# Canon 5D mkIV pixel count



## Cosmicbug (Jun 24, 2015)

Looking to upgrade my 5D3 with the 5D4 when it arrives.
However, recent posts have been suggesting pixel counts as low as 18mp. This makes me a little uncomfortable.
I am hoping for a 25-28mp sensor. As for DR, my clirents are more than happy with the levels in the 5D3 so a little improvement there would be a bonus. Am I alone in this?

Thanks for polling!


----------



## meywd (Jun 24, 2015)

If it comes close or beats the a7S, have top AF and 8++ FPS, then I don't mind the 18mp, because I would have bought the 1D X if it was cheaper.

However I understand the need for more MP, and wish for a high MP cam with a good high ISO performance, however until that comes, I prefere the high ISO boost.


----------



## K (Jun 24, 2015)

While I think there is almost no chance of this happening, I voted 18MP. I would buy a 5D4 at 18MP only IF it improved high ISO noise by at least one full stop, but preferably 1.3 - 1.5 stops.

This would be worth it. Anything less, and it will be hard to justify. I have to get something for the loss of megapixels. 

In the other thread about the full frame future, I made a huge post discussing why megapixels isn't everything. 18MP will be fine if I can get cleaner images at high ISO. But it has to be easily noticeable, not a pixel peeping kind of noticeable. The total resolution capability of 18MP is more than enough for the vast majority of work. If you're printing giant things like billboards, get a 5DS.

A 5D4 with 18MP would absolutely have to put out equivalent image quality at 6400 ISO to a 28MP 5D4 at 3200. Anything short of that, and it becomes difficult to justify the loss of 10 megapixels which is a lot. 

In other words, 1/3, 1/2 stop or even 3/4 stop could be overlooked in favor of more resolution and cropping ability. The leap from 18 to 28 is significant. It would be a non-issue from say 22 to 24, or 22 - 26, or 18 to 22 (as it is with the 1DX and 5D3). A spread of 4MP, not a big deal and ISO wins. 10MP...that's something.

The proof has to be in the images. If I have to pixel peep to see the difference in noise, forget it. Why take the downgrade? On the flipside, if when reviewing images the difference is obvious and I've gained at least a full stop (or hopefully more), this does translate to better IQ.

The better ISO performance will make up for the loss of MP in this case. 28 noisy megapixels of fuzzy, reduced resolution IQ doesn't help. Better to have 18MP that are cleaner. There's more detail that is retrievable.

But it will be a specialty tool. Since at low ISO, they will all be unnoticeable close in ISO noise and the 28MP camera will be quite a bit better because of the resolution. 

I'm ok with going for low-light performance over MP. But this means the 5D4 is no longer well rounded since by modern standards, 18MP is primitive and a ton of photography is done under ISO 3200. It will take a beating on IQ due to lack of resolution in all tests at normal ISO ranges. It will almost have to be marketed as a low-light specialist camera, otherwise the reviews will massacre it as tests are done at 100, 400, 1600 ISO.


----------



## Maiaibing (Jun 24, 2015)

Cosmicbug said:


> Looking to upgrade my 5D3 with the 5D4 when it arrives.
> However, recent posts have been suggesting pixel counts as low as 18mp. This makes me a little uncomfortable.



Just praying that one day a gullible and foolish soul here will take my standing offer to bet against a 18 MPIX 5DIV. The chances are as close to zero as you can get.

Pushing Canon's most popular FF series (5Dx) into specialty territory would be marketing insanity. Canon _has already said _5DIV will be a general purpose camera. _18 MPIX makes for a very marginal FF camera_. Its as easy as that. End of story.

If Canon does a 18 MPIX camera (in itself unlikely unless they go the SONY A7S road) it will not be a "5DIV" but another model. 

32 MPIX+ is in my view very likely and certainly more likely than <30 MPIX even if this cannot be excluded.


----------



## FEBS (Jun 24, 2015)

Maiaibing said:


> Cosmicbug said:
> 
> 
> > Looking to upgrade my 5D3 with the 5D4 when it arrives.
> ...



