# Possible Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Spec Talk [CR2]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 22, 2015)

```
We’re told the following specifications are for a camera that may turn out to be the EOS 5D Mark IV, but for the moment it is just a test camera that may never get to market in this form. We’re expecting a replacement to the EOS 5D Mark III some time in the final quarter of 2015.</p>
<p><strong>A camera currently being tested specifications</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>18mp Full Frame CMOS</li>
<li>ISO 100-204,800</li>
<li>61 AF Points (all crosstype)</li>
<li>12fps</li>
<li>Dual CFast</li>
<li>4K Video Capture</li>
</ul>
<p>It was stressed that the above is <em>NOT</em> the EOS-1D X Mark II. There will be a quantum leap in fps, dynamic range and a bump in resolution for that camera. We’re told that there’s a possibility that a replacement to the EOS 5D Mark III could be called the EOS 5D X, but no final decision has been made on that.</p>
<p>I stress again that this is a reported test camera that may never come to market, and it is unknown how old this test camera is.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## candyman (Feb 22, 2015)

18mp?
but 61 points all crosstype...yeah
12 fps ....yeah
cfast...but is that both sd?


----------



## IsaacImage (Feb 22, 2015)

hopefully Lag time will be up to 1dx level.
and DR a bit higher and you can count me in


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

This sounds pretty aggressive for Canon.

But, okay, whatever. I'm going to hold off until the (hopefully) fall announcement before I decide what to do.


----------



## Click (Feb 22, 2015)

candyman said:


> cfast...but is that both sd?



No, it's a new technology card

http://www.sandisk.com/products/memory-cards/cfastpro20/


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 22, 2015)

This set of specifications makes no sense. It has no logic one 5D Mark iii substitute have only 18 megapixel and at the same time, powerful 12 photos per second.

A true replacement could have 20 megapixel and 8 frames per second.


----------



## candc (Feb 22, 2015)

ok, so if you want an 18mpx 12fps ff camera then why not just get a 1dx now? i suppose the 4k video makes it a videographers camera like the 5diii?

interesting that the 1dx replacement gets "quantum leap" in framerate? i thought the only way to get substantially higher fps is electronic shutter mirrorless. like the one sony is working on now. i can't see canon going that direction with the 1d series.


----------



## tron (Feb 22, 2015)

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEES.

I guess it is rather obvious I agree with this specification ;D ;D ;D

That is assuming it will be a truly low light, high iso speed daemon : : :


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 22, 2015)

tron said:


> YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEES.
> 
> I guess it is rather obvious I agree with this specification ;D ;D ;D
> 
> That is assuming it will be a really low light and high iso beast ;D ;D ;D


If something sounds too good to be true, then it is not true. :


----------



## tron (Feb 22, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEES.
> ...


I agree, I have already changed the emoticons. Plus, that is why I said: "assuming"


----------



## candyman (Feb 22, 2015)

Click said:


> candyman said:
> 
> 
> > cfast...but is that both sd?
> ...


Thanks click


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 22, 2015)

so basically this will be equivalent to Nikon D700. A lot of birders are going to be happy such a camera sees the light of the day.


----------



## Patak (Feb 22, 2015)

This does not seem right. Going with the lower MP sensor is not the trend in any camera development. Even Rebels now have more than 20MP. This would present a severe segmentation of 5D market with some people left without the ovarall well rounded camera body like 5D III and 5D II were. 

It is nice to see High ISO and really outsantind FPS, but in 5D model features need to balanced. Lack of SD card slot will likely not be welcomed by some users. 

With these specs i will definitley hold on to my 5DIII and posibly consider 5DSR as an extra body.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 22, 2015)

Seems a bit odd, but it is afterall a test prototype. I dont see Canon reducing the MP in a 5 series unless they plan on using the 20.2 MP sensor from the 6D but with DPAF. 12FPS would nice but would they really bring the frame rate into the 1DX realm? Current 5D3 is 6FPS. 8-10FPS seems more realistic in a final product. A "quantum leap" in DR and FPS in a 1 body would be fantastic, not that the current model is a slouch whatsoever. And no, you dont need mirrorless to do it. None of them do it now. 20FPS doesnt do a lick of good without a reliable AF system and mirrorless isnt there yet.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> This set of specifications makes no sense. It has no logic one 5D Mark iii substitute have only 18 megapixel and at the same time, powerful 12 photos per second.
> 
> A true replacement could have 20 megapixel and 8 frames per second.



The difference between 18MP and 20MP is basically undetectable.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

candc said:


> ok, so if you want an 18mpx 12fps ff camera then why not just get a 1dx now?



Two reasons - cost and I hate the 1D series bodies, and would never own one for that reason.


----------



## Viper28 (Feb 22, 2015)

It would seem very strange to drop the mpx in the 5Div body to 18mpx, that's leaving a huge resolution gap between that body and the 5DS and dare I say it no real answer to the D810. I was certainly hoping for something on the 28-30pmx range with say 6-8pfs


----------



## clarksbrother (Feb 22, 2015)

Patak said:


> This does not seem right. Going with the lower MP sensor is not the trend in any camera development.



Not necessarily - take the Sony A7S. It's a 12.2mp full frame whose forte is low light. That said, it also has a 36.4mp sibling... 18mp seems like a hedge to a certain extent. But I've said it before and I'll said it again, I'd sacrifice a few megapixels if it meant greatly improved low light. 



Patak said:


> This would present a severe segmentation of 5D market with some people left without the ovarall well rounded camera body like 5D III and 5D II were.



I see where you're coming from, but I'm not sure I _entirely_ agree. 18mp is enough for the vast majority - based on the listed specs it doesn't look like FPS, Video (4K) or Focusing are negatively impacted at all. Truthfully, the only "non-well-rounded" part that I see is that it lacks an SD card slot... Yes, a few more MP might be nice... but I think most people would make the tradeoff for low light.



Patak said:


> It is nice to see High ISO and really outsantind FPS, but in 5D model features need to balanced. Lack of SD card slot will likely not be welcomed by some users.
> 
> With these specs i will definitley hold on to my 5DIII and posibly consider 5DSR as an extra body.



As mentioned before, agree on the SD card. If you need MP - then the new bodies are the way to go. Truthfully though, I've never seen much of a reason to upgrade from version to version - your Mark III is a great camera and unless there is some killer feature you're looking for, there's probably no compelling reason to upgrade.

I've used my Mark II for darn near everything - shooting NFL games from the sidelines, big game in Africa, landscapes, astrophotography, timelapse, architecture and the odd portrait now and then. I don't see the specs listed adversely impacting any of those (save for the slight MP loss for landscape).

My two cents anyways...


----------



## takesome1 (Feb 22, 2015)

So they are turning the 1DC in to the 5D IV?

This is an unlikely rumor.

It actually looks like miss information used to find the leaks in your organization.


----------



## geonix (Feb 22, 2015)

As someone who is mainly interested in wildlife photography and therefore needs to crop images often in post-processing, I am not too excited about an 18 MP fullframe sensor. 
After the announcment of the 5Ds and 5Ds R I would have guessed the 5D Mark IV will have a sensor with something inbetween 25 and 30 MP. 
Without question it has its advantages to have big, light-consuming pixels, but overall resolution is also critcal. 

We'll see. CR2 can also be a wrong guess in the end. 

And how will a 5D Mark IV with 18 MP be postioned on the market against a Nikon D810, 36 MP or a D900 with 40 MP ?


----------



## keithcooper (Feb 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > This set of specifications makes no sense. It has no logic one 5D Mark iii substitute have only 18 megapixel and at the same time, powerful 12 photos per second.
> ...


Sure is from a marketing POV ;-)


----------



## preppyak (Feb 22, 2015)

Patak said:


> This does not seem right. Going with the lower MP sensor is not the trend in any camera development. Even Rebels now have more than 20MP. This would present a severe segmentation of 5D market with some people left without the ovarall well rounded camera body like 5D III and 5D II were.


See the Sony A7s. Went to 12MP to get the best possible low-light for video and stills shooting. Canon has their big MP monster, and the 5DIII will still exist...but, if they want to target the video community, something that comes close to the A7s in low-light and 4k internally would be a pretty huge leap for Canon.

Combo'ing that with 12fps would make this an even bigger jump than the jump between 5DII and 5DIII


----------



## clarksbrother (Feb 22, 2015)

Also worth noting that NorthLight Images listed a rumor saying there would be a general purpose Mark IV and then a 5DC (cinema) version as well (Link:http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_5d4.html)

The specs listed sure sound like a cinema version to me...


----------



## rs (Feb 22, 2015)

geonix said:


> And how will a 5D Mark IV with 18 MP be postioned on the market against a Nikon D810, 36 MP or a D900 with 40 MP ?


Just because Nikon have made one line of bodies high MP doesn't mean Canon have to outgun them on that one metric alone with every single body. Surely the 5Ds/5Ds R have that niche covered in style?


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

"4k video" is 3840x2160. At a 3:2 aspect ratio, that would be 3840x2560, or 9.83MP.

I doubt they'll go there.

So that leaves either cropping to get 4k, or downsampling to get 4k.

The C100 pixel bins to get 4k. The way it does it is essentially 2x2 (binning the greens and recording to the red and blue).

That would be 2*(3840x2560) = 7680x5120 or 39.3MP. I suppose that one could be credible.

Or, they could just do some form of downsampling and/or skipping. Problem is, downsampling from, say, 18MP to 4k (8.3MP) is pretty computationally intensive, and doing it 30 or 60 times a second uses a lot of power (battery energy).


----------



## KT (Feb 22, 2015)

Patak said:


> This does not seem right. Going with the lower MP sensor is not the trend in any camera development. Even Rebels now have more than 20MP. This would present a severe segmentation of 5D market with some people left without the ovarall well rounded camera body like 5D III and 5D II were.
> 
> It is nice to see High ISO and really outsantind FPS, but in 5D model features need to balanced. Lack of SD card slot will likely not be welcomed by some users.
> 
> With these specs i will definitley hold on to my 5DIII and posibly consider 5DSR as an extra body.


Canon said earlier that they will move away from a global model that shoots everything and develop cameras with specifications suited to the needs of different photographers. I think the development of the 5DS along with the proposed specs here for the 5DX is a reflection of that thinking and it makes perfect sense. This camera looks identical to the current 1DX except it's rumored to shoot 4K as well. I don't see that as a drawback. The sensor will probably be a refined version of what's in the current 1D X, not bad either. If they offer this camera for $ 3K price, it's an awesome deal. You'll have your high MP 5DS for landscape/studio work and your high FPS / high ISO 5D X for sports/bird/street photography.


----------



## geonix (Feb 22, 2015)

rs said:


> geonix said:
> 
> 
> > And how will a 5D Mark IV with 18 MP be postioned on the market against a Nikon D810, 36 MP or a D900 with 40 MP ?
> ...



I didn't say Canon has to outgun Nikon. It will just be difficult to compete for a 18MP sensor when the equivalent camera class of the competitors differ so much in MP count. Experienced and capable photographers of course don't just look at the MP count but it is also not as simple as when people say the lower the MP count the better. 
The 5Ds and 5DsR are really niche products to mee (so far). It seemed to me Canon wanted to show what they can do. When I look at the specs besides the sensor, I am not impressed, as in may aspects they are a step back compared to the 5D III. And as Canon said themselfs, these cameras are not meant as replacements of the 5D III.


----------



## jdavis37 (Feb 22, 2015)

geonix said:


> And how will a 5D Mark IV with 18 MP be postioned on the market against a Nikon D810, 36 MP or a D900 with 40 MP ?



I do find the drop in pixels to be surprising given marketing always seems to suggest more pixels are always better. My primary photography in past 5 years has been birds and to my eyes I have found cropping small pixel images a lot turns feathers into very flat looking photos. Whereas when cropping my larger pixel 5D3 images (sometimes severely) there is still a sense of depth to the feathers and overall the bird looks more pleasing. I guess my eyes just like the look of larger pixel sensors.

The camera in this CR2 rumor is essentially a 1D-X with 4K video. Offering 12 fps and 18 MP sounds exactly like the current 1D-X, which is why I would not get too worked up over the rumor. That is a LOT of action performance. While I would greatly welcome a 5D4 that had these specs, I am not seeing it coming to fruition. I pray I get to eat some crow feathers later.

The D810 competitor will not be a 5D4 body like this rumor. Different markets. Not everyone wants high frame rate. I do. The 5D3 is an "up to 6 fps" body which loses frame rate as the batteries discharge. At 50% battery level the frame rate is about 4 fps, maybe a hair under. When trying to get action sequences like a male bluebird feeding his offspring, 4 to 5 fps can mean missed shots.

And to show how different people want different things, if the 5D4 had 36 MP I would avoid it like the plague. I am glad Canon has produced high resolution 5 Series bodies for those desiring high resolution. I just hope the 5D4 and subsequent models avoid the high resolution part and continue to improve in areas such as higher ISO, improved AF and higher frame rate. Whether the sensor is 18 MP, 22 MP or 24 MP is mostly irrelevant for me.


----------



## geonix (Feb 22, 2015)

jdavis37 said:


> The D810 competitor will not be a 5D4 body like this rumor. Different markets. Not everyone wants high frame rate. I do. The 5D3 is an "up to 6 fps" body which loses frame rate as the batteries discharge. At 50% battery level the frame rate is about 4 fps, maybe a hair under. When trying to get action sequences like a male bluebird feeding his offspring, 4 to 5 fps can mean missed shots.



Really? I never observed this fps drop on my 5D III. I will try this.


----------



## jonjt (Feb 22, 2015)

Maybe this is for the low light version of the new 5d generation. However, i dont expect Canon to seriously release a 1dx in a 5d body and try to sell it as the general purpose, prosumer FF solution.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > This set of specifications makes no sense. It has no logic one 5D Mark iii substitute have only 18 megapixel and at the same time, powerful 12 photos per second.
> ...


The difference in resolution between 18 and 20 megapixel is irrelavante, but for marketing looks like a downgrade.

I do not think Canon will make a competitor to A7s.


----------



## lintoni (Feb 22, 2015)

I wonder if there is more than one 5DIV to come - this 5DX and a higher MP, slower frame rate version (5DIV)? Canon does seem to be making the most of the 5D line - witness the two high MP bodies, the 7D2 which appears to be a 5D body...


