# Canon EOS 3D at 46.1mp Next Month? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 25, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=11389"></g:plusone></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=11389"></a></div>
<strong>More confirmations of a big megapixel body for PhotoPlus


</strong>I have received more confirmations that the current plan is to showcase a new 46.1mp Canon EOS 3D at PhotoPlus in New York City in October. Along with the camera body, an official announcement for the EF 200-400 f/4L IS 1.4x will be made.</p>
<p>It’s also suggested that 2 other lenses could be appearing for PhotoPlus, though those details have yet to be finalized.</p>
<p>Last year for PhotoPlus, Canon announced the EOS-1D X. It is a show Canon has been known to make a splash with.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## EOBeav (Sep 25, 2012)

What? I thought the 6D was the hero we'd been waiting for?


----------



## caruser (Sep 25, 2012)

Yes! Yes! Yes!

Now 28 or 32 would have been enough, but I'll take 46, too ;-)


----------



## marekjoz (Sep 25, 2012)

I propose a short Q/A round:

Q: Is 46.1MP enough?
A: Yes, it is

Q: Is 46.1 enough?
A: No, you want 46.2 at least

Q: Will you be dissapointed with AF/FPS/DR/ISO/VF/LCD/Rate Button/camera format/sealing etc?
A. Yes you will

Q: Will it be a good camera anynway?
A: Yes it will be a great camera

Q: Will Sony/Nikon sensors be still better?
A: Yes they will be better

Q: Despite worse sensor will people be satisfied anyway?
A: Yes, those who will buy, will be very satisfied

Q: Will you complain about the price?
A: Yes, all the time. This is much too expensive.

Q: Will Canon delay it's delivery?
A: Most probably yes (80/20)

Q: Will be there a lot of preorders anyway?
A: Yes, a lot of them

Q: Will it have light leaks/paint scratches/firmware issues et.c?
A: Yes it will have

Q: WIll you buy it?
A: Yes, after 6-24 months when price drops. Or 5D3. Or 1Dx. Or D800...

Q: Will DxO value it high?
A: No, it will not

Q: Will Ken like it?
A: Yes, Ken will like it.

Q: How many people will tell, that this is finally the time they will switch to Nikon?
A: As usual the same guys

Q: Will it be better than 5D3 or 1Dx?
A: I will not answer that - I have to leave some place for you on this forum 

Q: Have you bought iPhone 5 already?
A: ...


----------



## dstppy (Sep 25, 2012)

Oh boy, time to go on the Nikon website and start posting about this 

Seriously though, there's a market for this (if nothing else, people that feel they need the pixels), but what's the price point going to be? $6k?


----------



## RLPhoto (Sep 25, 2012)

Please be sub-4000$. :-\


----------



## Gothmoth (Sep 25, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> Please be sub-4000$. :-\



ROTFL......


----------



## bdunbar79 (Sep 25, 2012)

46 MP? It won't be sub $4k, I'm predicting $4999 at a store near you!


----------



## RLPhoto (Sep 25, 2012)

Gothmoth said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Please be sub-4000$. :-\
> ...



A MAN CAN DREAM! ;D


----------



## pierceography (Sep 25, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> Please be sub-4000$. :-\



lol. Yeah, let's call it the 5.1D then. With Canon's pricing strategy, $4,500 is almost a guarantee. 6D -> 5Dm3 -> 3D -> 1DX. $4,500 fits in there nicely.

Does Canon even make a lens that can resolve 46MP?


** EDIT: ahem, >$4,500 is a guarantee. Though I don't think Canon will come within $1,500 of the 1DX, as it clearly wants that body to remain cream of the crop from a pricing standpoint **


----------



## RLPhoto (Sep 25, 2012)

pierceography said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > Please be sub-4000$. :-\
> ...



Yep, The 100L & 135L are beast. Perhaps the New 24-70 II?


----------



## Trovador (Sep 25, 2012)

46.1mp? WEAK! I'm switching to Hasselblad.


----------



## heptagon (Sep 25, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> pierceography said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Any Canon Lens, that can take a 2x Converter with 18MP APS-C can not only resolve 46MP Full-Frame, but up to 120MP Full-Frame. Resolution-wise we're not done until reaching pixel sizes of about 0.25 micron.


----------



## hammar (Sep 25, 2012)

pierceography said:


> Does Canon even make a lens that can resolve 46MP?



This. I assume they will have to replace 85/1.2, 50/1.2, 35/1.4 and 24/1.4 (the latter not likely anytime soon ofc).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 25, 2012)

hammar said:


> pierceography said:
> 
> 
> > Does Canon even make a lens that can resolve 46MP?
> ...



Wow, I didn't know that all of those lenses are outresolved by the 7D. :


----------



## bdunbar79 (Sep 25, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> hammar said:
> 
> 
> > pierceography said:
> ...



Shows what you know! 

Sorry, couldn't resist!


----------



## zhap03 (Sep 25, 2012)

$7000-$8000. Priced and marketed in parallel with the 1Dx as a flagship camera for the segment of users that complained about the 18mps of the 1Dx. You know who you are, now's your chance to put your money where your mouth is.


----------



## Chewy734 (Sep 25, 2012)

zhap03 said:


> $7000-$8000. Priced and marketed in parallel with the 1Dx as a flagship camera for the segment of users that complained about the 18mps of the 1Dx. You know who you are, now's your chance to put your money where your mouth is.



I don't see it costing more than the 1D X, since that camera is Canon's flagship. Also, I doubt the 3D/6D/etc will be weather-sealed like the 1D-series, include a CF shutter rated to 400k cycles, built-in battery grip, etc.


