# do you hope for sony sensors in the 5D MK 4?



## Jon_D (Nov 6, 2014)

too me it looks like any other brand is getting better and better sensors with each new camera while canon is kind of stagnating.

now 2-3 month from now sony is introducing yet another improved generation of sensors.
making canon possibly look even more outdated when it comes to sensor performance.

on the lens front canon is still one of the best beside nikon.
but other companys improve on the lens front too.
not long and 90% of the customers will find all the lenses they want from any brand.

canon has to act know to get new customers and keep old ones.
i don´t see them doing that. there is no real mirroless alternative from canon.
the A6000 beats the pathetic (sorry but my opinion) EOS-M at everything but price.

even the people who will buy the 7D MK2 because of it´s speed and features would love to have a better sensor in the camera.

would canon using sony sensors make us all a happy bunch of people?


----------



## cpsico (Nov 6, 2014)

While Sonya have have great low ISO performance canon is better at high ISO where most event shooters stay. The problem I feel is this attempt to bastardized cameras into video tools. I am sure compromises made to create a video capable camera affect still image quality.


----------



## lintoni (Nov 6, 2014)

Ooh! A troll poll!


----------



## Jon_D (Nov 6, 2014)

lintoni said:


> Ooh! A troll poll!



please shut off when you have nothing on topic to say fanboy.


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 6, 2014)

I think the real question for you Jon_D is if Canon were to put Sony sensors in their dslrs, what are you going to do with your life ?


----------



## Jon_D (Nov 6, 2014)

Sporgon said:


> I think the real question for you Jon_D is if Canon were to put Sony sensors in their dslrs, what are you going to do with your life ?



what are you doing with your life except spending it on internet forums?
maybe time to think about that, mr. massposter?

rotfl


----------



## lintoni (Nov 6, 2014)

Jon_D said:


> lintoni said:
> 
> 
> > Ooh! A troll poll!
> ...


You could try to write a coherent sentence.


----------



## lintoni (Nov 6, 2014)

Jon_D said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > I think the real question for you Jon_D is if Canon were to put Sony sensors in their dslrs, what are you going to do with your life ?
> ...


The _rate_ at which Sporgon posts on Canon Rumors isn't much higher than the rate you post. The difference, however, is that Sporgon's posts are pertinent and useful. He knows more about photography than you could ever aspire to. Now, why don't you do something useful? Take your camera and go and practice some photography.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 6, 2014)

lintoni said:


> Ooh! A troll poll!



+1


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Nov 6, 2014)

Well that did not take long. Is this is record for CR threads?


----------



## RLPhoto (Nov 6, 2014)

I could careless.


----------



## Don Haines (Nov 6, 2014)

I went with Canon because their mount was designed as a digital mount from scratch, not bastardized from a mechanical mount to make it work.... That means that it is more likely to stay around.....

A lens is an investment. A camera is a consumable. The camera will be around for a few years and then replaced while a good lens will still be a good lens 20 years from now.

In that camera are many systems... arguably the two most important ones are the AF system and the sensor. Although both are critical for a great picture, if the AF system can not handle the task you end up with blurry out of focus pictures, and who really cares what the sensor IQ is of a blurred picture....

With that sensor, we have the perpetual Canon/Sony tradeoff. Yes, the CURRENT Sony sensors have advantages over the Canon sensors, but it isn't a slam dunk... At high ISO Canon pulls ahead. The only thing that you can be certain of in the long run is that BOTH will improve. The question of who is the best is becoming less and less important as realistically, both are fairly close under most circumstances... too close to tell the difference without pixel peeping or heavy manipulation.

And back to the glass... as both companies improve their sensors, the limiting factor starts to become the optics... and this is where Canon definitely holds the lead. As Neuro is fond of mentioning, we are talking about imaging systems, and it is the total package that determines the final result... Look at some of the things being discussed on various forums.... Bob switches from Canon to Nikon... Dick switches from Nikon to Sony... Jane switches from Sony to Canon.... Shouldn't this be a clue as to how close they really are?

So to answer your question, NO! In the long run, it makes no significant difference in imaging quality but it does stifle innovation.