----------



## Tom W (Feb 22, 2015)

There would have to be a compelling leap in other aspects of sensor performance for me to accept 18 megapixels in a body slated to replace the excellent 5D3.


----------



## cosmopotter (Feb 22, 2015)

Just a test camera. When you consider the specs of their competition, there's no way it will be 18MP. Some cool features though.


----------



## Robert Welch (Feb 22, 2015)

It does sound like a 'test' body, and probably the final version would be very different.

The thing I'd be concerned with is the CFast cards. As a 5Dmk3 owner, I would hate to have to buy all new cards for a new camera, especially ones that are certain to be more expensive and not certain to become an industry standard (QXD cards anyone?). That alone could force me to stay with the 5Dmk3. At least I would be able to get another one really cheap.


----------



## cosmopotter (Feb 22, 2015)

It will be 4K with at least 24MP mark my words.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Feb 22, 2015)

This is just one of what is likely several test cameras on the streets, and, it might be a year old!

I am one who would get a 1D X instead as well. Prices for gray market models have dropped to very close to the price of a new camera, and it uses CF cards, so no need to spend $750 for a couple Cfast cards.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 22, 2015)

I don't want to buy two different bodies with different capabilities where I have to swap the lenses to use each bodys special features. I am very impressed by the 5Ds's but what body to choose? Prices are o.k. but I would easily pay 4000 €/$ if they had made a switchable low pass filter. 

IMO a logical new incarnation of the 5D main line would have 22-30 MPix, the same frame rate, 4k video and high DR/colour accuracy/good high ISO capabilities and excellent ergonomics. Add wifi and a tilt screen for situations where you have no access to the OVF.

Bringing four or five 5D flavours to market is only logical from the marketing side: Sell more bodies. The moderate prices for 5Ds and 5Ds R might be a hint for that transition.

More and more I tend to buy a 5D classic or two if I switch to full frame and check if full frame is interesting for me.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

mb66energy said:


> I don't want to buy two different bodies with different capabilities where I have to swap the lenses to use each bodys special features. I am very impressed by the 5Ds's but what body to choose? Prices are o.k. but I would easily pay 4000 €/$ if they had made a switchable low pass filter.



You okay with that switchable filter requiring you to partially disassemble the body?

https://support.red.com/entries/100226366-DSMC-Interchangeable-OLPF-System-FAQs#q10

"You will need to use a T6 Torx driver to install and remove a DSMC Interchangeable OLPF and an LED flashlight (or similar) to ensure no debris or contaminants are visible in the optical cavity before inserting an interchangeable OLPF.

NOTE: It is not required, but RED highly recommends performing an OLPF swap in a cleanroom environment."


----------



## pixel8foto (Feb 22, 2015)

Don't get people dismissing even the suggestion of a camera on the basis that its rumoured spec doesn't meet an arbitrary pixel count of their wanting. 18MP on a 1DX is plenty for many uses and delivers files with plenty of capacity to crop and print large. You want more from Canon? There's a 50MP model with different crop options already slated.

And why is a new card format an issue? I use the same cards in the same cameras, every day. Shoot, take card out to edit, put card back in, shoot again. If you're spending £2-£3k on a camera, another £100 odd for a superior format card to go with it seems perfectly reasonable.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

pixel8foto said:


> And why is a new card format an issue? I use the same cards in the same cameras, every day. Shoot, take card out to edit, put card back in, shoot again. If you're spending £2-£3k on a camera, another £100 odd for a superior format card to go with it seems perfectly reasonable.



They're crazy expensive right now.

A Lexar 64GB Cfast 2.0 card is $352.43.
A Lexar 64GB UDMA 7 CF card is $72.95.
A Lexar 64GB UHS-II SD card is $54.18.

Sorry, that doesn't seem "perfectly reasonable" to me.


----------



## Tom W (Feb 22, 2015)

Robert Welch said:


> It does sound like a 'test' body, and probably the final version would be very different.



Yeah, sounds like they might be using the 1DX sensor in the test mule, or at least in some of the test mules. Might be using a proven workhorse sensor to test other aspects of the camera, while other test bodies have what might be the new sensor.


----------



## cosmopotter (Feb 22, 2015)

pixel8foto said:


> Don't get people dismissing even the suggestion of a camera on the basis that its rumoured spec doesn't meet an arbitrary pixel count of their wanting. 18MP on a 1DX is plenty for many uses and delivers files with plenty of capacity to crop and print large. You want more from Canon? There's a 50MP model with different crop options already slated.
> 
> And why is a new card format an issue? I use the same cards in the same cameras, every day. Shoot, take card out to edit, put card back in, shoot again. If you're spending £2-£3k on a camera, another £100 odd for a superior format card to go with it seems perfectly reasonable.



There already IS a 1Dx, which is likely where this sensor is from. They don't need 2


----------



## JMZawodny (Feb 22, 2015)

This rumor makes me much more curious about the 1DX2 than it does about the 5D4. All of my 2015 plans for equipment are now on hold - well except for 3 lenses.


----------



## Tugela (Feb 22, 2015)

Rumors had the 7D2 shooting 4K as well, and look at the junk that finally appeared. This is Canon we are talking about, I will believe it when I see it.


----------



## Tugela (Feb 22, 2015)

candyman said:


> 18mp?
> but 61 points all crosstype...yeah
> 12 fps ....yeah
> cfast...but is that both sd?



For the vast majority of applications 18mp is more than enough. Having higher pixel densities just reduces ISO performance.


----------



## K (Feb 22, 2015)

The rumor does clearly state this is a test camera. But with an announcement coming in the fall - you'd think Canon has the specs 99% set. 

There is NO WAY that Canon will decrease megapixel count. Megapixels can only go up, never down as that is difficult for marketing to overcome. They could only go down by creating a new camera on a different line for a special purpose. Otherwise, for MP to go down, the specs would have to be incredible. 1DX type specs. Canon isn't going to hand down the 1DX sensor and shutter to the 5D line. I don't remember a 2nd tier pro camera inheriting the previous generation flagship specs. The flagship models keep certain strengths for longer.

My prediction remains the same, around 24MP 

If their sensor technology has improved, then they can still get one more stop improvement from it, with a native 51K ISO.

The FPS is also way too high. Expected FPS would be anywhere from 7-8. My prediction is 8. 10 is too high...gets too close to 1D series. Those who want high FPS and FF would be able to avoid spending $6K on a 1D series. That's not how Canon does things.

4K sounds right.

61 or 65 point all cross type AF sounds right. Curious about the number of dual-cross points...


----------



## Tugela (Feb 22, 2015)

K said:


> There is NO WAY that Canon will decrease megapixel count. *Megapixels can only go up, never down as that is difficult for marketing to overcome*. They could only go down by creating a new camera on a different line for a special purpose. Otherwise, for MP to go down, the specs would have to be incredible. 1DX type specs. Canon isn't going to hand down the 1DX sensor and shutter to the 5D line. I don't remember a 2nd tier pro camera inheriting the previous generation flagship specs. The flagship models keep certain strengths for longer.



You mean like the a7s? Did that camera not make waves, even though its pixel count was way down over the original a7 cameras?

There is a reason the pixel count went down.

Remember, Canon are a follower, not a leader. Sony showed that there is a market for such a camera, now Canon will follow because they are too timid to lead.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

Tugela said:


> Having higher pixel densities just reduces ISO performance.



No it doesn't.


----------



## K (Feb 22, 2015)

Canon would have to call it something other than the Mark IV if MP went down. 

Otherwise, people would say Canon is regressing.

We know the difference, most others will too - but the criticism of decreased resolution cannot be overcome. The expectation is to increase resolution AND get more ISO and DR.

Very different if you release a specialty camera instead that is low-MP intentionally for some other benefit like low-light.


----------



## Diltiazem (Feb 22, 2015)

I doubt this camera will ever come out. But if it does, it will be the 1DX MKII mini. Price will be much lower than 1DX MKII. 5DIV surely will be 24MP or more and will have 10 FPS or less.


----------



## unfocused (Feb 22, 2015)

I don't believe in getting worked up about detailed specifications in a camera that might be a year away from being released. 

It's more productive and enlightening to look at the trends and patterns the rumored specs reveal and to treat them as ballpark estimates.

This sounds as though Canon is taking many of the features of the 1Dx and migrating them down the line to the 5D. That's consistent with past practices. 

Canon has just released two niche market 5Ds for those desiring high megapixel count and low ISO performance. It makes perfect sense to tweak the existing 5DIII to focus on users who want high ISO performance, speed and improved autofocus – which I suspect are the three main drivers for most 5DIII users. 

Will it be 18 mp? Maybe, but I look at that as a range – likely to be between 18 and 24 based on balancing the best ISO performance against megapixel count. 

I doubt seriously that it will have two CF slots. The 5Ds and 7Ds are sister cameras and I expect it to have a CF and a SD slot, both matched to the standards available at the time of development (development NOT release), but backwards compatible.

Aside from the card slot, nothing in these specs would suggest the camera is not suitable as the general purpose workhorse that has made the 5D series so popular.


----------



## Maiaibing (Feb 22, 2015)

This may - or may not - be a test body connected to reality. 

But it sure as hell has nothing to do with the "5DIV" as its nothing like a 5D/5DII/5DIII successor camera. Canon would never kill the 5Dx marketing streak with a side act like this rumor.


----------



## kalieaire (Feb 22, 2015)

I find it sort of silly they want to name it the 5D X.

I mean seriously, if they're going with roman numerals, keep going. If you jump to X, it's just like the 1 series, where's 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9? What's going to happen when they come out with a 5D X successor? 

There isn't a huge level of improvement, instead it's simply what the market demands. And they better include focus peaking like for the EOS M3.

At any rate, with the frequency of cameras they keep coming out with, they should do what car manufacturers or Apple has done with their laptops. State a model line and state the release year and let Wikipedia delineate if the body is the 4 or 5th in that specific line.


----------



## Antono Refa (Feb 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> pixel8foto said:
> 
> 
> > And why is a new card format an issue? I use the same cards in the same cameras, every day. Shoot, take card out to edit, put card back in, shoot again. If you're spending £2-£3k on a camera, another £100 odd for a superior format card to go with it seems perfectly reasonable.
> ...



2) Throw a new card reader in for $30

3) I don't see a feature in that spec that justifies buying new cards and card reader. SD cards are sufficient for 4K video, and I'm plenty happy with the 5DmkIII's fps.


----------



## Jan van Holten (Feb 22, 2015)

ISO 100-204,800

Who can tell me why one should use an ISO of 204,800???
These specs does not seem very logic compared what you can get now.


----------



## RGF (Feb 22, 2015)

I would have thought it would been called the 5D V since it is 5th 5D model. Like the 1V film camera.

Canon seems to like to use "V" and "X" in the model names to denote longevity and significant model.

BTW, the 1V was a great camera.


----------



## jonjt (Feb 22, 2015)

Tugela said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > There is NO WAY that Canon will decrease megapixel count. *Megapixels can only go up, never down as that is difficult for marketing to overcome*. They could only go down by creating a new camera on a different line for a special purpose. Otherwise, for MP to go down, the specs would have to be incredible. 1DX type specs. Canon isn't going to hand down the 1DX sensor and shutter to the 5D line. I don't remember a 2nd tier pro camera inheriting the previous generation flagship specs. The flagship models keep certain strengths for longer.
> ...



I think he is saying that Canon isnt going to decrease the MP count for a general purpose 5Div. I agree with him, in that case. Should this camera end up being a low light version, then the specs make sense. And in that case, id also expect to see a 20-something MP 5d, in addition.


----------



## Tugela (Feb 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Having higher pixel densities just reduces ISO performance.
> ...



Yes it does.


----------



## RGF (Feb 22, 2015)

K said:


> The rumor does clearly state this is a test camera. But with an announcement coming in the fall - you'd think Canon has the specs 99% set.
> 
> There is NO WAY that Canon will decrease megapixel count. Megapixels can only go up, never down as that is difficult for marketing to overcome. They could only go down by creating a new camera on a different line for a special purpose. Otherwise, for MP to go down, the specs would have to be incredible. 1DX type specs. Canon isn't going to hand down the 1DX sensor and shutter to the 5D line. I don't remember a 2nd tier pro camera inheriting the previous generation flagship specs. The flagship models keep certain strengths for longer.
> 
> ...



Canon may be split the 5D into a high MP series (the 5Ds) and a high ISO model (5D MIV)


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

Jan van Holten said:


> ISO 100-204,800
> 
> Who can tell me why one should use an ISO of 204,800???
> These specs does not seem very logic compared what you can get now.



In 2004, I heard the same thing about ISO 3200.
In 2011, I heard the same thing about ISO 12,800.
In 2013, I head the same thing about ISO 25,600.

I've been in plenty of extreme low-light conditions where I could see easily but I couldn't take pictures, even with an f/1.4 prime at ISO 12,800.

I did a little test one time to see what ISO it would take to get a picture about like I could see with my eyes after a full dark adaptation, at the same equivalent shutter speed (about 1/10th). My eyes can do black and white at an f-stop of about f/3.5 and an ISO of about 2 million when compared with a digital camera.


----------



## DR. High ISO (Feb 22, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> 18mp Full Frame CMOS
> ISO 100-204,800
> 61 AF Points (all crosstype)
> 12fps
> ...



[Whichever model would be this..] Dear Santa..


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

Tugela said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



Someday someone needs to explain to me why this myth persists after a decade of things going the other way despite similar basic sensor performance (QE).


----------



## lintoni (Feb 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> Jan van Holten said:
> 
> 
> > ISO 100-204,800
> ...


The higher (usable) ISO the better for widefield astrophotography.


----------



## pedro (Feb 22, 2015)

If Canon really come out with an 18 MP low light version of their next 5D I could be in the market for one in a few years. Till then, my 5D3 rocks...


----------



## vscd (Feb 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



It's no myth, it's physics. Did you ever ask yourself why the ISO-Monster A7S has lesser Pixel (12MP) and the 5DS with 53MP looses ISO against the old Model (ISO6400)?


