# An 50.6mp EOS-1 Body Being Explored [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Mar 25, 2015)

```
<p>We’re told that Canon is exploring making an EOS-1 style body with the latest (or variation of) 50.6mp sensor by Canon. “Exploring” doesn’t mean it’s going to happen, and it won’t happen before the EOS-1D X Mark II is announced.</p>
<p>The sales of the EOS 5Ds & EOS 5DS R will ultimately decide if Canon makes a higher priced version of the camera. There’s been people over the years that have never felt the amalgamation of the EOS-1 line was going to last forever. There are ergonomics attached to the EOS-1 bodies that a lot of people have a hard time moving away from.</p>
<p>I would suspect what the pros have to say about the EOS 5Ds will have an influence on whether or not such a camera gets produced.</p>
```


----------



## dolina (Mar 25, 2015)

It'll give 256GB and 512GB memory cards a reason to be bought. ;D

Wonder if they'll use CFast to keep up.

To be honest CFast should be standard for Cinema EOS bodies.


----------



## ahsanford (Mar 25, 2015)

Don't forget that 1-series bodies have some drool-worthy features unrelated to framerate or an integral grip.

I would give my left nut for spot metering at any AF point. It's the one thing my 5D3 cannot do that I would use instantly and often.

- A


----------



## erjlphoto (Mar 25, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> <p>We’re told that Canon is exploring making an EOS-1 style body with the latest (or variation of) 50.6mp sensor by Canon. “Exploring” doesn’t mean it’s going to happen, and it won’t happen before the EOS-1D X Mark II is announced.</p>
> <p>The sales of the EOS 5Ds & EOS 5DS R will ultimately decide if Canon makes a higher priced version of the camera. There’s been people over the years that have never felt the amalgamation of the EOS-1 line was going to last forever. There are ergonomics attached to the EOS-1 bodies that a lot of people have a hard time moving away from.</p>
> <p>I would suspect what the pros have to say about the EOS 5Ds will have an influence on whether or not such a camera gets produced.</p>



Presume that ther is a prism viewfinder on it, that your preview image simply cut off the top of the camera.

Unless its my iPad?..


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 25, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Don't forget that 1-series bodies have some drool-worthy features unrelated to framerate or an integral grip.
> 
> I would give my left nut for spot metering at any AF point. It's the one thing my 5D3 cannot do that I would use instantly and often.
> 
> - A


Definitely lots of good stuff beyond just the body style and big higher voltage battery. The viewfinder shutter is another one that I long for on the 5D series, which is what I use for most of my long exposure work. Same goes for the multi-spot metering. The Auto ISO + EC in M mode is certainly another, and I hope that one makes it into the 5Ds range as well.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 25, 2015)

Sold.


----------



## cbphoto (Mar 25, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> There are ergonomics attached to the EOS-1 bodies that a lot of people have a hard time moving away from.



That would be me. I have large hands and the form factor of the 1Ds bodies is ergonomically pleasing. Plus, the battery life is what I expect in a pro body.


----------



## IglooEater (Mar 25, 2015)

Is there anyone else who thinks that this is what should have been released *instead of* the 5ds?


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 25, 2015)

IglooEater said:


> Is there anyone else who thinks that this is what should have been released *instead of* the 5ds?


Only those of us not wanting Canon to make a lot of money . I think the 5D has outsold the 1D X by a huge margin and for most (not all by any means) of the people that the "s" series appeals to, the lower price and smaller body are preferred. I include myself in that group, especially on the price side of things.

I find the 5DIII plenty tough for landscapes, architecture, portraiture, and the like, and can add the grip if I want to. The 1D X toughness and frame rate are a better fit when I do wildlife and sports work, where 18MP is acceptable.


----------



## Phil Lowe (Mar 25, 2015)

Just curious about something...Is there any older Canon lens - like the EF100-400L - that will be able to resolve anything close to what a 50.6mp sensor can resolve, or will buying a 50.6mp camera require all new glass?


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 25, 2015)

Phil Lowe said:


> Just curious about something...Is there any older Canon lens - like the EF100-400L - that will be able to resolve anything close to what a 50.6mp sensor can resolve, or will buying a 50.6mp camera require all new glass?



Any lens will resolve more on a 50MP sensor than a 20MP one, some will resolve much closer to 50 than others but none can resolve the full 50MP.


----------



## wockawocka (Mar 25, 2015)

I'm not interested if it's going to have that POS sensor in it :


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 25, 2015)

Explore away. I'm betting against it happening. I agree with everyone the 1 series offers a different experience but is it really worth more than double the price of almost the same camera in a 5DS (given these rumored specs)??

I'll be in line right away for a 1DX2 with a FF version of the 20.2MP DPAF of the 7D2 (larger photosites. Not more, I mean) or an all new FF 24MP DPAF sensor they base on the new T6i rebel (660D) 

Will two professional grade 50MP cameras really sell in the same line? Besides, one of the main features of the 1DX is its amazing AF combined with nice high ISO (fast action and sports). .... We already know this new sensor isnt built for the ISOs. 

So if the target market is studio/landscapers then why would I spend $7000 for this camera vs $3600 for the 5DS?


----------



## bellorusso (Mar 25, 2015)

I love my 1Ds M2 ergonomics and I would definitely buy another one with the same feel.


----------



## Eldar (Mar 25, 2015)

I would be very surprised if this happens ...


----------



## m (Mar 25, 2015)

Phil Lowe said:


> Just curious about something...Is there any older Canon lens - like the EF100-400L - that will be able to resolve anything close to what a 50.6mp sensor can resolve, or will buying a 50.6mp camera require all new glass?