----------



## Besisika (Nov 6, 2014)

Jon_D said:



> would canon using sony sensors make us all a happy bunch of people?


No. Call it loyalty. 
Some people simply trust long experience and don't just jump out of the train because of remote beauty. I will give few years of canon "failure" before I would trust someone else.


----------



## jdramirez (Nov 6, 2014)

I don't care, because I'm skipping the miiv generation and probably won't upgrade until the mkv.


----------



## infared (Nov 6, 2014)

Canon will put in a sub-par sensor like they just did with he new 7D...they can ride their full system (lens choices, fast AF, etc.) and get away with it a for now nd make more money. They are a business and business is the shrinking so they are not going to be purchasing sensors from Sony for a high-end camera. They are only going to be able to ride that dragon for a short time... The market and better tech is closing in on them....just my guess.


----------



## can0nfan2379 (Nov 6, 2014)

cpsico said:


> While Sonya have have great low ISO performance canon is better at high ISO where most event shooters stay. The problem I feel is this attempt to bastardized cameras into video tools. I am sure compromises made to create a video capable camera affect still image quality.



I have almost zero use for video. While I appreciate that many users do have a use for video I think Canon and most other companies have moved away from the essence of a stills camera. Canon have an awesome selection of lenses and their AF is probably the best around especially with the superteles. If I were a sports shooter I'd totally appreciate the anti-flicker mode on the 7DII -- that is a great innovation on the stills side.

I agree that incorporating video probably has some affect on sensor design vs a stills only camera but what or how much I have no idea. Improved sensor would be nice but I still view the system as a whole and I hate Nikon ergonomics.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Nov 6, 2014)

can0nfan2379 said:


> I have almost zero use for video. While I appreciate that many users do have a use for video I think Canon and most other companies have moved away from the essence of a stills camera.



Will there come a point where the bestest still camera and the bestest video camera will be incompatable on the same body?

I also don't care about video and I wonder if my still cameras could be "better" if the design concentrated on still photography instead of video.

If a camera tries to be the best at both, is there a point when it ends up being the best at neither?


----------



## Cgdillan (Nov 6, 2014)

I feel like camera companies have been trading off back and forth forever and Canon sensors were leading for a while and now it's time for someone else to talk et lead for a few years and light a fire under Canons ass. For still shooting I'm still using my 5D3 and for video A7s. I also hate Nikons ergonomics though they do have nice offering for IQ. I would be happy for Sony sensors in Canon cameras until Canon can catch up, but we all know that would never happen. With Sony's great sensor offerings, I'm still shooting Canon. Just because Sony has "better" sensors doesn't mean Canon has "bad" sensors. As long as you know what you are doing you can make pretty much any look great. I love the speed and ergonomics of my 5d3.


----------



## Famateur (Nov 6, 2014)

Okay...I'll bite.

No, it would not be good for Canon to switch to Sony sensors for their DLSR cameras -- despite Sony sensors being considered "better" in _some _ways.

Why? Because this is how competition works! When Sony-sensored DSLR/mirrorless cameras threaten Canon's market share enough, Canon will respond. If/when Canon (or some other company) leapfrogs Sony's sensors, Sony will respond. This dynamic is critical to the "innovation" you demand and is ultimately best for the consumer. If your current camera/system doesn't meet your needs and one from another company does, then switch. That will help move the wheels of competition, too. 

If Canon used Sony sensors, it reduces Sony's incentive to innovate. You'd have Sony, Canon and Nikon all using the same sensors. You want to talk about a company riding sensor technology for as along as it can? That's exactly what such a non-competitive scenario would encourage!

All that useless : business crap aside, I've yet to peruse a pro photographer's portfolio and have any clue from the photographs which company made the sensor that was used to capture the image. Until that happens, I'm happy as a clam thinking of cameras as systems and not sensors.

Sure, I'd love as much dynamic range and as little high ISO noise as I can get, but somehow, digital photography thrived before Exmor, and plenty of pros manage to produce amazing images with...gasp...Canon sensors. :


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 6, 2014)

Jon_D said:


> lintoni said:
> 
> 
> > Ooh! A troll poll!
> ...