----------



## Don Haines (Feb 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...


Many things affect high ISO performance.... we can not fixate on just one yet many of us do.

Ultimately, it comes down to light...

A higher quantum efficiency of the sensor will lead to more light being converted into electrons, and will give you increased high ISO performance.

Lower read noise/higher SNR will give you a cleaner signal and will result in improved high ISO performance.

BSI sensors have less circuitry blocking the incoming light, which gives you more usable light, and results in increased high ISO performance.

Finer lithography blocks less light, and like above, gives better high ISO performance.

A cooler sensor (temperature cooler, not trendy cooler  ) has less thermal noise and gives better high ISO performance.

And yes, pixel size does matter (sort of).... a smaller pixel will collect less light than a larger pixel and that pixel will have lower high ISO performance than a larger pixel.... but you have to remember that a picture is not made up out of one pixel.... it is the results of ALL the pixels that give you the picture. For example, think of two sensors built with the exact same technology and of the exact same size. One is a 10Mpixel sensor and the other is a 40Mpixel sensor. The pixels on the 10Mpixel sensor, being four times larger, will collect 4 times the light as the pixels from the 40Mpixel sensor and the ISO performance will be 2 stops better. However, we can not forget that the 40Mpixel sensor has 4 pixels covering the same area as each of the 10Mpixel pixels and that if you bin those 4 pixels together in post production you end up with very similar performance to the 10Mpixel sensor. Yes, you will loose a slightly greater amount of area to lithography, but you gain a bit from increased sampling density. Practically, the end result will be the same..... So in the end, larger pixels give you better PER PIXEL ISO performance but with normalizing the resulting images, very little difference in PER PICTURE ISO performance.

And yes, size matters. A FF sensor will capture more light than a crop sensor and for the reasons above, better ISO performance.


----------



## binky7 (Feb 22, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> 18mp Full Frame CMOS
> ISO 100-204,800
> 61 AF Points (all crosstype)
> 12fps
> ...



These specs suggest this model would be positioned to compete with the Sony A7s. 

Let's start from the bottom of this list and work our way up:

- 4K video capture would be at least equivalent to the A7s or better if it can do it internally.

- The Dual CFast card capability suggests that they're willing to take the new card standard pains/grumbles from us to get a fast-enough card standard that can do 4K in-body.

- 12fps... If you consider the state of technology Canon has currently attained, their dual DIGIC 6 chips used in the new 5Ds & 5DsR bodies have enough internal data bandwidth to push 50mp x 5fps = ~250,000,000 bps. Now let's say we drop the same dual DIGIC 6 chips and connect a low-light sensitive sensor of say 18mp x 12fps= ~216,000,000 bps. That's well within the realm of possibility for current 2015 technology.

- 61 point AF is already a known update that we've seen on the 5Ds & 5DsR. No mystery there.

- The ISO 100-204,800 is a telling sign of this low-light competitor body from Canon, and is probably an H2 setting, which would put it at a likely native ISO of 100-51,200. For those who don't see how impressive noise-free high ISO capabilities are, just take a look at this Sony A7s demo here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7RyiS-mrp1c

- Finally, at least from Canon's marketing perspective, Canon's new low-light body with 18mp > Sony's 12mp A7s.
And calling it a 5D X would also mean that there's still room for the 5D IV for the general market looking for the successor to the Mark III.


----------



## DR. High ISO (Feb 22, 2015)

Tugela said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



(I would say) ... by increasing image noise and decreasing DR.
(Never trust ISO numbers, camera makers always cheating a little bit with ISO-s..  )


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

Don Haines said:


> However, we can not forget that the 40Mpixel sensor has 4 pixels covering the same area as each of the 10Mpixel pixels and that if you bin those 4 pixels together in post production you end up with very similar performance to the 10Mpixel sensor.



I think this this the main reason the myth persists.


----------



## Shoot3r (Feb 22, 2015)

: This system could be to just test paired Digic6+ or 7s. It could be for only testing the CFast card system. May be both to confirm a given standard before moving to a (new)24mp sensor. I certainly hope that the folks at Canon are smart enough to test new tech as it comes available and not wait until everything for a new system is acquired. That would be a debug/eval nightmare. Car companies do the same thing. If they have a new idea for a break system they test it on an existing platform rather than wait to create all the parts for a new model or line. R&D occurs at many levels.


----------



## fusionz (Feb 22, 2015)

Makes sense - the 5ds and 5ds R= studio, 5d mIV = video / low-light/ semi-pro sports. Probably a good thing they leaked this as the SONY A7s is making waves in the video community and the 5d iii looks very tired compared to the new mirrorless options. 18MP if it has crazy iso performance will be useful to many and won't cause their current lens offerings to be outdated. All they need now is some real dynamic range and they would really be successful. I guess we can always hope. They better hurry up too, I would assume an A7s II @ 24 or 36MP is not far behind....


----------



## DR. High ISO (Feb 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



Interesting article:
http://www.clarkvision.com/articles/does.pixel.size.matter/#sensorconstant


----------



## vscd (Feb 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > However, we can not forget that the 40Mpixel sensor has 4 pixels covering the same area as each of the 10Mpixel pixels and that if you bin those 4 pixels together in post production you end up with very similar performance to the 10Mpixel sensor.
> ...



You assume the area of both sensors are the same. This may be true in theory, but practically there are microlenses above the pixels/sensors. Please look at the schemes of such an structure. 4 small lenses have not the same area as one lense one the whole area of 4 small pixels. You didn't answer my question anyway. I guess, on purpose.


----------



## Light_Pilgrim (Feb 22, 2015)

If this happens, I am off Canon. I was a very happy camper so far for 6 years.
I currently own a 5D MKIII, but it looks like there is just no upgrade.
5Ds is not an upgrade and it looks like 5D MKIV is not an upgrade either.
Where is the equivalent of the D810?


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

vscd said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Of course - I'm not comparing full-frame to crop here.



> This may be true in theory, but practically there are microlenses above the pixels/sensors. Please look at the schemes of such an structure. 4 small lenses have not the same area as one lense one the whole area of 4 small pixels. You didn't answer my question anyway. I guess, on purpose.



The microlenses are actually the great equalizer. They take away a lot of the fill-factor difference cause by constant lithography size and variable pixel pitch.


----------



## Light_Pilgrim (Feb 22, 2015)

If this is true, then I think Canon will hand over the still photo segment to Nikon while settling for MF wannabe and Cinema line cameras. 

I have to say I am massively disappointed that there is no camera for ambient light landscape and people/street photographers. 5D MKIII is a good one, but it will not be replaced.

D810 is the what 5D MKIV should be....but it looks like it will never be the case.


----------



## pixel8foto (Feb 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> pixel8foto said:
> 
> 
> > And why is a new card format an issue? I use the same cards in the same cameras, every day. Shoot, take card out to edit, put card back in, shoot again. If you're spending £2-£3k on a camera, another £100 odd for a superior format card to go with it seems perfectly reasonable.
> ...



For new tech? Every development starts off more expensive than the technology it supersedes. That's not a good reason to stand still.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

vscd said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



The A7S has a better sensor, not just larger pixels.

The 5DS has the same pixel size as the 7DII, which is limited to ISO 16,000 bases, 51,200 extended. The fact that the 5DS is limited the way it is, despite the larger sensor (which gives it an inherent 1 1/3 stop advantage), proves that this is just another Canon artificial crippling exercise.


----------



## pixel8foto (Feb 22, 2015)

cosmopotter said:


> pixel8foto said:
> 
> 
> > Don't get people dismissing even the suggestion of a camera on the basis that its rumoured spec doesn't meet an arbitrary pixel count of their wanting. 18MP on a 1DX is plenty for many uses and delivers files with plenty of capacity to crop and print large. You want more from Canon? There's a 50MP model with different crop options already slated.
> ...



I have no idea where the sensor from this hypothetical camera is from, if such a thing even exists. Do you?

Assuming a 1DXii or not, it's perfectly plausible that existing 1DX tech could be employed in a lower-level camera in the future. That seems like standard progression. I'd love to see some of the 1DX's functionality in a 5Dx form-factor DSLR, were that possible. Or maybe it'll be similar MP but with superior performance?

There already is a £5K 1DX *today*. Next year there may be a £3K camera with similar spec.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> mb66energy said:
> 
> 
> > I don't want to buy two different bodies with different capabilities where I have to swap the lenses to use each bodys special features. I am very impressed by the 5Ds's but what body to choose? Prices are o.k. but I would easily pay 4000 €/$ if they had made a switchable low pass filter.
> ...



I wrote switchable and it meant literally switchable by menu or a hw switch.


----------



## jrista (Feb 22, 2015)

Not sure why no one else has suggested this, but:


*18mp x3 layer sensor?*


That would make it 54 million photodiodes, but spatially an 18 million pixel sensor. 



PureClassA said:


> Seems a bit odd, but it is afterall a test prototype. I dont see Canon reducing the MP in a 5 series unless they plan on using the 20.2 MP sensor from the 6D but with DPAF. 12FPS would nice but would they really bring the frame rate into the 1DX realm? Current 5D3 is 6FPS. 8-10FPS seems more realistic in a final product. A "quantum leap" in DR and FPS in a 1 body would be fantastic, not that the current model is a slouch whatsoever. And no, you dont need mirrorless to do it. None of them do it now. 20FPS doesnt do a lick of good without a reliable AF system and mirrorless isnt there yet.




They might reduce it if it is a layered sensor. If it is 18mp x3, then it would have 54 million photodiodes. If Canon is pairing the camera with a DIGIC 7...then they should have the necessary throughput (each DIGIC 7 chip would need to handle around 600MiB/s throughput, which is a little more than double the current DIGIC 6 chips.) 


It seems more logical to me that it would be 10fps, in which case each DIGIC 7 (or whatever they call it) would end up handling 500MiB/s throughput, or exactly double the current DIGIC 6.


----------



## Perio (Feb 22, 2015)

Light_Pilgrim said:


> If this happens, I am off Canon. I was a very happy camper so far for 6 years.
> I currently own a 5D MKIII, but it looks like there is just no upgrade.
> 5Ds is not an upgrade and it looks like 5D MKIV is not an upgrade either.
> Where is the equivalent of the D810?



What is so special in D810 that 5ds and 5div (assuming specs are more or less correct) cannot achieve?


----------



## jdavis37 (Feb 22, 2015)

mb66energy said:


> IMO a logical new incarnation of the 5D main line would have 22-30 MPix, the same frame rate, 4k video and high DR/colour accuracy/good high ISO capabilities and excellent ergonomics. Add wifi and a tilt screen for situations where you have no access to the OVF.



This is what makes producing new equipment difficult. I would prefer higher frame rate and little to no increase in pixels, The linear resolution difference between 22 MP and 30 MP is about 17% but the data throughput (and thus frame rate ) difference is 35-40% difference. With the latest high resolution bodies giving people 50 MP and 5 fps it does not seem like producing a 30 MP body with 6 fps makes much sense since people like me who would prefer higher frame rate just got well nothing.

I would be okay with a 22 to 26 MP sensor and 8 to 9 fps (not that Canon exactly worries about making a camera just for me) but I would actually welcome 18MP and 12 fps. I also do not see Canon doing that because it is essentially a 1D-X in a smaller body if they do.

This is a good rumor though as it will certainly get the chatter started! I hope it is mostly true but remain very doubtful!


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

mb66energy said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > mb66energy said:
> ...



I know...and that isn't really possible the same way switching lenses isn't a menu switch. Yeah, others have tried vibrating the sensor for AA filtering, but that approach hasn't yet proven to be both effective and without side effects.


----------



## jdavis37 (Feb 22, 2015)

Don Haines said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



Well said. If you are not cropping significantly, the per picture ISO of a smaller pixel sensor could in fact make a more visually pleasing photo in terms of noise/detail, etc. That said, many activities do require significant cropping such as birds.... you just cannot frame perfect every sized bird at same time nor can you make them land equal distance away. Thus you often have to crop a lot. That is where per pixel issues start to show.

It is easy for 2 people to argue and in effect be saying the same truth from a different perspective. My eyes prefer larger pixels given today's available light collection efficiency . But everybody's eyes see color, noise and quality (subjectively) differently. A good friend of mine is ok with more noise as long as it is more uniform and less splotchy in nature. Just very difficult to debate noise when we are all biased by our own eyes and how we see things.

For me I will gladly take fewer pixels if it helps with frame rate and per pixel noise characteristics. Not that I desire heavy cropping but there are times when I have little choice. A brown headed nuthatch at 20 feet and 700mm is still a heavy crop so going bigger on the lens is not really an option.


----------



## drjlo (Feb 22, 2015)

fusionz said:


> I would assume an A7s II @ 24 or 36MP is not far behind....



? 24 MP version of A7s is A7 I/II and 36 MP version A7R, no?


----------



## vscd (Feb 22, 2015)

> What is so special in D810 that 5ds and 5div (assuming specs are more or less correct) cannot achieve?



Noooo. Don't feed the DR-Trolls! Not another dead thread please...


----------



## pwp (Feb 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> candc said:
> 
> 
> > ok, so if you want an 18mpx 12fps ff camera then why not just get a 1dx now?
> ...


Cost? Fair enough...but have you ever owned and extensively used a 1-Series? 
They're just plain fantastic. All the way from the EOS-1 film bodies from the 1990's. 

-pw


----------



## MartinEA (Feb 22, 2015)

Canon promised this would he a high ISO use camera so cutting the megapixels down to 1DX and D4s sizes makes sense. I think this will be exactly what they said, a high ISO animal. I am actually looking forward to seeing the real specs. 18 megapixels will be fine for prints.


----------



## nightscape123 (Feb 22, 2015)

jdavis37 said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



But if you only have 18MP to start with, you can't afford to crop your image because you have so few pixels to work with. Lets say you want to crop to 1.6x, that leaves you with a 7MP image... that isn't even enough to display on a 4k monitor, let alone print in large sizes... So it seems you would be better off with more MP and slightly higher per pixel noise, since you would still have a useable image when you were done.

I think 30-50 MP is the sweet spot for current sensor tech. It lets you get great high ISO noise and still have plenty of room to crop your pictures. The A7r and the D810, both have great high iso performance and both have >30MP's. I would rather they keep the pixels from 30-50 and just keep improving the ISO performance and FPS and AF.


