# The Canon EOS 90D is Coming Later in 2018 [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 24, 2018)

```
While we’ve tried to confirm without any doubt that the EOS 7D Mark III is not coming in 2018, we haven’t done so yet. However, we’re 80% sure that’ll be the case.</p>
<p>The first APS-C DSLR cameras will be three new Rebels next month ahead of CP+. Why are there three Rebels coming? We’re thinking each one must have a specific focus, because that is a lot of Rebels in the series, a series that continues to drop in sales.</p>


<p>We’re told that an EOS 80D replacement is currently marked for the second half of 2018. The EOS 90D will show “further separation from the EOS 77D” .  The 90D will receive an all-new sensor to the lineup once it is announced, so that tells us it won’t share a sensor with the upcoming Rebel’s or EOS M50. The camera will also have a new version of DPAF, but we’re not sure if it will be the first camera in the lineup to receive it. There is no mention of the mythical “4K” capability and we don’t want to guess either way.</p>
<p>Beyond that, we’re too far out to have any real idea of how the camera will be specced out.</p>
<p>The 2018 roadmap isn’t in focus at all yet, and we seem to be receiving an increase in vague and conflicting information. We’re instead waiting for some confirmation from folks we trust and that have a good track record.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## MrFotoFool (Jan 24, 2018)

Later this year (by early summer) I will likely buy an APS-C body to keep on my telephoto so I don't have to keep switching lenses. I love my current 5D4 but will not be able to afford another one as my second body.

I am strongly looking at 80D and if a 90D is out that would be nice. Maybe I will get it or maybe I will still get an 80D but it will be cheaper because of the announcement?


----------



## Canoneer (Jan 24, 2018)

Any word if he 90D is going to kickoff a new resolution standard? The 24MP DPAF seems to be universally implemented across the APS-C lineup currently. Maybe the 90D will be 37.5MP (7,500 x 5,000)?


----------



## Chaitanya (Jan 24, 2018)

Canoneer said:


> Any word if he 90D is going to kickoff a new resolution standard? The 24MP DPAF seems to be universally implemented across the APS-C lineup currently. Maybe the 90D will be 37.5MP (7,500 x 5,000)?


That's too much for APS-C format, I won't mind if resolution stays 24MP +/-2MP.


----------



## midluk (Jan 24, 2018)

Canon Rumors said:


> The camera will also have a new version of DPAF, but we’re not sure if it will be the first camera in the lineup to receive it.


Perhaps they go one step further to quad pixel AF, which would result in something like cross type AF points.


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 24, 2018)

Or alternate vertically and horizontally arranged dual pixels. Not sure it would be worth the extra complexity though.


----------



## SkynetTX (Jan 24, 2018)

Chaitanya said:


> Canoneer said:
> 
> 
> > Any word if he 90D is going to kickoff a new resolution standard? The 24MP DPAF seems to be universally implemented across the APS-C lineup currently. Maybe the 90D will be 37.5MP (7,500 x 5,000)?
> ...


The largest aperture that is not diffraction limited yet is f/8 for an 18 mp APS-C format camera and f/14 for an FF camera with the same resolution. Though f/11 for APS-C and f/22 for FF can be used without losing too much detail the more MP you have the lower the DLA will be. In my opinion there's no use of having a 24+ MP sensor until it will be able to decrease the diffraction effect somehow.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jan 24, 2018)

SkynetTX said:


> In my opinion there's no use of having a 24+ MP sensor until it will be able to decrease the diffraction effect somehow.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 24, 2018)

SkynetTX said:


> Chaitanya said:
> 
> 
> > Canoneer said:
> ...



Sounds like somebody only did half the diffraction/CoC/DLA course. The multitude of cameras, of all sizes, available with DLA figures much lower than f11/14 is proof of that.


----------



## ritholtz (Jan 24, 2018)

Sharlin said:


> Or alternate vertically and horizontally arranged dual pixels. Not sure it would be worth the extra complexity though.