----------



## ronderick (Sep 25, 2012)

Who knows? Maybe the two lenses to be announced with it might be specifically designed to maximize the performance of the 46.1 MP sensor.


----------



## UrbanVoyeur (Sep 25, 2012)

Since they are calling it the 3D maybe it will have eye control focus! (dreaming)


----------



## nicku (Sep 25, 2012)

Canon Rumors said:


> <div name=\"googleone_share_1\" style=\"position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;\"><glusone size=\"tall\" count=\"1\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=11389\"></glusone></div><div class=\"tweetmeme_button\" style=\"float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;\"><a class=\"tm_button\" rel=\"&style=normal&b=2\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=11389\"></a></div>
> <strong>More confirmations of a big megapixel body for PhotoPlus
> 
> 
> ...



I believe Canon had this sensor and the technology to mas produce ti for some time (2-3 years) but they were somewhat afraid to be the firs that announce a FF sensor with Medium Format resolution. After seeing the huge success and IQ of the Nikon D800, they hurry to deliver it.


----------



## lola (Sep 25, 2012)

It's been a while since I saw a CR3 rating at a rumor and this is no different...
Yeah, a big MP camera is coming soon... It doesn't take a genius to predict that!


----------



## Woody (Sep 25, 2012)

Th 64 million dollar question is: will we see an improvement in dynamic range?


----------



## Bosman (Sep 25, 2012)

Why? All they will do is firmware upgrade the 1dx and it will be 46 mp. lol Now they can use the 1dx for 1dc and 3dx.


----------



## Stuart (Sep 25, 2012)

So Canon and Nikon are developing almost the same products together.


----------



## albron00 (Sep 25, 2012)

Is it gonna have 5D-like body? 
Any thoughts?


----------



## distant.star (Sep 25, 2012)

dstppy said:


> but what's the price point going to be?



Also, what will the price be?


----------



## DB (Sep 25, 2012)

UrbanVoyeur said:


> Since they are calling it the 3D maybe it will have eye control focus! (dreaming)



Or perhaps they're calling it the EOS 3D because it will have 2 x 23.05MP sensors (left-eye & right-eye) ???


----------



## unfocused (Sep 25, 2012)

> I believe Canon had this sensor and the technology to mass produce it for some time (2-3 years) ...



Yes, they've been using it in the 7D for three years now.


----------



## Studio1930 (Sep 25, 2012)

Stuart said:


> So Canon and Nikon are developing almost the same products together.



I think they are the same company and people. They just get us to fight it out on which is the better flavor of the year while they make money either way.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Sep 25, 2012)

If Canon thinks that a firmware update / unlocking is worth $8000, I wonder how they feel about an extra ±20mp.
Canon is hard to predict these days. It may come at $3500, $5000 but it can also be $8000 - $10,000.


----------



## DB (Sep 25, 2012)

albron00 said:


> Is it gonna have 5D-like body?
> Any thoughts?



Short-body. Canon have only ever used tall-bodies for 1D-series for PRO's to accommodate larger battery pack + additional buttons for vertical shooting. The 3D will be first and foremost a Landscape/Studio camera


----------



## Meh (Sep 25, 2012)

46 MP FF is SWEET. Will make a lot of studio and product and landscape photogs happy. For the rest of us... well.... meh... it's of lot of pixels. 46.1 MP is precisely 18 MP APS-C scaled up to FF. So this would suggest Canon has improved the pixel performance (noise, iso, etc.) sufficiently that they are willing to deploy it in a 46 MP FF pro body? If so, then giddy up little pony and let's get to shootin'... the current 18MP APS-C are very good (not perfect, but they are good) so if there is any improvement at all then we all be lovin' it. It could also mean that Canon will keep the APS-C sensors at 18MP and similarly improve performance which is great.


----------



## DzPhotography (Sep 25, 2012)

Not for me anyhow. I need high ISO performance for my event photography. I'll take a 5D MkII or a 6D to accompany my 1Dx as second FF body ;D


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 25, 2012)

DB said:


> Short-body. Canon have only ever used tall-bodies for 1D-series for PRO's to accommodate larger battery pack + additional buttons for vertical shooting. The 3D will be *first and foremost a Landscape/Studio camera*



Hmmm, "...first and foremost a Landscape/Studio camera." That sounds a lot like how Canon has described the *1Ds* line. After all, 's' = 'studio', right?

Still, unless this is called a 1D Xs, I expect anything other than a 1-series will not have an integrated grip.


----------



## PVS (Sep 25, 2012)

I can't imagine any landscape photographer would want a 46.1Mp tool with diffraction limit starting at f/5.6 already.


----------



## Zlatko (Sep 25, 2012)

Let's hope that one of the two lenses to be announced is an updated version of the old 35mm f/2 lens. A high quality, small 35/2 lens, similar to the excellent new 24/2.8IS and 28/2.8IS lenses, with quiet fast autofocus, would be a great alternative or addition to the large & heavy 35/1.4L.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 25, 2012)

PVS said:


> I can't imagine any landscape photographer would want a 46.1Mp tool with diffraction limit starting at f/5.6 already.



So...maybe they announce more TS-E lenses to get around the diffraction limits with tilt...


----------



## KAS (Sep 25, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> DB said:
> 
> 
> > Short-body. Canon have only ever used tall-bodies for 1D-series for PRO's to accommodate larger battery pack + additional buttons for vertical shooting. The 3D will be *first and foremost a Landscape/Studio camera*
> ...