 
If it looks like a Troll

Sounds like a Troll

Smells like a Troll

Then Its a ...


----------



## jdramirez (Nov 6, 2014)

I feel that this conversation is predicated on Nikon's decision. They outsourced the sensors... So why didn't Canon. Obviously don't is willing to sell their technology.

If Nikon kept their tech in house, I'm guessing there wouldn't be as much belly aching.


----------



## jdramirez (Nov 6, 2014)

Jim Brown was an all American at both lacrosse and football... So it isn't a given that a split goal won't work.



AcutancePhotography said:


> can0nfan2379 said:
> 
> 
> > I have almost zero use for video. While I appreciate that many users do have a use for video I think Canon and most other companies have moved away from the essence of a stills camera.
> ...


----------



## jepabst (Nov 6, 2014)

... I'll bite too. I would like to see the sony sensors used... until Canon catches up.. then back to making their own. Diversity in the marketplace is good for us. Increases competition, pushes everyone to up their game. But if I was in the market for a new full frame in the coming 12 months, and I might be, I'd be happy with a Sony sensor compared to the weak marks DXO just gave to the 7DII


----------



## Lawliet (Nov 6, 2014)

Famateur said:


> If Canon used Sony sensors, it reduces Sony's incentive to innovate. You'd have Sony, Canon and Nikon all using the same sensors. You want to talk about a company riding sensor technology for as along as it can? That's exactly what such a non-competitive scenario would encourage!



You're missing the other sensor manufactors in that equation - its not a Sony/Canon duopoly, there are quite a few other players in the game.
On the other hand just look what that self imposed lock in did with DPAF. What could be top of the line is hamstringend by legacy decisions while others deliver what DPAF should have brought.


----------



## wockawocka (Nov 6, 2014)

We have clean ISO3200 with great dynamic range across the board with all DSLR's released in the last 3 years.

If you can't get a great capture with any of the existing technology you shouldn't be shooting.

I'll use the best complete system that helps me get the shot I need. I have no loyalty but Canon suits me for their pragmatic approach.

I'd like a fully functioning 1DX in a smaller body. That's what I'd buy.


----------



## justsomedude (Nov 6, 2014)

All current and relatively recent DSLR cameras are great and provide excellent images, as has already been stated. While I agree that some of Sony's sensors have greater DR at lower ISOs, I don't personally see a need to push 3 stops out of my shadows.

Now, are there some Ansel-Adams-esque artists that demand that kind of range for their landscape and post-processing work? Sure - and for them, those sensors are their holy grail.

In the grand scheme, the low-ISO shadow pushing crowd is a small market niche to satisfy.


----------



## danski0224 (Nov 6, 2014)

No.

As others have mentioned, it will stifle competition and innovation.

I have no plans to get the 5DIV, so it is a moot point.

For those that long for a Sony sensor, you can buy one today and use Canon glass with an adapter.

If everyone that PAM'ed about the poor quality Canon tech bought a Sony, then maybe something would change... oh, wait, you can't build a camera company on 20 sales...


----------



## pdirestajr (Nov 6, 2014)

Hey guys,

Will I get kicked out of the CR club if I admit that I actually am still satisfied with the images I can create with my 7D and 5DmkII?

Am I doing something wrong?

Just a heads up, but there are a LOT of threads on CR these days about Sensors, Sony and DRzzzzzzzzzz...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 6, 2014)

Lawliet said:


> On the other hand just look what that self imposed lock in did with DPAF. What could be top of the line is hamstringend by legacy decisions while others deliver what DPAF should have brought.



So improvements delivered by others are more important than DPAF *to you*. Like many people here, you apparently fail to understand that it's not Canon's goal to make products that will please *you*. Rather their goal is to make products appealing to the broadest possible market, to sell more cameras. Canon bet that improved AF for video (which certainly needed improving) would have broader appeal than improved low ISO DR and cleaner shadows with extreme post-processing (which don't seem to have much appeal apart from DxO and a few posters on Internet forums). Time will tell, but I suspect Canon made the right bet.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 6, 2014)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Jon_D said:
> 
> 
> > lintoni said:
> ...