xxd series is bellweather for Canon new tech. 70d is the first camera with due pixel tech. 80d is the first camera with DR tech and next level duel pixel tech (servo tracking with live view) which ended up in every crop camera released. 90d is going to come with new Canon stuff. There is going to be next iteration of duel pixel tech to improve live view / mirrorless shooting further, probably 4k and auto MFA to close the gap with mirrorless. Canon is putting lot of effort in pushing both sides of focusing tech (on sensor / pdaf).


----------



## AlanF (Jan 24, 2018)

The DLA for the 5DSR is ~f/6.6, about the same as for a 20mpx APS-C. Photozone reports that for the 5DSR the MTFs for lenses they have tested tend to be optimal at f/4, showing that diffraction effects come in quite soon after that. A 30 mpx APS-C would have about the same pixel size as a 20 mpx M4/3.


----------



## stevelee (Jan 24, 2018)

It's not like diffraction suddenly jumps out of the bushes and eats the image quality. 

The cautionary tales in articles on diffraction and their formulae can come off as too alarmist. In any photograph one is trading off all sorts of things. One just needs to be aware of the effect and balance it against other factors. At what point does the increased depth of field cease making the picture look sharper because of diffraction effects? As with most things, the answer is, "It depends."

A perhaps extreme example is the test in which I inadvertently demonstrated diffraction effect. I shot the metric side of a yard stick using the 100mm macro lens with my T3i. I was looking at depth of field for different apertures with 1:1 magnification. For many practical purposes, shots a f/32 looked better than the rest just because about 4 cm. of the marks were relatively in focus. For something important I'd probably use focus stacking and a wider aperture. But for a quick shot of something small, f/32 works rather well.

Results with different lenses and hyperfocal or infinity focus would vary, of course. Some day I might get around to some tests on that order for landscapes with FF.

My travel shots account for a lot my landscapes, so I have the short lens and 1" sensor of the G7X II. I happily let it use a wide aperture of its choice most of the time, since diffraction kicks in early, and DOF is not a challenge at 8.8mm.


----------



## slclick (Jan 24, 2018)

A bit of an aside but where is Canon going with the naming scheme following the 90D?


----------



## Canoneer (Jan 24, 2018)

slclick said:


> A bit of an aside but where is Canon going with the naming scheme following the 90D?



They'll probably switch to Roman numerals. It seems like a proper Canon thing to do.


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 24, 2018)

I guess they will have a little wriggle room with 91D, 92D
The might also go back to 10M when its mirrorless.
Im not sure how dense they can make the MPs on APS-C.
I’m not sure more is desirable. I’d prefer better quality.
I thought the 7D2 and 5DSR overdid it for the technology of it the time.
I meet very few people nowadays with xxD cameras. 
A lot of people I know jump to full frame from xxxD.
Maybe it’s more successful and in other countries.
I personally don’t see the point of the range these days. 
But I guess others do.


----------



## symmar22 (Jan 24, 2018)

SkynetTX said:


> Chaitanya said:
> 
> 
> > Canoneer said:
> ...



Except in real life it doesn't matter that much. As an architecture and interior photographer, I shoot most of my subject with wide angles, stopped down in the f14-f22 range, on a 5Dsr Yes it is a bit softer at f22, but when I need everything in focus, that's the way to go. None of my clients ever complained.

Diffraction is very overstated by a lot of people. That you want to optimize sharpness for some pictures is OK, but when you need depth of field there is no choice. My experience is that sharpness decreases significantly only after f22 for it to be a real concern. I prefer the extra resolution of a denser sensor than to fear diffraction. Remove the useless low pass filter and you save "1 stop" of diffraction.


----------



## crashpc (Jan 24, 2018)

If there is the moire visible in the image, than the lens diffraction is not that bad anyway. People also need process the mage in a ways that might take some more resolution away. Like rotating and stuff. For that reason, we need oversampled image, to actually rely only on the lens capabilities and diffraction, not on the sensor shortcomings. Sensor resolution and storage is relatively cheap. Not so with good glass. That way it would be very welcomed to have at least 32Mpx APS-C sensor, if not more, for landscapes and macros and birding...


----------



## Quackator (Jan 24, 2018)

What if all those new rebels are mirrorless and Canon enters the mirrorless market full swing?