This might be partially my own wishful thinking. But if this is going to be a splash (as described in the original article), then I think (and hope) it's a proper 1Ds replacement. It could be a new format sensor. Perhaps that 30x45 size or something encroaching on medium format.

Personally, I think there are enough sub-1DX full frame cameras in the lineup already (5D3, 5D2, 6D). If Canon is going to innovate and "make a splash" I expect a 1Ds replacement...which means it'll be somewhere around $10k.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Sep 25, 2012)

3D's price must be the average value between 1D(x) and 5D. 

2 * 3D = 1D + 5D

We can similarly deduct the price for the next 4D (the average value between 3D and 5D) etc.


----------



## KAS (Sep 25, 2012)

JohanCruyff said:


> 3D's price must be the average value between 1D(x) and 5D.
> 
> 2 * 3D = 1D + 5D
> 
> We can similarly deduct the price for the next 4D (the average value between 3D and 5D) etc.



At this rate, we'll ultimately end up with a different camera for every pricepoint at $500 intervals.


----------



## Nishi Drew (Sep 25, 2012)

KAS said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > DB said:
> ...



I'm surprised there's no mention of the 1Dc, how much was that "firmware upgrade from 1Dx" going for again?
As with 4K being a "special feature" what's stopping Canon from labeling the super resolution as a special feature that excludes itself from all others, and thus deserving of an insane price tag?
Then again rumours are rumours, this beast is either pro level, or in the spirit of the original 5D, a large mp FF sensor in a not-so-special-at-all body?


----------



## unfocused (Sep 25, 2012)

Meh said:


> 46 MP FF is SWEET. Will make a lot of studio and product and landscape photogs happy. For the rest of us... well.... meh... it's of lot of pixels. 46.1 MP is precisely 18 MP APS-C scaled up to FF. So this would suggest Canon has improved the pixel performance (noise, iso, etc.) sufficiently that they are willing to deploy it in a 46 MP FF pro body? If so, then giddy up little pony and let's get to shootin'... the current 18MP APS-C are very good (not perfect, but they are good) so if there is any improvement at all then we all be lovin' it. It could also mean that Canon will keep the APS-C sensors at 18MP and similarly improve performance which is great.



Yes, I think Canon has concentrated their sensor development over the past several years on improving noise rather than continuing to increase pixel density. If it really is 46 mp, then the improvements will almost certainly trickle down to an 18mp 7DII next spring.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Sep 25, 2012)

I doubt it will be anywhere near $10k nor above the price of the 1DX. R&D costs and costs of making such a camera are not nearly as high as they were back in 2007 when the 1Ds Mark III was $8k. If Nikon can sell the D800 where they are, Canon can sell this camera in the $4k-$5k range.


----------



## SwampYankee (Sep 25, 2012)

Will any of this finally drive the price of a 5DIII consistently below $3,000? I've been unable to grab the few that have been at Beach or Adorama. Even a 46mp a year away ought to knock a couple of hundred bucks of a 5DIII, no?


----------



## Viggo (Sep 25, 2012)

Large and heavy 35 L ?? 

I can almost guarantee that if this camera is launched with a 35 it will be L II.


----------



## fotoray (Sep 25, 2012)

Stuart said:


> So Canon and Nikon are developing almost the same products together.



Yes. It's a phantom company call Cankon


----------



## jrista (Sep 25, 2012)

marekjoz said:


> Q: Will Ken like it?
> A: Yes, Ken will like it.



ROFL.


----------



## Meh (Sep 25, 2012)

PVS said:


> I can't imagine any landscape photographer would want a 46.1Mp tool with diffraction limit starting at f/5.6 already.



"starting at" is the key... AFAIK other than very large prints it may not really start to be visible until much smaller apertures. Neuro or Jrista can tell us more I'm sure. But fair point, for serious landscape medium format would still be leaps and bounds ahead.


----------



## ablearcher (Sep 25, 2012)

If Canon releases such a high MP camera, then price will be one of the major factors accountable for its success. It does not look like an "upgrade" cam for 5DMKIII as it will appeal to a limited market (landscapes and studio shooters), so it will not be in any real direct competition with 5DMKIII (all around workhorse and event photography choice). That means that price of one will not cannibalize the price of the other, basically meaning the price of the high MP cam could be quite reasonable. Another fact to factor in - D800. If Canon's high MP cam is priced too high (as some suggesting over $5K) then it will be cheaper to get D800 and a couple of decent lenses and run a two system setup. I would keep my Canon glass for my current Canon body for event photography (I might grab 5DMKIII in a year or so if the price becomes reasonable) and get D800 with a lens or two for studio and landscapes. Considering both systems have their advantages that might be the most logical way to go. The irony of Canon's policy to overprice its products... Of course, if the price is at least somewhat reasonable then Canon's high MP cam becomes a more attractive choice as I already have the glass... Life will tell...


----------



## sagittariansrock (Sep 25, 2012)

marekjoz said:


> I propose a short Q/A round:
> 
> Q: Is 46.1MP enough?
> A: Yes, it is
> ...



+1 ;D


----------



## bdunbar79 (Sep 25, 2012)

Hey!! Those guys on here have switched to Nikon before.................And they can do it again


----------



## marekjoz (Sep 25, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> Hey!! Those guys on here have switched to Nikon before.................And they can do it again



They switch like on/off buttons. They are ON position somewhere around announcement and OFF the field some time after. 
Canon - Canoff.