They say all L glass since 2010 will do.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Mar 25, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Don't forget that 1-series bodies have some drool-worthy features unrelated to framerate or an integral grip.
> 
> I would give my left nut for spot metering at any AF point. It's the one thing my 5D3 cannot do that I would use instantly and often.
> 
> - A



Probably the main reason I went 1D4 used over 7D2. Metering where you're focusing can be very handy when there is action.

Jack


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 25, 2015)

m said:


> Phil Lowe said:
> 
> 
> > Just curious about something...Is there any older Canon lens - like the EF100-400L - that will be able to resolve anything close to what a 50.6mp sensor can resolve, or will buying a 50.6mp camera require all new glass?
> ...



ANY L glass (or ANY glass) will resolve better on 50MP vs 20MP. And just like on 20MP, some glass will do more than others. The 20 year old 135 f2 L will wreck this sensor just as much as the brand new 16-35 f4 or 70-200 mkII will


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Mar 25, 2015)

instead of making a 5Ds or 5Dsr they should have made a new 1Dx or etc with 50MP better video & 12+fps
can u imagine the sports or wildlife shots you'd get with 50MP and dual digic 6 1 can only imagine but maybe soon they will make 1. 
i got a good feeling the 5D4 will be out by nov with a aug announcement


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Mar 25, 2015)

Phil Lowe said:


> ...Is there any older Canon lens - like the EF100-400L - *that will be able to resolve anything close to what a 50.6mp sensor can resolve*...?


There are several old Canon lenses able to show much more detail with a 50 megapixel camera. A brief list:
400mm F5.6L
300mm F4 IS L
200mm F2.8L
180mm F3.5L macro
135mm F2L
100mm F2 USM
100mm F2.8 Macro USM
85mm F1.8 USM
50mm F1.4 USM (when used in F2.8 or more closed)
TS-E24mm F3.5L
TS-E17mm F4L

Using the old Canon 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L you will see a small increase sharpness in a 50 megapixel camera.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 25, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> Phil Lowe said:
> 
> 
> > Just curious about something...Is there any older Canon lens - like the EF100-400L - that will be able to resolve anything close to what a 50.6mp sensor can resolve, or will buying a 50.6mp camera require all new glass?
> ...


The TS-E lenses will be key for those wanting maximum resolution and extended DOF. The diffraction limited aperture (DLA) is projected to be f/6.7, so f/16 or even f/11 won't be as usable at 50.6 as it is on the 5DII et al. Shooting with a T/S lens at f/5.6 or f/8 with tilt will be the way to give your image more DOF with a single exposure while keeping the aperture set for maximum sharpness. 

I know some may chime in to explain all the technical details and limits here, but in practice, this is going to be the case. Hopefully this will push Canon to upgrade the non-L TS-E lenses (esp. the 45mm).

EDIT: Here's a good example from The-Digital-Picture:

300 f/2.8 IS II on the 1DsIII vs 7DII @ f/16

While not the most ideal example, the effect of diffraction on one of the sharpest lenses Canon makes is shocking on the 7DII (roughly same pixel pitch as 5Ds), even at f/11.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Mar 25, 2015)

mackguyver said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > Phil Lowe said:
> ...


Good point.
I often reprimanded by people who say:
"more megapixel will never be worse" :-X


----------



## gsealy (Mar 25, 2015)

The 1D series is targeted to fast moving events and in all kinds of weather. The professional guys that use this camera pop away hundreds and thousands of shots during even a 1 day assignment. 

I recently was at a golf tournament and it was raining and on the cold side. The photographers had these beasts and it sounded like a machine gun when it fired off. These guys had to fly from hole to hole and around the greens to keep up with a particular group. It was a tough struggle that day, but they were getting paid. The bottom line for them was that the camera couldn't fail them and it had to focus quick. The camera had to withstand the elements. This is what goes into the price of the 1D and the pros are willing to pay it. 

Do they need 50MP? Probably not as a lot of their work goes into online and print media. Plus they are not going to be happy with a lower frame rate and lower ISO limits. Their mode of operation is to gather lots and lots of photos and then an editor somewhere can pick the best of the best.


----------



## RGF (Mar 25, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sold.



how much would you pay? 

I would like to see a 1Ds at 50 MP, but not at $8K.

Perhaps Canon should have made the 5Ds at 38-42 MP and the 1Ds at 50MP to differentiate the cameras.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 25, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > ajfotofilmagem said:
> ...



It depends if you are comparing apples to oranges, or not. 

The 7DII crop is enlarged over twice as much so is an effective ff equivalent to f22. Change the crop camera aperture down 1 stop and you are looking at the same actual image qualities, or, dial f11 into the comparometer and keep the FF at f16, then you will see the true effects of diffraction at the same magnification and subject output, not so very different after all.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=739&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=6&LensComp=739&CameraComp=963&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=5

More MP are never worse, but look at more MP at 100% and they appear worse because you are magnifying them more. Magnify things the same and the more MP will always return more detail, even after DFA's. How much more is a test I am interested to carry out when I can come across a 5DSR, but that won't be soon and I don't expect to see much difference.


----------



## Pesto (Mar 25, 2015)

All good points but in the end there is nothing like the quality and feel of the D1 series cameras. I for one will sign up immediately should they build this camera.


----------



## Hannes (Mar 25, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> So if the target market is studio/landscapers then why would I spend $7000 for this camera vs $3600 for the 5DS?



A 1 series camera is a different beast altogether compared to "lesser" cameras. If my livelihood depended on a pair of camera bodies the 1 series would be my go to. The ergonomics, the weatherproofing, the battery life etc etc is in a different league.

The 1Ds III sold despite the 5D II being out which arguably had lots of advantages. I can't see why a 1Ds IV wouldn't despite the prohibitive price tag. It isn't a camera aimed at enthusiasts but rather people who will put them on their tax return.