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 24, 2018)

symmar22 said:


> SkynetTX said:
> 
> 
> > Chaitanya said:
> ...



+1


----------



## James Larsen (Jan 24, 2018)

If there isn't any 4k I'd be very disappointed.


----------



## Don Haines (Jan 24, 2018)

I really don’t expect to see much of an improvement over the 80D.

4K... of course....

Perhaps 2 more megapixels, a slightly better burst rate, hopefully a faster SD interface..... which becomes an almost unlimited buffer.... and some improvements to the WiFi interface.....

Other than that, we are approaching the limits of the current technology......


----------



## Talys (Jan 24, 2018)

I love my 80D -- it's easily my favorite camera. It literally has everything I want from a camera for most purposes, including size, EXCEPT that the sensor has too much noise for my taste on most photos shot at higher ISOs.

The one thing that I'm looking for that would make me buy this is visibly better higher ISO performance. If it can be as clean as a 6DII at least at ISO 800, I'll seriously consider it. If it's as clean at 1200-1600, I'll buy it in an instant. Maybe this will happen with a new sensor; don't know.

There are other obvious things from the 77D and 6D2's featureset that will no doubt be brought over... Bluetooth and the ability to remember several wirelessly tethered devices, for example. I would expect usual stuff like minor FPS bump, some resolution bump, who knows, maybe some DR bumpage to make that crowd happy.

If the 90D records 4k, that would make a lot of people very happy, I suppose, and it has the EFS 18-135 nano, which is a good pairing for APSC video.

A "new generation of DPAF" sounds cool, though I almost never use it on my 80D. 

One thing, though: if 7DIII doesn't come out in 2018, 90D this would further diminish 7D sales until its release.


----------



## slclick (Jan 25, 2018)

Hector1970 said:


> I guess they will have a little wriggle room with 91D, 92D
> The might also go back to 10M when its mirrorless.
> Im not sure how dense they can make the MPs on APS-C.
> I’m not sure more is desirable. I’d prefer better quality.
> ...



I know quite a few folks who made the jump from the XXD to the 6D series. I also know a great deal more who have the 50D and 60D who love them (esp the 50) The 50D seems to have a special place in many peoples hearts. I myself went from Rebel to 7D to 5D.


----------



## Tremotino (Jan 25, 2018)

Quackator said:


> What if all those new rebels are mirrorless and Canon enters the mirrorless market full swing?



The same idea came to my mind. 
May it be a mirrorless, a hybrid and a classic rebel. 

The 90d I think will have better sensor technology mainly because of the improved dpaf, which I really love on my 70d, smooth, precise and never fails.


----------



## 9VIII (Jan 25, 2018)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Canon_EOS_digital_cameras
If you look at the release cycle of Canon's current products there are _five_ bodies that should get a replacement in 2019, and one that would land in late 2018.

1200D lasted 2.25 years, 1300D should be replaced in Q3 2018.
750D and 760D lasted 2 years, 800D and 77D should be replaced in Q2 2019
70D lasted 2.75 years, 80D should be replaced in Q1 2019.
7D lasted 5 years, 7D MkII should be replaced in Q4 2019
5D MkIII lasted 4.5 years, 5DS should be replaced in Q4 2019

(I missed the EOS M6 at a 2.25 year cycle should be replaced Q3 2019, and while the M5 is the first in its category 3 years is probably the best trend to go by, which would put it's replacement in Q4 2019.)

It sounds like some are coming sooner but there should be _a lot_ of new products coming out of Canon in the next two years.


----------



## 9VIII (Jan 25, 2018)

Ok maybe it's easier to put it the other way around, only four out of Canon's current thirteen lines of EOS bodies will go without replacement by the end of 2019.

(Three of those four remaining bodies being Full Frame, basically that means the entirety of Canon's APS-C production is getting revamped. The SL2 is the only current crop body that won't get replaced in the near future.)


----------



## Talys (Jan 25, 2018)

Yeah, there is no way that 7DII, 77D, 80D, and 5DS are all replaced in 2019 though. It would be malpractice, since there are people who might buy 2 or more of those bodies, and dropping them all at the same time would kill that.

