for my new glass but ALL the new glass looks amazing on the Sony A7R anyway.
“in the corners it can’t outresolve a big bowl of porridge with many of their own lenses”
100% extreme corner crop from the A7R and FE 35mm f/2.8:
http://mattgrum.com/fm/luxembourg_crop4.jpg
Not bad for a camera/lens that “can’t outresolve a big bowl of porridge”.
There’s a difference between “all lenses” and “some lenses” – do the same with the 24-70mm or even the 70-200mm and the experience will be different.
One example does not prove the rule.
The issue I see is that allot of Sony Glass is not upto the challenge and can’t deliver 50MP, I think they will need to start refreshing there lens line-up and making it a little more solid… The more you look into lens resolution and quality it’s surprising at just how low even some of the Sony G Lens’s are…
The only one which really bugs me is the 24-70.
The 24-70mm F2.8 Zeiss is in fact visibly soft at F2.8 on a 24MP sensor. And it bothered me too when I started buying primes and realized that they were sharper at F1.4 and at F2 and most certainly at F2.8…
I actually stopped bringing my 24-70mm to a lot of weddings because I didn’t want to carry around a heavy lens all day that I wasn’t shooting with all that much.
But recently, I tested it again and found that when stopped down to just F3.2 there’s a huge improvement in sharpness, without a huge difference in subject to background separation! And stopping down to F3.5 seems to visibly max out the sharpness of the lens (to my eye anyways). F4 didn’t seem much sharper and the background started to almost snap into focus by F4. At 70mm, you might want to shoot it at F3.5 or F4, as it’s softest at the long end. But from 24-60mm, I’m happy to just leave it at F3.2 and adjust the shutter speed for exposure variances.
For versatility’s sake, I’m starting to incorporate my 24-70mm back into my go-to kit of lenses for wedding and event work. And I’m just treating it as an F3.2/F3.5 lens. Try it, I bet you’ll be impressed!
ahh I’m sorry I should have been more clear. The f4 24-70 za OSS which is a bit of a hot mess until your at least at 6.3, with f9 being the sweet spot on my lens. I’d be overjoyed if it performed well anywhere near f4..
Well that’s a different story. I feel for ya man!
lol yea…its silly. I’ll wait to see how it performs on this next body, but if it goes as expected, I’ll probably trade it for the 50.
3.2 is my default aperture for 2.8 zooms – it’s a good compromise between shallow DoF and sharpness.
Being able to out-resolve some of my current glass is a good thing! Slow speed film was able to out-resolve some lenses; no one complained about that. I hope it pushes my better glass to it’s limits.
As an example of what this means I will provide an example. Since I am a master of photography I am able to take an A7R image and turn it into a 50mpx masterpiece. Here is a beautiful landscape I took that has won many awards. When you understand the true nature of a camera like I do, you will be able to create beautiful images. 50mp is only an improvement on an already amazing system.
this is a great example of a landscape photograph!
Ansel Adams would have been jealous 🙂
Where do you show you work online, so that we can learn from you?
Thank you! Him and I share the same genius. It is about time people recognize who I really am.
I leave you with the benefit of belief and doubt, anyway, who cares, there are some that call themselves King, some pretend to be Jesus and some others even think they are greater than GOD. Anyway, one needs a lot of of things to make a world. I have thousands of such shots as the one you show us here, I have never won any award, but, since I am just a humble person, i do not expose any of my “masterpieces”, except one that I show to anyone who wants to see it. Thanks for the picture and the pretension, Mister Master Genius.
Concerning sarcasm, you should know that life is a mirror, all reflects on all, and the mirror of pretension is sarcasm. Anyway, the a..hole is the Master of the body, if it closes the door, the body will die. Just to relate some Master stories.
MASTER, would you please show us some of “Awards” you earned for above called “masterpiece”? We’ve never seen a real photography master calls himself “Master” and his shots masterpiece. Let people judge!
Is that sarcasm I detect? You are another who is jelly of other people skills.
Isn’t it a 4:3 ratio? Why did you choose that on your a7r?
Like I said, when you understand how to use a camera like I do than you will see.
I was just curious, now I’m not curious anymore.
online photo course you do ?
This is another picture that he stole off a website.
Here is the source this time: http://soundslikenoise.org/
Scroll down to “road trip”.
Quick question Brett. How is it that you’re so easily able to find the original source of a photo like this? Is there some kind of Google image search tool that you’re using to find similar photos or something. Please share.
The speed with which you’re able to “out” MyContentSites’ image theft has got me thinking about applying whatever method you’re using to my own images in hopes of catching those who’ve stolen my copyrighted material!
Thanks in advance 🙂
You guessed right, google image search.
If you have google chrome, right click on it, go down to “search google for this image”, click on that and it will open up a new tab with the result. If you don’t, go to images.google.com and you can plug in the url.
Thanks! This tool is amazing 🙂
Guess I am not surprised..
What camera and lens combination did you use to take this master piece?
Si
That was shot with an iPhone 5. Not that it’s his photo or anything, he randomly posts photos he steals off random websites.
http://www.verexif.com/en/ver.php?foto_url=https%3A%2F%2Fsoundslikenoise.files.wordpress.com%2F2014%2F12%2Fimg_0689.jpg%3Fw%3D625%26h%3D469
aaarrrrr so we are in the presence of a master thief and troll. Clearly lacking any morals or manners too and a complete lack of respect for a true Master.
Si
Indeed, he has brought great shame to the art world.
Do Not Ever Question the MASTER~!!!
You linked to a 625x479px image (that has not won any awards), how does that support any of your claims? Stitching images is a basic and highly automated tenet of photography nowadays that any amateur with an iPhone can do – it’s hardly mastery.
If the camera in which it is installed doesn’t clack to death, I’m game.
Today will be 50 MP maybe tomorrow will be 72 MP 😉 If we always think it is unnessesery we had stocked at 10 MP.
To surpass human vision you need more than 500 Mpix, more than 18 DR stops and so on. There’s still room for improvement ;).
I think the sensible limit is 120 MP this is humunas eye resolution, but more is better – having 500 MP the digital zoom starts to make sense 😉
Several studies show we have about 7 Mp resolution per eye fixated in on one point, but because our eyes can roll we can see about 500+ MP in total.
I guess I am one of the few people who really need all the resolution they can get to deliver the best Job possible. And yes, every bit of detail more I get in a Image is important. Buuut, having that said, the Jump from 36 to 52 is more important because of all the side effects it brings with it, e.g. a 36MP sensor with better light sensitivity, possibility to crop and scale down when shot in poor light conditions etc.
Finally, I think, my own objective is to be able to deliver 100% perfect quality fashion shoots for my clients under 100% natural light, which is only under rare circumstances the case nowadays. I almost always need a bunch Strobes, Reflectors etc. Everything over ISO 400 gets critical, even with a mkIII or D810.
“12 megapixels is all a person will ever need” #SonyA7s #betterpixels #notmorepixels
There are other aspects which require improvement more than the number of pixels.
I wonder how ‘great’ the Sony A7S colour really is XD Same in loss, equivalent? better?
Based on your lake picture, and your “masterpiece” landscape picture, lets just admit you do not know what you are talking about.
I used to be in the “it makes no difference” group until i used the A7r for professional work, if those pixels are of good quality, it really does add something to the images.
CAN THIS NEW CANON CAMERA BE USING THE NEWLY DEVELOPED SONY 50MP SENSOR?! Most probably because Canon technology is way behind Sony. Nikon will follow through with implementing the 50MP sensor in their cameras when the D810 sales slow down.
3 giant camera companies will be using the same 50MP sensor just like how the 24MP sensor of Sony is being used heavily by Nikon, Pentax and Sony. Who will be the winner of this war? and guess who will be cashing it all? that’s right! It’s going to be Sony’s Sensor department.
Well it is possible that Canon will use Sony sensors (they did the same in their P&S some times. But I doubt they will do it with their flagship cameras….
Personaly I think that Canon is not that far behind Sony on sensor tech and adding pixels will not be that high tech in the end…
Sorry to dash the hopes and all, but it’s doubtful Canon would use Sony at that level. The new Canon sensor is just supposed to be a scaled-up version of the sensor from the 7D mark II (for better or for worse). The math makes sense: 20.1mp * 2.62 (area coefficient between Canon FF and APS-C) = 53.0mp
This (Sony) 50 MP sensor will better fit in Nikon cams when processing 14 bit Lossless raw (+ considering IQ loss when opening the files for post-treatment with Lightroom or Camera Raw)!!
I’m curious about the file size that will be processed with such a monster since a .NEF is about 42 Mo from a 36MP sensor D800) when using these settings!
Bingo. Sony really needs to fix their raw recording.
Meh.
The only way this would interest me is if they had a non-demosaiced option, where every 4 rgbg pixels are joined into 1 full color pixel.
I have no use for 50MB images where half the data is interpolated.
If you join color pixels instead of demosaicing you’ll get a 13MP image that is just as sharp as the 50MP and takes less space and processing power.
Can’t you do it from RAWs?
You’re not understanding how demosaicing works all the full implications of it. A binned 13MP image will not be “just as sharp”.