----------



## gsealy (Feb 22, 2015)

JMZawodny said:


> This rumor makes me much more curious about the 1DX2 than it does about the 5D4. All of my 2015 plans for equipment are now on hold - well except for 3 lenses.



Yes, I will not do anything this year either. I am interested in Canon 4K because I want to use the lenses that I have. I have so many more cinematic options that way. So we wait until things shake out. 

(I also want external recording. 4K eats storage like crazy and I want some low cost storage options. )


----------



## quod (Feb 22, 2015)

vscd said:


> > What is so special in D810 that 5ds and 5div (assuming specs are more or less correct) cannot achieve?
> 
> 
> Noooo. Don't feed the DR-Trolls! Not another dead thread please...


DR-Trolls? You mean the Canon fanboys that deny the importance of DR to some photographers? How are you adding to the thread, exactly? In the spirit of actually responding to the question asked, I think the D810 has a good blend of high resolution, high DR, and low noise at base ISO. We don't know if the 5Ds or 5D4 will hit on one, two, or all three of these attributes.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 22, 2015)

pwp said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > candc said:
> ...



No, and I'd never own one, for two reasons. One, the grip is too large for my hands (I have small hands). Two, I don't need a portrait grip and so don't want to carry one around.


----------



## binky7 (Feb 22, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Anyway, if true, the dynamic range rumor for the 1DX2 is a grat sign, but IMO they utterly, totally bungled this 5Ds/5D4 era.



I wouldn't declare 2015 the bungled era for Canon just yet. Here's why:

These specs most likely point to a model Canon is positioning to go up against the Sony A7s. It seems to be low-light sensitive and positioned to shoot 4K video internally.

These specs certainly don't live up to a 5D4 feature list, which is almost certain that there will be one worthy of being the successor to the 5D3.

All hope is not lost in Canon land... People just need to take a broader view of these rumors.


----------



## Marauder (Feb 22, 2015)

Specs seem quite odd to me. It's essentially a "mini-1DX" and we already have one of those in the 7D Mark II. Like a few others that have posted here, I find the idea of a resolution drop to 18MP very odd for an "all rounder" camera that the 5D Mark III is supposed to be. One wonders at the target market??? Sports and wildlife shooters? As much as I'm in favour of that kind of camera as it's my favourite kind of shooting, the 7D2 and 1DX already cover that segment at two varying price points. Not to say the 5D doesn't appeal to that market and many already use the 5D Mark III for those purposes because it's a great all-rounder. But these specs appears to be rather specifically _aimed_ at that market, and that seems a bit strange. 

The beauty of the 5D Mark III is that, like it's predecessors it's aimed primarily at the lucrative wedding and event photographer, with very good crossover potential for sports/wildlife and studio work. This seems to compromise that well established and successful recipe. It might also cut into the 7D2 market, albeit not too much given the likely substantial price difference. And it would definitely seem to encroach heavily into 1DX territory, although that may also not be a factor for too long if a "quantum leap" 1DX replacement follows hard on its heels. 

I suppose if the 5D IV (or 5DX as it were) might turn the heads of more general photographers if the high ISO is simply class leading in every way--that might just lead event/wedding photographers to ignore the resolution loss in order to get amazing low-light ambient shots that aren't possible with 20+MP sensors--but it would really have to be an AMAZING performance to justify losing resolution. It's not even just a performance thing--it's a perception issue. Too many photographers and reviewers are tied to the concept that "more=better" when it comes to resolution. And it might be a bit risky to buck that trend in a camera designed for mass appeal to general photographer. 

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the specs. My primary photography pursuit is wildlife shooting and I think this is phenomenal--but I'm not thinking of_ myself _here--I'm thinking about what the target audience of the 5D series generally wants. I would have thought that a moderate gain in resolution, with a more moderate fps increase (to say 8, or maybe 10), would have fit the "does everything well" 5D3 replacement. 

Of course, this is very preliminary. And I remember all too well how incorrect the earlier speculations were regarding the 7D Mark II specifications, even when they seemed all but confirmed! Time will tell how "real" this beast really ends up being!


----------



## jdavis37 (Feb 23, 2015)

nightscape123 said:


> But if you only have 18MP to start with, you can't afford to crop your image because you have so few pixels to work with. Lets say you want to crop to 1.6x, that leaves you with a 7MP image... that isn't even enough to display on a 4k monitor, let alone print in large sizes... So it seems you would be better off with more MP and slightly higher per pixel noise, since you would still have a useable image when you were done.
> 
> I think 30-50 MP is the sweet spot for current sensor tech. It lets you get great high ISO noise and still have plenty of room to crop your pictures. The A7r and the D810, both have great high iso performance and both have >30MP's. I would rather they keep the pixels from 30-50 and just keep improving the ISO performance and FPS and AF.



My experience has been the opposite. The 5D3 which I own has 22 MP which is not much more than the rumored 18MP in this CR2 rumor. I used to own a 7D MkI and it had a much higher pixel density than 5D3.

And I could crop it FAR less and still have pleasing bird feathers which I could see with depth and shape. A 50MP FF sensor would take on the same characteristics as a 1.6X crop sensor, the very thing I wanted to avoid when I went FF. The crop sensors hold up well as long as you don't further crop much. To my eyes the larger pixels hold up better to cropping than do smaller pixels.

But I do birds and feather behave differently than does say dog hair, and if Canon will produce an 18 MP camera that does 10 to 12 fps in a 5 series body I am happy as can be. Is funny seeing text that suggests 18 million pixels is not very many. Another advantage is the effects it has on computer processing. The 50MP files in Tif format will be quite large and doing manipulations in Photoshop etc will be affected.

For me it appears Canon may be offering camera bodies/sensors for many different people which is a good thing. No one camera body fits all wants. They have 2 different 50MP 5 series bodies and perhaps will come out with a lower resolution high ISO action type 5 series body. I think the variety is a good thing. Those wanting high MP's now have 2 bodies to choose from and still have 5 fps.

The only spec in this rumor I dislike is the CF card format. I have tons of fast enough UDMA7 CF cards now and do not desire buying $300 cards to replace them. If true and not backwards compatible hopefully the new format prices will drop rapidly.


----------



## jdavis37 (Feb 23, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> 18MP vs 36MP you don't lose much, even if you lose a full 1/3 stop of SNR or something, is that 1/3 stop loss as big a deal as the lost of 50% MP? (even if it somehow turned out ot be 1/2 stop, which is doubtful, would that be worth 50% MP loss?)



Canon is already making a 50 MP 5 series body at 5 fps. Where is the advantage of crowing in another 36 MP sensor? The linear resolution difference between 50MP and 36 MP is about 18%. The linear resolution difference between 18 and 36 MP is much larger at 41% and associated frame rate would be much lower.

On flip side some people (like me) want frame rate as high as possible without having to pay $7000 for a 1 series body. Given Canon has already announced 2 high pixel count 5 series bodies it makes sense to build a higher frame rate lower pixel camera body. If the 3rd 5 series body had 36 MP at 6 fps it would essentially be the same body as those having 50.6MP.

Having a high frame rate 5 series body, even if it turned out to be 24MP and 8 or 9 fps would be very welcome by me (at least).

All this just shows how difficult it is to build products that please everyone. If I thought the 5D4 would have a 36MP sensor and 5.5 or 6 fps I would buy a gray market 1D-X right way, something I really prefer not to do!


----------



## binky7 (Feb 23, 2015)

If we look at how Canon views the market segmentation for DSLRs, maybe we can see it from their perspective and gain a glimpse into their potential moves going forward.

Here are the current and upcoming DSLR contenders for 2015:

Wedding / Events / Portraits
[5D4] > D810 > D750 > 5D3 > D610 > 5Ds >6D
The 5D4 would need to improve in ISO and DR to be a compelling option compared to the D810. Otherwise, the D810 will continue to eat Canon's lunch as they're doing with the aging 5D3.

Sports / Action / Wildlife
1Dx > D4s > 7D2 = 5D4

Landscapes
D810 ~ 5DsR depending on your feature priorities.

Low Light & 4K video
[5Dx] > A7s = GH4
A low-light body like this 5Dx may be the best of both worlds compared to the A7s and GH4 if it proves to be a great low light shooter and can record internally. 18mp in this category would also put it ahead of both of these competitors.

Astrophotography
D810A > 60Da 

Halo product 
[1Dx Mark II] > [D900] > 1Dx> D4s & D810

So really, we're looking at a new Canon lineup that will likely include (in FF)
- 1Dx Mark II (The professional's tool & Canon's halo product to showcase their dominant position)
- 5D Mark IV (An around FF body with basic or maintream 4K capture)
- 5Ds / 5DsR (Studio / Portrait / High MP)
- 5Dx (Low light contender and with more robust 4K video recording in-body)
- 6D Mark II (This one should take on the D610 & D750 although I don't know how they will manage it without going up in price).


Looking at all these changes, Canon will be very busy over the next 12 months revamping practically all it's lineup.


----------



## Matthew Saville (Feb 23, 2015)

LOL. Considering the specs of the $6K 1DX, and $3K 5D III, there is only one way I would describe this collection of alleged specs:

Canon fanboy imagination figments.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 23, 2015)

5D IV possibility:

1Dx mirror assembly.
Fast processing (DIGIC 7, whatever) to support 4k/30 from a high resolution (i.e. 24+MP) sensor.
10-12fps.

1DX Mark II possibility:

Electronic global shutter.
Same fast processor * 2 supports 30fps at full res (20+MP).
On-sensor PDAF (dual pixel, whatever) to support focusing at that speed via dedicated separate processor (DIGIC 6/6+).
30fps only works in mirror-up mode which means only works in EVF mode.
In mirror-down mode, works conventionally at 15+fps.
2x the processing power means it supports 4k/60.


----------



## Busted Knuckles (Feb 23, 2015)

The product positioning is getting compressed. This may be more of what the other electronic products have gone through, addressing smaller market segments individually but larger in total product line approach.

Look at the positioning of the 7dII down to the now quite capable T5 series.

Then look at the FF line up. Some what similar as the compression. 

So what feature set is oh so important that crosses the new product upgrade threshold.

I would think something very low light has to show up well under $4k otherwise a 1DX works fine for me - if or when I really want to upgrade.


----------



## candc (Feb 23, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> 5D IV possibility:
> 
> 1Dx mirror assembly.
> Fast processing (DIGIC 7, whatever) to support 4k/30 from a high resolution (i.e. 24+MP) sensor.
> ...



That's just the thing, in order to get that 30fps rate you have to go mirrorless. I don't think the parts on a dslr can flap that fast. So if you are going to build a camera that does that then why make it a hybrid? Sony is rumored to be working on a pro dslr sized mirroreless camera that shoots 36mpx stills at 30fps and does 8k video. They are saying its going to be ready for the 2016 Olympics. A similar canon body would be a wet blanket for Sony. I am sure the canon developers are aware of this and are working on it. Better sooner than later.


----------



## Policar (Feb 23, 2015)

Impressive what a large percentage of people here are both printing larger than A3 and releasing video theatrically.

Specs seem great for my needs, and those of 99.999% of the world. If you need better, go medium format or Alexa. Too expensive? Rent.


----------



## Bennymiata (Feb 23, 2015)

A half-priced and smaller and lighter 1DC?
Sounds good to me!


----------



## RobD (Feb 23, 2015)

Makes total sense. 4k video on an 18mp sensor is exactly what the 1DC does, it shoots 4k with an APS-H crop. Canon loves to reuse previous tech, so mass producing an updated 1DC in a smaller body is definitely Canon's MO. I would much prefer this to the awkward ergonomics and lens adapters of the Sony A7S, and I'm pretty sure more other wedding photo/video shooters are equally interested.

Wish they would take mirrorless seriously though. I'd love a built-in EVF for video.


----------



## streestandtheatres (Feb 23, 2015)

jdavis37 said:


> nightscape123 said:
> 
> 
> > But if you only have 18MP to start with, you can't afford to crop your image because you have so few pixels to work with. Lets say you want to crop to 1.6x, that leaves you with a 7MP image... that isn't even enough to display on a 4k monitor, let alone print in large sizes... So it seems you would be better off with more MP and slightly higher per pixel noise, since you would still have a useable image when you were done.
> ...


I guess it depends on how you're looking at the images. I found moving to a retina iMac+SSD both terrific (because it's pretty quick, and I don't have to wait long for Photoshop) and hard on the photos I take. I don't have to crop the 7dii images much before the loss of quality is obvious. I still need to able to crop, to fix composition when a bird is flying past at speed, etc, and over the last few months having a 5k screen is really making me work harder in the field to get the composition exactly right, because there isn't much room to move in post. But then I'm looking at the images on screen, not printed etc...


----------



## andrewflo (Feb 23, 2015)

As stated, these specs have to be taken with a grain of salt. But definitely some exciting stuff to see Canon trying out.


----------



## lucuias (Feb 23, 2015)

I seen so many complaints this isn't d810 equavalent. Isn't canon answer with 5ds series .this 5dx is really amazing spec to came true.high iso performance and dynamic range is something a wedding photographer wishing for.18mp is good enough .I don't need 30mp.


----------



## dolina (Feb 23, 2015)

I will not talk about the image sensor, ISO range, AF system, fps and video resolution as they may be just for a test mule.

What I will talk about is the use of CFast.

I think the 5D Mark III replacement would be too "low-end" a camera to use this standard. I would really expect this to be used first on any of the Cinema EOS bodies or even a 1-Series body before trickling down to the 5-Series body.

Then again, I may be wrong.

Dual UDMA 7 CF cards with a minimum write/read of 1000x would be more my thing assuming built-in WiFi is present. But then again I am being selfish a I only want to deal with one memory card standard for EOS bodies.

If you are to visit BHPhoto.com today there are only 3 brands of CFast cards namely Lexar, Sandisk and Atmos.

Lexar sells 4 different capacities, Atmos 2 different capacities and SanDisk only one.

Cheapest card starts at $159 for a 64GB CFast card from Atomos with a read speed of 200MB/s and write speed of 80MB/s.

Highest end card sells for $1,067.99 for a 256GB CFast from Lexar with a read speed of 510MB/s with no write speed indicated. It has yet to be released.

Pricing will change from today until the day the 5D Mark III replacement are bought by end-users but I do not think it will change by much.

In 2012 Canon and Phase One gave public support to this memory card standard.