I'm interested in 7D3, 90D, and 5DSRII. I won't buy all 3, but if they're spaced a year apart, I might buy two.

Do I get a 7D3 or a 90D? That's easy; I'll probably be trilled with either, since I love my 80D. So the answer is... whichever comes out first.

Do I get the 5DSRII? If I get excited enough about it, and it hits the mark on the things that prevented me from seriously considering 5DSR... and if it's far enough away from my last camera body spend, because it's going to be a pricey luxury, that I know I don't really need.


----------



## Imagewerx (Jan 25, 2018)

slclick said:


> A bit of an aside but where is Canon going with the naming scheme following the 90D?



15D,25D,35D etc etc......


----------



## Imagewerx (Jan 25, 2018)

9VIII said:


> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Canon_EOS_digital_cameras
> If you look at the release cycle of Canon's current products there are _five_ bodies that should get a replacement in 2019, and one that would land in late 2018.
> 
> 1200D lasted 2.25 years, 1300D should be replaced in Q3 2018.
> ...



The replacement cycle gets longer and longer with each successive model range.

My first DSLR was an EOS 10D,and they already had release dates scheduled for the 20D,30D,40D and 50D,all roughly 18 months apart.It was after the the 50D it started to get longer before the next model came out (or at least that's the way I remember it).


----------



## mistaspeedy (Jan 25, 2018)

Talys said:


> The one thing that I'm looking for that would make me buy this is visibly better higher ISO performance. If it can be as clean as a 6DII at least at ISO 800, I'll seriously consider it. If it's as clean at 1200-1600, I'll buy it in an instant. Maybe this will happen with a new sensor; don't know.



Unfortunately this is impossible. Even the best of the best APS-C sensors from Sony and Nikon cannot come close to a full frame sensor. Do not expect that much difference in APS-C sensor performance for at least another 10 years, maybe more... the difference is that big.

https://gyazo.com/f4b8b43e330014ad0088fda4982d499a
Here is a comparison between the 80D, Sony a6500 (best APS-C) and 6D mark II.

Here is another comparison... Canon 10D from 2003 vs Sony a6500
https://gyazo.com/cea02d897a0ccfd5da2b1c6387b88e7d

It took 13 years in sensor technology to make up that gap... and the gap between the 80D and 6D mark II is the same.
Looking at the graphs... unless you want to shoot the Sony a6500 at really really high ISOs like 12800 to 51200, you can't get close to the 6D mark II with an APS-C sensor... but at that point the quality is severely degraded anyway.

Unfortunately that is the decision we are left with... the only real upgrade path with a big difference in performance is full frame, and all the associated expenses with full frame glass.

Last but not least... a funny little comparison between the 1D mark II (from 2004) and the 80D & a6500.
https://gyazo.com/a557806e1be6739564cfc0491e368ec8
Purely from an image noise perspective... the 1D mark II (1.3x crop) from 2004 is damn close to the 80D.
Just goes to show how much of a big difference sensor size makes.

PS: The 80D obliterates the 1D mark II in many many other measurements like dynamic range, resolution etc, I'm not saying they are comparable in everything.


----------



## exquisitor (Jan 25, 2018)

I am curious, what the three Rebels will be and how they will differentiate. Two of them are probably going to be direct successors of 800D and 77D. But the third one? Will it be more video oriented with 4K?


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 25, 2018)

mistaspeedy said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > The one thing that I'm looking for that would make me buy this is visibly better higher ISO performance. If it can be as clean as a 6DII at least at ISO 800, I'll seriously consider it. If it's as clean at 1200-1600, I'll buy it in an instant. Maybe this will happen with a new sensor; don't know.
> ...



Sensors are already less than one stop away from theoretical 100% efficiency at mid to high ISO values. The diminishing returns are evident when considering eg. these DR charts. I added the Nikon D7200 as a reference; its DR curve is very close to optimal.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 25, 2018)

Sharlin said:


> mistaspeedy said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



Excuse my ignorance, but are dynamic range and noise interchangeable? Can a sensor have better noise control without having more dynamic range? I'm unconcerned about dynamic range, but I would like cleaner files.