Yeah no…
Im sure there are some people here thinking:
“Yeah!….the smaller the pixel photosite, the happier I get!!”
Another might think:
“Yes!…the fewer photons I collect at the photosite and the smaller the charge it creates, the happier I get”
LOL!!
Thats where you are wrong! This is 50mpx, so they are bigger than 36. It is math!
Oh man….Is this the way we are here at SAR? Is this how 50mp sensor buyers think?
It’s math?
Scarry…..
Are you denying that 50 > 36? Where did you study maths?
Thank you, at least I know now some people on here are educated.
Yes, but we aren’t many. And you are quite unique, a beacon of light in an otherwise dark and dreary wasteland populated by maggots posing as photography experts.
50 mpx isnt necesarily bigger pixels then 36 mpx. The size of the sensor is the same, that is a fullframe sensor right!? So if they jam in 14 million pixels more, should that lead to the fact that the pixels are in fact smaller, to fit the same area as those of 36 mpx? So, due to the math, the pixels are indeed SMALLER…
one sensor is divided into 36 megapixels or 50 megapixels
1/36 > 1/50
That inverted (or even perverted!) version of math might work in your bizarre mind, but not in reality.
Your math is off by a factor of one million (:-))
photosites on 50mp are SMALLER than on 36mp FF aensor.
This is a sad example of sooo many people’s understanding of the math on sensor size and pixel pitch.
And your post is a sad example of sooo many people’s failure to understand when someone is joking, or just “taking the piss”.
You’re definitely a “genious”
Funny thing is, at base ISO the Sony 36mp has more dynamic range than the Sony 12mp sensor ;~).
You want more megapixels for a reason: more sampling is always better than less sampling in analog-to-digital systems, as the underlying patterns are better resolved.
You want larger photosites for a reason: in very low light, you stand a better chance of discriminating between what would be considered weak data.
We actually want BOTH those things, not just one or the other. The thing that Sony did right was that–because they can’t do it one sensor–they gave us the A7s/A7r twins. As photographers we can figure out which of those two to use for any given purpose.
But to take the position that Sony should only do one type of sensor would be wrong, at least with current technologies. Those with long memories will know that I started arguing for modular DSLRs about a decade ago for this very reason: I could see that sensors were going to get specialized. Thus, I want to be able to change sensor in my camera just as I changed film back in Ye Olden Dayes.
But, with the low price of the A7x bodies – isn’t it essentially the same thing as switching sensors. I mean, if Sony did develop a modular system, would you be saving any cost over these already low cost bodies? I could see an economic case if the sensor modules were in the range of $500 – but I doubt Sony would do that.
Close, but not exactly. When I proposed my modular system I also pointed out that this would enable monochrome, infrared, and various other sensor types to be sold, and it would mean that I wouldn’t be replacing my high end body every time a new sensor came out.
I shared my math: I’d buy two high end bodies and at least five sensors and probably more. I’d replace sensors as better ones became available. The net dollars to the maker would actually go up, at least from me.
Look at what’s happening with Sony right now. The A7II announcement stalled the A7s and A7r sales because everyone’s expecting II versions of those. Sony had to drop the prices as a result, getting lower GPM.
Good points.
I also like the idea of having body options. Smaller, fewer controls when I need it – larger, more controls when I need it.
I am afraid, replacing only the sensor, will not work. You need a processor for the newer sensor and of course the firmware.
Nikon uses the same EXPEED ASIC for virtually all their current sensors. Canon ditto with DIGIC. It’s possible that you’d need to upgrade an ASIC at some point in the future, but frankly, Ricoh already showed everyone that it is possible with the GXR, so I’ll just say, yes, it will work ;~).
thanks, Thom,
but the price of the GXR and the system with fixed lenses on the modules (if I got it right) is something different than just buy a second A7 and use all your lenses. And it is not FF at all.
What do you save on a system like this, the body with battery, card slot and finder. Lets see, what will get in the future. Interesting times for photographers anyway.
BTW: they want us to buy new bodies 🙂
Go back and read what I wrote about Ricoh’s “lensor” concept. I said it wouldn’t work in the market, and it didn’t. But that was a bad design decision. They did produce the M-mount module, which was far, far closer to what needed to be done.
Stop thinking like an engineer at a camera company. What you gain by a true modular system is convenience. Buy two basic bodies, buy as many sensors as you’d like to keep up with technology over time. Switching to B&W or Infrared or high ISO or high pixel count is a breeze. But all that is from the USER point of view.
Oh, and by the way, our cameras are already modular, only the single module they support is lenses ;~). Imagine if you had to buy different CAMERAS to do different jobs because all lenses were totally built in ;~).
that reminds us of the good old Nikon F2, you could change the finder, the screen and even the sensor, mixing color, B&W and high ISO all the time. Or even more the good old 4×5″, where we could change almost everything form shot to shot :-))
You remember film-plane flatness issues I take it?
In “Ye Olden Dayes” a photographer carried two or more bodies each loaded with a different film speed or color/bw variation. Changing sensor on the fly is just not practical, there are many mechanical and data processing issues to be resolved. The multiple body approach is the way to go, yesterday and today.
Not exactly. In those days, maximum shots were 36 or so (12 on larger formats). You had three approaches as a pro: (1) rewind and mark how many exposures taken, so as to complete the roll later; (2) just shoot whatever’s left quickly before changing rolls; or (3) just ignore the shots you didn’t get on the roll before changing it. A few of us tried (4) take a blank shot then change ISO, instruct the lab to cut the film at frame X where the change took place and process the second half differently. That didn’t tend to work well ;~). And yes, a few did (5) carry multiple bodies loaded with different film.
Obviously you never shot using film cameras professionally, lets leave it at that. Nice try.
Obviously, you don’t know my history.
Go have a look at a 36″ LCD at your local store, then have a look at a 42″ one. Then please tell me one is not significantly bigger.
You’re arguing the wrong problem, I think. Both of those LCDs have 5760 x 1080 visible dots if you look closely. What we’re talking about here is 4000 x 3000 dots versus 8000 x 6000 dots in the same size.
Make lenses, not megapixels.
Silly noob! You cannot make megapixels, they are grown.
This. But it’s easier for Sony to sell its sensors.. Be it on new camera bodies or to other Companies for their camera models.
They can sell the sensor to Nikon,
but they can’t sell the lens to them. 😛
Make both.
The lenses and sensors aren’t made by the same company. Sony is an umbrella corporation consisting of many companies, so I’m sure they are working on both.
First sell the megapixels..then they have reason to come back for the lenses.
Yep. Megapixels = marketable = inevitable.
Not at all unwelcome. Just not as useful, or long term, as glass. Still no native, fast, high quality FE 85/90, or 135.
Something tells me that the lens department and the sensor department are distinct.
They should be working towards the opposite end, one big pixel covering the entire sensor. If you don’t divide the image into pixels, then you will never have artifacts in your images, and they can be blown up indefinitely without pixellation occurring. A photo will truly be an image of reality instead of just an imperfect, graphical representation of it.
You can get a really accurate colour meter for that. How about a colour meter averaging mode in the camera, as those accurate colour meters are extremely expensive. Basically like a white balance detector i suppose. This would/could include local colours of the subjects like the usual auto white balance, any ideas as to how all that might work best?
Maybe tick them on or off by selection on screen…for best rendition of those you want, included in the white balance calculation.
But remember you have to use the metric system
In a-mount?
A99 II ?
As far as I am concerned: No, it´s not madness, just the perfectly logical continuation of what has started a long time ago.
What is a photograph? An image. Does an image of reality equal reality? No, it does not. While some images try to stay as close as possible with reality, in most cases an image tries to somehow go beyond the given moment, the situation, that which can be seen, etc. Even the worst, most amateurish photographs try to achieve that.
What is the ultimate reference when it comes to visual perception? The human eye.
It is, therefore, perfectly conceivable to wonder whether there can be an imaging device which can and does exceed the capabilities of the human eye.
In what ways can the natural capabilities of the human ye be exceeded? For example by such a huge dynamic range and low noise that even objects appearing almost black to the human eye may yield unexpected detail after careful processing. Or by a huge amount of detail captured in an extremely short moment – so much that it far exceeds the capabilities of the human eye to gather, collect and process visual information in the same timespan.
Which gets us to more megapixels.
Detail does not necessarily equal “just” more detail. It equals more detail and “X” in an image. It does not necessarily do so in every image, and it certainly doesn´t need to in every image. And not every genre of image requires more detail. There are images that thrive on giving less information than would have met the human eye.
But my point is this: 4K video gave us HD plus more details plus “X”. 8K video will give us 4K plus more details plus “X” beyond what 4K gave us.
Isn´t it cool to make images that seem to have frozen or extended time despite the fact that they were taken in an extremely short timespan, just because the amount of information unhinges the proportionality between time vs. detail and thoroughness of scrutiny?
So, bring it on!
If recent history tells us anything, Sony and Canon will make a 50MP sensor, but Canons sensor will suck.
To answer the poll: As long as sensor tech is improving along with it, why not?
I can always downsample, and maybe it will compel companies to make better and better glass to resolve these new 50MP sensors. It isn’t something that’s going to make me run out and upgrade, but it’s a logical march forward as sensor tech improves. I’m sure we’ll be seeing a 16MP sensor with the iso performance of the A7s before too long, or a 12MP one that bests the performance of the A7s.