AFAIK none of them have produced a product using this standard.

In 2014 ARRI, Canon, Hasselblad, PhaseOne and Leica, and video technology pioneers, Atomos and Blackmagic Design gave public support to this memory card standard.

AFAIK ARRI and Atomos & Blackmagic Design sell products supporting the standard.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 23, 2015)

JRista hit on something that occurred to me earlier as well. Canon DOES have a patent filed for a multi-layer foven style sensor. Could be that. Or it could just be the same 1DX sensor that they are using to test something else in a fiction body we will never see. 8 pages speculating on a rig that will likely never see the light of day.

If they really wanted an A7s competitor (and I think they should) then make a real 4k machine, for video only (almost no one is buying the A7s for stills...that puppy was built for video) with 9MP and obscene low-light performance.


----------



## mb66energy (Feb 23, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> mb66energy said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...




I am not shure if this is impossible ... thinking of smart materials whose opical properties can be cmhanged by applying a voltage (DC or AC). Perhaps it's a technical problem with 50 MPix, but feasible with 12 MPix.


----------



## 9VIII (Feb 23, 2015)

I still wish they had just stuck the 5Ds sensor in the 1Dx body, I want the resolution along with the huge battery and integrated grip (more stable on a tripod).
But I also want wi-fi and a touchscreen.
Sigh, now that they have a 24MP sensor, chances are the SL2 is actually going to be the best body for me (whenever they get around to it).


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 23, 2015)

9VIII said:


> I still wish they had just stuck the 5Ds sensor in the 1Dx body, I want the resolution along with the huge battery and integrated grip (more stable on a tripod).
> But I also want wi-fi and a touchscreen.
> Sigh, now that they have a 24MP sensor, chances are the SL2 is actually going to be the best body for me (whenever they get around to it).



The 50MP sensor?? I wont say it's impossible, but it's pretty far down the pecking order of probability. That was a sensor they obviously tuned for low ISO, not the end all be all action sensor.

Give me a 1DX2 with a mid 20 sensor, 14fps, an absolute criminally insane number of AF points that can focus at f2, and make 12800 ISO look like 3200. There's your unicorn list.


----------



## Antono Refa (Feb 23, 2015)

pixel8foto said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > pixel8foto said:
> ...



"It's new" is not a good reason to adopt.

I'd rather see dual SD cards because

- SD cards are smaller than CF/CFast cards.

- CFast pins are on two plastic boards, which is an improvement over pins, but my guess still more problem prone that SD.

- SD cards are fast enough for my needs. Some people would like faster, Canon makes the 7D and 1D-X lines for them, and I couldn't care less if Canon releases a 1D-Xmk2 with dual CFast slots.

- CFast is around for a couple of years, but doesn't seem to catch, much like XQD. That's a recipe for cards remaining scarce and expensive. Again, if Canon thinks it's the future, it would be better off adding it where customers are more likely to appreciate it - the 1D-X and 7D lines.

- The cheapest cards are those I already have.


----------



## Tugela (Feb 23, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



Because when your small pixel drowns in a sea of noise a large pixel will still be getting a signal. It is simple physics.


----------



## Maiaibing (Feb 23, 2015)

Policar said:


> Specs seem great for my needs, and those of 99.999% of the world.



Thank you for speaking out for all the rest of us. We will follow your brilliant lead!


----------



## Machaon (Feb 23, 2015)

jrista said:


> Not sure why no one else has suggested this, but:
> 
> *18mp x3 layer sensor?*



Now that really rings true.

If you believe the Sigma Quattro hype, a sensor like that would offer equivalent spatial resolution to about 2x 18MP = 36 MP Bayer sensor, which seems to be the ball park the high-end general purpose camera is converging on. However, colour rendition would be better and larger pixel pitch might help with some of the noise / sensitivity / ISO issues inherent in a multilayer design.

Now that would be a kick-arse sensor...

(That, and 4K video, also go some way towards explaining the CFast card.)


----------



## vscd (Feb 23, 2015)

> That's just the thing, in order to get that 30fps rate you have to go mirrorless.



No, that's a marketing-myth from the mirrorless department. You can leave the mirror open and use the same techniques as the mirrorless does. The DPAF is even better for this than the existing solutions. You will loose the good AF-Modul, but you can do anything else as "they" do.

Taking a 4k Video ist nothing more than shooting @50/60 fps... (and a smaller images of course).


----------



## Machaon (Feb 23, 2015)

candc said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > 1DX Mark II possibility:
> ...



Perhaps the 1Dx II will see the definitive pro-standard mirrorless enter the Canon line-up and usher in the end of the SLR, from the top-down?

Their DPAF already goes some way to addressing a major design issue for mirrorless.

They'll have to develop a seriously fast EVF, though, with no human-perceptible lag. There's also the matter of battery life, although that would be another good reason for making the entry via a 1-series body.


----------



## MihalyLaczko (Feb 23, 2015)

Hi,

I think the 18 mpixel would be fine, if it is a multi-layer sensor and not the good old Bayer mosaic.
As we read earlier there should be a 5 layer (UV+Blue+Red+Green+IR) in the pipe, but nobody knows when it will going to be reality. 
The 12 FPS burst is not my world, I am a single shooter from the film era, even if I am shooting almost ten year with DSLRs.
More DR, more accurate color scene, higher ISO capability is what I really need. For example, a Bayer mosaic 18mp FF sensor has less pixel density than my APSC 50D, but with the multi layer technology it is really doesn't matter any more.

By a videographer standpoint, the 4K like what we have in the EOS 1Dc is a big file size, not more. An EOS 5DMkIII with the ML's 14 bit raw has almost same detail in an 1080p footage, more DR and far better color accuracy. 
What is really needed is a 14 bit raw video flow instead of the funny frame by frame ML way. And with the global shutter, Dual pixel AF, 60p mode and so on.
An 1080p 14 bit raw footage has almost similar detail as the Canon's factory setting 4K.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 23, 2015)

vscd said:


> > That's just the thing, in order to get that 30fps rate you have to go mirrorless.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Or use a semi transmissive fixed mirror. Then you get fps and no view finder blackout at all....but still being able to look though the lens.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Feb 23, 2015)

For me, the specs look interesting but I would want to see a higher DR, interchangeable view finders and I would want the resolution to stay at around 22mp.


----------



## vscd (Feb 23, 2015)

> Or use a semi transmissive fixed mirror. Then you get fps and no view finder blackout at all....but still being able to look though the lens.



Yes, Canon already had that, but it darkens the OVF quite heavy. Furtermore you loose 1-2 stops of light to the sensor which has to be compensated. This is a Cul-de-sac for the majority, I think.


----------



## sanj (Feb 23, 2015)

Light_Pilgrim said:


> If this happens, I am off Canon. I was a very happy camper so far for 6 years.
> I currently own a 5D MKIII, but it looks like there is just no upgrade.
> 5Ds is not an upgrade and it looks like 5D MKIV is not an upgrade either.
> Where is the equivalent of the D810?



Am lost. What will you call an upgrade pls? What specs will satisfy you? Genuine question.


----------



## Etienne (Feb 23, 2015)

vscd said:


> > Or use a semi transmissive fixed mirror. Then you get fps and no view finder blackout at all....but still being able to look though the lens.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, Canon already had that, but it darkens the OVF quite heavy. Furtermore you loose 1-2 stops of light to the sensor which has to be compensated. This is a Cul-de-sac for the majority, I think.



They could do both: provide optional flip up for the semi-transparent film, which could be used in low light (slower frame rate). Leave it in place in good light for higher frame rate shooting.


----------



## DominoDude (Feb 23, 2015)

I wouldn't draw too many conclusions about any upcoming 5D Mark IV from this. My guess is that they've taken an already existing 18MP sensor and are using this as a testbed for CFast together with the 4k video and the high FPS. If Canon doesn't have any body that uses CFast today, it could make sense to test out new drivers, new hardware and interfaces on a testbed like this.
CFast is a serial data transfer system, while the CF is parallell. Have to create a few new obstacles to solve for Canon.


----------



## fox40phil (Feb 23, 2015)

I'm hoping for an awesome 24MP Sensor with a big DR upgrade, -3 EV focus sensitivity and many focus points like the 5DIII/1DX but more to the corner please! And a great/better ISO quality like the 6D/1dX.. 4K would be nice and 1080p/60fps please...!


----------



## scyrene (Feb 23, 2015)

Tugela said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



Way to advance an argument: "I'm right, you're wrong". I think both could do with an added [citation needed].


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Feb 23, 2015)

fox40phil said:


> I'm hoping for an awesome 24MP Sensor with a big DR upgrade, -3 EV focus sensitivity and many focus points like the 5DIII/1DX but more to the corner please! And a great/better ISO quality like the 6D/1dX.. 4K would be nice and 1080p/60fps please...!


Your list really looks like what the target market expected a 5D Mark iii replacement.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 23, 2015)

It's really funny (and sad) some of the people on this thread who are ready to committ HaraKiri over the rumored specs of one of probably at least a dozen or more crash test dummy cameras...


----------



## Light_Pilgrim (Feb 23, 2015)

OK, here is the answer.

If I am to upgrade my 5D MKIII (being a landscape and portrait/street photographer), this is what I would love to get as my next camera:
1. 30+ MP (more resolution than 22MP)
2. 2 stops of DR improvement and less shadow noise 
3. AF system can be the same or can have all cross type points
4. 1 stop ISO improvement - nice to have, not critical



sanj said:


> Light_Pilgrim said:
> 
> 
> > If this happens, I am off Canon. I was a very happy camper so far for 6 years.
> ...


----------



## raptor3x (Feb 23, 2015)

Light_Pilgrim said:


> OK, here is the answer.
> 
> If I am to upgrade my 5D MKIII (being a landscape and portrait/street photographer), this is what I would love to get as my next camera:
> 1. 30+ MP (more resolution than 22MP)
> ...


----------



## 9VIII (Feb 23, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > I still wish they had just stuck the 5Ds sensor in the 1Dx body, I want the resolution along with the huge battery and integrated grip (more stable on a tripod).
> ...



I guess a simpler way of putting it is "1DsIV".
ID body with landscape sensor. But yeah probably not going to happen.


----------



## mclaren777 (Feb 23, 2015)

18 MP sounds really intriguing.

If this camera was able to achieve ISO 3400 or greater on DXOMark's rating scale, that would be tremendous.

If Canon can pull that off and get its read noise issues under control, I could see myself buying two of these cameras.


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Feb 23, 2015)

All i need to see is the fps and the MPs to know that there is no way in hell.


----------



## mkabi (Feb 23, 2015)

For those wishing for a 36 MP Camera and/or wanting something close to or similar to D810. Its never going to happen because of this...











Also mentioned here:
http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/canon-pokes-fun-on-nikon-and-sony-because-they-now-have-less-pixels/

_To me_, it makes no sense for someone to poke fun and then create one of their own. Might as well call defeat.

So... with that said those of you admiring a D810, its time to switch!


----------



## Light_Pilgrim (Feb 23, 2015)

So then the 3rd mug for 5D MK IV will be called "tiny"? Should be half the D810 mug size....if we are talking 18 MP


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 23, 2015)

scyrene said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



How about a test?

Pixels that would give you a 208MP full-frame sensor on the left, a 13MP full-frame sensor on the right. Same ISO, same f-stop, same shutter speed, same lighting, same focal length, both processed from raw using the same settings on the same converter.


----------



## Famateur (Feb 23, 2015)

I think I'm in the camp of others on this thread suspecting the body (and specs) in question is a test bed for specific technology and not a prototype destined to become an actual product as-configured.

What stands out to me is the fact that as I read the rumor, I was thinking, "This sound like a 1DX," and then read this: "It was stressed that the above is NOT the EOS-1D X Mark II. There will be a quantum leap in fps, dynamic range and a bump in resolution for that camera."

Now _that _sound exciting! I might never own a 1 Series body, but a new breakthrough in that series is good news, nonetheless. I'm surprised these odd-ball 5DIV "specs" are even being talked about when a "quantum leap" in FPS and dynamic range is rumored to be in the pipeline.

Of course, if the source is the same, then it might be as bogus as this 5DIV spec list.


----------



## Jan van Holten (Feb 23, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> Jan van Holten said:
> 
> 
> > ISO 100-204,800
> ...



What I meant of course is the quality of the image. I would love a 20.000 iso performance with the same result as 400 iso nowadays.


----------



## mkabi (Feb 23, 2015)

Light_Pilgrim said:


> So then the 3rd mug for 5D MK IV will be called "tiny"? Should be half the D810 mug size....if we are talking 18 MP



We are looking at the same category of cameras... Nikon, Sony's high MP professional cameras vs. Canon's high MP professional cameras. Unless you want to say, hey... Canon has won that race, and we can still release a 36MP camera below the 50.6MP???

Lets face it, 30MP and above is really for specific users... its not an all rounder... exemplified by the D750.
Many people want a camera that is able to do everything, not just to create a huge file that pixel peepers are happy with... You want high MP and low light capabilities (what are the chances thats going to happen?). The 5DIII can't do low light as well as 1DX, and the 1DX can't do low light as well as a7s. Guess why that is? Clue: higher MP is not going to make it better. 

You want 2 stops more DR... also not going to happen... DR problem has been with Canon long before 2008 (when the Mark 2 was released), Nikon has won that area year after year... for who knows how long.

EDITTED TO ADD: In fact, I dont' think Canon can make a D810 at this point in time and say "hey its better"... in fact, I see it being a whole lot worse if they did create it. So instead of creating a 36MP with 12 stops of DR and 6400 ISO, they created a 50 MP camera with 12 stops of DR and 6400 ISO.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 23, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



Ah I know you've posted supporting evidence before, so I respect your view more. However, I've seen both sides argued by seemingly respectable parties, and since I'm no technical whizz, I'm still left confused.

Personally, I'd rather have more MP, as I can downsize if I want, or crop if needed. Better of both worlds.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Feb 23, 2015)

mkabi said:


> For those wishing for a 36 MP Camera and/or wanting something close to or similar to D810. Its never going to happen because of this...