----------



## photonius (Mar 25, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > mackguyver said:
> ...



the crop should not be enlarged over 2x. the test chart should be shot at 1.6x distance, if tdp does it correctly.


----------



## rs (Mar 25, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Any lens will resolve more on a 50MP sensor than a 20MP one, some will resolve much closer to 50 than others but none can resolve the full 50MP.


Most will, but not all. I'd argue that a lens baby or equivalent won't gain any resolution advantage at all from >20MP


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 25, 2015)

rs said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Any lens will resolve more on a 50MP sensor than a 20MP one, some will resolve much closer to 50 than others but none can resolve the full 50MP.
> ...



Well explain to me how a lens baby doesn't obey the laws of physics then.

System resolution can be broadly shorthanded down to this equation, it isn't perfect but pretty close.

tsr = 1/sqrt((1/lsr) ² + (1/ssr) ² )

Where tsr is total spatial resolution, lsr is lens spatial resolution, and ssr is sensor spatial resolution.

So if, for example, we have a sensor that can resolve 100 lppmm, and a lens that can resolve 100 lppmm we get this

1/sqrt((1/100) ² + (1/100) ² ) = tsr of 71 lppmm

Leave the same lens on, good or bad, and double the sensor resolution to 200 lppmm

1/sqrt((1/100) ² + (1/200) ² ) = tsr of 89 lppmm


You will notice that the system resolution, even in this simplified form, can never resolve 100% of the lowest performing portion of that system, so if a 24MP sensor is returning 80% of the potential of a Lens Baby then a 50MP sensor might return 90%, how useful that is in real life is a moot point, but it does illustrate that even the most modest lens will show increased resolution when put in front of a higher resolving sensor.


----------



## chauncey (Mar 25, 2015)

I paid an obscene amount of money ($8,000) for my 1Ds MkIII...although I love it, it'll be a cold 
day that I again cough up that amount of money.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 25, 2015)

photonius said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > ajfotofilmagem said:
> ...



Er, if you shoot something from 1.6 times the distance with the same lens and then reproduce it the same size you are enlarging it, and any IQ issues, diffraction, aberrations etc, more!

It is a 1.6 times linear enlargement, or a 1.6 x 1.6 area enlargement, which is 256% the area.


----------



## 9VIII (Mar 26, 2015)

I think Canon is doing people a serious disfavour not putting the 50MP sensor on a 1D body.
I was specifically hoping to get a high density sensor with the extra boost to AF speed. Then consider if they put a good crop mode in.
If they effectively gave you all the abilities of the 7D2 and the 5Ds in one body, with more than double the battery life, who wouldn't want that?


----------



## nonac (Mar 26, 2015)

i just recently had the opportunity to shoot college sports for 3 days with a 1Dx body at a Canon event. Really fell in love with the form factor of that body. I'll probably look at the Mark II iteration pretty closely.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 26, 2015)

nonac said:


> i just recently had the opportunity to shoot college sports for 3 days with a 1Dx body at a Canon event. Really fell in love with the form factor of that body. I'll probably look at the Mark II iteration pretty closely.



Save a bit more and try to get a MkIII, they are much better cameras than the MkII's.


----------



## SoullessPolack (Mar 26, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> nonac said:
> 
> 
> > i just recently had the opportunity to shoot college sports for 3 days with a 1Dx body at a Canon event. Really fell in love with the form factor of that body. I'll probably look at the Mark II iteration pretty closely.
> ...



Clearly he meant a 1Dx Mark II iteration, which has yet to be announced. He's in no big rush to get a 1D series right now, which means he can wait until the successor to the 1Dx arrives.


----------



## gsealy (Mar 26, 2015)

Hannes said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > So if the target market is studio/landscapers then why would I spend $7000 for this camera vs $3600 for the 5DS?
> ...



I agree. And those guys have to have a camera that will perform and perform. 200K actuations? No problem. Once you see such guys in action then the 1D is a no-brainer.


----------



## expatinasia (Mar 26, 2015)

gsealy said:


> I agree. And those guys have to have a camera that will perform and perform. 200K actuations? No problem. Once you see such guys in action then the 1D is a no-brainer.



Yes, I would not give up my 1D X for anything apart from a 1DX II. The battery life still amazes me (for stills at least, not so much for video). And as a camera to take pictures with it is outstanding.

In a way I really hope they do not release a 1DX Mark II until 2016 as it is an expense I do not need right now.

But frankly I am not sure they would make a 1DX S. I think the 1DX II will have more MP anyway and will most likely require CFfast or whatever they are called. USB 3.1 would be nice but I don't think that would happen.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 26, 2015)

Hannes said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > So if the target market is studio/landscapers then why would I spend $7000 for this camera vs $3600 for the 5DS?
> ...



1DX vs 5D3, I agree with you (but they are all pretty rugged and weather sealed). But a 5DS vs 1DS with the SAME sensor built for low ISOs in this day and age?? No. No way. That I can tell you won't happen. You may to pay double the price for the same thing, but most won't. Those who wanted an S model pro camera from Canon back in the line, just got got it. There would have to significant, yet untold, advantages other than that sensor in a 1DS to warrant the product. Canon would never sell enough otherwise. The 5 series is just as professional grade as the 1 in terms of build, and tons of professionals use them. They too are put on depreciation and amortization tables on tax returns. 

All that said, We will see a 1DX2 which I will be extremely excited to buy.