It seems we have two camps. Those who say “bring on the 50MP sensors” and those who say “no, develop more bodies for the 12MP sensor”. I don’t think we will ever get these two to agree.
I agree, if they could all just understand that 12mp sensor is just part of the 50mp sensor. When they line up a few more 12s than they will actually have the same exact sensor, made by sony, just 50. Also since the 50 is 4 times the 12, it should have a lot more sensor space to grab light ie. better low light performance than the a7s
Well, not exactly. I get the argument for a 12MP sensor. It goes something like this: the sensor is the same physical size as the 50MP sensor – but in theory the individual photo sites will be 50/12 times larger. Larger photo sites means less cramped wiring which should mean less cross-talk between wires which should mean less noise. That is my understanding of it.
But I also get more resolution too. For cropping you just can’t beat lots of resolution.
Not exactly. And you could always get around the cramped wiring part by using BSI. Thing is, it’s the area of light that’s captured that’s important. And there isn’t a lot of difference, even after the power/data lines are considered, between 12mp and 36mp on an FX sensor today. If we output the same (12mp), the light collection differential is small, and the noise differential is small and mitigated somewhat by the averaging we do in downsizing the larger sensor.
Yes, there’s an advantage to 12mp over 36mp (or 50mp or whatever’s next), but it really comes only at high ISO values and where pixel level results are visible. It’s a niche, basically. An important one for some, but a niche nevertheless.
Ultimately, we’re likely to see Fossum’s photon counting approach win out. It’s still unclear to me what all the noise implications of his dealing with every photon that arrives will be (he records place and time of arrival).
I’ve always wondered how much the de-mosaiccing screws up the assumption that shot noise (assuming identical QE) in the final image viewed at a given size is independent of pixel size (for a given sensor size)?
Four 2.5 micron photosites with readout values binned together will not produce the same high ISO value as a single 10micron site.
Example: A7r vs A7s high ISO. A7r is great but A7s is better in low light.
Same size sensor, very diffint pixel pitch. (pixel size)
Yes, that is what I was getting at. Did you mean to reply to me?
I thought the 1mps sensor had bigger pixels hence a greater ability to record light and that the higher the mps the smaller the pixels as they have to be squeezed into the same space 36 x 24mm?
Si
No because 1 mp sensor is just 1 mp. The 50 is 50.
But surely the physical sensor size is the same requardless of the mpxs count. I do not understand as I have an RX100 which has a 1″ sensor and it is 20 mpxs and an A99 which has a 36mm x 24mm and 24 mpxs????
Si
I think you may be a little confused. The 50MP sensor is the same physical size as the 12MP sensor in the A7s. They are the SAME SIZE. The difference is that the 50MP sensor packs in approx. 5 times as many photo sites (pixels) as the 12MP sensor. This does NOT mean that the 50MP sensor “receives more light” or anything like that. It only means that the 50MP sensor is able to resolve more detail than the 12MP sensor. While the 12MP sensor has larger photo sites and more distance between the wires that connect the photo sites, hence less cross talk or “noise”.
Agree to disagree
What is there to disagree about? You keep saying that somehow the 12MP sensor in the A7s will be a different size than this new 50MP sensor that Sony is supposedly developing. That is simply false. Nothing to agree/disagree about. The 12MP sensor in the A7s will be the SAME PHYSICAL SIZE as this new 50MP sensor.
Neither of us are Sony engineers, so we do not 100% know how it works. I understand much more about cameras than anyone on here, that is why I come here to share my knowledge and try to help people. If you read this information somewhere, please show me the address. Otherwise agree to disagree.
Oh, I get it. You are a comedian. OK. I knew there were some people on here like that. Just don’t smash me.
Just in case you were not kidding (find it hard to believe, but OK). No web address required. All you have to do is actually read the article on which you are currently commenting. And it goes a little something like this:
“Both, Canon and Sony are rumored to launch new 50 megapixel Full Frame sensor cameras”
The key message in that quote is Full Frame sensor. In case you didn’t know – Full Frame refers to the physical size of the sensor. Now, fire up google and do a web search to figure out the size of the 12MP sensor in the A7s. You will quickly see that it is also a Full Frame sensor. Which means they are THE SAME PHYSICAL SIZE.
***
I think we would prefer you to backup your claim with proof as having google’d I cannot find anything to support your statement. Happy to be proven wrong if that is the case. As they say we learn something new everyday.
Si
Simon – don’t bother. This guy is just joking. I know it is hard to tell, but he is just a comedian.
A Master comdedian lol, cheers.
Si
Don’t get him started unless you want to see a dozen 650+ word nonsensical diatribes. He’s our clown, every blog has one.
MonkeySpanner, you’re being trolled, simply ignore MyContentSites.
I thought so. Thanks for the heads up.
You are truly a master comedian! Fantastic!
WTF
Jenny – don’t bother – this is a troll just trying to get a rise from you.
If only Sony made two cameras to keep both camps happy, one with 50MP and the other with 12MP… wait a minute!
Yeah, who is living in fantasy land now! Oh, wait.
Or, they could make modular cameras, allowing us to rotate 2 or 3 sensors in single camera. So you dont have to pay for 3 bodies, 3 EVFs, LCDs, IBISes, etc.
Who is living in fantasy…..
Yup, that is the dream. I have seen it discussed many times. Don’t think any manufacturer would cut their own throat like this.
Is there only one type, genre or field for a photographer?
Yes, trust fund babies.
Admin, since you’re still striving to cause fan boy flame wars with headlines that use the term “VS, let’s include another sentence to your headline.
“Sony sensor to be used to photograph cats and brick walls. Canon & Nikon to be used professionally to photograph weddings and fashion. “
How About “Sony & Canon’s First 50MP Sensor Rivalry, Camp Medium Format Yawns”
No no no… Canon & Nikon to be used mainly by tourists in my country to shoot boring tourists photos in town.
No way bro. I use my Sony to shoot exclusively cats. Brick walls are for morons.
I love Cat photos~=D
Nice.
I just keep the lense off so I can see the FF sensor.
“Sandisk & other storage manufacturers rejoiced~!!!”
BTW. 18 euros for a 64GB SDXC .. not Sandisk tho. I worry about ppl’s sanity that worry about storage medium costs. Sure SSD:s are not free yet… I give ya folks that
When you have nothing else to complain about, you just start making $hit up. No matter how dumb.
Did you mean Sony 50 MP rumor vs. Canon 50 MP rumor?
I spent a lot of money chasing higher mpxs rated cameras and it was a complete waste of money. I wish I had invested in lenses from the off. The arguements for greater mpxs sensors is well documented. The fact is technology runs at a pace and manufacturers need to keep customers happy and loyal. If we all took the view that we were happy with what we have their yearly revenues would drop. In two to three years time you will be seeing offers on 50mpxs at the same prices a 24mpxs cameras today. Consumer electronics are becoming cheaper and cheaper so question of whether higher mpxs is justified are a bit mute in some respects.
Si
The question is, if they both offer 50MP- for those that want it, who would you choose? Just the fact that Sony would stuff this in an FE mount camera and refuse it to A mount- Canon it is.
Depends entirely on how the Canon performs. If they get their $#!+ together and offer competitive IQ compared to whatever Sony (and by proxy Nikon) release then I’d consider Canon as the new direction of my work would benefit more from their lenses (specifically tilt-shift, macro, and telephoto options). I highly doubt it will, and yet it’ll still manage to be priced ~1000 more than whatever Sony/Nikon releases….so I’d probably go with Nikon in the end.
How do Canon sensors hamper your work? Please answer with your own experience, not with links to someone else’s website with paid non-photographing noobs.
lol @ “expert”, snarky much? The Canon sensor lacks the comparative DR that the Nikons are offering. In addition my work is now revolving more around beauty for various cosmetics and hair care product lines…and I find that the increased resolution of Nikon and Sony to be more appropriate for that type of work. Although I do readily admit that Canon makes the best lenses bar-none. It’s just MY experience having owned in the last 3 years: D7000, 7D, D7100, 5DII, A7…and also having the pleasure of shooting with 5DIII and D800E on a couple jobs….I prefer Nikon, and find that the files are have much more latitude for my retouching.
I’m not tied into one system (as you can see from the equipment I’ve owned, I jump to whatever works for my needs at that time), and I really would prefer the Canon system IF it offered similar IQ to what I’ve seen the D8XX series produce. In a perfect world I’d have Canon lenses, D810IQ and AF, in an A7 body…but that’s probably asking too much. I’ll keep my fingers crossed for Canon as I really would prefer to spend this year using their 70-200, 135, and 100macro as opossed to Nikon, but I’m not holding my breath based on what I’ve seen as of late.
But what do I know…I only get paid to do this, not snarkily question people’s opinions whilst taking photos of my cat or “landscapes” at the local park for free *shrug*
Chillax. And how are those Canon files unworkable and the Nikons offer so much more latitude? My comparisons show very little difference, easily offset in post. Yes, I also shoot multiple systems.