----------



## jrista (Sep 25, 2012)

Meh said:


> PVS said:
> 
> 
> > I can't imagine any landscape photographer would want a 46.1Mp tool with diffraction limit starting at f/5.6 already.
> ...



Here to save the day!! ;P

Actually, diffraction starts at f/6.9 (same as 7D, which actually has the same pixel pitch as a 47.6mp sensor...so a 46.1mp sensor would probably actually have a DLA of f/7.1 or so). And the diffraction limit is simply the point at which the airy pattern (vs. the airy disc, which is the central peak) STARTS to affect surrounding pixels. The outer region of an airy pattern is generally a far lower intensity than the central airy disc. You can keep stopping down beyond the DLA, as it would be a couple stops before the airy disc becomes large enough to affect more than a single pixel and exhibits as detail-eating _diffraction softening_.

You also have to keep in mind...a sensor with smaller pixels will only experience *diminishing returns* beyond the DLA. Once diffraction starts affecting resolution, that does not mean that your awesome 46.1mp sensor will have WORSE quality than a lower-resolution sensor. Simple fact is a lower-resolution sensor is physically incapable of resolving as much detail as a higher resolution sensor...always. In the absolute worst case scenario, say f/22 or f/32...or f/64, a 46.1mp sensor will only ever produce images "as bad" as a lower resolution sensor. A higher resolution sensor will never produce images that are "worse" than a lower resolution sensor (from a resolution standpoint...noise is a different aspect of IQ, and out of context here.) 

Until you reach the diffraction cutoff frequency (the point at which pixel size is the same size or smaller than the wavelengths of light), you can continue extracting more detail with higher resolution sensors. As such, a 46.1mp sensor will always be better than a lower resolution sensor, regardless of the aperture used. Even at f/8, f/11, f/16 for landscapes...a 46.1mp sensor is going to keep extracting more detail...even if its minimally more, its still going to be more than say a 36mp sensor, a 22mp sensor, an 18mp sensor.


----------



## cliffwang (Sep 25, 2012)

PVS said:


> I can't imagine any landscape photographer would want a 46.1Mp tool with diffraction limit starting at f/5.6 already.



Finally Canon feel pressures from Nikon. I believe not only landscape photographer want to get this camera. Even I taking pictures only for family want to get one if the price is below 5K. However, I will skip this generation since I already got my 5D3.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 25, 2012)

jrista said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > PVS said:
> ...



Actually, the easier solution is just to use a wide angle lens, because as we all know, wide angle lenses have a deeper DoF, and so are not affected as much by diffraction. 



...and yes, I know the above is complete BS, but I figure why not start anouther argument, since really, this is a CR1 rumor, and we're still left with 'Canon either will or will not release a high MP body in the near or distant future'...


----------



## jrista (Sep 25, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Meh said:
> ...



LOL. Sorry, I updated my answer when you were quoting it. 

I liked your original idea....for Canon to release more TS-E lenses. I would love to have a full range of TS-E lenses with the same kind of IQ as the *TS-E 24mm f/3.5 L II*. I like the 17 and 24, but a 35mm would be nice as well.


----------



## Meh (Sep 25, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Meh said:
> ...



;D


----------



## Bruce Photography (Sep 25, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> PVS said:
> 
> 
> > I can't imagine any landscape photographer would want a 46.1Mp tool with diffraction limit starting at f/5.6 already.
> ...



I'm a landscape guy that shoots D800 and D800E and in my real world testing I limit most of my shots to F14. At F16 the sharpness change becomes noticible. I do use the Nikon 24 TSE which I'm not that pleased with. I miss the Canon 17 and 24 TSE lenses which are great. If Canon can make and DELIVER a true 40+ MP camera (not like the Nokia way of counting) I will buy it (assuming it is less that 10k). I was going to put in a few other things I would like to see for the money like 1D Body (I always buy the grip anyway), better dynamic range (like the D800 - I love it) but my mind is blank. 

From what I've learned about 36MP with the D800, the diffraction point is actually higher than the vendor states in actual outdoor settings. I really need to shoot around F11 so whatever Canon needs to do to make this happen, I hope they do it (but I still will buy whatever 40MP+ camera they make). I want to use my Canon lenses again. My Canon 5D3 sits in the bag most of the time until twilight. While I think that Canon has had this capability for some time, I wonder why they let Nikon have the market this long (this last 6 months) without actual products to counter with - why did they wait? (too busy with their cinema cameras?) Well who knows... Since we waited over a year for the super tels to become available who knows this time. I was VERY impressed that within a week after the Nikon D600 was announced, we had pictures of Nikon D600 boxes sitting at retailers - imagine - new cameras waiting for a good home and then, even multiple ones at retailers. I didn't buy one because I have the D800 but if I wanted one I could just buy it. Imagine....


----------



## Ricku (Sep 25, 2012)

I won't celebrate before I see evidence of a significant bump in DR.


----------



## Meh (Sep 25, 2012)

jrista said:


> Meh said:
> 
> 
> > PVS said:
> ...



Knew you could!

I think what happens is that when us science guys (I only loosely, very loosely, include myself in that category) make statements such as "diffraction limits" and "diffraction starts to affect image quality" we mean that on a calculated basis where there is a measurable affects (e.g. where the tail of the Airy disk from one pixel is at least 5% of the intensity of the adjacent pixel or something thing like that) but the non-science folks (i.e. normal and socially tolerable people ;D) think we mean that it starts to become noticeable and visually affects image quality. And they might think it means that beyond the stated limit IQ drops off a cliff. We need to do a better job explaining these things.