Why all that high mp? The 1Dx has only 18mp, and what a marvelous camera is that. The Nikon 4Ds has only 16mp. So the flagships of Canon and Nikon both have more or less the same mp. So they are both doing wrong? Please do give all those high mp to the consumer so they can tell each other how many mp they have. But they don't show photos. I'm only doing photography as a serious hobby, and I know, it's not the big mp that counts. So please let Canon be wise, and keep the mp of a 5D4/1Dx2 at 24mp or lower. For me it is OK to get 18mp.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 24, 2015)

What if it's an 18 MP 3-layered sensor (54 million photo sites)? Then it wouldn't be so bad.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jun 24, 2015)

Rumors of a 18 megapixel 5D, refer to a hypothetical "5D Cinema", which would replace the 1D Cinema.

I see no technical reason for 5D Mark IV need more than 24 megapixel, because there is already a 5DS for those who make prints in giant size.


----------



## John (Jun 25, 2015)

I prefer a 5d m4 with 25 or more MP, but i could live with 18 MP if in fact the m4 handles noise 1 or 2 stops better than the m3. i own the 5d m3 and i really love the camera. it does an excellent job at relatively high ISO's and it is so nice being able to shoot over a range of low to high ISO's without worrying about noise. it would be awesome if the 5d m4 did 1 or 2 stops better than the m3 with respect to noise. the range of ISO's that i would love to see very clean would go up to about 3200. i don't care about its video capabilities. my major concerns would be AF capabilities, AWB accuracy, processing speed, high ISO's without too much noise, and MP count.


----------



## pwp (Jun 25, 2015)

Cosmicbug said:


> However, recent posts have been suggesting pixel counts as low as 18mp. This makes me a little uncomfortable.


Anyone who uses the 1Dx (18.1 Mp) isn't grumbling about the pixel count. Personally I prefer the files from 1Dx vs 5DIII in most situations. Then there is the 1Dx's clear one-stop advantage in high iso performance. I love the files from the 1D MkIV (16.1 Mp) and with sensible iso's and best glass can confidently deliver anything with them from double page spreads to cross-track billboards. 

Don't waste time & energy being uncomfortable, whatever form it takes the 5D4 should be a handsome and useful evolution over its predecessor.

-pw


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Jun 25, 2015)

Cosmicbug said:


> Looking to upgrade my 5D3 with the 5D4 when it arrives.
> ......As for DR, my clirents are more than happy with the levels in the 5D3 so a little improvement there would be a bonus. Am I alone in this?



I am wondering why you would want to upgrade then. The 5D3 is still a pretty good camera. Is it really going to be worth the money switching?

I don't tend to upgrade every time a new model camera comes out. I usually wait a bit, but that's just cheap me.


----------



## DavidA (Jun 25, 2015)

Several comments assuming the 5dIV sensor will be a traditional sensor rather than something new or multilayerd:
- There should be no need to drop from 22mp to 18mp. The 5dIII was released in 2012 and Canon should be able to get close to a stop of light with with current software, processor and sensor process improvements. If they can't, they have truly been sitting on their butt and it may be time to move along. 
- The 5d has been a foundation line for Canon and I think a drop in MP would be a huge marketing blunder. I know that they split the line with the high mpx, but I think they are missing the mark if they do not continue to evolve the 5dIII in a similar market context (the swiss army knife). I believe the 5dIII is a typical bell curve with the 5ds meeting a niche on the high mpx side, the 5dIII/5dIV meeting the bulk of the market in the middle, and the ?? meeting a niche for High ISO. If I a correct in the market distribution, you don't abandon your primary customer base. I think trying to scale the capabilities of the 6d up (as proposed in another thread) to fill the 5d sweet spot would be a difficult marketing strategy. 
- Other than wildlife, a 5dIII (evolved to a 5dIV) is a very versatile tool and adequate for most shooting situations. An increase in CLEAN mpx would be nice, but the 22 mpx is a nice compromise. 
- I think most pros would like more resolution in the 1dx and 4ds to allow for larger prints and crops. The offset is that high frame rate and high ISO are more important in shooting the more challenging environments. I shoot a lot of wildlife and it is mostly in early morning/late evening with challenging light. 
- I would only find a 5dIV with 18mp interesting if I got 1.5 - 2 spots of CLEAN ISO improvement, 8-10 FPS, and better DR. 
- The one thing that might drive Canon to 18mp for the 5dIV is 4k. They may not be able to get the video performance/features they want with a 22mp or larger sensor.