1) lens wont be able to handle it, even outperforming 36 mpix FF is quite hard task (not many apart Zeiss and Leica can do that)
2) could be positive, cause Canon would need to use different tech to produce 50 MP (not possible with their current 500nm), Sony probably can keep using 180nm, but maybe they will go towards better one? (90nm? .. 65nm like Samsung would be great)
3) another positive is using downsampling to eliminate noise, also will be sorta needed in order to stash those files somewhere, HDDs might be cheaper, but good quality HDDs are not much cheaper.. (or bigger)
Its positive news, but it will be incredibly expensive camera, so I wont buy it. Probably will get it after like 3 years, when it will be old enough and cheaper.. (second hand FTW :D).
Also, I would prefer to see bigger sensors, not more mpix. 645 sized 36 mpix sensor for reasonable price would win for me over everything.. (apart bigger sensors of course.. 6×7 anyone? :).
“Also, I would prefer to see bigger sensors, not more mpix.”
I couldn’t agree more.
Most people don’t want to spend bigger sensor bucks though.
Moores law
Mostly BS, but well written.
24 mpix in aps-c has the same photo-site size 24mpix x (1.5^2) ~ 53mpix.
So the photo-site size is not a problem. The problem is the throughput from sensor to other components and processing power.
But the photo site size is a problem on those 24 MP APS-C sensors. Image quality is terrible!
I think the quality was quite alright on that. Especially, when on A6000.
People want to be able to zoom in at 300 percent and not be dissapointed. I mean, their photo’s can be disappointing but not the technical aspect of the image. We can thank post processing for that. Me? I just want Sony to get off the shiiter and bang out some A mount cameras. Heck, I’ll even take 12MP.
If the past record is anything to go by, we are going to have another winner by Canon, but without basic features such as a touch screen, and another buggy toy by Sony, which will score better in some loser paid website.
In 6 months, the Sony will be superceded by a new version with some new gimmick but no bugfixes. Sony are also going to issue a new 25 mm F4 wide angle lens and a new kit zoom.
You pretty much summed it up there. But the truth is a bitter medicine to swallow for most people, especially Sony fanboys.
The bitter medicine is the fact that Canon fanboys have had to endure the worst quality sensors for several years.
The new Sony sensor will make the Canon sensor look like a joke, just as they do with the current crop. Get real.
Yes, Canon will have another winner. Only because there are so many canon fanboys (or slaves due to glass investment) and they used to paying huge fees for sucky sensors. No doubt canon will put together a slick photographic tool. But it will be heavy as a truck and will be body only $3500 (if in 5 series) or $6500 (if in 1 series).
Not to mention the fact that all the current and very expensive Canon bodies with the crap sensors will drop in value and be available at giveaway prices on the used market.
What’s this nonsense with Canon sensors sucking? They are all right, I really cannot see any trouble. Or are you a paid shill?
Yes, I am a paid shill.
Or….We will be given another mediocre offering from Canon. With the same old average sensor…. and then be informed by Canon fanboys that it is the greatest camera ever made…
Sony fanboys will underexpose by 5 stops, then look at the Corners and note that the Canon is 12.78% noisier. That is science LOL
These are mostly paid shills or clueless beginners. The former are just doing their job, the latter cannot take good pics with the best tools on the market (ie Canon cams for you kids).
If it weren’t for the brilliant mind known as MyContentSites, this forum
would be boring as a stuffed goat. If this continues, I will never have to watch a
movie or read a book again. This is first class entertainment, and we
learn something at the same time. He has many valuable insights about
photography, that we all can benefit from.
Absolutely. He should admin this site.
Yes, paying attention to a raving psychopath is a great learning tool.
Let’s just hope he can’t reproduced :0
The lower res cameras certainly don’t have the better image quality, the A7R is lightest and the Sony A7S the most expensive.
http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Sony-Alpha-7S-sensor-review-New-low-light-champ/Sony-A7S-versus-Sony-A7-versus-Sony-A7R
Getting a lower res camera because you don’t think the lenses will match a higher resolution sensor is absurd because some lens at some point always will and surely we see all do to a point, why have the camera as a limit upon that resolution and all other image quality potential. The Sony A7S marginally beats Sony A7R in low light and high ISO but is it worth loss of all the main image quality characteristics otherwise in normal use…I guess this time round everyone should make a truly informed decision regards what resolution means in their choice of camera.
Is it fair to say now this itch has been scratched that low resolution sensor cameras of the peak performance type, no matter being as expensive as A7S is in difference, have absolutely nothing to offer in relation to dynamic range and colour depth- and in this case a drastic loss all the way down through the cheapest A7?
The A7S mainly has lower resolution because it’s made for video. Full sensor read-out, you know?
Yes, the persistent trollucation posts seem to think otherwise.
Doesnt really work though does it, 35mm frame and all that rolling shutter. Full sensor read out? And people wonder why we don’t have much better camera processing for this and that removal of ‘innate photographic compromises’ from the equation..its horribly expensive. DO you have an A7S?
8-bit, no internal 4K possible..need i go on? s-log? have to add stabilizing option lenses at the new crop focal lengths presumably with little overall benefit from the potential of the sensor, to complete compact system XD
Low light video with good lighting and so on im sure its ok but not the sort of general interest offering anyone expected..
As an example, here is another amazing photo I have taken. As you can see, the colors almost make the viewer get teary. The resolution I use has given me an advantage in my field. As a photography master I have learned to balance color and resolution.
The image is just OK, nothing special compositionally or color wise.
He knows that. He’s trying to be funny.
He’s so delusional it’s difficult to tell when he’s joking or serious.
He’s just a c**t, let’s leave it at that.
Just ok? Perhaps you need glasses! This won major awards!
I was trying to be nice, actually it’s rubbish.
Wow – that is great work. I need to be your apprentice.
Perhaps he will let you hold his light meter.
Is that a metaphor?
Where is the yellow?
I have a picture I took one time of a bird. Can I show you so I can get some constructive criticism from you? You are a master.
Yes please share
Great, thank you. Here it is.
I could teach you many things
I am ready to learn.
Do you have a website we could visit so we can see a master at work?
Si
I know you are a master – and I was hoping you would notice my attempt at using the “rule of 3rds” to get the bird in the exact right place to make this image just “pop”. I know it is really good as it is – but you could probably give me some tips to make it even better.
XD 😀
:0
Bla bla bla, my old man’s a mushroom.
So how are things going in the “The Last Of Us” world? Did the fireflies found a cure for the lens fungus disease?
not one in this thread has NEED for 50MP.. otherwise he would have bought a medium fromat camera already.
you are all clowns.. wannabe tech geeks…. i bet 80% have not taken a single picture this week.
People stop laughing at my posts! I am a serious master photographer, not a clown. If you want to be jelly trolls go elsewhere!
Mmmmm, jelly trolls in my belly *salivating*
We have camps. Some people think you’re just incredibly dumb. Others think you are a Master Troll. I mean someone who honed his trolling skills to perfection. And some would assume you’re both. It’s somewhat amusing. For now. Long term it’s gonna be tiresome.
you know what i do when i see a sony shooter…. i spit in his face!
fuji rules!
Fuji are cetainly bringing out some very nice cameras for sure and I think you will find that women use Sony so it is his or hers face!
Si
Only stupid woman or men….
Why be offensive, is it necessary?
Si
It’s a real shame that you spend money on any camera with that mentality. It’s a complete waste. Saying this as a Fuji shooter.
It’s going to be great, 50 megapickles of high IQ (Sony) versus 50 megapickles of noise (Canon). Probably you can use a Canon sensor as a cryptographically secure random number generator at the pace Canon keeps lowering DR and increasing shadow noise.
The shadow noise and banding of the Canon sensor can be used as a creative tool, the new sensor has actually enhanced this great feature.
When wlll sony get a decent lens lineup? rotfl…..
I guess when you moron died or when a new lens mount is introduced. 🙂
So the tired old lens lineup makes up for the crap sensor?
Do you take many pictures yourself? Aside brick walls and statues?
If I shot Canon, would limit myself to shooting grey cards to prevent banding. The good thing about Canon is that you have a relatively large group of fanboys forever present to give you validation.
Don’t forget the red hue shift that makes skin tones look so unreal.
Depending on where you live, that might not be a bad thing. Ever seen an Englishman or a Finlander?
Yeah, terrible problem. How are your statues coming out?
With a red shift. LOL
None of these nincs takes pictures. They are paid shills, and ignorant at that.
Canon has a new name for it’s 50MP sensor range: The enigma machine, I shot their new campagne commercial called “the imitation game” the new mirrorless EVF less camera includes a touch screen and a nice simple menu layout. the camera can go all the way up to ISO 640.
are all sony shoother retarded?
Yes!
No we are actually very educated. Why would you propose such a thing?
Some of us are Masters ;-} but on a serious note the fact that you label people with a medical condition that is both challenging and debilitating for those who suffer is sick.
Si
Are you retarded?
Seriously?
Si
He’s right. Who the fck signs comments?
+1
I do so what?
Si
well you seem to be mentally ill….
You got that from one comment, you are clearly in the wrong profession if you are not in mental health already.
Si
Joking and even trolling can be fun, but personal attacks are just so unnecessary. You contribute nothing of worth to this forum.