----------



## clicstudio (Mar 26, 2015)

The body and the ergonomics is exactly why I won't be getting a 5Ds. I am drooling over the 50mp but it's not enough to make me switch. Specially because I rather have better dynamic range instead of more pixels and I am disappointed about that too. 
I have been using 1 series cameras since 2002 and it is a different feel all together. 
I am really hoping Canon doesn't forget the real pros and releases a 1Ds soon


----------



## Memdroid (Mar 26, 2015)

It is possible the fusion of the sport and studio idea of the 1dx is taking a more serious step.
Here is a crazy idea. 
RAW 50mp @6fps
mRAW1 ~35mp @ 9 fps
mRAW2/sRAW~20mp and the integrated crop modes @12 fps

I'll buy that in a heartbeat


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 26, 2015)

clicstudio said:


> The body and the ergonomics is exactly why I won't be getting a 5Ds. I am drooling over the 50mp but it's not enough to make me switch. Specially because I rather have better dynamic range instead of more pixels and I am disappointed about that too.
> I have been using 1 series cameras since 2002 and it is a different feel all together.
> I am really hoping Canon doesn't forget the real pros and releases a 1Ds soon



I love the 1 series too. Don't misunderstand. I have used a 1DX for many thousands of shots at hours on end during many dance recitals. BUT, Canon making TWO pro-grade "S" models with the exact same sensor, just doesn't make any fiscal sense to me. Granted Canon knows more than I do. My point in all this is that IF Canon pulled this trigger, there would have be substantially more to it than what the 5DS/R would offer. If you want more DR and better noise and 1DX-like ISO performance....same sensor will NOT work in this body. Again, give me a 1DX2 (which IS coming) with 15fps and killer good performance at 6400, DPAF, 100+ Crosstype AF spread across the entire frame, etc... All the stuff that SHOULD be in a flagship 1 body.

While some of you would like a 5DS in a 1DS body and pay double for it, I'm just not sure there are enough of you for Canon to produce it.

PS - I'll add to this that given Canon's seemingly recent move towards model specialization... I wouldn't expect them to make this because there would likely be too much overlap. I think this is just them playing around to test something else, just like the rumor we had about the 5D4 prototype out there with the same old 18MP sensor that made everyone freak out.

What better way to test Dual Digic 7 limits than with a 50MP chip? Maybe they DO make this camera at some point, but it would have a new sensor all of it's own to address the very things you just said you'd want in such a camera.


----------



## photonius (Mar 26, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> photonius said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...


But that's not what should be happening with the test images at tdp. you have a standard test target. you use the same lens (e.g. 300mm). In one case on a FF body, let's say you are 3.5 meter away from the target to cover the test chart. With the maps-c body, you are 5.6 m away to cover the test chart. Now you zoom in 10x to show only the central circle of the test chart in both cases, the circle will be the same size. That's what you post on the web site. So, there is no extra enlargement.


----------



## ahsanford (Mar 26, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> PS - I'll add to this that given Canon's seemingly recent move towards model specialization... I wouldn't expect them to make this because there would likely be too much overlap. I think this is just them playing around to test something else, just like the rumor we had about the 5D4 prototype out there with the same old 18MP sensor that made everyone freak out.



Yep. Canon made a specialization move with what we assume will be a great "good light" camera with the 5DS/r. We should expect the 5D4 to have less MP but a higher framerate, better low light performance, (also: 4K), etc.

So the question is whether the 1D line _also_ gets the dual option -- one camera for maximum detail and one for framerate/high ISO. My money is on yes, and here's why:

1) Not doing it would represent a really painful choice for 1D users. There is a subset of pros that use 1D-series bodies today and they would love a high MP rig, butmoving down to a 5D body would be a downgrade. As many have said on this thread, 1D bodies offer a ton more than the sensor, the framerate, the grip, etc. They have wonderful ergonomics and features you just won't get anywhere else, and _people value those features enough to go north of $6k for it_. So Canon is leaving a lot of money on the table by not offering such cameras.

2) The 1D line was split long before the 5D line was split. Think 1Ds vs. 1D cameras -- one was for studio and one was for the field. Part of that was the need for APS-H, but part of it was a framerate differentiator.

3) Offering just one 1D body -- with either the 5D4 sensor (speed / low light) vs. the 5DS sensor (high MP) -- will probably leave the 1D series lacking something that 1D users have been asking for.


I just think that we're looking at two future 1D bodies. I could be wrong.

- A


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 26, 2015)

photonius said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > photonius said:
> ...



Seriously?

Look, a 300mm lens has x magnification at x distance irrespective of what sensor is behind it, if you increase the distance the magnification gets less, if you reduce the distance the magnification gets higher.

How then can two cameras shot from different distances have the same size output? You enlarge the more distant shot more, that is what is being done in the linked tests. The only way you are comparing like for like with regards, in this instance, diffraction, is to shoot both cameras from the same distance with the same settings and enlarge them the same. But that is not what the first comparison does, my linked second comparison more closely emulates that from the results we have, but it still isn't quite the same.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 26, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > PS - I'll add to this that given Canon's seemingly recent move towards model specialization... I wouldn't expect them to make this because there would likely be too much overlap. I think this is just them playing around to test something else, just like the rumor we had about the 5D4 prototype out there with the same old 18MP sensor that made everyone freak out.
> ...



IF Canon feels they can successfully market 2 cameras with the same sensor, one being double the price of the other) then they will. If not, they won't. They had a split in the 1D line before, yes. But with two different sensors for two different purposes, neither of which was really addressed at the time by the 5 series. That's what is different now. And If a 5d4 comes out with 10fps, it's starting to chew into 1 bodies a little more as well. Are there enough people out there willing to spend twice as much money for a 5DS with more fps and a bigger body that Canon can make the profit margin they want. That's the question. 

What I can tell you is that Canon will almost assuredly sell a ton more 1DX2 bodies than they would a modestly stepped up 5DS. Therefore, they will likely produce that first. I just don't think you're going to see this mythical body anytime soon.