----------



## zim (Jan 25, 2018)

+ 1 for improved noise at mid-high iso, more DR great if it's there but meh otherwise.

For me the biggest dissapointment is no 7D3 in 2018 I don't hold out any hope on that 20% of doubt.
I'll make do with what I've got and if neccessary rent, quite fancy having an excuse to try a 5D4 actually


----------



## The Fat Fish (Jan 25, 2018)

"There is no mention of the mythical “4K” capability and we don’t want to guess either way"

They'd be the laughing stock of the industry if they didn't. Back when the 80D was released there were already complaints at the lack of 4K as the Sony and Nikons at the time offered it. The 80D was just enough of a camera to get away with it but in 2018 that isn't going to do.

Canon HAVE to break this streak of negative coverage (5DIV video and 6DII).


----------



## davidcl0nel (Jan 25, 2018)

9VIII said:


> 7D lasted 5 years, 7D MkII should be replaced in Q4 2019
> 5D MkIII lasted 4.5 years, 5DS should be replaced in Q4 2019



And 1DX II the same...
I think all 3 (7D3, 5D5, 1DX 3) professional comes late 2019 or Spring 2020, just before "their" Olympic Games in 2020 in Tokyo.


----------



## mistaspeedy (Jan 25, 2018)

unfocused said:


> Excuse my ignorance, but are dynamic range and noise interchangeable? Can a sensor have better noise control without having more dynamic range? I'm unconcerned about dynamic range, but I would like cleaner files.



To answer your questions...
1) Dynamic range and noise (SNR) are NOT interchangeable.
2) Yes. A good example is 6D mark II vs 80D. The 6D mark II gives much cleaner files (SNR) than the 80D at all ISO levels due to the much bigger full frame sensor. At ISO 100 and ISO 200, the 80D has much better dynamic range. (They are nearly the same at ISO 400, and beyond that the 6D mark II is better.)

Let's say you take a side by side image from both cameras at ISO 100... the daytime sky will have less noise on the 6D mark II, but if you want to brighten the shadows a lot during editing, the 80D will be cleaner in those shadow areas (yet simultaneously have more noise in the sky).

If you take an image and look at the highlights and midtones (everything besides the deep shadows), and evaluate the noise... you are looking at the 'noise' or SNR (signal to noise ratio).
Looking at the noise in deep shadows is talking about dynamic range.

These two metrics are measured separately in DXOmark's tests for a reason.

Many people seem to think that the 6D mark II's sensor is worse in every way than the original 6D, when it is just the dynamic range that has fallen a little bit.
Resolution, SNR, tonal range and color sensitivity have all taken a step forward, especially at ISO 100.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 25, 2018)

The Fat Fish said:


> Canon HAVE to break this streak of negative coverage (5DIV video and 6DII).



It depends where you get your news from, if its YouTube then the 6D MkII is the new wonder child of achievable vlogging. All the big boys and many up and comers are saying how great it is and how it is the ultimate current vlogging camera.

The 5D MkIV is widely accepted as the best all round ff camera in the world. Seen any press conferences lately? Over 90% of photographers (by visual reference) are using 5D MkIII/IV's, they are used at thousands of weddings every weekend for both stills and video, portrait studios love them too, people like Peter Hurley and Sue Bryce keep the interest and profile of the camera pretty high.

If you look under rocks for your 'news' you will find snakes. If you look at photographers you will find Canon's.


----------



## exquisitor (Jan 25, 2018)

Talys said:


> I love my 80D -- it's easily my favorite camera. It literally has everything I want from a camera for most purposes, including size, EXCEPT that the sensor has too much noise for my taste on most photos shot at higher ISOs.
> 
> The one thing that I'm looking for that would make me buy this is visibly better higher ISO performance. If it can be as clean as a 6DII at least at ISO 800, I'll seriously consider it. If it's as clean at 1200-1600, I'll buy it in an instant. Maybe this will happen with a new sensor; don't know.



As mistaspeedy already mentioned this is not going to happen. But it would be nice if 90D would be on par with the current 24 MP Sony sensor at high ISO.