Are you retarded?
Your grammar and spelling are abysmal, so honestly are you just slow or mentally retarded? Or should I say “special”.
Your grammar is abysmal too, as is mine
lrktjggtngnt knkgntt gmggmkgm gtgmt gtgmddcönj hgvråfg gtgtbgmg ! ghjpkhg vflv,l bbhmhnmhnhm gbgmbgkmkmölmlkmgkmkmbgkmgkmbkmbkmkb b
ujuuunnn?
Someone please remove the gags from his/her mouth.
Of course, the Sony A7S is more than just a stills camera; it’s a souped-up hybrid camera with a host of professional-level video features, including impressive 4K video capture, higher bitrate Full HD, and customizable Picture Profiles with SLog2 gamma — straight from Sony’s pro-line of camcorders. While 4K video does indeed look spectacular — with lots of fine detail and great dynamic range — the convenience factor for shooting 4K on this camera is significantly hampered by the requirement an external HDMI recorder to capture the 4K signal. In short, 4K capture on a full-frame sensor packed into such a small body simply generates too much heat to record internally simultaneously. With 4K HDMI recorders relatively few and far between at this point in time, not to mention expensive, the A7S is, unfortunately, reserved for more high-end, professional users if 4K is your thing.
You just keep on giving! SAR readers are a lucky bunch!
Thank you for your kind words
Go on.
Copying my art makes you an artist huh? I have a BMPCC anyway, for the colour and price and compact form factor.
As we have not seen a piece of your own art just you touting others work it is difficult to say.
Si
My unique avatar is art.
Understand that but surely you have a website, Flickr or similar account we can look at? SImple Yes or No will do!
Si
Yes in as much hundreds, must move to gather the suitable content 🙂
well lets have a look then, I would welcome your comments on my website and work, especially my gear choice. http://www.slawrencephotography.com
Si
If that is your site, i would suggest not using wide angle all the time, and rather, following my ‘natural way of perspective’ 🙂 I would advise you to use colour as much as possible, not negate it always, as it adds a lot of potential dimensionality to an image and realism or even surrealism if that’s your thing. I like the crisp processing style, but again i advise you use colour too, that will help you limit tonemapping to the bare essentials and set the contrast instead. If the sky highlight goes off colour, put it back high 🙂 and so on. You have a self portrait with you shooting against a mirror, this is very instructive, with around absolute normal lens 42mmish or with a zoom and on 35mm camera, get as close as you can without distortion…to make it a natural viewing distance as you well might in that space looking at yourself in the mirror…here you use too wide an angle i think, and shoot from too far away. same for all ‘subjects’ whatever scale they might be, person, house, tree. I very much approve of self awareness and the way you are shooting yourself in that way, honestly 🙂 Shoot others like you shoot yourself.
wow thank you so much for all the advice and comments. Yes it is my site I have no need to plunder or steal the work of others. As for my over use of wide angle lenses I am not sure how that is an issue. The majority of my work is church architecture and by the very nature of the subject it demands a wide angle lens and similarly so does my street photography. As for the use of B&W over colour it is purely a personal choice and I find my church and street photography looks better in B&W.
Again thank you for taking the time to reply and comment.
Si
Your welcome 🙂
Its true, you are limited when shooting long and for a distance, especially in a building, however, what leaps to my mind is …shoot straight down the building…shoot level and make the most possible of those shots, with patience 🙂 Perhaps, if it is allowed, when someone is handling proceedings there in some way for human subjects. Who knows, if that place went in a month that person would have the image at least of them there.
I find your colours really upsetting, so I understand you prefer black and white. You may want to look into your colour profiles, for the screen and for the camera. A non-Sony camera also helps.
In the meantime here is a taste of what I can do. Here is a picture of my girlfriend.
I know that’s not your picture as I KNOW WHO ACTUALLY TOOK IT you phony sod!
I am sure it is just someone who looks similar, this is my girlfriend.
Send me another picture of her and prove it then? One shot in England where you live!
Ah, you’re caught in another lie I see!
spamming sh.t is lame, at least post some quality stuff
Hummm… Something is wrong in this picture, it looks more like Bait of Babylon !
You people are just disgusting.. you are not Photographers you are disgusting scum.
A phone call to your therapist is in order, try to remain calm by taking deep breaths.
A lot of people are thinking that this will be a “50mp battle” and one or the other will be definitely better.
(Canon or Sony, probably depending on whatever gear the highly opinionated commenters currently own…)
But what if Canon’s using Sony’s sensor? (Like they did with G7x)
Then the differences would mostly be in the processing.
That may be the case, Canon may be bluffing about the new sensor and be sourcing it from Sony. Either way it’s a good thing for Canon.
The way I see it is this is between canon and nikon. Ever since Sony provided their highest resolution FF sensor before putting it in one of their own this would never be about Sony. They cannot compete in the DSLR/t market. They assured it themselves. Hell, even nikon gets more out of Sony sensor’s than sony. This is also why Sony dislikes the a- mount and forging full speed ahead on the e-mount. They can compete in that market. It will be interesting to see what canon can produce since their sensors seem to lack in comparison to Sony, but I do prefer the canon colors to Sony straight out of the camera. if canon fails with their new sensor and actually realizes they are behind in sensor technology and just do what nikon does and use a Sony sensor, then Sony can provide sensors to both nikon and canon and they can stop making cameras all together, except the e-mount and RX cameras. I don’t think us a-mount users will ever see a great a-mount camera and I have the 99. Sony will make sure of that.
What the heck is with this mediation bs.
Battle? I bet, they’ll be using the same Sony sensor anyways. (Remember, Canon and Nikon are already using Sony Sensors in some cameras.)
So “Battle” is not the right word. Or would you supply weapons to your enemy if you are in a battle?
I have also wondered this. On one hand it would be good for Sony to pull the plug on supplying their competitors with sensors, but on the other they probably make a lot of money from selling them and they don’t have the market share on camera bodies…yet.
I doubt they can keep the mirrorless system afloat without selling their sensors to a third party if the a-mount just barely pays for itself. I tink the steady income actually helps with developing crazy new bodies and sensors.
Copying and pasting is a chore. Liked the old format and site better. I guess this site just pays better.
(Ignoring the weird devolution of this discussion>) The best answer isn’t in the poll at all. 50MP will be indispensable for a few specialized photogs, irrelevant (to moderately annoying because of large file size) for most of us. I’d love to get one to use occasionally, but not as an everyday camera.
I want to hate this freaking A7. I keep trying to hate it, but everytime I take it out it keeps growing on me. As an A mount user it’s pissing me off. I feel I have no choice but to move over. So, I think by end of year this will be my new set up:
A7II
Loxia 35mm F2
Loxia 21mm F2 (if available)
Voigtlander 15mm 4.5 (New Helinar III coming out in spring)
Wildlife/Event Photography:
D750
15-30mm 2.8 Tamron (oh yeah, I want it)
24-70 2.8 something or other
Some big asss 400mm F4 that I’ve wanted for ever but Sony NEVER has had other than the overpriced Minolta.
I have to let go of my 135mm 1.8 Zeiss. It’s been holding me back from doing what I know can’t be ignored. I’m going to take a hosing on the 50mm 1.4 A mount Zeiss. But alas, you have to look toward the future. FE for hobbiest type work and D750 for growing wedding buis.
No lenses in the medium telephoto range……… How on earth will you shoot anything of variety whatsoever, while having to be as close as to shoot with 15/21/35 on the A7II..and whats more, why even get into that e mount now, with in body stabilizer which you don’t really need for those focal lengths and good fast wide apertures? And some sweet primes which are quite expensive and non transferable to say m mount use. Who knows, you might want to shoot them on something which has as short as that but not Sony, you all trolled this matter yourselves…Why on earth wouldn’t you wait for the Sony A7RII if that has been your characterization for how many comments? Sure i didn’t wait for a stabilized body A7R, but i mastered photography with the super sharp A7R so its all good.
I am waiting from Sony A7RII.
AND the A7II?! Why not JUST get some tele lenses, minolta ones if they are good, and use on adapter to the new A7RII
What will you get if there is no Loxia 21mm f/2?
The ZA50/1.4 is a pretty decent lense. Weather sealed and pretty fast AF.
Bokeh is also ok. Colors and contrast are on a hq level as expected by a ZA.
In fact not flawless, but questionable whether it is worth the price considering these flaws.
Sharpness is “just” fine in the corners up to 2.2, CA are quite pronounced as well as bokeh fringing under certain conditions.
That’s interesting thank you. I wonder if Sigma and such fast prime lenses have weather sealing and reasonable AF adapted onto Sony A7 cams. I haven’t even thought of a present solution to weather sealed lenses for my system yet. I’ll start considering it now.
https://fstoppers.com/gear/sigma-answers-your-questions-about-new-lenses-business-4409
”Fstoppers: Several readers wanted to know: “Is the 35mm weather sealed on Canon weather sealed bodies?”
Sigma: No, the only lenses that are weather-sealed are in the Sports category.”
As of owning most of the ZA and G for A-Mount, I went for the LA-EA4 due to budget reasons.