----------



## ahsanford (Mar 26, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> IF Canon feels they can successfully market 2 cameras with the same sensor, one being double the price of the other) then they will. If not, they won't. They had a split in the 1D line before, yes. But with two different sensors for two different purposes, neither of which was really addressed at the time by the 5 series. That's what is different now. And If a 5d4 comes out with 10fps, it's starting to chew into 1 bodies a little more as well. Are there enough people out there willing to spend twice as much money for a 5DS with more fps and a bigger body that Canon can make the profit margin they want. That's the question.
> 
> What I can tell you is that Canon will almost assuredly sell a ton more 1DX2 bodies than they would a modestly stepped up 5DS. Therefore, they will likely produce that first. I just don't think you're going to see this mythical body anytime soon.



Agree. I might have misled with a 'high framerate' statement on the 5D4 -- it's just going to be _more than the 5Ds_ due to having (presumably) comparable data-moving ability and a smaller MP sensor. I don't think it'll be a 1DX sort of screamer, perhaps 7-8 fps or so.

We might be looking at something like this in 1-2 years:

5Ds: 50 MP + ("up to") 5 fps
5D4: 30 MP + 8 fps + 4K and higher ISO limits

1DXs: 5Ds sensor at 7 fps + the additional 1D series features 
1DX2: 5D4 sensor at 12 fps + the additional 1D series features 

- A


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 26, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > IF Canon feels they can successfully market 2 cameras with the same sensor, one being double the price of the other) then they will. If not, they won't. They had a split in the 1D line before, yes. But with two different sensors for two different purposes, neither of which was really addressed at the time by the 5 series. That's what is different now. And If a 5d4 comes out with 10fps, it's starting to chew into 1 bodies a little more as well. Are there enough people out there willing to spend twice as much money for a 5DS with more fps and a bigger body that Canon can make the profit margin they want. That's the question.
> ...



I'm with you on the 5D4 and 5DS. I'll even throw in a 5DC, again at the same price point as the 5D4 and 5DS with 12MP, 4k, and a menu and feature set tweaked out for cinema/video

But, if all this theoretical 1DXs will give us over a 5DS is the bigger body and 2 extra FPS .... it will remain a pipe dream prototype. I'd like to hear more about what specific features we would gain over the 5DS taht warrant double the price. Do I really need a blistering fast new AF system for a studio and landscape camera? Obviously we won't see better ISO performance given the same sensor. Nothing about this screams "Financially viable" when the half priced option would give me 95% of everything else.

Now we can really go wild and speculate that 4k in a 1 series body would be reserved for this machine.... I highly doubt it, because 4k with 50MP really is overkill for it to the specialty 1 body for that. That will stay with the 1DX2. I just dont see how sales forecasts would support actual production short of, as I said, there being some REAL SERIOUS advantage beyond body ergonomics and 2-3 extra FPS.


----------



## ahsanford (Mar 26, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> I'm with you on the 5D4 and 5DS. I'll even throw in a 5DC, again at the same price point as the 5D4 and 5DS with 12MP, 4k, and a menu and feature set tweaked out for cinema/video
> 
> But, if all this theoretical 1DXs will give us over a 5DS is the bigger body and 2 extra FPS .... it will remain a pipe dream prototype. I'd like to hear more about what specific features we would gain over the 5DS taht warrant double the price. Do I really need a blistering fast new AF system for a studio and landscape camera? Obviously we won't see better ISO performance given the same sensor. Nothing about this screams "Financially viable" when the half priced option would give me 95% of everything else.



That's the real question isn't it?

My gut would say: 


Tougher build quality
Possibly a newer AF system (keep in mind 1DX / 5D3 / 5Ds have fairly similar AF systems already)
Higher framerate
Integral grip and all that entails
1D-series exclusive items: auto-ISO in manual, spot metering at any AF point, mechanical viewfinder cover, etc. 

Is it worth the money? Absolutely not -- _unless the 1D the only style of rig you use_. So then the calculus changes from 'How is it better than the 5Ds?' to *'Is this worth upgrading from my 1DX?'* 

Ultimately, if such a 1D camera was offered, those using the 1DX today_ in good light_ will likely snap it up. Those heavily pushing up their ISO might want the _other _1D body I am guessing is coming, and that one will have the 5D4 sensor and better low light performance.

- A


----------



## jhpeterson (Mar 26, 2015)

gsealy said:


> The 1D series is targeted to fast moving events and in all kinds of weather. The professional guys that use this camera pop away hundreds and thousands of shots during even a 1 day assignment.
> 
> I recently was at a golf tournament and it was raining and on the cold side. The photographers had these beasts and it sounded like a machine gun when it fired off. These guys had to fly from hole to hole and around the greens to keep up with a particular group. It was a tough struggle that day, but they were getting paid. The bottom line for them was that the camera couldn't fail them and it had to focus quick. The camera had to withstand the elements. This is what goes into the price of the 1D and the pros are willing to pay it.


This is the far and away the reason why I find myself using the 1D series for nearly everything I do. Yes, the price is definitely an issue for those of us on the commercial and, especially, the editorial side. (I'm still a photojournalist at heart.) There have been times I've second-guessed whether they are worth the cost, only to find I can't afford anything less.


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Mar 26, 2015)

it will happen.


----------



## Ozarker (Mar 27, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> rs said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



Mortals like myself are glad humans like you exist. I consider myself a real geek on some subjects, but you impress me. Math was never my strong point. I have problems with such things. I'm always in awe of people with that talent, because I do not have it in the least. I could never quite grasp it. Off topic, I know, but I am impressed and highly entertained. Thank you! There are a lot of people like you on this forum. That is why I keep coming back. I figure just reading posts by such knowledgeable people has saved me a lot of money.