----------



## mkabi (Jan 25, 2018)

The Fat Fish said:


> "There is no mention of the mythical “4K” capability and we don’t want to guess either way"
> 
> They'd be the laughing stock of the industry if they didn't. Back when the 80D was released there were already complaints at the lack of 4K as the Sony and Nikons at the time offered it. The 80D was just enough of a camera to get away with it but in 2018 that isn't going to do.
> 
> Canon HAVE to break this streak of negative coverage (5DIV video and 6DII).



Don't wait, start laughing now....

And, at this point, I honestly don't think 4K will be available in the 90D...

Don't get me wrong, there is an obvious demand for it, although this forum doesn't think so... I'm sure that Canon wants to offer it too, but they can't... may be it is to protect their higher end cams or cinema cams... but I have another theory and that is that they don't know how to... Reason: its this ridiculous codec - MJPEG - that does 500mbps for 4K/24fps & 800mbps for 4K/60fps... Its great for IQ & color correction, but storage is a nightmare. So, the question is, can they be using this codec with their current SD interface?

Its also a big possibility that they bought the older SD interface in bulk, and want to get rid of them as much as possible before moving on.... remember how they had a bunch of 18MP sensors and they put them in everything from the 7D to the SL1.


----------



## Sharlin (Jan 25, 2018)

unfocused said:


> Excuse my ignorance, but are dynamic range and noise interchangeable? Can a sensor have better noise control without having more dynamic range? I'm unconcerned about dynamic range, but I would like cleaner files.



Not exactly, but close enough if you keep sensor size fixed. Dynamic range in a camera sensor is capped from the top by photosite well capacity (hard cap; the sensor just saturates and no extra information beyond that can be recovered because there isn't any) and from the bottom the noise floor (soft cap; the weaker the signal you're trying to recover the more you amplify noise as well, resulting in lower and lower signal/noise ratio).

At medium to high ISOs nowadays, the noise component of sensor signal is entirely dominated by photon shot noise: the statistical variation expected simply because photons are discrete packets of energy randomly hitting the sensor. The weaker the signal to be amplified, the fewer photons and more random the pattern. The only way to improve that is to gather more photons. This means either using a lower ISO and a longer exposure time (or a bigger aperture), using a larger sensor with larger photosites (or more of them so their signal can be averaged), or making the sensor more effective at gathering light.

If we want to keep exposure and sensor size fixed, the last one is our only option. Not all of the sensor surface is light-sensitive; around every individual photosite there has to be room for wiring and support structure. The photodiode:scaffolding ratio has climbed over the years, but there's a natural cap so diminishing returns are inevitable. Light-focusing microlenses and, more recently, back-side illuminated sensors are some of the ways the effective light-sensitive surface area has been improved.

Most digital cameras utilize Bayer filters over monochrome CMOS sensors to allow color information to be recorded. The color matrix necessarily blocks some of the light as each Bayer cell filters out perfectly good photons that just happen to have a wrong wavelength. Improvements here are based on coming up with dyes that are optimally transparent to photons of the "right" wavelength range. Or you can of course opt to rid of the color filter altogether (see Leica Monochrom and many astro cameras).

Even of those photons that are lucky enough to hit a photodiode, not 100% can be converted to useful signal. The quantum efficiency of a modern CMOS photodiode is somewhere between 50 and 90 percent, depending on wavelength. CCD sensors can have high (~90%) quantum efficiencies which is why they're popular in astro imaging.

Adding all of this up, state-of-the-art sensors are already well over 50% efficient at converting photons exiting the lens to useful signal. So there's less than one stop of improvement possible even in theory, and returns are definitely diminishing.


----------



## CosminD (Jan 25, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> The 5D MkIV is widely accepted as the best all round ff camera in the world.



You probably haven't seen the Nikon D850


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 25, 2018)

CosminD said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > The 5D MkIV is widely accepted as the best all round ff camera in the world.
> ...



Seen it and used it and agree with many others, I just don't need or want that many pixels all the time.


----------



## Talys (Jan 25, 2018)

exquisitor said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > I love my 80D -- it's easily my favorite camera. It literally has everything I want from a camera for most purposes, including size, EXCEPT that the sensor has too much noise for my taste on most photos shot at higher ISOs.