I could believe, that the 50/1.4A would have no drawbacks when the A mount version would be used via the Sony adapter.
I’d swap the 135mm for the Nikon 135mm F2. I need the autofocus with that lens. It’s my secret weapon at weddings.
Yes…I like that focal length too. And plural systems…Why are you doing all that? Starting to shoot Weddings as a business proper now?
Will you take the all compact manual focus and aperture set with Sony A7X cam along too?
A bit yes. I’m also slow and methodical. With that said, composing in an OVF with the camera off is my thing.
With JUST three focal lengths you could practically know them from sight and JUST position your camera in shooting. I’ll try doing that with all my favourite lenses, shooting blind. Actually come to think of it it is quite easy..But then i am the master and i make things in photography easy XD
We know that peripheral vision goes to about 8mm right, JUST go back from there, whatever is before us. yeah and USE nikon JUST to spite Sony the camera and electronics manufacturer and users of the best digital imaging equip.
JUST tried 24mm and it covers all i can see apart from things that are close and i don’t notice.
Thats 24mm…..It almost makes the 8mm seem arbitrary, even this 24mm looks like all you see in front of you…You really might want to consider some intermediate FL’s….
ZA 135mm f1.8 is the only reason I stay in Sony Camp. I like the close focusing ability of that lens
I do not need 50 Mpix for static landscapes. Many of my landscapes have between 80 and 300 MPix just by stitching one or more rows of images and they are printed up to 2m wide.
Why do landscape shooters always ask for more pixel and wider lenses? Stitching can give you any resolution and any desired angle of view!
But:
for portraits I would like to have more pixels for my OTUS 85/1.4 🙂
And for portraits I would like a touch screen for a fast setting of the focus loupe.
I like to stitch but I also like wide angle lenses for their perspective that you can’t get with stitching
Of course you can. Or do you mean “distortion”?
in case you mean distortion, you have plenty of pixels to correct that in PP.
For example, when you shoot architecture, where you may get a form of fish eye distortion of lines.
as we saw some pictures here, I may show you two examples and hope, that it is not too much OT.
The first one is from last week, made with the Leica M Monochrom (18 MPix) and the APO Summicron 75/2, stitch of 2×2 images hand held, 47 MPix.
The second real panorama is from 2005 made with the Nikon D70 (6 MPix!), stitch of 6 images portrait orientation. The result is 27 MPix 🙂
sorry, there is a bug in the editor, after editing the text one image appears twice 🙁
This is why I could never spend the money on a Leica. That second pic there is quite good…actually, these are all very good. I cannot tell them apart so much on a monitor that is. Maybe big prints the differences become apparent. I’m really digging that last pic.
Also, when you say stitch…are you using a panoramic ball head at all? Curious what you use. Thanks.
thanks 🙂
as this is about high MPix and Sony, here is one more.
Just to show, that we don’t need a new camera to shoot high resolution landscapes.
NEX7 converted to infrared and Rhinocam adapter with Hasselblad Zeiss Distagon 40mm/4, stitch of 10 images = 170 MPix.
Nice photo but the place would probably look good shot with a Sony.
Anton, the NEX7 IS A SONY 🙂
The lens is Zeiss with Hasselblad mount.
That is, what I love on these cameras, you can use any lens and if there will be a better mirrorless from any other brand in the future, you just need a different adapter.
I love infrared for landscapes, I remember this was a big thing to try in the 80’s. Have you ever tried the Cambo Ultima sliding back? It is a lot of fun if you want high MP. Used a converted one with my linhof glas. I’m thinking of buying an Actus for my mamiya lenses, but only if Sony comes up with the new 7R that does what I want 🙂
I only used the Rhinocam so far. It seems to do all that I want (but does not accept the A7R, only the smaller NEX bodies. I can use it stand allone with Hasselblad lenses or use it on the Sinar with LF lenses and any tilt and shift.
Here is an example, tilted so much, that the focus lies on the book cover and the apple on the book seems to be photoshoped into the image 🙂
NEX-6 on Rhinocam on Sinar P, about 100 MPixel.
you may find more in my flickr Sinar album:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/dierktopp/sets/72157641670093123/
Thanks, you have some really cool photo’s in there. Always wanted to buy a Rhinocam, it just seems like a lot of fun. How long does it take to shoot the entire frame? Would love to use it for portraits but not sure you can throw it around quick enough to get perfect setups.
I never would consider to use it for portraits. It is quite fast but still about 10 to 15 seconds for 6 images. As I used it, it seems to be ideal for “static” landscapes and stills. For architecture you can’t shift and if you want to shift, you have to use a 4×5″ camera –
BUT: 90mm on a 4×5″ is too short, as the Rhinocam moves the image plain too far to the back and the lens will hit the adapter at infinity. I feel, that 120mm and more is fine, but not ideal for architecture.
You can’t get it all :-))
I thought so, but I’m thinking more along the line of a person in relation to their art, Perhaps a single picture for the person in a more extreme composition and the artwork next to it. I think I’ll order one for my a6000 will be interesting to see what the mamiya TS lens does on a basic rhinocam setup.
I see your point about the image plain
The book and apple picture is funny, it does look like it is two separated elements, but I won’t be using such a fancy setup 🙂 After paying $30 to get a single 120 roll developed and scanned at pretty poor resolution I think this is going to be fun and relatively cheap. a lot cheaper then buying any of the sony lenses hah.
are we getting OT?
I payed 600€ for the Sinar P and 350€ for a Schneider120mm Macro lens.
And you get into an interesting new world 🙂
The only analog I would use now is the this year coming NEW55 Polaroid type film for 4×5″ :-))
Ok ordered a rhinocam set nex / mamiya from amazon, should arrive in a week or two. Migth have something worth sharing in a month or so 🙂
I think, you will like it – but don’t blame me :-))
BTW: I wrote a post at Steve Huff about the Rhinocam in 2013:
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2013/08/22/170-megapixels-with-a-sony-nex-camera-and-vizalex-rhinocam-by-dierk-topp/
when I started stitching over 10 years ago, I used the cheep Panosaurus
pano head and adjusted everything to the nodal points with marks for different focal lengths of the zoom. But I found out, that this is only important, if you have real foreground. So I got lazy and shoot most of my pano hand held, sometimes with a normal ball head and got the new Uniqball some time ago.
For perfect stitched stills I use the Rhinocam and Zeiss lenses and the tiny NEX-6.
BTW: I printed the third panorama on 50x150cm and it looks great 🙂
I do landscapes, and I struggled with the limitations of stitching particularly when there is movement in the scene, e.g. a moving boat, people moving and walking, waves on the ocean. Plus, it’s a pain in the behind to review your digital catalogue because your archives consist of masses of part-photos that cannot be reviewed since the total picture requires stitching to see it. Also, stitching is hit or miss when your camera is not perfectly horizontal, for instance, when you point the lens up or down.
This site is starting to be useless, too many trolls and little information.
@ admin: Any rumors about A99II yet? february is closer still.
SAR Already answered…
“I got this info from different sources: The new A99 successor will ship early 2015. The weird thing I heard from one of those sources is that the camera may be announced 2-3 months AFTER Photokina. I don’t know what this means. Maybe Sony is only going to display a prototype of the A99 successor at photokina without releasing specs with full announcement coming 2-3 months after.”
I have to agree it is a shame as the admin puts a lot of effort into the site and it clearly shows. It is a shame that those who troll, bully and lie cannot be removed.
Si
I agree, you and I are good users who only seek to help others. All day I see people with anonymous accounts come here to troll. I wish there were more like us, we are a rare pair you and me.
uuummm, please do not compare yourself with me that is not a compliment.
Si
I understand we have different styles, I am more speaking along the lines of helping people. We are both exactly alike in helping other users but 100% opposite in our photography.
as I suggested before, you could help many of us beginners, when you give us a link to your online gallery!
And even more, it could be of more help, when you would offer all your knowledge in a book instead giving it here for free.
Me thinks one is not quite a Jedi Master yet!
Si
Don’t worry friend, dierk will learn at his own pace. We just need to focus on our style now.
If you help people by calling them politiotrolls the second they don’t completely agree, then yes you have been helping everybody here 100%.
Sharpshooter has changed accounts yet again, afraid you get too many negative flag clicks, it does not matter you will get all new ones. As long as you keep talking rubbish people keep disliking you. then again, as a troll you are just here for the attention.
slowshooter / Gary has been a menace here for months and is trying to play holy cow, I guess crack doesmake you schyzo bi polar.
The problem is that admin gets some refund by guys clicking and buying something on the advertiser pages he’s linking.
As he is doing this all by himself I can imagine that there is no way to “rease” all the troll posts. In addition it is also always difficult to differentiate between trolling and joking.
Guess we have to live with it like it is.
Stella job is being done too.
Si
Just click the flag on each post you think is pointless, if it get’s enough votes it will disappear.
Alright, 400 comments here already. Let’s see if we can crack the 700 mark the previous bloated post couldn’t.
The embarrassing reality of our times, just like armchair
generals…armchair photographers with a lot of moaning, a lot of
groaning, a lot of debt they think the world owes them and therefore
they immediately have the need to punch the keyboard in a relentless,
endless, meaningless effort to make themselves feel like they truly have
something to say.