Duck.


----------



## Lawliet (Nov 6, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lawliet said:
> 
> 
> > On the other hand just look what that self imposed lock in did with DPAF. What could be top of the line is hamstringend by legacy decisions while others deliver what DPAF should have brought.
> ...


That conclusion implies a lack of comprehensive reading skills...so much for a clear mind.
It's not a matter of importance, but little details like having to disable the feature in certain video modes.
The feature would have an invariant value if the sensor could be read fast enough. Mandatory disabled due to a design flaw it has a value of...zero.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 6, 2014)

Lawliet said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > Lawliet said:
> ...



More properly ambiguous language on your part...if you're trying to say something, don't bury it in innuendo. Or perhaps I'm unaware another manufacturer delivering PDAF on the image sensor where 16 million pixels (80% of the total MP) are used for AF. 

DPAF is disabled at one of the many possible resolution/frame rate combinations, but works at all of the others. That's 'hamstrung'? The new Samsung NX-1 delivers 15 fps...but at anything above single shot frame rate, it drops from 14-bit to 12-bit RAW. Does that mean continuous shooting on the NX1 has a value of...zero?

Much like your flawed understanding of the use of non-electronic ballasts in lighting, your views are apparently at odds with reality.


----------



## Lawliet (Nov 6, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> More properly ambiguous language on your part...if you're trying to say something, don't bury it in innuendo.


The language I use tends to be very precise - precise enough to find out whether the other person actually reads or just looks at a few words and fills in the blanks. The latter case offers additional insights, of course.


> Or perhaps I'm unaware another manufacturer delivering PDAF on the image sensor where 16 million pixels (80% of the total MP) are used for AF.


Apart from being wrong, as anyone who knows how PDAF works realizes, that numbers game doesn't matter. Its about the functionality provided - is the PDAF grid dense enough to track a subject?


> DPAF is disabled at one of the many possible resolution/frame rate combinations, but works at all of the others.


"One" is not the exact number...


> That's 'hamstrung'?


Yes, considering its symptomatic


> The new Samsung NX-1 delivers 15 fps...but at anything above single shot frame rate, it drops from 14-bit to 12-bit RAW. Does that mean continuous shooting on the NX1 has a value of...zero?


That depends on whether a picture with the tonality and luma resolution of the 5D3 offers at base ISO has a value of zero. Again - function over spec sheets.


> Much like your flawed understanding of the use of non-electronic ballasts in lighting, your views are apparently at odds with reality.


Reality: Operating a lighting system that the 7D2 could compensate for would get you a fine or some time behind bars - violation of the equivalent to workplace security and similar regulations plus the intrinsic properties of common utility AC motors - in just about any country I've worked in. Across five continents that sums up.


----------



## Maui5150 (Nov 6, 2014)

Will Sony even still be in Camera business. Sony is bleeding cash and has no clear direction. 

Betamax
Walkman

Remember all those Sony Vaio laptops... Sold off.

TVs... Sony selling that off too... 

See a trend???


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 6, 2014)

Lawliet said:


> The language I use tends to be very precise



I'm sure you believe that's the case. Metacognition is not everyone's strong suit.


----------



## Lawliet (Nov 6, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lawliet said:
> 
> 
> > The language I use tends to be very precise
> ...


That's why I have others, not involved, but quite often bemused by the reactions, check that from time to time and get independent confirmation.
NB: quite the typical reaction for people who can't deal with the garden path challenge


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 7, 2014)

Lawliet said:


> quite the typical reaction for people who can't deal with the garden path challenge



If your goal in posting here is to intentionally trick people, that says something about your character. I misinterpreted your post in light of the context of the thread at that point. Happy now? Feel special and important? Good for you.


----------



## jrista (Nov 7, 2014)

Nope. Personally, I don't want Canon to use Sony sensors. I want Canon to become the force that makes Sony innovate harder and faster, by innovating harder and faster themselves. I want Canon to step up their sensor manufacturing game, and become a bigger player in the image sensor market, against Sony, Aptina, Omnivision and other companies. I don't expect Canon to start selling their sensors openly on the market...but I do want them to join the fray and become a solid competitive force that keeps sensor technology progressing for digital cameras. 