Thanks to Jrista and Neuro for always providing the technical voices of reason and truth!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 25, 2012)

One bad thing about 46MP is more than 5fps seems VERY unlikely. 38MP would be plenty enough and if it could do 5fps at 46MP it could do 6fps at 38MP. In all honesty, noticing 38MP vs 46MP is a LOT tougher than noticing 5fps vs 6fps. OK sure they can brag it's a fully 10MP above the D800, but making it speedy enough for action/wildlife (which the 38MP reach would help with too) would make FAR more practical sense to me. Sure some pure studio and landscape would take the 46MP, but they'd be making it a lot less well-rounded, making it more specialized and likely higher cost, for, IMO, not THAT much practical benefit.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 25, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> hammar said:
> 
> 
> > pierceography said:
> ...



I didn't realize all of those were unusable on the 7D :


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 25, 2012)

lola said:


> It's been a while since I saw a CR3 rating at a rumor and this is no different...
> Yeah, a big MP camera is coming soon... It doesn't take a genius to predict that!



;D


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 25, 2012)

Bosman said:


> Why? All they will do is firmware upgrade the 1dx and it will be 46 mp. lol Now they can use the 1dx for 1dc and 3dx.




;D

(and guess what, the 5D4, will be an unlocked 5D3 )


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 25, 2012)

Nishi Drew said:


> KAS said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



part of me think the 36MP with amazing DR will have to keep the 46MP Canon price in check, WAYYYY in check unless the new Canon also has top DR ;D

but part of me thinks Canon went 46MP 5fps instead of a more all-around useful 38MP 6fps (also with more perfect video reads) because they are oooooo it's a full TEN more MP than the D800 now we can charge whatever, maybe even $7000, maybe even $9000 and will give us a less all-around camera and go MP crazy and dump a higher price and also think they don't need to match DR just because it has 10 more MP now :'(


Instead of focusing on what would make it a more all-around camera, part of the desire for MP is for more reach and when you want reach you often times would want better body response and more fps, once you are to 6fps you can at least live withit, even it it is not ideal. So giving it just a few less MP, which will be harder to spot anyway for landscape prints than frames an extra 1 fps apart difference and crop modes instead of silly sRAW/mRAW would make it a really cool all around camera instead of a specialized studio/landscape cam (at a perhaps higher price and lower sales).


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 25, 2012)

Meh said:


> PVS said:
> 
> 
> > I can't imagine any landscape photographer would want a 46.1Mp tool with diffraction limit starting at f/5.6 already.
> ...



quick test:
does your 7D set to f/8 capture more detail than your 20D (or 5D2/5D3 center APS-C crop) set to f/5.6?
There is a good answer.


----------



## GuyF (Sep 25, 2012)

fotoray said:


> Stuart said:
> 
> 
> > So Canon and Nikon are developing almost the same products together.
> ...



Cankon is a dumb name for a joint venture. Surely they'd take the first part of Nikon and the second part of Canon and call the company Nik.... oh, bugger.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 25, 2012)

Meh said:


> I think what happens is that when us science guys (I only loosely, very loosely, include myself in that category) make statements such as "diffraction limits" and "diffraction starts to affect image quality" we mean that on a calculated basis where there is a measurable affects (e.g. where the tail of the Airy disk from one pixel is at least 5% of the intensity of the adjacent pixel or something thing like that) but the non-science folks (i.e. normal and socially tolerable people ;D) think we mean that it starts to become noticeable and visually affects image quality. And they might think it means that beyond the stated limit IQ drops off a cliff. We need to do a better job explaining these things.



good points

all too many do seem to take it as a hard limit and some even take it to mean that the higher density camera will even do not just instantly no better, but actually worse, once past the limit


----------



## V8Beast (Sep 25, 2012)

Hell yeah, 46 mp baby. Now I can crop the $hit out of my images instead of properly composing my shots or buying the appropriate glass.


----------



## V8Beast (Sep 25, 2012)

ablearcher said:


> If Canon releases such a high MP camera, then price will be one of the major factors accountable for its success. It does not look like an "upgrade" cam for 5DMKIII as it will appeal to a limited market (landscapes and studio shooters), so it will not be in any real direct competition with 5DMKIII.



Wait a second. I thought studio and landscape shooters represent the majority of the market, at least according to all the whiners on Canon Rumors


----------



## psolberg (Sep 25, 2012)

I don't know if this month but this is coming no matter what. And expect even HIGHER resolution 50+ from Nikon/sony to follow. And to all those people what were complaining that 36MP is too much, yada yada, are going to be the FIRST to jump on this because ultimately it was never about the megapixels as much as it was the fact canon dropped the ball


----------



## jrista (Sep 25, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> One bad thing about 46MP is more than 5fps seems VERY unlikely. 38MP would be plenty enough and if it could do 5fps at 46MP it could do 6fps at 38MP. In all honesty, noticing 38MP vs 46MP is a LOT tougher than noticing 5fps vs 6fps. OK sure they can brag it's a fully 10MP above the D800, but making it speedy enough for action/wildlife (which the 38MP reach would help with too) would make FAR more practical sense to me. Sure some pure studio and landscape would take the 46MP, but they'd be making it a lot less well-rounded, making it more specialized and likely higher cost, for, IMO, not THAT much practical benefit.