Maybe they are just trust fund babies.
Too many trolls, unlucky with their brand and system.
please know that a few on this forum are actually low paid trolls “turks” hired by can/nikon to disrupt and instill confusion and mistrust.
It is money well spent especially with the beta-male / inferiority complex/ unconfident type that many sony shooters unfortunately are.
Did she break up with you ?
It’s ok , we’ve all been there
Here is a bit of info Andrea probably never read:
https://help.disqus.com/customer/portal/articles/466242-using-the-blacklist-and-whitelist
So we are heading for 50Mp now? Which requires expensive lenses to capture those, of course. What happened to the 1000 dollar kit that includes a couple of lenses? Oh, right, that is Canon and Nikon territory (with some Olympus to garnish it). Had an A58 for a while and had the opportunity to compare it to a Canon T4i with STM kit lens (not mine). Boy, what a difference in build quality – and video usability. It’s a shame Sony practically gave up that section of the market. Sony’s hectic, whimsical marketing course makes it hard to stay faithful to them. I am just not ready to throw 3000 dollar at a system change and I’m pretty sure I’m not alone in this.
This is a fair point.
Si
You get what you pay for… If you want a camera from the 90’s cool, pick up an entry level DSLR.
for me a camera body is like film in the analog days. At that time we got new films with better emulsions all the time. A digital camera today is not that much different, but more expensive. But hundreds of roles of film and all the processing and printing has been very expensive too!
How many negatives do you have, that you never saw as a real positive image? I have tons of that.
Since many years I started to invest in good glass and I am very happy with that 🙂
No one is making you spend more on high quality lenses? If you desire mid range, your wish is granted, you can buy a used a7 or a77 for fairly cheap. Just because you can’t afford doesn’t mean the larger public, or higher end users does not want. They will probably release a lower res version anyway to appease the HD space savers.
Sure I’ll take one! I’ve had the A7R since it came out, just got a A7II. Hoping for some good lenses to match.
It matters for me , gives me comfort in cropping for bird photography 🙂 Hurrraaay
Canon vs Sony? Like USA vs Zimbabwe?
Lol
It would be interesting to see Zimbabwe spanking USA
If Canon is the equivalent to the USA…I want no part of that….That country is messed up…
i personally see nothing wrong with the pursuit of a perfect image..and its not going to stop at 50mp.
I think 230MP should be just about right.
No interest in High Megapixel Full Frame cameras! I’m looking foreword to a no more than 24 Megapixel a7000.
I’m sure that gear-heads will line-up to buy 50+ Megapixels, then 75 Megapixel …
Probably the same guy who said I need no more than 8mp,, then definitely no more than 12,, Hard drive space is cheap, don’t you want the best possible resolution even if you downsize for current uses. Your photos are with more than you are giving credit for.
I shoot advertising. Standard magazine size is 8 3.8″ x 10 7/8″ At 300 DPI thats 2513 x 3263. A 16megapixel Sony NEX 6 is 4912 x 3264. So 24 megapixel (6000 x 4000) is overkill for me.
Me, I need no more than 24 megapixel. I have NO idea what you need and won’t try to tell you what I think you need,
BTW I do know exactly what my photos are worth.
And of course Canon will sell more than Sony and Nikon together 🙂
At more than twice the price of the Sony….Sony will sell a lot!!!
because there are more idiots in the wolrd
So true. People still buy iPhones. There’s still lots of idiots in this world.
So…what type of shoes do you wear. If it has any sort of name like Nike Addidas, etc. etc. etc. you are an idiot too who has been brainwashed by big names. Where do you eat? where do you buy your coffee? the idiots don’t stop at Cameras. Where did you get your education?…what type of phone do you use? the list is very long….
I didn’t talk about brand loyalty btw…
There’s a difference between buying popular brands because they are objectively the best or their design or brand appeals to you versus because of only the false perception that they are the best.
So what about all of the people who own Canon and are taking amazing photos under the influence of this false perception. Take James Nachtwey for instance…you know that dumb idiot using a Canon. I am not a Canon user and really mean to not sound like I am being difficult but the Snobby comments coming from Camera enthusiasts is off the hook.
Different strokes for different folks. Simple as that … You like inexpensive package for $999.99 with five lenses plus, plus accessories then go for it. You need for your work PhaseOne 50+ megapixels with let’s say three lenses for $60,000.00 then buy it … SONY is inexpensive system for amateur and serious photographer as well as pro-studios no question about it. Just choose what you need.
SONY is on the road of innovation so what is wrong with that. In time of film photography it was almost on daily schedule, that film makers broad new film-emulsions on market. In nowadays it is sensor which did replaced film. Everything else is very much the same.
We’re living in a golden age of photography. It’s never been cheaper to shoot high quality photos. Post processing can turn retro lenses into star performers if you know what your doing. I still can’t believe you can grab an A7 for now 1k slightly used all day long. Absolutely amazing and the video is a throw in.
Post processing can turn retro lenses into star performers if you know what your doing. Pictorially yes, Objectively no. Therefore you imply retro lenses aren’t already star performers and are trolling, like with your Sony ‘inexperienced enthusiast’ manual control and Nikon ‘uncles business’ ‘idea’. By having a set of three great primes, if one of them ever got made, you actually made a good argument for Sony system and Zeiss glass, why not? But do add the more Zeiss for tele. Forget the expensive compromised Nikon route altogether, that was JUST a sham after all, if it paid for itself, you were paying for the Sony side anyway..paradoxically, no enthusiasm at all shown= bad photography. Actually you are being both a great politotroll and a terrible example for budding photographers.
Next time say: 135mm f/2 can be more versatile than 85mm f/1.4, for instance at weddings, and a really easy to use system like the Sony and manual aperture lens set could be an excelent thing with a good range of Focal lengths covered. Thats the one i would use for wedding too, more discrete and using great primes for well ALL of those usual setup shots. Perfectly convenient to work with as they have manual aperture and compact size with perfect compatibility and possibly similar rendering/colour to match like a still sequence movie..or rather instead your curbed..and ‘lack of enthusiasm’.
:0
I agree 100%
it is a fantastic time for taking pictures!
If I was starting out today I would be giving the A7 a serious glance for sure. The fact it comes with two of my favourite lenses, 16-35mm and 24-70mm ZA is another reason. Sony are packing a punch and a half into the cameras and that is just sweet for all concerned.
Si
I have both, the 24-70 is good in the center and I like to use it for portraits, when I want AF, but the corners are very poor!
“Post processing can turn retro lenses into star performers if you know what your doing.”
It can, theoretically. Just like you can paint something in paint and I can turn it into a hyper-realistic painting with my wacom.
It’s not time efficient to do so and if it’s not time efficient it’s not cheap
Well, some pro’s might contend that anything non-Otus isn’t efficient either. Everyone has different degrees of tolerability. What I am saying is that you can take a 15 dollar Minolta 50mm 1.7 and a 1500 dollar 50mm 1.4 Sony Zeiss and with a little bit of work outside of wide open almost make identical images. Not in every situation because frankly the old MD lenses have some harsh bokeh, but it’s sickening sometimes how close you can get. Biggest issue is the contrast. You seriously need to pump it up PP to get some juice into those files. But what can I say, the digital era makes it possible- yippie!
Compared the price of the 70-200 to canon, nikon or or sigma lately? It’s not inexpensive. Have you looked at the price of the flash compared to canon’s offerings? Again, it’s not inexpensive
High megapixels = muddy and bad photos. The perfect compromise is 12mp and the perfect camera is A7S
lol no. High resolution images are the opposite of Muddy they are more clear. (of course the a7 has DR advantages though)
Tom_Tom, it all depends on what you do. Magazine are printed at about 150 DPI (photographer turns in 300 DPI files), so if you shoot either editorial or advertising 12 megapixel is enough. Lots of Vogue and Sports Illustrated covers shot with 12 megapixel Nikon D300.
Most editors won’t accept a 12mpix raw. Also, it doesn’t depend what you do. You can always downsample. Stop trying to turn this into a bullshit subjective discussion. More data is more data
no
Technology is awesome and changes often. 50mp is a great move forward, bringing us closer to medium and large format film cameras, but with the ability to tweak things in photoshop at a fraction of the price of these film cameras.
What a great time to be in photography. Not everyone wants or needs a large format camera which is fine. Sony is on the cutting edge creating the best sensors on the market it would be a shame if they weren’t taking advantage of their own sensor tech and only making it for
others.
Adopting the cutting edge Sony sensors and FE mounts means we have to be patient for
lenses to catch-up. 3rd party lens manufactures need to see where the
market goes before they invest in a new mount and it’s hard to invest in a new
product line (full frame mirrorless) which would be hard to adapt to multiple
mounts (cannon, Nikon, Pentax and so on). So 3rd party will take
time hopefully they are seeing the market shifting and start making lenses for
full frame mirrorless.
They are most likely waiting for Nikon and Canon’s response. If they come out with a better mirrorless option with more functionality in terms of existing lenses- FE becomes the new A mount if you catch my drift.