----------



## tiredofstitching (Mar 27, 2015)

As much as I loved my 1Ds3 and have used it with much satisfaction for at least 6 years, till the release of the D800E, as much I now hate the large heavy body form factor and will never again invest in an expensive camera. The 1Ds3 lost its resale value shortly after I bought it, when the 5DII with film feature was released. 

There are a few basic questions Canon should have asked before releasing the 5Ds/R. Questions like: who wants a 50Mp sensor, and what for. 

Action, sport, wildlife, wedding photographers, they all drooled and lusted for the 36Mp D800E. The fact that Canon has let his customers wait for so long on a contender is beyond sense. And now they eventually released a 50Mp 5Ds with an AA filter! That's probably OK for JPEG shooters. But why a 5DsR with AA filter with effect cancelled???? That is again beyond sense. Why bother with huge 50Mp files that contain optically speaking no more information than a 36Mp file produced with a non bridled Nikon D810 or Sony A7R? I'm in shock… I eventually purchased a Sony A7R to get rid of some of my frustration with Canon. I still wish that they will release a low priced 50Mp with no AA filter soon.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 27, 2015)

Just catching up on this thread and yes, Private is right - my example is bad. Not sure what I was thinking comparing crop to FF at the same apertures... I'm sorry I threw the conversation a bit sideways with that one. I guess I need more sleep...

Back to the topic, I agree with some who talk about the pleasure of using the 1D series. I really thought the 5DIII was about as good is it could get, but there is something about holding one of these big cameras in your hands and using them that brings a smile to my face


----------



## bdunbar79 (Mar 27, 2015)

tiredofstitching said:


> As much as I loved my 1Ds3 and have used it with much satisfaction for at least 6 years, till the release of the D800E, as much I now hate the large heavy body form factor and will never again invest in an expensive camera. The 1Ds3 lost its resale value shortly after I bought it, when the 5DII with film feature was released.
> 
> There are a few basic questions Canon should have asked before releasing the 5Ds/R. Questions like: who wants a 50Mp sensor, and what for.
> 
> Action, sport, wildlife, wedding photographers, they all drooled and lusted for the 36Mp D800E. The fact that Canon has let his customers wait for so long on a contender is beyond sense. And now they eventually released a 50Mp 5Ds with an AA filter! That's probably OK for JPEG shooters. But why a 5DsR with AA filter with effect cancelled???? That is again beyond sense. Why bother with huge 50Mp files that contain optically speaking no more information than a 36Mp file produced with a non bridled Nikon D810 or Sony A7R? I'm in shock… I eventually purchased a Sony A7R to get rid of some of my frustration with Canon. I still wish that they will release a low priced 50Mp with no AA filter soon.



I think the problem is that you are confused about two things, to say the least.

1. What sports/action/PJ's need but worse

2. How marketing, demand, and R&D work together to produce and release a product.

They produced a high MP body BECAUSE THAT'S BEEN THE #1 COMPLAINT TO CANON SINCE THE D800/E WAS RELEASED. So yes, it is in demand.

_*There are a few basic questions Canon should have asked before releasing the 5Ds/R. Questions like: who wants a 50Mp sensor, and what for.*_ 

You just couldn't possibly be serious.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 27, 2015)

mackguyver said:


> Just catching up on this thread and yes, Private is right - my example is bad. Not sure what I was thinking comparing crop to FF at the same apertures... I'm sorry I threw the conversation a bit sideways with that one. I guess I need more sleep...
> 
> Back to the topic, I agree with some who talk about the pleasure of using the 1D series. I really thought the 5DIII was about as good is it could get, but there is something about holding one of these big cameras in your hands and using them that brings a smile to my face



Couldn't agree more on that statement. And as an update, CanonWatch.com has apparently put this same rumor out with a CW4 rating, which is very high. Again, I'd be very (albeit pleasantly) surprised if Canon finds enough of a market for 2 new 5 series studio/landscape bodies AND a new 1 series body for the exact same purpose in such a short period of time. Again, it makes a lot more sense to upgrade the 1DX as a new supreme everything body, short of them finding a way to use this same chip (as speculated) and make it work WELL up to and beyond 6400. That seems more the realm of a 1DX2 and not a 1DXs. I think if they had gone the other way, releasing a 1DXs first and THEN the 5 bodies, it may have made more sense. But given the fact that Canon obviously recognized the need to have a D810 competitor, they played smart and made it a 5 body.


----------



## ahsanford (Mar 27, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> tiredofstitching said:
> 
> 
> > I still wish that they will release a low priced 50Mp with no AA filter soon.
> ...



Re: AA filters, I'm admittedly behind on this front. I thought -- and please correct me if I am wrong -- that Nikon settled this one for us. 

The D800 (Low pass + AA), D800E (low pass + no AA), D810 (neither low pass nor AA) gave us a nice test platform to answer this question. I thought removing the LP and AA only made stills sharper by the smallest of margins, and only if you shoot at the given lens' absolutely sharpest aperture. The only head to head I've seen was Ken Rockwell's comparison (wince) and it didn't show much of a difference.

In return, I thought that pulling those filters was problematic for moire, esp in video. 

So is this more marketing hype than true value for photographers? I honestly am not too well read on this and would appreciate some perspective. Is dropping the AA filter a bandwagon Canon simply must get on, or is it just some clever shenanigans to rope in more enthusiasts?

- A


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 27, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > tiredofstitching said:
> ...



A Low Pass (LP) and Anti Aliasing Filter (AA) are the same thing. What the D800E ad 5DSR do though is have an AA/LP filter and then have another equal and opposite AA/LP filter to counteract the effect of the first. Apparently, and I wouldn't know if it is the truth, adding two is technically easier than not having any when you are making two versions both with and 'without' AA/LP filters. Something to do with light paths and focusing.