What a ridiculous thing. For shame, Canon.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 23, 2015)

scyrene said:


> Ah I know you've posted supporting evidence before, so I respect your view more. However, I've seen both sides argued by seemingly respectable parties, and since I'm no technical whizz, I'm still left confused.
> 
> Personally, I'd rather have more MP, as I can downsize if I want, or crop if needed. Better of both worlds.



Lee Jay's supporting evidence is rarely what it seems, or he claims it to be. For instance, that comparison uses two completely different kinds of sensor tech so is entirely redundant. 

If you are going to 'compare' one metric then all else must be equal, in that comparison nothing is equal so the comparison is not just of pixel size.


----------



## vscd (Feb 23, 2015)

> They could do both: provide optional flip up for the semi-transparent film, which could be used in low light (slower frame rate). Leave it in place in good light for higher frame rate shooting.



It sounds like an interesting idea, but then you have the dark OVF, too. This could only be done with an optional EVF... Furthermore the AF_Modul would be rated at f5.6, too. The AF is not good at f5.6 (no double cross etc.).

Believe me, there were a lot of ideas back in the last two decades of DSLRs 

Fast Mirrormovement @12fps and more with Liveview and Global Shutter seems to be the best solution for me.


----------



## SwnSng (Feb 23, 2015)

If these are the specs of the 5D mkiv I hope there will be two versions: this one and one with 2X (36mp) the resolution and half the FPS (5-6fps). 

If this is true and only one 5D MkIV exists and this is it then i'm one huge step closer from picking up a D810 for landscape and keeping my 5D mkiii for everything else.


----------



## CG photography (Feb 23, 2015)

Every time there is a megapixel advance some people claim "no one needs that many pixels etc. etc. etc."; they said this at 3 mp, 5mp, 10mp etc. More pixels is always better if you don't have to give up anything (not sure yet what the 5ds will require us yield). The best advances, like the 5dI --> 5d2 double the megapixel count without harming DR, high iso performance etc. Nikon did this as well when they took d700 12mp sensor to the d800 with 36mp while improving DR and minimally impacting high iso performance.
I shoot both a 5d3 and a d810; I shoot a variety of subjects and I can tell you, having 36 mp and then going backwards by 50% to 18 mp would be hurtfull. Both the 5d3 and d810 are great balanced cameras and I would much rather see smooth symmetric increases in mp, dynamic range, frame rate/buffer, high iso performance and features rather than creating highly divergent specialized camera lines.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 23, 2015)

CG photography said:


> Every time there is a megapixel advance some people claim "no one needs that many pixels etc. etc. etc."; they said this at 3 mp, 5mp, 10mp etc. More pixels is always better if you don't have to give up anything (not sure yet what the 5ds will require us yield). The best advances, like the 5dI --> 5d2 double the megapixel count without harming DR, high iso performance etc. Nikon did this as well when they took d700 12mp sensor to the d800 with 36mp while improving DR and minimally impacting high iso performance.
> I shoot both a 5d3 and a d810; I shoot a variety of subjects and I can tell you, having 36 mp and then going backwards by 50% to 18 mp would be hurtfull. Both the 5d3 and d810 are great balanced cameras and I would much rather see smooth symmetric increases in mp, dynamic range, frame rate/buffer, high iso performance and features rather than creating highly divergent specialized camera lines.



There is a huge difference between somebody saying _'nobody needs more than x MP'_ and saying _'I don't need more than x MP'_

I'd love a Pentax 645Z, but I just don't need it. I'd probably like a 5DS, but again, I have no need for it.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 23, 2015)

CG photography said:


> Every time there is a megapixel advance some people claim "no one needs that many pixels etc. etc. etc."; they said this at 3 mp, 5mp, 10mp etc. More pixels is always better if you don't have to give up anything (not sure yet what the 5ds will require us yield).



ISO 6,400 limit with expansion to ISO 12,800 (same as the pocketable S120 with 1/1.7" sensor, by the way).


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 23, 2015)

I like the idea of a 24-32mp sensor as it gives the flexibility of both resolution and of ISO performance. The 1Dx2 would be the high ISO champ in the future lineup, the 5Ds studio camera, and 5D4 as a general purpose all rounder.

I'd probably keep my 5D3 with a spec list like this.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 23, 2015)

Famateur said:


> I think I'm in the camp of others on this thread suspecting the body (and specs) in question is a test bed for specific technology and not a prototype destined to become an actual product as-configured.
> 
> What stands out to me is the fact that as I read the rumor, I was thinking, "This sound like a 1DX," and then read this: "It was stressed that the above is NOT the EOS-1D X Mark II. There will be a quantum leap in fps, dynamic range and a bump in resolution for that camera."
> 
> ...



Like I said ... getting riled up over a Crash-Test-Dummy camera. And yes, more FPS and DR with a modest MP bump is much more DX2-ish. If the descriptor comes from a decently reliable source the "quantum leap" in DR has me curious. We haven't seen what an enlarged pixel 7D2 DPAF sensor will do. the 20.2 on the 6D (same pixel count as 7D2) looks very nice, but no DPAF. The new 5DS is an upsclaed 7D2 pixel sensor, but also no DPAF. We now see 24MP crop sensors coming on the new Rebels... So will we see a 20.2 or 24MP DPAF 1DX2? IF IF IF the word quantum leap is reasonably accurate in terms of DR (FPS, yes, Canon has the win without question) ... but could this suggest that Canon may be trying to employ their patent for the ON sensor ADC?

This is what makes Sony sensors so great at DR: 
http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/cx_news/vol47/pdf/featuring47.pdf

Canon also has a design of their own:
http://image-sensors-world.blogspot.com.es/2013/08/canon-files-for-dual-range-column.html

This is precisely the type of major fabrication advancement Canon would want to introduce in a new 1 series body. In addition to all but eliminating read noise (and boosting DR) with the on sensor analog-to-digital process, working with what we would assume to be Dual Digic 7 chips, and an even faster mirror assembly.... how many more FPS could all this bring? 18FPS? hmmm... very feasible if you have a third Digic 6 chip doing nothing but commanding the AF system full time like they do with the single Digic 4 in the current 1DX. Could Dual digic 7 chips slinging 24MP also support a 16bit RAW instead of 14? Cant pass more 14 stops of DR in a 14bit file...

I'm wildly speculating, but it's all in the realm of reason and plausibility because Canon has the Tech to do this. Now whether they can cost effectively fabricate this right now is another question... Gonna be a fun year!!

EDIT: I'll add to this by suggesting it could also FINALLY be the employment of a Dual ISO function using DPAF which seems so perfect to do such a thing with. If so, I wonder if they will also make a firmware update for the 7D2 if they put it in the 1DX


----------



## iron-t (Feb 23, 2015)

18mp would be enough for me if the ability to recover shadow detail were usefully improved from the mark iii. The general specs seem rock solid. That plus exposure comp in manual (auto ISO) mode and I'm just about sold.


----------



## tomscott (Feb 23, 2015)

I think I speak for a few current 5D owners that if they reduced the mp then I would just stick with the 5D even if it improves DR by 1/2-1 stop. Resolution is important too. Recently been using mine a lot for wildlife and the ability to crop a little more would be most welcome. 26-28mo would be great


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 23, 2015)

tomscott said:


> I think I speak for a few current 5D owners that if they reduced the mp then I would just stick with the 5D even if it improves DR by 1/2-1 stop. Resolution is important too. Recently been using mine a lot for wildlife and the ability to crop a little more would be most welcome. 26-28mo would be great



I've said this before, but....

I'd really like it if the 7DII were 24 or 32MP instead of 20MP. However, I'm fine with my 5D classic's 12.8MP.

Why?

Well, I usually use full-frame when I can properly frame images, and properly framed images having 12.8MP are just fine with me, even for large prints.

I usually use the crop camera when I can't properly frame, due to focal length (or, to a lesser extent, magnification) limits. In that case, I often end up cropping like crazy and that's where high pixel counts help.

I would have been interested in the 5DS for both applications (it has about the same pixel density as the 7DII) but for the ISO 6,400 limit.

Given that Canon isn't going to give us a high-ISO camera (I'd have been happy with the 5DS having the same ISO range as the 7DII + the 1 1/3 stops it has inherently just due to the larger sensor) and a high pixel count camera in one, I'll stay with shooting high ISO with full-frame, properly framed, and high pixel density with crop when I can't properly frame with a full-frame camera. So, for full-frame, I'd be happy with 18MP, 20MP, 24MP or whatever, since I'm happy now with 12.8MP from a pure resolution perspective.


----------



## Famateur (Feb 23, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> I'm wildly speculating, but it's all in the realm of reason and plausibility because Canon has the Tech to do this. Now whether they can cost effectively fabricate this right now is another question... Gonna be a fun year!!



Speculating on juicy stuff like this is the whole fun of this site, so carry on! 

Agreed on the possibility/plausibility. It comes down to product positioning, internal road maps and manufacturing hurdles. I'm excited!


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 23, 2015)

Famateur said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > I'm wildly speculating, but it's all in the realm of reason and plausibility because Canon has the Tech to do this. Now whether they can cost effectively fabricate this right now is another question... Gonna be a fun year!!
> ...



They obviously have the fabrication in place now to produce the pixels they want, but I just don't know how much of an overhaul it is to retool to get the signal flow they designed in their patent and get everything on ONE die. I'm sure it's expensive, but is it so expensive as to make it non-feasible. We can only assume that's why we haven't seen it to this point yet. The original 1DX was announced in 2012. That patent appeared in Aug 2013. Things like that are in the works long before it's filed and made public.


----------



## edknuff (Feb 23, 2015)

At 18 MP, for me, it is DOA.


----------



## Famateur (Feb 23, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> Famateur said:
> 
> 
> > PureClassA said:
> ...



My hunch is that there is a new process (hopefully on-die ADC of some kind), and it's taken Canon a bit longer than anticipated to bring it up to production-ready status, especially if DPAF is involved. For some reason, I get the feeling DPAF is proving more challenging to produce (yields). Still not sure if it's that or just product differentiation that has kept it from the M (a natural recipient) or even the newer Rebels.

The recent downward movement in price for the 1DX and 1DC sure seem to signal that successors will arrive (or be announced) this year (e.g. 1DXII and 5DC?). This would point to the process being ready, whatever the chip technology is. I hope it's something cool!


----------



## tron (Feb 23, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> CG photography said:
> 
> 
> > Every time there is a megapixel advance some people claim "no one needs that many pixels etc. etc. etc."; they said this at 3 mp, 5mp, 10mp etc. More pixels is always better if you don't have to give up anything (not sure yet what the 5ds will require us yield).
> ...


I suspect that the quality will not be the same : : :


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 23, 2015)

tron said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > CG photography said:
> ...



Right - which is why the 5DS should go much higher, not the same.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Feb 23, 2015)

I agree with Lee Jay.

I think sensor size is a heck of a lot more important than pixel size in determining ISO performance. You can always increase the QE and smaller pixels already have less read noise. Noise = SQRT #photons. If I can collect and use more photons with smaller pixels (admittedly tech improvements need made) then why not?


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 23, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



As always, comparing completely different technologies and extrapolating, you really should know better.

The S120 has a back-illuminated sensor and is not comparable to the current DSLR sensors.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 24, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> I agree with Lee Jay.
> 
> I think sensor size is a heck of a lot more important than pixel size in determining ISO performance. You can always increase the QE and smaller pixels already have less read noise. Noise = SQRT #photons. If I can collect and use more photons with smaller pixels (admittedly tech improvements need made) then why not?



If you only talk about the same sized sensors then bigger pixels have the potential to be less noisy if built to the same tech, if for no other reason than less of the sensor area is taken up with the lithography. Once you start comparing different sized sensors the smaller sensor will always have to have better tech to even keep up. Which leads us to the BSI-CMOS tech in the P&S's which gives much better IQ than even a medium format digital on a per area basis, but as it uses such a small area the total image IQ is lower. 

I have said for years, you can look through my posting history, sensor area is king, a smaller sensor with the same tech will never be able to give you the IQ of the bigger sensor, at what point that becomes noticeable, or the IQ is not 'good enough' is something each person has to judge for themselves.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 24, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> If you only talk about the same sized sensors then bigger pixels have the potential to be less noisy if built to the same tech, if for no other reason than less of the sensor area is taken up with the lithography.



Microlenses pretty much equalize that.

Smaller pixels tend to win whenever noise is shot-noise dominated. Shot noise is pretty much pixel size invariant for the the same size final image, but noise reduction software beats out the block averaging done by larger pixels. If you're read-noise dominated, bigger pixels can win, but smaller pixels tend to have less read noise too, partially or (in some cases) totally eliminating that advantage. But you tend to be read-noise dominated only at very high ISOs in the 5 to 6 digit range or more.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 24, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > If you only talk about the same sized sensors then bigger pixels have the potential to be less noisy if built to the same tech, if for no other reason than less of the sensor area is taken up with the lithography.
> ...


Clearly they don't, but why let honest actual objective real world results get in the way of a good argument and theoretical discussion?

If you compare any same generation and tech sensors the ones with the smaller pixels have more noise per sensor area. Well that has been true in every instance of a genuine fair comparison I have seen.


----------



## Tugela (Feb 24, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > Tugela said:
> ...



When you hit the bottom of the well you have hit the bottom of the well. No amount of averaging between wells is going to make it anything other than the bottom of the well. A larger pixel is a deeper well and will always provide a better signal than a smaller pixel.

Like I said, its physics.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 24, 2015)

Tugela said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > scyrene said:
> ...



Also, as I said, that 'comparison' is between two totally different sensor technologies, one is back-illuminated and the other isn't, so the two images mean nothing.


----------



## Machaon (Feb 24, 2015)

SwnSng said:


> If these are the specs of the 5D mkiv I hope there will be two versions: this one and one with 2X (36mp) the resolution and half the FPS (5-6fps).



Isn't that the 5Ds? Or are you after a 5Ds with better ISO performance?



CG photography said:


> I shoot both a 5d3 and a d810; I shoot a variety of subjects and I can tell you, having 36 mp and then going backwards by 50% to 18 mp would be hurtfull.



That is, unless you're going from Bayer CFA to a multi-layer sensor, in which case the spatial resolving power of the 18 MP sensor may be similar...


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 24, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



Nope. Same basic sensor technology, same generation.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 24, 2015)

Tugela said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > scyrene said:
> ...