A7S MKII 12MP sensor shift get 48MP at $2599 w/IBIS release in Spring 2015
This will never be about canon vs Sony. It will be canon vs nikon via sony. nikon is not capable of making their own sensors and will use the same Sony sensor and get more out of it than the Sony counterpart. Sony made its mistake or was Sony’s plan to crush the a-mount when it developed the 36 mpix sensor, let nikon use it in three different cameras and Sony never placed it in any of their a-mount ff’s. Which is all of one underpowered ff camera. The only 36 mpix camera is the e-mount. It is time to get rid of the a-mount, Sony has. Sony hates the a-mount. Let’s face it, they actually released not only 3 ff e-mounts after the underperforming 99 but released a second version of one of them. If canon fails to produce a new outstanding sensor to rival the one nikon uses then canon should realize they should go the way of nikon and use Sony sensors. Then Sony will have no need to make any more a-mount cameras.
It might be, that Nikon bought exclusive rights to use 36 mp sensor.
I am not saying they didn’t, just that it was not smart if Sony had any intentions on continuing to seriously pursue the A-mount. It may have been Sony’s way of putting the a- mount out of its misery.
Yes – it is pretty clear that the a-mount is a problem that Sony wishes would go away. But right now they would still pee off too many people by killing it.
Wow, Why do commentators have such difficulty understanding the fundamental improvement this makes to Photographic tools? They totally miss the point. Its not about prints, its about FLEXIBILITY and image quality.
1. Digital zoom via crop
2. Digital noise reduction from down sampling
3. Improved resolution
4. Improved creative options via crop
All this equals Improved camera versatility and reduced cost.
I need less lenses to produce a wider variety of results.
I have vastly improved IQ from down sampled images and significantly improved noise reduction without loss of detail
I have multiple images from a single shot in post production
Mostly though there is improved compensation for the loss of detail from Bayer filtering and detail erasing interpolation.
Canon could use a 50 year old sensor and still out sell Sony. Nobody cares about sensors.
Yes, Canon could – and does do that. Reason – too many Canon slaves – too deep in Canon glass to ever crawl out.
Not just canon glass. The 600ex-rt is far superior to anything sony offers. The entire design of the canon cameras are better suited for professional work in general
Proly.
I think it’s awesome that I can own a 12mp A7s which has the best sensor on the market for me and slap my lenses on a 36/50mp rental for those rare occasions I want supper resolution.
Great point.
Yes, having to upgrade two cameras is awesome. What would be awesome is if the 50mp could take shots at 12mp to the same standard as the a7s. Oh wait, that’s too simple
available today! In fairy land right?
There are many Sensors that support Binning, available today.
Binning groups pixels together and averages their result, that gives you a few different resolution choices and the resulting increase in low light performance, color accuracy, and DR.
With up to 8x binning available (more commonly only up to 4x) that would make a 64 MP Camera that shoots 8 MP Images with several times better low light gathering ability. A boon to 4K Video.
Using 2x binning would leave you with a 32 MP Camera, with nearly 2x better low light performance, and the ability to use somewhat affordable Lenses.
Now for the ‘Top Three’ to put Binning in the Menu so we can activate it.
It would also be possible to use a very large sized Sensor to take single-shot-HDR Images, With a 64 MP Camera half the pixels would be set up using one Curve and the others used with a different Curve. That gives two 32 MP Images taken at the same time which could be combined easily in-camera for a blur-free HDR Image.
So large Sensors are not “nuts”, but we don’t “need” a Sensor larger than 32-40 MP unless we have a Printer that can print 4′ x 8 feet Prints (or Binning is made available in the Firmware).
It IS “simple” but like “Global Shutter” if the Consumer does not know about it and demand it, they just buy whatever comes out, then things will be as slow to change as they have always been.
Problem is, the diffraction limit of 50Megapixels happens at f7.8. Shooting beyond that only yields lower quality images. After f/9 you might as well be on a 36 megapixel camera, at f/11 you might as well have 24megapixels. The resolution bottleneck happens on the lens not the sensor. The only advantage you get with 50 megapixels (unless you shoot low apertures) is you can remove the high pass filter and rely on downsampling to reduce aliasing and moire.
Now if you’re an astro photographer who shoots f2.8 then these cameras will be amazing. 🙂
Wrong. You are confusing f/stop where diffraction effects become noticeable and f/stop where no more details appear with smaller pixels (the latter is known as “diffraction cutoff”)
I’m referring to diffraction limit. Diminishing return, Rayleighs Criterion. The spreading of light waves as they interact with surfaces. Basically the IQ of your image is limited by the diffraction of light waves as your aperture increases. Either way, at 50 megapixels after f7.8 you will notice your image getting lower and lower in quality the higher fstop you go. By f22 it won’t matter if you have a 50MP camera or a 36mp camera. It’s the same reason Apple sticks with 8 megapixels on their iphone with a locked 2.2 aperture. Any more than 1.5 micron pixels or 8 megapixels gives diminishing returns on a sensor that size unless they use a wider aperture.
It’s like having a 4k TV then watching cable television thinking your watching 4k. The information coming in is limited to what’s being broadcasted, usually 1080i or 720p. The lens can only produce a certain level of resolution as the lightwaves interact with the intricate surfaces of the lens, it doesn’t matter how many megapixels you have at that point. The higher the fstop the less IQ, it’s math.
Here is a sample illustration I did last year of diffraction on the Sony A7r with the Zeiss Sonnar 35mm lens, cropped in 100% from center. http://goo.gl/Vr89WS
I’ve regularly shot at F/11 or f/16. The photos are for print ads in magazines or catalogs. Print is about 150 DPI, at that low resolution you CAN NOT see the difference.
There is a BIG difference between perfect and the real world.
Yeah. I’m just a tech nerd. So I love all this shit. 🙂 I’m going to pick up the Sony a7rii and run it against my A7r at high fstops with imatest when it comes out, just to see. Should be fun. I’m sure this new sensor has more improvements besides just megapixels as well. That original modified d800 sensor in the A7 is about two years old now.
Lord Rayleigh didn’t create criteria for bayer sensors.
And your comparison is irrelevant because it compares same sensor with different f-stops when the question is same f-stop at different pixel sizes.
I expect if your argument has any merit Sony, Canon and Nikon are also aware of it and have engineered their products to take full advantage of this new technology. Tamron has a new lens designed to take advantage of the 50mp sensor and expect others will follow. If you don’t believe a 50mp sensor will do anything for you personally don’t buy it. Those of us who want the latest and greatest or see a need for a high mp sensor will buy it. I expect testing after the product is available will provide better information then guessing if the engineers got it right or not.
It will definitely be an upgrade for me. Imagine shooting landscapes at f5.6 then focus stacking to get the perfectly crips 50 megapixel 40″x60″ print with no diffraction with that Tamron lens. It’s going to be awesome and I’m definitely getting one. Tamron is already preordered. 🙂
And I’m not trying to argue with anybody I’m just pointing out the science of how light works and the diminishing return of quality that comes with high apertures on sensors with a higher pixel density. 50mp is probably the limit for a full frame sensor. And I’m not just making this stuff up, it’s not my opinion, it’s science and the camera manufacturers have said so themselves.
Quote from Fuji Manager Iida Toshihisa “.. the lenses having also a limited resolution, we are going to reach a maximum. We consider that 25Mpx is that maximum for APS-C. With the current technology available, it doesn’t make much sense to go higher.”
The tests this year will be fun to see, and it’s an exciting time for photography. But I will have to change the way I shoot to take advantage of this sensor. I stopped shooting landscapes at f/16 and moved to f/11 as my limit with the Sony A7r on the lenses I have because of the quality loss. With the A7rii I’ll probably have to shoot f/9 or lower and focus stack to maintain depth of field. But it will be worth it for me since printing 40″x60″ shows all sorts of unholy anomalies. 🙂
Again, I’d prefer an A7S II with 10bit 4K output…
But, well, it’s bound to happen right ? Maybe by next summer and better, announced at NAB ?
How about an A700. It’s 12 mega pixels as well, has a great OVF and No-K output.
I want to see a new top of the line camera with the same low light performance of the A7s but with the new rumored sensor, the one that they rumored a couple of months ago, with higher dynamic range, revolutionary low light capability and 4k at 240 fps with electronic global shutter on each pixel, Im hoping sony to keep their cameras lightweight, same with the lenses, also I’m hoping to see more fast lenses, improvements on autofocus, and improvements on the 5 axis stabilization system! for me that would be awesome! I really love the dynamic range of the sony A7s and the colors are amazing! but a new one lightweight with all the new stuff would be perfect!
I have used the Nikon D800e for a year now, it requires careful consideration to get the full effect out of the chip, very few lenses are good enough.
That said, I would love som more pixels, it is very natural that for some uses, like my art and landscape photography, we never get enough pixels. Most of my prints now are 1×1,5meters, I want to make better and bigger prints. So off course camera manufacturers need to provide increasing resolution, and fight to overcome the problems. I do not always need all that resolution, so using f-stops above 9 which causes diffraction even on the mere 36mp of the D800e, does not mean that the picture is useless, it is just not that sharp in the fine details. Science will show us where the limits are, but I am not sure we are even close today. Talking about the pixel race as madness is very narrowminded, there are many of us who know how to use every pixel available to the best.