There was also the mention (rumor) that it would be fully 16-bit. At a full 16-bits, 5fps @ 46.1mp is actually pretty impressive. Canon did release that 120mp APS-H sensor prototype a couple years ago, which had a reasonable readout rate. I can't say for sure, but if Canon is using some kind of hyperparallel readout like Sony, we should be able to get decent readout rates at high MP in the future. Whether we'll be able to get 10-12fps is anyone's guess, but 6..7...maybe even 8fps in the future?


----------



## jrista (Sep 25, 2012)

GuyF said:


> fotoray said:
> 
> 
> > Stuart said:
> ...



Hmm, I'd have figured on NiCan myself...but the day we see a joint venture by those two eternal rivals, hell will well and truly have frozen solid.


----------



## Viggo (Sep 25, 2012)

"Canon-Canoff" I am still laughing so hard. Great stuff! ;D


----------



## Razor2012 (Sep 25, 2012)

GuyF said:


> fotoray said:
> 
> 
> > Stuart said:
> ...



What about NiCan or CaNik? ;D


----------



## AmbientLight (Sep 25, 2012)

I believe the oldest variant is Canikon, isn't it?


----------



## jrista (Sep 25, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Nishi Drew said:
> 
> 
> > KAS said:
> ...



I am not sure any super high resolution camera is ever going to be an "all-rounder". The D800, even at a "low" 36mp, is really not a general purpose camera. It has its niche...effectively the same niche a Canon 46mp camera or a MFD camera has...studio and landscapes. I've never needed more than 1 frame per minute when doing landscape with any camera, so 5fps in a 46mp camera is pretty amazing to me. 

As for DR. If we gather up all the rumors so far, this 46.1mp FF camera from Canon could potentially have a thermally cooled sensor for better low-ISO noise (better DR), PLUS full 16-bit per channel color. Even if the thermal cooling doesn't give Canon sensors as high a DR as SoNikon Exmor, thermal cooling combined with two additional bits should give them better overall DR (assuming Canon doesn't jack up ISO 100 read noise to 100e-!!!  :''''( ). At worst, I'd expect them to have similar DR to the D800 with both improvements in place. The real question is whether thermal cooling and full 16-bit are simply wild rumor, or based on some kernel of truth somewhere.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 25, 2012)

zhap03 said:


> $7000-$8000. Priced and marketed in parallel with the 1Dx as a flagship camera for the segment of users that complained about the 18mps of the 1Dx.



... exactly, recently there was a bootleg shot of a Canon slide with a space next to the 1dx, that's where the 3d will go. 



bdunbar79 said:


> If Nikon can sell the D800 where they are, Canon can sell this camera in the $4k-$5k range.



It's not about what Canon *could* do, but about what brings them their best revenue - and the specs of the 6d shows that Canon is pretty confident to get away with almost everything because people are only talking about switching to Nikon, not actually doing that.

But even if I repeat myself: People, stop buying the 5d3! Wait and save for the 6d or 3d! (then the price of the 5d3 will drop eventually and I can get one )


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 25, 2012)

jrista said:


> Even if the thermal cooling doesn't give Canon sensors as high a DR as SoNikon Exmor, thermal cooling combined with two additional bits should give them better overall DR (assuming Canon doesn't jack up ISO 100 read noise to 100e-!!!  :''''( ).



Um, what's this thermal cooling supposed to be exactly? A fan on the side of the camera? Heat dissipation through a part of the camera that has a "never touch here" sticker on it?


----------



## jrista (Sep 25, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Even if the thermal cooling doesn't give Canon sensors as high a DR as SoNikon Exmor, thermal cooling combined with two additional bits should give them better overall DR (assuming Canon doesn't jack up ISO 100 read noise to 100e-!!!  :''''( ).
> ...



No details yet. It could just be a heat pipe cooler, which is an efficient way to passively draw heat away from the sensor and possibly to the shell. If heat is drawn away to multiple external dissipation points, none of them should be too hot to touch. Another option would be peltier cooling. A Peltier is a thermoelectric cooling device (TEC) that uses P & N type silicon nodes in an array sandwiched between ceramic plates to draw heat from one side of the peltier to the other. They are extremely powerful coolers in very small packages (say, exactly the size of the sensor die?). They generate their own heat, but the thermal differential from the hot side to the cold side can be on the order of tens to even hundreds of degrees. Even a moderately powerful peltier in a camera could cool the sensor to sub-freezing temperatures. Combined with an advanced heat pipe sink and maybe some fans, and you could dissipate a LOT of heat from a sensor, and nearly eliminate electronic noise if you cool it enough.


----------



## CatfishSoupFTW (Sep 25, 2012)

UrbanVoyeur said:


> Since they are calling it the 3D maybe it will have eye control focus! (dreaming)




the day that ever comes back... 

D: maybe it can?! bringing back that EOS 3 * (correct me if im wrong) seeing it shares a very similar name


----------



## marekjoz (Sep 25, 2012)

jrista said:


> Marsu42 said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



And Peltier cooling would require lack of LCD in the rear. Reasonable power and termosensors management could make such a solution really a breakthrough with relative small costs. The main problem here I see is a heat dissipation - some kind of quiet radiators or noisy fans would be neccessery and radiators could burn photographers hands. Radiator would heat other camera regions and most probably could cause weight increase. Anyway, it's really worth of consideration, if the radiator could have a good mount to the tripod plate, which could help dissipate the heat. There are landscape and studio shooters, who would be more than happy having much higher image quality, without even noticing, that the tripod is 5 degrees warmer.


----------



## jrista (Sep 25, 2012)

marekjoz said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Marsu42 said:
> ...