Yeah, but you don't know any physics.

An ideal sensor would capture the location and wavelength of every incident photon individually. Think of that as an infinite number of infinitely small pixels, most of which capture no photons at all.


----------



## RGF (Feb 24, 2015)

RLPhoto said:


> I like the idea of a 24-32mp sensor as it gives the flexibility of both resolution and of ISO performance. The 1Dx2 would be the high ISO champ in the future lineup, the 5Ds studio camera, and 5D4 as a general purpose all rounder.
> 
> I'd probably keep my 5D3 with a spec list like this.



I see the need for 2 5D cameras. High ISO camera, lower MP, no need to 1D build (though it would be nice if price is right) and an intermediate MP camera, similar to the Nikon D810.

Don't expect 12 FPS, that is the territory of 1Dx.


----------



## adhocphotographer (Feb 24, 2015)

My thoughts:

Looks great to me, a slimmed down 1DX... fantastic! As for the 18mp sensor... i think this is just the 1dX sensor, and i would guess it would change for the retail... I think it will stick around the 20-23MP range with increased ISo and DR.

This looks perfect for me!  The 5Ds for high MP, the 5Dx for the general and a 5Dc for the more video orientated! 

This is all very exciting....  Fingers crossed that this prototype is not too far off the mark!

Price wise, i think it will be the same as the 5Ds/sr cameras. ~3600 USD.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 24, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



At that level though, can't you effectively increase the ISO in pp? There's not much difference (if any?) between doing it in camera at the boost settings or after the fact, is there? That's the impression I get from similar discussions I've seen.


----------



## scyrene (Feb 24, 2015)

So the original quote was:


Tugela said:


> Having higher pixel densities just reduces ISO performance.



Now pixel densities have been increasing for years. And yet high ISO hasn't got worse (has it?). Clearly there is more going on here. "It's physics" isn't good enough, sorry. I think Privatebydesign's point of comparing like with like is relevant - especially as each generation of cameras has managed to increase pixel counts *and* high ISO performance (as a general trend, I guess there will be exceptions). So when we are discussing a future camera, which presumably has a more modern sensor than past models, why should we not expect this trend to continue?

Otherwise, those seeking the best low light performance would always use the oldest, lowest-resolution sensors.

I'm just trying to understand reality, I don't have an axe to grind. Surely something as seemingly basic as this can be settled objectively one way or another?


----------



## zim (Feb 24, 2015)

adhocphotographer said:


> My thoughts:
> 
> Looks great to me, a slimmed down 1DX... fantastic! As for the 18mp sensor... i think this is just the 1dX sensor, and i would guess it would change for the retail... I think it will stick around the 20-23MP range with increased ISo and DR.
> 
> ...




I really really hope you are correct but that would mean 4 variants of the 5D!! 

What if it turns out to be 
5Ds and 5Dsr for high MP and a 5Dc for the more video orientated and general

:'(


----------



## bdunbar79 (Feb 24, 2015)

This is the way I see it. And of course Lee Jay and PBD can add/correct me if needed.

To increase high ISO performance to me is to increase DR at high ISO/light-limited situations. I need to increase FWC or max signal per pixel or QE, however you look at it. You need to lower read noise. HOW you do those two things I'm not really commenting about but if you can do that you can increase S/N at high ISO. You already have less read noise with smaller pixels so why can't you increase the size or efficiency of the photodiode in the pixel? I've been in discussions about smaller parts in and around the pixel to make way for larger photodiodes, for instance. I can also see where the FWC could be more important than read noise and overcome the higher read noise by adding more signal because signal is additive whereas noise is added SQRT. So in that case, larger pixels might still win. This of course is all at equal sensor size and equal technology.


----------



## RLPhoto (Feb 24, 2015)

RGF said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > I like the idea of a 24-32mp sensor as it gives the flexibility of both resolution and of ISO performance. The 1Dx2 would be the high ISO champ in the future lineup, the 5Ds studio camera, and 5D4 as a general purpose all rounder.
> ...


I wouldn't buy a lower MP 5D4 than my 5D3. Plus knowing canon being canon, they'd want you to spend more money on the high ISO champ the 1Dx2 rather than a low MP 5D4. 24mp or a 32mp sensor with improved performance would make the 5D4 more General purpose than a 18mp sensor when the extra resolution is needed. (Especially since stock sites usually require at least 20mp to sell the largest size.)


----------



## clifflwms (Feb 24, 2015)

I can believe most of this, it looks great, but I'm skeptical about the 18MP AND the Dual CFast. Why would they add a new card to the camera while removing the card that most people already have? Traditionally (At least in recent history), cameras in this range have had one SD and one CF. Why wouldn't they just replace the CF with CFast? why remove SD?


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 24, 2015)

scyrene said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > tron said:
> ...



The difference is speed, metering, and verification of correct settings.

I go though this on my 5D, which has a maximum ISO of 1600, 3200 base. It's acceptable up to ISO 12,800 but using ISO 3200 and EC-2 is a pain, it's hard to use the image preview to see what you got, it doesn't work well at all in JPEG mode, and it's a hassle even in raw.

Just being able to set the exposure index you actually want to use would be a big help in practice.


----------



## davidmurray (Feb 25, 2015)

clifflwms said:


> I can believe most of this, it looks great, but I'm skeptical about the 18MP AND the Dual CFast. Why would they add a new card to the camera while removing the card that most people already have? Traditionally (At least in recent history), cameras in this range have had one SD and one CF. Why wouldn't they just replace the CF with CFast? why remove SD?



I have invested in using good CF cards for my camera and prefer to get back the ROI rather than having to invest in another card format.

I'm looking for incremental improvement in DR, IQ, high ISO capability, FPS and megapixels. Incremental would be nice - if I wanted seriously higher specs then I would be looking at the next model up.

I don't care for video in my stills camera so have no interest in 4K video in a 5D.

To get 4K video I would upgrade my video camera. For me a video camera needs a different style of controls for creatively recording motion pictures.


----------



## jrista (Feb 25, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> This is the way I see it. And of course Lee Jay and PBD can add/correct me if needed.
> 
> To increase high ISO performance to me is to increase DR at high ISO/light-limited situations. I need to increase FWC or max signal per pixel or QE, however you look at it. You need to lower read noise. HOW you do those two things I'm not really commenting about but if you can do that you can increase S/N at high ISO. You already have less read noise with smaller pixels so why can't you increase the size or efficiency of the photodiode in the pixel? I've been in discussions about smaller parts in and around the pixel to make way for larger photodiodes, for instance. I can also see where the FWC could be more important than read noise and overcome the higher read noise by adding more signal because signal is additive whereas noise is added SQRT. So in that case, larger pixels might still win. This of course is all at equal sensor size and equal technology.




Increasing FWC (probably a poor term to use, max saturation is probably better) is definitely a way that you can improve DR at higher ISO. Reducing read noise can certainly help, but at higher ISO read noise is already quite low, 3e- or less these days usually, and it's tough to complain about that. The saturation point at higher ISOs is usually only a couple thousand e-, sometimes as little as a few hundred e-, so increasing the charge capacity of each pixel is probably the better way to improve SNR at high ISO. There is also the simple fact that you really want to improve the signal, and reducing noise doesn't exactly do that per-se...only increasing the charge capacity and the charge accumulated per unit time does. Increasing Q.E. can certainly help, but at very high ISO, you suffer from clipping problems (so, while with high Q.E. you might have the necessary sensitivity, if it isn't paired with a capacity increase, it might be a useless improvement to sensitivity.) 


Increasing photodiode size is certainly one way to improve charge capacity, but there have been other recent innovations (usually for super small pixel sizes) that use layered photodiodes to capture deeper penetrating photons and convert them to charge as well (not for the purposes of color, just increased charge capacity). There have also been innovations in photodiode design...charge accumulates at a layer at some particular depth inside the PD, around where N-type and P-type silicon interface. I've read of a couple patents that have been changing the curve of that interface layer to increase capacity without increasing PD size, or to change the structure of that layer. A curved or shaped layer has more surface area, and thus more room for electrons and electron holes to accumulate. 


If you could double your signal with the same read noise, you could certainly gain some DR. For example, if you have 300e- saturation at ISO 12800 and 3e- RN, you would have ~6.67 stops DR. If you increase saturation to 600e-, you would have ~7.67 stops of DR. You gained a stop. Doubling charge in a photodiode without increasing it's size could be tough, so it's unlikely to see quite that much of a change without some other technological innovations. A reduction in process size, use of a curved N/P interface layer in the PD, use of BSI, etc.


----------



## Lee Jay (Feb 25, 2015)

jrista said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > This is the way I see it. And of course Lee Jay and PBD can add/correct me if needed.
> ...



You aren't thinking about this correctly.

At high ISO, FWC is limited artificially by all the gain. The cells are fully capable of holding a lot more charge, and they do, but the A-D saturates because of all the analog gain.

Assuming you are at high ISO because you are light-limited (not a bad assumption, IMHO), then the ONLY way to increase DR is to reduce read noise (assuming Bayer dyes, same QE, etc.).


----------



## KeNgoaiDao (Feb 26, 2015)

Damm nice ;D


----------



## K (Feb 27, 2015)

Rockwell is saying on his site that there likely will be no 5D4. That the 5DS is the replacement for the 5D3.

Didn't Canon state that it is NOT a replacement for the 5D3? Which implies there's going to be a different replacement for it?

Unless Canon is lying to keep 5D3 sales going until the 5DS is out in the summer.

On the other hand...we're seeing unauthorized dealers essentially blowing out 5D3's for $2K ...

That makes me completely wrong about my speculation on the declining price of the 5D3 as the 5D4 approaches. I figured the 5D3 would hold higher value and price until a true replacement was closer. For the 5D3 to have a street price of $2K new right now, which is still 3-4 months out till the 5DS hits the stores, let alone later this year in the fall before an speculated announcement of a 5D4 and then the wait after that before it hits the stores....

The price drops of the 5D3 gives weight to theory that the 5DS is the replacement...Otherwise, why the big drops? Still, it is an unauthorized dealer. When the big shops drop it more, that will be confirmation.

Perhaps the 6D Mark II "upmarket" move is going to be that fall announcement? Perhaps that will be the low-light, general use camera?

What is interesting is, his forecast specs call for NO 4K video. Even though all other rumors state the 5D4 will have 4K. 

His forecast specs for the 5D4 seem to me to be the specs of the 6D Mark II. Which is like a 2nd generation 5D3. The same way the 6D was like a 2nd generation 5D Mark II.

He also mentions 10fps. That is bizarre. That equals the 7D Mark II. A FF camera with 61 focus points and 10FPS...why would anyone buy the 5DS other than to have crazy high megapixels? 


If true, what becomes of 4K video? Will Canon force the video crowd to buy their flagship DSLR for that? That wouldn't surprise me.

I think his forecast is way off....If he does have a connection, he likely is getting info on the 6D2 and calling it the 5D4.


But the dropping prices of the 5D3 does make me wonder...they are way too premature for a 5D4.


Rumors are rumors, but business is business and no one likes to lose money. Inventory reduction is critical when something is about to become obsolete. I consider these business decisions to be a forecasting tool of sorts.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 27, 2015)

Rockwell is an idiot, a smart one, who will say anything for page hits.

The 5DS/R are not 5D MkIII replacements, there will be a 5D MkIV and probably a 5DC too to round out the leveraging of the 5 series name.

The 'blowout' prices are because of currency fluctuations, the very strong dollar, and the fact that the USA is a dominant expendable income market. Essentially it is easier and more profitable for, for instance, Thai importers to resell their inventory Grey market in the USA for a stronger currency at what seem like cheap local prices that when converted back to Baht actually make them more money than retail in Thailand.


----------



## K (Feb 27, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Rockwell is an idiot, a smart one, who will say anything for page hits.
> 
> The 5DS/R are not 5D MkIII replacements, there will be a 5D MkIV and probably a 5DC too to round out the leveraging of the 5 series name.
> 
> The 'blowout' prices are because of currency fluctuations, the very strong dollar, and the fact that the USA is a dominant expendable income market. Essentially it is easier and more profitable for, for instance, Thai importers to resell their inventory Grey market in the USA for a stronger currency at what seem like cheap local prices that when converted back to Baht actually make them more money than retail in Thailand.



I just checked one major retailer, and the 5D3 with printer kit after rebate is now $2549

It is dropping a bit quick for a replacement camera that is supposed to be coming no earlier than November.

I think the key is 4K video.


Is there any reason why Canon would NOT put 4K in a 5D camera? I think it would be a disaster if they don't. Only way would be they plan to just include it in the next 1DX and just have a single flagship that literally does everything well (except super high megapixels). I think that is a bad idea to keep 4K video at an over $5K price point. What is Nikon's roadmap for including 4K in a DSLR? If it isn't anytime soon, why should Canon rush to it? Who knows..

If they release a 5DC...then why would there also be a Mark IV? Four total cameras in the 5D range...a bit excessive.

5DC, a 4K camera with 18MP, and great low light. That could justify the $3800 price range.

The 6D Mark II, essentially a 2nd generation 5D3 will fill the gap as the basic, all-around DSLR in the $2.5K price range.


----------



## jrista (Feb 27, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...




I understand it perfectly. 

I agree that if you are light limited (a possible use case for high ISO), then you would need lower read noise to increase DR. I disagree that's the only use case for high ISO. I frequently shoot at high ISO when there is plenty of light, easily enough to saturate the entire sensor in a fraction of a second, because I need motion-stopping shutter speeds for very fast motion (just watch a Chickadee or Bushtit sometime...those things NEVER stop moving, and they make these ultra fast micro-moves that blur with shutter speeds lower than around 1/2000th or so). Increased EQE and increased FWC would result in greater IQ at the higher ISO settings I often need to use for these birds. Personally, I would rather not go with larger pixels to achieve that higher FWC though...I want my resolution.

So, I disagree that the only way to increase DR at high ISO is to reduce read noise. Just look at the A7s...that sucker has a MASSIVE FWC (true full well capacity, the base ISO maximum charge capacity of the photodiode) of 155557e-! It's saturation point at say ISO 12800 is 1298e-. Now that's thanks to having a greater fill factor...more total light sensitive surface area in the sensor, and per pixel, because the pixels are huge. The saturation point at the same ISO for the 6D is 604e-. Both cameras have similar read noise at that ISO, 1.8e- and 1.6e- respectively, but one has 9.7 stops DR and the other has 8.4 stops. Why does one have more DR than the other, if the only way to improve DR at high ISO is to reduce read noise? The camera with the higher DR actually has higher read noise! The 6D has a lower fill factor, less total light sensitive surface area. 