----------



## x-vision (Jun 25, 2015)

Most likely 28-30mp.

Those rumors for 18mp are bogus. 
The 5D series is the bread-and-butter pro camera from Canon.
Today, 18mp is too low for general purpose photography; more suited for a specialized/niche camera.
That's not what the 5D is.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 25, 2015)

Cosmicbug said:


> Looking to upgrade my 5D3 with the 5D4 when it arrives.
> However, recent posts have been suggesting pixel counts as low as 18mp. This makes me a little uncomfortable.
> I am hoping for a 25-28mp sensor. As for DR, my clirents are more than happy with the levels in the 5D3 so a little improvement there would be a bonus. Am I alone in this?
> 
> Thanks for polling!



You are probably not alone. The 5D series originally started out as a wedding camera and its benefit was for low light. When the 5D MK II came out, many non professionals started using it as well as video professionals. By the time the 5D MK III arrived, a lot of prosumer users were buying it, perhaps even a majority of buyers.

With the 5DS as the high MP body, this leaves them free to put out a camera with a higher ISO performance. I'd expect that if 18mp, we would be seeing a 1D X based sensor with some technology upgrades.

Somehow though, I don't expect a reduction in MP.


----------



## Cosmicbug (Jun 25, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Cosmicbug said:
> 
> 
> > Looking to upgrade my 5D3 with the 5D4 when it arrives.
> ...



+1
I have to agree with your logic. However, if there is an 18mp 5Di n test then could that be a 5DX perhaps ie a rebodied 1Dx???


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 25, 2015)

32mp would be a nice upgrade.


----------



## YellowJersey (Jun 25, 2015)

I'm quite happy with the 22mp of the 5DmkIII, which may come as a surprise since I'm a landscape photographer. A bump in resolution would be nice, maybe up around the 28-32mp range, but I'm not going to get my knickers in a twist. What I'd really like is better DR and ISO performance. 

However, it's difficult from a marketing perspective. Nikon and Sony have their big megapixel monsters with the D800, D810, A7r, and A7RII, and have been rocking three of them for years now. So for Canon to not break the 30mp mark for the 5DmkIV or the 6DmkII could be a problem in the eyes of the buying public. Even if Canon goes with the "focusing on IQ" thing, it doesn't look good to potential customers when Sony's 36mp sensor for the D800, D810, and A7r gave you the resolution without sacrificing the DR and, indeed, giving better DR. Why go with Canon and sacrifice resolution for IQ when you can get both and sacrifice nothing by going with a Sony sensor? (I know it's not that simple when you dive into things, I'm speaking from a marketing perspective. Even a completely brilliant camera may be difficult to market if it's not what the buying public says/thinks it wants) 

A bit off topic: 

I'm thinking Sony has the right approach here with the A7 line: put out three cameras at the same tier but each geared towards something different. The A7 is the all-rounder, the A7r is the MP monster, and the A7s is the low-light king. Canon's approach of having different tiers (1D, 5D, and 6D) may be part of the problem, as the sprinkling of features across multiple bodies and multiple tiers is a bit of a confused approach to take. From a psychological perspective, the 6D is lower in the lineup than the 5D or 1D, so people may think it's a worse camera. So even if you give something unique to the 6D, it may not attract buyers because of that perceived stigma of being an entry-level full frame body. Maybe it makes sense to have three bodies that are largely identical but offer different sensors? I have only questions, not answers, but I do think Sony is on to something with their A7 approach. 

There might be a way to incorporate this approach into Canon's lineup. Have an 18-22mp range for the 1D and 6D lineup, using potentially the same sensor with a focus on low light and DR. If you need low light and high burst rate, go with the 1D, but you only need low light, go with the 6D (and dumb down the 6D a bit to bring down the price and keep it as an accessible/entry level full-frame option, like not having the best autofocus system). Have the 6D as your A7s rival and entry-level full frame. The 5DmkIV is your all-rounder with 24-32mp range (the A7 rival) and the 5Ds(r) is the mega pixel monster (the A7r rival). However, I don't have much confidence that Canon would do this, as offering a variety of products to suit differing sets of needs often bows to trying to get you to pay more for the next model up by deliberately dumbing down the lower models TOO much. Either that, or have three different 5D cameras like the A7 line (but then it gets costly and you risk having TOO much on the market with five full frame cameras, which makes it harder to sell enough units to be cost effective )