> ...



Why is it impossible for Canon to make an APSC sensor superior to Sony?


----------



## HaroldC3 (Jan 26, 2018)

Where do they go after the 90D? I'm really surprised they made it to 90D from 10D.


----------



## Talys (Jan 26, 2018)

HaroldC3 said:


> Where do they go after the 90D? I'm really surprised they made it to 90D from 10D.



91D! Which gives them another 9 generations! 

But my serious guess would be 90D Mark II.


----------



## mistaspeedy (Jan 26, 2018)

Talys said:


> exquisitor said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



Theoretically speaking, if Canon somehow manages to make some new breakthrough, they could make something better than Sony (but I doubt it, since Sony invests HUGE money in cutting edge fabs and sensor technology).
However, this is not the thing we said was 'impossible'.
'Impossible' was referring to huge leaps and strides in APS-C sensor performance to make it match the full frame 6D mark II. The huge difference in sensor size will not be overcome anytime soon.
Anyone who owns any modern APS-C camera, and wants a big leap in performance should be looking to jump to full frame (or get better glass that is 1 or 2 stops faster). Getting a new camera body isnt going to make much difference.


----------



## exquisitor (Jan 26, 2018)

Talys said:


> exquisitor said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



Because, as it was already mentioned in the thread, the Sony sensor is quite near to the physical limit of the current technology. So the new Canon sensor could be a bit better than Sony sensor, but not by far. I am rather realist, that's why on par is what I would expect from Canon.
FF sensor gets 2.56x more light than APS-C. This physical difference can not be overcome easily. So if you want cleaner files at higher ISO, get bigger sensor.

P.S. mistaspeedy was faster...


----------



## rrcphoto (Jan 26, 2018)

Talys said:


> exquisitor said:
> 
> 
> > Talys said:
> ...



it's not impossible, simply improbable and is it worth it really? the differences between the various 24MP sensors is small enough that you are really splitting hairs.

Some of Sony's high ISO gains was when they bought out Aptina.

Also alot of Sony semiconductor R&D goes into smartphone sized sensors, the improvements at that level usually ripple up into the bigger sensors.

Canon really doesn't have such a R&D feed so things tend to move slower.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 26, 2018)

Talys said:


> HaroldC3 said:
> 
> 
> > Where do they go after the 90D? I'm really surprised they made it to 90D from 10D.
> ...



95D, 99D. Or maybe we go hexadecimal and it goes 90D>A0D>B0D etc


----------



## Talys (Jan 26, 2018)

mistaspeedy said:


> Talys said:
> 
> 
> > As mistaspeedy already mentioned this is not going to happen. But it would be nice if 90D would be on par with the current 24 MP Sony sensor at high ISO.
> ...



Theoretically speaking, if Canon somehow manages to make some new breakthrough, they could make something better than Sony (but I doubt it, since Sony invests HUGE money in cutting edge fabs and sensor technology).
However, this is not the thing we said was 'impossible'.
'Impossible' was referring to huge leaps and strides in APS-C sensor performance to make it match the full frame 6D mark II. The huge difference in sensor size will not be overcome anytime soon.
Anyone who owns any modern APS-C camera, and wants a big leap in performance should be looking to jump to full frame (or get better glass that is 1 or 2 stops faster). Getting a new camera body isnt going to make much difference.
[/quote]

To be clear, I didn't say that I was looking for 90D to match 6DII in high ISO performance. I realize that given today's technology that's just not going to happen. However, at ISO 800, I find the 80D's photos to be noticeably worse than the 6DII -- I'd like to see that gap significantly narrowed, whether it's actually less SNR, or whether it cleans up better in post, I don't care. Really, it's just up to ISO 1600 that's a big deal to me, because it would significantly improve my ability to do bird photography with a crop camera on cloudy days, and also with f/6.3 and f/8 apertures.