The capacity of a photodiode is primarily limited by it's area, and the sensitivity is limited by area and EQE. Sensor sensitivity is affected by total light sensitive area in the sensor. So if Canon had made the 6D with the 65nm process Samsung is using, they could have increased the photodiode area. I don't have time at the moment to actually calculate how much area increase Canon could achieve without changing pixel size, but suffice it to say they could increase light gathering capacity and sensitivity by increasing photodiode area. There are still EQE losses due to the use of microlenses and CFA. Improve microlenses (aspheric lenses have been researched to better focus off-axis light onto photodiodes), replace the CFA with color splitters, move to BSI and basically gain nearly the entire surface area of the sensor as light sensitive area, and you increase the amount of light reaching each photodiode, which makes them saturate faster, thus utilizing that increased capacity, therefor allowing you to reduce gain further (which reduces the amplification of everything, noise included.) That improves IQ, even at high ISO.


----------



## privatebydesign (Feb 27, 2015)

K said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Rockwell is an idiot, a smart one, who will say anything for page hits.
> ...



Personally I think 4K is overblown, the kind of "I need it" feature that people say they want but when they get it it isn't what they thought, like 54MP in a 135 format camera. Sure some people do need it, but most of us don't.

For a start 4K is a pain to work with, it is expensive and time consuming to work with too. Also, while shooting larger than 1080 makes huge sense for cropping and stabilization, shooting 4k at 4k brings back all those issues you just overcame, you don't need to shoot 4k to get good cropping and stabilization capability in true 1080.

From a marketing point of view, sure the 5?? will have to have 4k, but really? Besides, I can see the best route for Canon being the 5DS, 5DSR, a 5D MkIV with limited 4K 28MP and boosted specs all around, and a 5DC that has a low MP sensor and all the video functionality the 1DC has with the option of internal 4k to CFast, headphone socket, Log Gamma etc etc. Meanwhile the 6D MkII will be the guts of the 5D MkIII in a poly shell with a couple of bits taken out and a couple of extras thrown in, well that is Canon history and there is no reason to suppose it should be different to any major degree

And, even at $2549 for a 5D MkIII now, that is realizing over ¥300,000, three years ago it sold for $3,499 and the exchange rate made that ¥290,000. In other words, it is retailing for more money to the Japanese now than it did three years ago and inflation in Japan is zero!


----------



## 3kramd5 (Feb 27, 2015)

K said:


> A FF camera with 61 focus points and 10FPS...why would anyone buy the 5DS other than to have crazy high megapixels?



Um, its pixel count IS its sales pitch.


----------



## dolina (Feb 27, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > A FF camera with 61 focus points and 10FPS...why would anyone buy the 5DS other than to have crazy high megapixels?
> ...


Some people think it'll make their images get the medium format look.


----------



## veryfelina (Feb 27, 2015)

geonix said:


> As someone who is mainly interested in wildlife photography and therefore needs to crop images often in post-processing, I am not too excited about an 18 MP fullframe sensor.
> After the announcment of the 5Ds and 5Ds R I would have guessed the 5D Mark IV will have a sensor with something inbetween 25 and 30 MP.
> Without question it has its advantages to have big, light-consuming pixels, but overall resolution is also critcal.
> 
> ...



My point exactly, I totally agree with you! 
I want better performance in low light but I'm also wishing for something around 30MP. And I would really like to see a rotative touch screen. I have a 650D and a 70D and I really love that feature!


----------



## tron (Feb 27, 2015)

veryfelina said:


> geonix said:
> 
> 
> > As someone who is mainly interested in wildlife photography and therefore needs to crop images often in post-processing, I am not too excited about an 18 MP fullframe sensor.
> ...


Why should 5DIV be positioned against Nikon's high megapixel cameras? There is a 5Ds(R) for this.
5DIV should be positioned against D750. Have you forgotten this model?


----------



## K (Feb 27, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...




I personally think 4K and any video in a DSLR is useless. But that's me. Dedicated video cameras are better. But...if Canon dodges 4K...all the video people will freak out and whine and moan about it across the internet for a long time. Being that Canon themselves claim to be cinema/video focused in DSLR's....and there's a respectable segment of video users - it would be bad. Plus, Nikon could release it first in a lower level DSLR and that would be a huge blow to Canon.

Truth is, 4K implementation doesn't have to be perfect. Sadly, it is all about marketing. They could add this capability, even if in a very primitive form. The same way HD video started off. At the start, it wasn't 60fps. ...Better to have, and not be perfect, than not to have at all. Because the competition will have it sooner or later.

Now, aside from the video/cinema angle Canon says they're all about - they promote themselves as being low-light kings. We know for a fact the 5DS isn't a low light camera maxing out at 6400 ISO native. Thus, it stands to reason there is some kind of low-light camera on the way.

I do not believe there will be 2 more models of 5D. Having 4 total models in the line would be ridiculous.

Canon has produced for the studio, landscapers and still shooters with the 5DS. A megapixel beast. It has also produced for the sports and wildlife guys with the 7D Mark II - a speed demon with killer AF.

What is left? Video and serious low light. Those two features are related to one another. Thus, a 5DX is more likely. A sensor anywhere from 18-30 MP, native ISO to 51K and 4K video. It can be priced right with the 5DS line.

That would make sense. 

One question is - what becomes of the lower end FF market segment? Does Canon keep the 6D in the same price range it originally was as an entry level, crippled FF camera? Or do they move it up? Why move it up? The idea to that is that there is a void in the lineup and price brackets. True, but Canon may not think that at all. 

Sure, for entry level FF, here's your crippled FF camera at round $2,200. If you want a serious FF, you pay $3,500 or more. That is how it used to be. Canon made you spend at least $1,200 more to make the jump.

Now, if that happens - Nikon will love it. Because they will offer very capable FF DSLR's for under $2,500. The D610 and D750 have good AF, good sensors, double card slots and other great features that the 6D does not have. Nikon will own that segment. Will Canon surrender it? Possible. If Canon believes the 7D Mark II to be that good, they might feel that is "entry level" pro camera - with the 6D being a FF at a bit more and that's that. Foolish in my opinion as no one considers a crop camera truly "pro"

Ok, so the opposite is that the 6D moves upmarket like the rumors say. Ok, by how much? Can't be too close to $3K...because at that point people will just save up, wait for rebates and sales, and just spend $3,300 - $3,400 for the 5D line instead.

If the 6D moves up to the $2,500 range...then Nikon now owns the entry level FF market as the D610 is going for $1,600. $1,000 is a big difference in this price bracket. These aren't flagships.

I don't know, it all depends. Nikon has positioned themselves all across the spectrum and have various levels covered. Nikon does not have the diversity of cameras that Canon does. They are all mostly similar, with incremental improvements going up the chain, with the exception of the D810 being 36MP. The rest of the features are close. In contrast to Canon who has a 7D2 sports camera, then a 5DS high MP camera - they are more specialized and seem to be going for specialization.

The pride Canon has for the 7D2, and the attitude they display in interviews and marketing leads me to believe they actually fancy it as fitting into an entry level pro camera. For all practical purposes (and Canon is very practical about photography, which is why they don't get hung up with nonsense) it is all about the usefulness and IQ - not whether it is crop or FF. And yes, the 7D2 will be used by pros for all kinds of things, including weddings. In the end, it is good enough. But for marketing perspective and all the photography nerds out there -it's NOT FULL FRAME. Thus, not a "real" IQ competitor to Nikon D610.

If the above is true, maybe that's it for the line up? 7D at the entry level, 6D as a midrange, and then the 5D line with the 3 specialty cameras up top.

Any other theory demands that Canon either:

1. Create a whole other model of camera (unlikely)
2. Loads up the 6D with enough features and power to cover everything the D610 and D750 can do (unlikely, because that camera will be so good, who will pay for the 5D4? - not me lol )


----------



## mkourouyan (Mar 1, 2015)

Any word if the 5D M4 will have the dual pixel auto-focus for the video, similar to the 70D? Or maybe some other AF for video?


----------



## reginaldwalton (Mar 1, 2015)

Only 18MP?


----------



## mclaren777 (Mar 1, 2015)

18 MP sounds heavenly! This rumor has me quite excited.


----------



## kevl (Mar 2, 2015)

I'm a tad bit late to the game but this spec list makes zero sense to me. 

Unless the DR is 3 stops better than the 5DIII and the low light noise is 2 - 2.5 stops better going down in megapixels is a very very bad idea. 

Someone above wondered why the 5D should be set against the Nikon D810 and perhaps the upcoming D900 - well because at $4,000 that's what you can get from Nikon and frankly Nikon has better DR and noise performance in the D810 than the 5Ds will have... The 5Ds is an ad-on to your Canon kit so you will stay with Canon, it is not a competitor to the Nikon for agnostic purchasers. 

The 5DIV has to best Nikon in the price range and target market or Canon is actually going to loose real market share. 18MP only makes sense if it is going to have D4s kind of DR and noise performance. 

12 frames per second is clearly wrong. Birders and sports guys should be using the 7DII or the 1Dx not a 5D... Why would you spend $4K on a camera only to crop the images down and get less quality than you'd have on a better suited camera that costs half as much... and if you are serious about your sports and bird photos enough to spend $4K on your body, why would you not choose the body that actually get the camera that is right for the job and get the 1Dx? 

As for a new card? I don't think that is wise... but who knows. Nikon hasn't had success with their new card and the 7DII isn't using a new card so I think this rumour is also wrong. I don't think we'll see a new card until we see a body that needs one. ie the 1Dx replacement... IF it needs something faster than a CF card which it probably won't. 

All in all I think CR2 was over the top for this set of specs. 

The only part that seems to be CR2 worthy is 4K. The 5DIV will have 4K. I am 99.99% sure.


----------



## kevl (Mar 2, 2015)

5DIV wants: 
24-30 megapixels 
2 stops better DR
1 stop better low noise performance 
1 CF 1 SD card (I hated the SD at first, but it allows me to sort better) 
Illuminated AF points (selectable) 

This is all I want. The 5DIII is already an awesome camera.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 2, 2015)

kevl said:


> Birders and sports guys should be using the 7DII or the 1Dx not a 5D... Why would you spend $4K on a camera only to crop the images down and get less quality than you'd have on a better suited camera that costs half as much...



If you properly equip yourself with appropriate lenses for your subject at your proximity, you'll need not crop and will get better images due to having a substantially larger sensor. 

I'm particularly confused by why you suggest a 5D is inappropriate for birding due to a necessity of cropping, but that a 1Dx is appropriate even though it has the same sensor size.


----------



## chukronos (Mar 2, 2015)

I wouldn't care if they left it the same as long as they added a built in beer bottle opener on the side. I can't, for the life of me, understand why that hasn't been implemented, yet. I guess it is just a super-pro feature on the higher end models.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 2, 2015)

chukronos said:


> I wouldn't care if they left it the same as long as they added a built in beer bottle opener on the side. I can't, for the life of me, understand why that hasn't been implemented



Just take your lens off, the mount works in a pinch


----------



## kevl (Mar 2, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> kevl said:
> 
> 
> > Birders and sports guys should be using the 7DII or the 1Dx not a 5D... Why would you spend $4K on a camera only to crop the images down and get less quality than you'd have on a better suited camera that costs half as much...
> ...



Was lumping sports and birding together.


----------



## Dariel (Mar 3, 2015)

I don't care about having 10 or 12 fps, that's what the 1dx is for, if I want fast shooting I'll use my 7d Mk 2
I don't care as well for high resolution camera, if the quality, DR, noise, is the same as the 7d2 (which is ok but not impressive at all).

This is why I will skip the 5ds /5dsr.

What I care for, and the reason I chose 6d over 5d3 was the better image quality AND the capability of the AF to focus at -3 EV (instead of -2EV for 5d3)

I shoot a lot of evening and night parties, and portrait with ambiant light (or whatever light I have), and my 85mm f1.2L II @ f1.2 is my secret weapon for that. I cursed the 5d2 for that, being a camera that I used a lot, i did not understand why canon underestimated the need for technology improvements in AF technology for so long. That's how i became skilled in the "switch to live view + zoom + manual focus + shoot" when the AF was unable to catch anything (which happened a lot, given the -0.5 EV AF sensitivity of 5d2)

I find the AF points of 7d2 too thick and wide, difficult to get a very precise focus with my f1.2 lenses. The 6d center point is much more precise in this area.

What is the need for super high iso or image quality if you cant focus at all...?

What I want in the 5D4, what would really make me buy it would be :

A new AF module :
-3EV able AF (or -4EV !), all cross points, ideally all compatible to f8 lenses (maybe more?) no need for 65 AF points, 20 or so is Ok if all of them are cross type, and more than one is double cross type.
I don't want to see any differences between 1600 isos and 6400 isos (the really usable max iso setting is 3200 of the 6d, and a little less of the 5d3, like 2500). Acceptable quality for portraits, or high quality printing, or fashion.
I want clean 12800 isos, clean enough to make something of the pictures (like downsized printing).
Dual card CF / SD UHS II
Antiflicker technology like on the 7d2 (great idea)
A really improved sensor with more DR (at least 1 stop more). If Canon would make a technology partnership with sony to leap for their old sensor tech, to exmor like BSI design, they would be king of the hill.
24 to 30 Mp not more
5 to 8 fps is enough
heavily tropicalized body.

What would be "nice to have"
50 to 120 fps 1080p video shooting
on sensor AF points like on the 7d2 and latest rebels, for continuous AF in movie mode.
different Movie AF algorythms (like the power focus feature on long telephotos lenses), quick, progessive, ...
Wifi/GPS (GPS is nice when traveling), I never used wifi for my 6d yet.

I don't care about 4k vids yet, but a 4k mode at 24 or 30fps would be nice for marketing purpose. 5d serie has a tradition of breaking through (first affordable FF body, First FF body that shoots video,...) The 5d3 brought nothing really new (that says a lot about canon lagging on one of the core tech of photography today : sensors...). If Canon keeps playing solo for sensor tech and/or bring nothing new that the same technology for their next sensor, they will have to include 4k for marketing.

And of course, I would like bold decisions for lenses (like the come back of f1.0 lenses!).

Too much dreaming i gess...


----------