Why would you have to drop the LCD? Peltiers can be extremely thin. As for a heat sink, I mentioned a heat pipe cooler on top of the Peltier. With a heat pipe, you could draw heat away from the peltier and dissipate it at multiple locations around the camera body, distributing the heat load and eliminating the possibility of burning the user. you wouldn't even really need a "radiator"...a few heat plates along the outside of the body would probably do. With enough heat distribution, the camera would probably feel only slightly warm to the touch. Active cooling could add noise, but it could also be configured to only turn on if the sensor is particularly hot (such as when being used in the sun.)


----------



## xthebillx (Sep 25, 2012)

If it has an integrated grip, will the grip be heated?


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Sep 25, 2012)

I was thinking that Canon would go Medium Format before hitting this megapixel range. I guess Canon got some more tricks up it's sleeve!

This would be an awesome studio camera. I was thinking that if you use the smaller RAW size files, that this camera can double as a really good all-arounder camera. But with the proposed ISO range, it really wouldn't be much better than the 5DMK2 at that point. You'd have to go full megapixel to get all the use out of the camera. Because 5fps is pretty darn good for many people.

I do think 5fps seems pretty fast for all these pixels. That's a huge barrier for the D800. It's speed. I also don't think it will be in a Pro body either. Not that it really matters since a studio/landscape camera will largely be on a tripod.

At first I thought this camera would be around $4k. But now I'm thinking it will start at $5k and eventually drop to $4500. The 5DMK3 will be in the $2700 range by the time this thing comes out and it's a HUGE jump in price. Totally different markets though. Unfortunately I don' t think the 7DMK2 (if it ever comes out) will fit between the 3D and 5D. I got a feeling the 7DMK2 will be the camera the 5DMK3 should've been...


----------



## marekjoz (Sep 25, 2012)

jrista said:


> marekjoz said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



Sure it could be thin and I agree, that heat pipe on top might be enough. It's just a matter of average Peltier cooler power consumption as a function of it's cooling demands as a function of desired goal - temperature on a sensor. If you wish to go really low, then you need more power so the more heat dissipation. More than electric power used for Peltier will be necessery to dissipate as a heat. Some good solution could be thermal isolation of the sensor like in vacuum flask. Anyway - if you go really low, then you might be forced to remove the lcd from the back of the body.
Peltier cooled sensors are widely used in microscopy and you find there brands well known and often mentioned here. It's interesting who has patent for Peltier cooling of camera sensors?


----------



## marekjoz (Sep 25, 2012)

RGomezPhotos said:


> I was thinking that Canon would go Medium Format before hitting this megapixel range. (...)



I'm against taking away their R&D resources for a new battle front as there is still much to do in the DSLR area. Medium format would require another lenses, new body concept. Starting medium format would almost be for them like EOS Cinema line. Who knows how much negative influence on EF lenses and EOS bodies had research on EOS C product line? Maybe we could have 5d3 and 1 dx more than a year earlier and the promised lenses as well.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Sep 25, 2012)

Marsu42 said:


> zhap03 said:
> 
> 
> > $7000-$8000. Priced and marketed in parallel with the 1Dx as a flagship camera for the segment of users that complained about the 18mps of the 1Dx.
> ...



Exactly. Canon's BEST revenue for this would be in the $4k-$5k range. Charging higher than the 1DX makes absolutely no sense to either Canon or the consumers. Comparing the 6D to this isn't comparing apples to apples. The 3D or whatever is going to be for professionals and professionals know when something is priced more than double its worth. Canon knows this, and a prime example is the 1Ds Mark III vs. the 1D Mark IV pricing: the cost of making a great DSLR reduced over time, and this was reflected in costs in the future for new DSLR's. Again, $8k-$10k makes absolutely no sense to everyone.

Why compare the 3D to the 5D Mark III? Again, makes absolutely no sense because these cameras do not serve the same interests. I would ill advise telling someone to take a 1Ds3 to a wedding; I know people did it, but the 5D Mark II was a far better tool for that, relatively speaking.


----------



## RLPhoto (Sep 25, 2012)

Canon Will do whatever is in the best interest's of Canon. ;D


----------



## torger (Sep 25, 2012)

I think Canon thinks this is a niche camera, primarily competing with medium format digital.

Anyone familiar with medium format digital prices know that this camera does not need to be cheap. I think it is smart of Canon to make it a true pro body (unlike the D800) since it will then be more attractive as a "MF killer".

Even with a high cost body you will need the best lenses which will not be cheap either. High resolution photography is not cheap, so I would not spare any expenses on the body.

The 40 megapixel Hasselblad H4D-40 is $16,000 body only, and it is one of the cheaper MFD systems.


----------



## torger (Sep 25, 2012)

dilbert said:


> V8Beast said:
> 
> 
> > ablearcher said:
> ...



Yes the success of this camera will very much be about low ISO performance, since that is what high resolution photographers use. Will it have as good DR as D800 at ISO50/ISO100? If it is as "bad" as 5D mark 3 it will not be a MF killer.


----------



## jrista (Sep 25, 2012)

dilbert said:


> V8Beast said:
> 
> 
> > ablearcher said:
> ...



If you look at Canon's sensor technology, the greatest improvement since they added Correlated Double-Sampling around a decade ago is their microlensing. Gapless microlenses were the most recent evolution on top of having microlenses at all. Since that "innovation" (I'm not even sure Canon was the first to use it), Canon has really cheated their way by. Fundamentally, Canon sensor tech is a decade old, if not older...where as the competition is using sensor tech that has been innovated throughout the last decade, with major improvements as recent as a couple years ago.