There is a TON of sensor innovation these days, however the majority of it seems to be getting done in much smaller form factors, and for sub markets other than digital photography...things like security video, cinematography, car rear view sensors (booming new market), astrophotography (sony changed the game there as well), etc. The only major innovation I've seen Sony make in the digital photography market since the introduction of the Exmor...what, maybe around five years ago now in the K-5 (?)...is the minor changes for the A7s, and the coupling with BionzX for digital signal NR.


I would really like to see Canon introduce a game changer. A layered sensor with at least 14 stops of DR would be disruptive at the very least, for a little while. That kind of full-constituent spatial resolution with that much DR would be...amazing. It should spur the competitive spirit in the likes of Sony, Aptina, Toshiba, etc. to get similar technology onto the market. I'd love to see bayer sensors disappear in the long run, in favor of something like either Foveon-esque designs, or perhaps dual-color array designs with color splitting (vs. color filtration, as filtration cuts out 60% or more of the light, greatly reducing overall Q.E., where as color splitting/microprisms preserve the vast majority of the light.)


I don't want Canon to use Sony sensors. I want Canon to become a major competitive player in the digital photography sensor world, to join the fight and help push image sensor technology farther, faster.


----------



## Marauder (Nov 7, 2014)

Of course not. Even if I believed Sony sensors were so greatly superior (and I do NOT believe that), Canon surrendering their own in-house sensor tech would be a huge mistake. A mistake not only for themselves, but for customer's as well. Letting _*any one * _ company form a monopoly would be bad news for photographers, stifling innovation and progress.


----------



## Lawliet (Nov 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lawliet said:
> 
> 
> > quite the typical reaction for people who can't deal with the garden path challenge
> ...



Wouldn't a neuroantomist know that the garden path has the simple purpose of estimating a persons mental work set, it's part of the required curriculum after all? Which in turn leads to obvious implications.
As a reminder: this challenge doesn't trick people who approach a problem with either an open mind or the capacity to reflect on a perceived contradiction and take their preconception into account.


----------



## jrista (Nov 7, 2014)

Lawliet said:


> Famateur said:
> 
> 
> > If Canon used Sony sensors, it reduces Sony's incentive to innovate. You'd have Sony, Canon and Nikon all using the same sensors. You want to talk about a company riding sensor technology for as along as it can? That's exactly what such a non-competitive scenario would encourage!
> ...




There are other players, but not necessarily in the digital photography space. Toshiba is another, but for the most part, Sony has a very, very dominant position in the space for digital photography. Other brand sensors, such as Aptina and Omnivision, play mostly in the small form factor segments. Smartphones, video, embedded and machine vision, astrophotography. Sony plays there as well, but in the digital photography segment, particularly the higher end digital photography segment? Even the MFD players have moved to Sony. Nikon is slightly more diverse, with some Toshiba sensors. Panasonic has their own sensors, but a lot of their innovations also don't seem to be getting used in the digital photography segment. Samsung may be moving in, but they don't have much at the moment. That makes Canon and Sony the big players. Canon moving to Sony would remove the only other significant player in this particular market segment...I think that would be very bad, at least for a while. Maybe Samsung could fill in the gaps, but I think they would have a tough time competing against an 1800 pound gorilla.


----------



## Lawliet (Nov 7, 2014)

jrista said:


> There are other players, but not necessarily in the digital photography space.



We also have STM, building for example the sensor for the Leica 240. At the first glance that's not much, but this impression is misleading - the usage of smaller structures left them with at least as much currently mothballed producion capacity, both for large area/small structure lithography and 300mm wafers, as canon has in total. Order in sufficient quantity and I'm sure they'll open one or more lines. Anything less the active 300mm line can handle.
That company isn't a big blip on the radar for DSCs, but they have tons of experience making stuff others find challenging or impossible, and doing it on a large scale. Coincidently multispectral imaging sensors for military usage, something that requires ideas that mirror those foveon-like patents from a while ago.