Depending on the acceptance rate of the two models I'd expect a unified 5DS/R MkII, interesting that the industrial espionage didn't give Canon enough confidence to start with the one version, another sign of their almost feet stuck in cement conservative approach, thank god the lens division don't eat at the same canteen. ;D


----------



## ahsanford (Mar 27, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> A Low Pass (LP) and Anti Aliasing Filter (AA) are the same thing.



Yep. My limited time with breadboards and signal processing in grad school taught me the same, but I've read that there were in fact two _different _layers to the stack with Nikon for the AA and some other LP filter, hence the convoluted story of:

D800 = LP + AA
D800E = LP 
D810 = Nothing

But is Canon hedging on this because of drawbacks in removing (cancelling) the AA? Does defeating the AA effectively make the 5Dsr a stills-only camera? Is that the hang-up? 

- A


----------



## tiredofstitching (Mar 27, 2015)

Of course moiré can become a real problem when you use a camera for filming or for shooting in camera JPGs. But who wants 50Mp for filming and for shooting in camera JPG's? Would 36Mp not be plenty for that use, and also be much more manageable?

On the other hand, a 50Mp camera is most interesting to those who want the best picture quality and who spend a lot of time in post prod. There are talks that say that there is no real visual difference between images taken with or without a low pass filter. That sort of talk feeds the industry. But any photographer who has an educated stand from using medium format backs for instance, will tell you that there is a clear visual difference, provided that there is a high end processing path.

So when I said that Canon should have asked who needs a 50Mp sensor and what for, the outcome should have been on that issue. Instead they made two swiss knives that do all but nothing to perfection. My two cents.


----------



## jrista (Mar 28, 2015)

IglooEater said:


> Is there anyone else who thinks that this is what should have been released *instead of* the 5ds?




Nope. The 1D series changed with the release of the 1Dx, and I suspect that if something materializes, it'll be a high resolution/high framerate camera that probably won't deliver the same kind of IQ as the 5Ds. Higher speed readout means more read noise, and optimizing for high ISO is obviously different than optimizing for low ISO. I think that is apparent in the design of the 5Ds and the A7s, both of which have interesting deviations from "normal" compared to other cameras from the same manufacturer (or using the same sensor technology). For example, most Exmor cameras have very low read noise at ISO 100, however the A7s has quite high read noise at low ISO, yet exceptional high ISO performance. The 5Ds has some of the best low ISO performance in the Canon lineup, but poorer high ISO performance (which I don't think is 100% related to pixel size, as I've seen better performance out of Nikon 24mp APS-C cameras at high ISO.) 


The 5Ds has it's place. It also seems clear that is Canon's new studio line. I'm not sure what they could put into a 1D model that is better for studio, maybe one or two minor features like AF-point linked metering. I suspect the 1D line will remain the "blended" high performance line, and still geared towards the action shooter, while the 5Ds line will become the new studio line.


----------



## jrista (Mar 28, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > A Low Pass (LP) and Anti Aliasing Filter (AA) are the same thing.
> ...




Low pass and anti-aliasing filters are the same thing. The D800 had horizontal and vertical low pass filters, which are AA filters. These split the incoming high frequency spatial frequencies in the horizontal and vertical directions to blur them just enough to avoid interference patterns around the nyquist limit. 


The D800E had only one, I forget which, let's say horizontal low pass filter. This was, for lack of a better term, a "positive" filter in that it split the high resolution spatial frequencies. Then it had another horizontal filter, only it was a "negative" filter in that it recombined the high resolution spatial frequencies, effectively canceling out the effect. 


Both cameras also had IR cutoff filters to block near infrared light, and also attenuate red light to produce more "human sight" like reds (without that filter, reds become significantly stronger in DSLRs...one of the reasons astrophotographers like to remove these filters...lot of gas in space is hydrogen, which emits a lot of red light.) 


The D810 doesn't have any low pass filters at all. It does have an IR cutoff filter, just not any low pass filters of any kind, "positive" or "negative".


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 28, 2015)

jrista said:


> IglooEater said:
> 
> 
> > Is there anyone else who thinks that this is what should have been released *instead of* the 5ds?
> ...



Bingo. Thank you for putting it better than I could.


----------



## ahsanford (Mar 28, 2015)

jrista said:


> Low pass and anti-aliasing filters are the same thing. The D800 had horizontal and vertical low pass filters
> 
> [truncated]
> 
> ...D810 doesn't have any low pass filters at all. It does have an IR cutoff filter, just not any low pass filters of any kind, "positive" or "negative".



Thanks. Very informative. Appreciated.

- A


----------



## photonius (Mar 28, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> photonius said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



well magnification is also Height-image divided height-object
And the two cameras have different sensor heights.
So, let's say, chart 1 meter high. M = 24/1000 for FF, for crop M = 15/1000 
For tdp let's say we need to blow it up to 5 meters (and take then a 1/100 center crop). 
FF: 5000/24 Total magnification from test chart to sensor to web site: 5000/24 * 24 / 1000 = 5
crop: 5000/15 total magnification 5000/15 * 15 /1000 = 5


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 29, 2015)

photonius said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > photonius said:
> ...



You keep making the same mistake, but this time you have confused yourself with maths in doing it.

Think if it like this. A lens projects an image onto the sensor plane, from any distance it does this the same size irrespective of what sensor size is behind it. If you change the distance the magnification changes.

If I use a ff camera and take a frame filling image of a test target (or anything) and then want the same framing from a Canon crop camera with the same lens I have to move back 1.6 times as far, in doing so that subject is projected onto the sensor 1.6 times linear smaller, or 40% the area. If I then want to reproduce those images the same size I have to magnify the crop camera image 1.6 times linear more, or 256% the area.

So I have made this little collage to help us along. The first two images are life sized FF and crop sensor images of a test target shot so the target fills the frame for both cameras, resize your browser window to make the FF image 36mm (or close to it) long.