Most people used to think that the only real arena left for improvement in sensors was megapixels, and people were sick of "more megapixels." Canon did actually listen to their customers cry for "fewer, but better, megapixels and MOAR ISO!!" Canon's failure, though, was to see that the competition has been doing both...improving the quality of each pixel while concurrently increasing megapixels. I don't think people in general thought that was possible...the old anecdotes (which are still profusely regurgitated across the net even these days) about smaller pixels being worse pixels are wrong, and people are finally beginning to realize that. Canon, who holds the largest user base, seems to be stuck, stagnant, and I think people are finally realizing they have been for a LONG time. Now that its becoming known that we can have both MORE pixels while concurrently getting BETTER pixels, fewer and fewer photographers will be satisfied with Canon effectively standing still with their sensor technology. 

The new demand is "More AND better megapixels!!", rather than "Better pixels at any cost, even if it means less megapixels." Personally, I think the demand is justified. Canon needs to get back into the game. They need to start innovating NEW technology, heat up the competition, and help drive prices down. That can only mean a win-win for the consumer...and being a consumer, I like my wins!


----------



## KitsVancouver (Sep 25, 2012)

bdunbar79 said:


> I would ill advise telling someone to take a 1Ds3 to a wedding; I know people did it, but the 5D Mark II was a far better tool for that, relatively speaking.



Why is that? I'm curious why a 1Ds3 would be a bad camera for a wedding photographer.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Sep 25, 2012)

KitsVancouver said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > I would ill advise telling someone to take a 1Ds3 to a wedding; I know people did it, but the 5D Mark II was a far better tool for that, relatively speaking.
> ...



Today, in 2012, I would not use it, IF I had either a 5D2 or 5D3. Besides, did I ever say anywhere it was a bad camera for a wedding photographer? No, there are better tools, NOW, however. You have much better ISO performance choices NOW. Technology improves and tools improve, and that is the only point I was making.


----------



## Zlatko (Sep 26, 2012)

dilbert said:


> V8Beast said:
> 
> 
> > ablearcher said:
> ...



Canon substantially improved on the 5D2 when they introduced the 5D3. There were numerous actual improvements, from substantially better high ISO performance to a much more responsive body to much better autofocus. Canon addressed numerous requests from pros. With the 5D3, the 5D series went from prosumer to pro. But then uninformed people whined terribly that it had become too expensive and somehow wasn't improved enough. Which leads me to conclude that many people want better products but aren't willing to actually pay for them; they will always decide that the better product is "overpriced".


----------



## Canon-F1 (Sep 26, 2012)

Zlatko said:


> . Which leads me to conclude that many people want better products but aren't willing to actually pay for them; they will always decide that the better product is "overpriced".



or maybe they just compare canon to other brands....


----------



## Zlatko (Sep 26, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> Zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > . Which leads me to conclude that many people want better products but aren't willing to actually pay for them; they will always decide that the better product is "overpriced".
> ...


I've done that comparison. The D800 is a fine camera, but the 5D3 meets my photographic needs much better. The 5D3 was designed as if the engineers were very attentive to my wishlist for a camera. The D800 was designed for other photographers' wishlists. As a result, there is nothing in the D800 that would make me choose it over the 5D3. But I was addressing the claim that people "want Canon to deliver actual improvements rather than the 'same old' that is marginally better ...". Canon has done exactly that with the 5D3.


----------



## Canon-F1 (Sep 26, 2012)

Zlatko said:


> As a result, there is nothing in the D800 that would make me choose it over the 5D3. But I was addressing the claim that people "want Canon to deliver actual improvements rather than the 'same old' that is marginally better ...". Canon has done exactly that with the 5D3.



and the 6D compared to the 5D MK2 or D600?

no question the 5D MK3 is a great camera.
but i understand that some landscape/studio photographer hoped for more MP and better DR.

and if you don´t care about high iso... i think it´s fair to say that the new 5D MK3 sensor is not such a jump.


----------



## Zlatko (Sep 26, 2012)

Canon-F1 said:


> Zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > As a result, there is nothing in the D800 that would make me choose it over the 5D3. But I was addressing the claim that people "want Canon to deliver actual improvements rather than the 'same old' that is marginally better ...". Canon has done exactly that with the 5D3.
> ...


I haven't compared the 6D to those cameras because it's not out yet.

Photographers who hoped for more MP and better DR will likely get the camera they want, just not on the exact day that they want it, and maybe not at the exact price they'd be happy to pay. Canon is a big company but not so big that they can meet everyone's needs all at once. The landscape/studio photographers will get their wishlist fulfilled on another day.


----------



## Etienne (Sep 26, 2012)

Zlatko said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > V8Beast said:
> ...



5DIII ISO performance is about 0.5 stops improved over the 5DII, if you are using RAW (doesn't everybody use RAW with the 5D series?). Don't be so "uninformed."


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 26, 2012)

Etienne said:


> 5DIII ISO performance is about 0.5 stops improved over the 5DII, if you are using RAW (doesn't everybody use RAW with the 5D series?). Don't be so "uninformed."



The 5d3 doesn't take the same shots like the 5d2 w/ 0.5 steps lower iso, that's too general. From the raw samples I looked at myself it's hard to nail down a specific number because the iso 5d2 to 5d3 in iso1600-iso3200 is surely much smaller than announced by Canon, but the visual appeal of the 5d3 shots is better because of less banding and a "nicer" film-like noise pattern.

The 5d3 certainly has a decisive gain above iso 6400, if you need that and can cope with the loss of dynamic range and color.


----------