And anyways, the 90D is going to get a new sensor, so the question is, how is the new sensor going to be better than the old one? Prevailing wisdom seems to be, "it's not going to be much different at all" -- I'm hoping for more  It's fine if it isn't -- but this will mean I probably won't buy it, because the 80D gives me almost everything I could want from an APSC; many of the peripheral things that could be improved to distinguish it from 77D and make it more like 7D are just not things I care enough about to buy another body for. And it isn't that I don't appreciate the convenience improvements on 6DII (like vastly improved remote tethering configuration), it's just that it isn't worth enough to me for a purchase.


----------



## snoke (Jan 27, 2018)

Canon need new series of camera.


----------



## djack41 (Jan 28, 2018)

The Canon 7D2 has been blown away by the Nikon D500 and now the Nikon D850 has blown away the 5D4. Canon needs to respond with innovative technologies. Waiting 4-5 years to release camera upgrades no longer works. A 7D3 is badly needed now.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 28, 2018)

djack41 said:


> The Canon 7D2 has been blown away by the Nikon D500 and now the Nikon D850 has blown away the 5D4. Canon needs to respond with innovative technologies. Waiting 4-5 years to release camera upgrades no longer works. A 7D3 is badly needed now.



What is innovative about the D500 and D850? They seem like incremental upgrades to earlier models to me, Nikon do it and they are called innovative, Canon do it and they are *******. Get real.


----------



## dp3294 (Jan 30, 2018)

Rumor has it that the 90D will not have 4K video.

However, don't worry! My same source tells me they will offer a paid upgrade for the 90D to have 4K video, for just $25,000 extra. They gotta protect those C700 sales, after all.


----------



## 9VIII (Jan 30, 2018)

privatebydesign said:


> djack41 said:
> 
> 
> > The Canon 7D2 has been blown away by the Nikon D500 and now the Nikon D850 has blown away the 5D4. Canon needs to respond with innovative technologies. Waiting 4-5 years to release camera upgrades no longer works. A 7D3 is badly needed now.
> ...



I still don’t know if they’re cheating like Fuji does, but the D500 has the cleanest APS-C high ISO image quality on the market by a wide margin (using DPReview’s studio test, which is supposedly _only_ good for judging image noise because that aspect of an image isn’t affected by the lens).
Nikon effectively did everything right with the D500 and it’s just hard to find criticisms.


----------



## midluk (Jan 30, 2018)

dp3294 said:


> Rumor has it that the 90D will not have 4K video.
> 
> However, don't worry! My same source tells me they will offer a paid upgrade for the 90D to have 4K video, for just $25,000 extra. They gotta protect those C700 sales, after all.


It is perfectly possible that the 90D does not have 4K. Perhaps they still haven't solved the problem of how to do realtime 4K encoding with anything else than MJPEG within the given power budget in a DSLR. MJPEG is a non-starter for consumer cameras due to file size and the needed fast cards and interfaces.

If they had the technology, they would likely already have added low quality very low bitrate 4K to the 6D2 and 80D. Good enough to appear in the spec sheets for those people that want 4K but don't actually need it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 30, 2018)

9VIII said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > djack41 said:
> ...



Looks like they are just cheating. This means that the Nikon is pre 'adjusting' the file where the Canon isn't, I am constantly criticized for saying this but make a preset that is ISO and camera specific that optimizes the Canon output and you are on a level playing field.

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%207D%20Mark%20II,Nikon%20D500


----------



## stevelee (Jan 30, 2018)

midluk said:


> If they had the technology, they would likely already have added low quality very low bitrate 4K to the 6D2 and 80D. Good enough to appear in the spec sheets for those people that want 4K but don't actually need it.



Or maybe they have staff who know the math, but don't want to put crappy, worthless video on the camera just to tick another box.

I've not seen streaming 4K TV, so I don't know which looks better, highly compressed 4K or 1080p at a similar bitrate. There is probably a gray area in there somewhere in which it doesn't make any visible difference, or an extremely subtle one. OTA 720p might look better than either. 

I have shot 4K video with my iPhone. It has been quite serviceable to allow for using editing to compensate for lack of zoom lenses. I've not bothered to try to figure out what kind of bitrate it involves.


----------