These are what your sensor sees, and to make it so you need to be 1.6 times further away for the crop camera.

The second two images are enlargements of the first two such that we see a section of the test target the same size for both sensors. The FF crop is enlarged 5X, the crop camera crop has to be enlarged 8X (5x1.6=8) doing this makes the features in the two crops the same size. 

The bottom two images are exactly what we are seeing in the linked tests. We can draw several conclusions from this:-[list type=decimal]
[*]The crop camera crop is enlarged more.
[*]The crop camera IQ is worse because it is enlarged more.
[*]Any aberrations are magnified more in the crop camera image.
[*]This is not a fair comparison of IQ.
[/list]


----------



## weixing (Mar 29, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> photonius said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...


Hi,
Hmm... I think you are correct if both FF and crop had the same pixels density, but if both FF and crop had the same resolution (i.e. crop had higher pixel density than FF), than they should produce the similar quality image (under perfect condition).

Have a nice day.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 29, 2015)

weixing said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > photonius said:
> ...



AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! :

No, they should not. Pixel density has got absolutely nothing to do with anything here, we are talking enlargement, or, magnification, pixel density has got zero impact on that in any modern digital camera. Whilst you are having a nice day go read this http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/ then get back to me with a comment that actually makes sense.


----------



## jrista (Mar 29, 2015)

weixing said:


> Hi,
> Hmm... I think you are correct if both FF and crop had the same pixels density, but if both FF and crop had the same resolution (i.e. crop had higher pixel density than FF), than they should produce the similar quality image (under perfect condition).
> 
> Have a nice day.




That sounds nice and neat, but it is not the case. Higher pixel density can affect final image resolution...but only in reach-limited situations. It does not actually mean IQ is the same if sensor sizes are different. It's because the SNR of the smaller sensor is lower than the SNR of the larger sensor. 

Let's just assume we have two cameras with 20 megapixels, one is 36x24mm and one is 18x12mm. This is an area difference of 4x, so the larger sensor has pixels 4x as large. As such, let's say the pixel FWC of the smaller is 25,000e-, and the pixel FWC of the larger is 100,000e-. You expose both cameras off an 18% gray card, so you get a perfect middle tone.

Your two photos are technically the same...you exposed both the same way on an 18% gray field, and both images have exposures exactly half their FWC. That means the average level in each pixel of the smaller sensor is 12,500e-, and in each pixel of the larger sensor is 50,000e-. The difference in the number of electrons per pixel (the signal) should already be telling you something here, but let's figure out the SNR for each just to be sure, and for now let's assume there is no read noise:


```
largeSNR = 50,000/SQRT(50,000) = 223.6:1
smallSNR = 12,500/SQRT(12,500) = 111.8:1
```

The larger sensor clearly has the higher SNR. Higher SNR is what leads to better IQ. We can convert this into decibels, which would then correlate with many test site data:


```
largeSNRdB = 20 * log(223.6) = 47dB
smallSNRdB = 20 * log(111.8) = 41dB
```

In decibels, a difference of 6dB is equivalent to a stop improvement. So, the larger sensor here gains exactly a 1-stop improvement in terms of IQ over the smaller sensor. The smaller sensor is exactly 1/4 the size of the larger sensor, or a difference of 4x. Image quality scales as the square root of that, or 2x...a factor of two, a doubling or halving.

In terms of noise, the larger sensor wins out here because each and every one of it's 20 million pixels are gathering more light. Assuming you were identically framed, there is no difference in final resolution either...you put the same amount of pixels onto the same area of your gray card in this case, but if it was a bird, or a mountain, or a person's portrait, it would be the same. Both cameras have 20 megapixels, but one has pixels 4x as large, and therefor it gathers more light for the same subject.


----------



## photonius (Mar 30, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> photonius said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



I have not confused myself, my math is exactly what you illustrate with your sample images. The only thing you left out is that the magnification is different to project the test chart onto the different sized sensors.

"The crop camera IQ is worse because it is enlarged more." this statement is only true under some conditions. If you have a 8MP FF sensor, and a 24 MP crop sensor, the crop will be better (i.e opposite what you show above).

"This is not a fair comparison". That is not the point. The web site simply provides images of lenses on different sensors, all magnified to the same extent compared to the original chart. That allows you to get
an approximate idea how good the image is of that lens/body combo compared to some other lens combo.
And yes, the crop sensor will show CA etc. 1.6x (linear) more than FF.


----------



## tiredofstitching (Apr 1, 2015)

Hey, wouldn't you folks trim the quotes to what you really wish to answer? It would make reading the posts so much more enjoyable! 

8)


----------



## StudentOfLight (Apr 2, 2015)

tiredofstitching said:


> Hey, wouldn't you folks trim the quotes to what you really wish to answer? It would make reading the posts so much more enjoyable!
> 
> 8)


+1 8)


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 2, 2015)

StudentOfLight said:


> tiredofstitching said:
> 
> 
> > Hey, wouldn't you folks trim the quotes to what you really wish to answer? It would make reading the posts so much more enjoyable!
> ...



For two reasons, first, it maintains context, I hate it when people partial quote and deliberately completely misrepresent what you actually wrote, just like photonius quoting my my partial comment _"This is not a fair comparison"_ then ripping me apart in saying that isn't the point of the website, I know that! But it was the point of the initial linked comparison about which we are talking and that the poster has subsequently agreed is not correct and not a fair comparison. And second, I kinda like to see how far the nesting will go ;D it seems like they go into a black hole of quotes!

Also, I gave up with photonius, I expect most other people can see the error of using those two samples as a comparison of diffraction, all those that don't have their head up their butts and confuse pixel density with enlargement anyway.


----------