----------



## RGF (Nov 7, 2014)

Hope yes

Expect no


----------



## Omni Images (Nov 7, 2014)

I just want a high MP camera from Canon. "like the one in the Sony A7r" 36mp
Don't care who it's from ... would be good if it was a canon sensor .. I have faith in you Canon.
I don't care what they call it.


----------



## Maui5150 (Nov 7, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Lawliet said:
> 
> 
> > The language I use tends to be very precise
> ...



Not to mention people tune out pompous pedantic people


----------



## AUGS (Nov 7, 2014)

I absolutely hope Canon do NOT use an external sensor in their dSLRs.
1. Competition is good for everyone.
2.  Outsourcing only provides short-term relief, and rarely long term gain.
3. Would you prefer to be independent in your development cycle or rely on someone else?
4. Sony is hemorrhaging cash at the moment. Would you rely on that source for your parts? What if Sony decided to sell off the sensor division while it was worth something? Where would that place the 5D5 or ongoing production support for the 5D4? You have just outsourced your expertise and potentially jeopardized that camera development - and possibly every other one too. Will you ever recover?

No, I love my 5D3 and what Canon currently offers is perfectly okay with me. Canon should stick with Canon sensors.


----------



## zim (Nov 7, 2014)

wee eck will no be happy at this poll!


----------



## JohanCruyff (Nov 7, 2014)

I hope for good sensors inside any forthcoming camera.

I never tried tha fabulous 8) Canon's Dual Pixel AutoFos, nor the holy  Exmor/Sony Sensor, so I can't figure out which would be the best option if I had to choose between the two.

Let me dream to be able to see the blazing fast DPAF 9.0 plus 56 stops of DR in the same sensor.  
Before I die.
Which could mean, more or less, before 2050 a.C.


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Nov 7, 2014)

*Why is this thread considered trolling?*

Why the harsh response to this thread initially?

The topic is "Do you hope for Sony sensors in the 5D MK 4?"

This seems like a legitimate question given the recent rumor that Canon's next DSLR will sport a Sony made sensor. If you don't like SonyAlphaRumors, how about CanonWatch - which posted the same rumor. In fact, SonyAlphaRumors learned about it from "Steve from CanonWatch" according to the SonyAlphaRumor rumor posting.

With the recent G7X also having what is believed to be a Sony sensor, it certainly doesn't seem impossible. However, as the poll indicated (along with responses to the OP's question), people indeed have mixed feelings about it. 32 members voted "Yes" making up 36.4% of the vote, no small number. 56 members voted "No" making up 63.6% of the vote. More easily understood, roughly 1/3 of those who voted, voted "Yes" - how can that be ignored and scoffed at? Are they all trolls?

Many, myself included, would prefer that Canon continue using its own in-house sensors. A good point was raised by at least one poster that effectively creating a monopoly where Nikon and Canon depend upon Sony is an undesirable situation. Personally, my reason is that I just like the Canon look and assume the sensor plays some role in it. On the other hand, there are some that would like to see a Sony sensor in a Canon camera. Why are they shunned? It seems ridiculous to me when this is a rumor site and there is a rumor about this being a possibility.


----------



## jrista (Nov 8, 2014)

It surprises me that people don't know that Canon has been using Sony sensors in their small form factor cameras for years, maybe even more than a decade. The use of a Sony sensor in the G7x is nothing new, it isn't even surprising, it is really to be expected as that is more the norm than Canon using one of their own sensors.


On the other hand, Canon using any other brands sensor in their pro-grade DSLRs would be unheard of, and go very, very much against the grain of Canon as a company, the culture they have cultured over decades, their mission statement, everything that is core to Canon as a photography company for professionals. There IS value to Canon's integration...it's just that, to some such as myself, we see that integration being held back by decades-old technology. I'd rather see Canon improve the least common denominator in their integrated ecosystem, than have them buy into the monopoly and potentially stifle innovation.


----------



## lintoni (Nov 8, 2014)

*Re: Why is this thread considered trolling?*



Mitch.Conner said:


> Why the harsh response to this thread initially?


Because the thread was originated as a troll poll?

Have a look at the OP's posts on Canon Rumors and make up your own mind.

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=373924


----------