A perfect example of this is Canon's treatment of video. Canon seems to insist you pay thousands of dollars more for what are pretty much standard features on cameras that go for a lot less (no point having a camera that A) has major selling features others offer for significantly less and B) most people won't be able to afford anyway), and I seriously think they're losing out on a lot of sales by putting in a half-assed effort to compete in the enthusiast video market. They really need to get their heads out of their asses on stuff like this. It may have worked when Nikon was their only real competitor, but Sony, Panasonic, Samsung, and others are all offering some stiff competition, particularly on the video front, and adapters for mirror-less make switching systems but keeping your lenses a snap, like the A7 series.


----------



## Don Haines (Jun 25, 2015)

You already have a 5Ds/r with lots and lots of megapixels and a low max ISO.... Canon doesn't need to make more of the same. Something with only 18Mpixels and superior high ISO performance will appeal to a different crowd. Different tools for different purposes beats the same tool for everything.


----------



## Pitbullo (Jun 25, 2015)

My bet is 32mp for the 5dmk iv, since 32 is easily scalable with 4K resolution.


----------



## PureClassA (Jun 25, 2015)

Not even our fools here in CR land are foolish enough to take that bet. This 18MP thing is either a bench test issue or a big fat red herring. 24MP - 28MP. I've got my high bets on a FF Rebel t6i sensor (24MP). What's critical is not the count, but whether Canon will also employ it's new dual channel AD readout like they are currently on the C300 II and soon to be 1DX2. It's really something that belongs in the 5D4 as well. That would solve the low-light issue pretty well in terms of reduced noise



Maiaibing said:


> Cosmicbug said:
> 
> 
> > Looking to upgrade my 5D3 with the 5D4 when it arrives.
> ...


----------



## rfdesigner (Jun 25, 2015)

Pitbullo said:


> My bet is 32mp for the 5dmk iv, since 32 is easily scalable with 4K resolution.



4k means 4096pixels wide, on a 1.5:1 w/h ratio that's 11.18Mpix. double that scale in each direction and you get 44.74Mpix

Rather close to the a7rII.


----------



## Pitbullo (Jun 26, 2015)

rfdesigner said:


> Pitbullo said:
> 
> 
> > My bet is 32mp for the 5dmk iv, since 32 is easily scalable with 4K resolution.
> ...


My thoughtnwas that 4K was approx. 8 mpx, multiplied by 4 = 32. 
I didnt think of aspect ratio. Perhaps 42 is the count for 5D4 then


----------



## mangobutter (Jul 9, 2015)

I'd like 18MP. I prefer striking low light performance vs. outright resolution. How many of you are viewing and/or printing your files at 100%? 18MP even is extremely excessive. The A7S strikes a good balance but also has monster low light. My 6D already has superb low light but I wouldn't mind a bit of improvement. Low light shooting is fun.


----------



## pwp (Jul 10, 2015)

The 5Ds has answered the call for a megapixel monster thus paving the option for an 18mp iso/dr monster for the 5D4. Anyone with a 1DX knows that 18mp delivers files that are fantastic for most commercial requirements. A 5Ds in the bag will be useful for those occasions where huge res is called for. This is a great time...we're spoiled for choice.

If the 5D4 doesn't deliver a substantial gain in iso/dr then Sony's A7s and a Metabones adapter will be on plenty of Canon shooters shopping list. I'm hoping like crazy the 5D4 delivers the goods, as a third camera platform would be a bit unwieldy for me. (I already have switched to Panasonic GH4 for video work...+1!!) 

-pw


----------



## dolina (Jul 10, 2015)

At this point all posts are pure speculation. It is starting to look like the camera will be in stores by December.


----------



## Sabaki (Jul 10, 2015)

A friend of mine has just been 'brought' over to Canon from Nikon and is being considered as a potential tester for the 5DIV

There are multiple MP variants but the two my friend mentioned were 18mp and 24mp, with the former more a field experiment in gauging affect on AF speed, buffer management.

The 24mp seems to be the target though but 8fps seems to be out of the question.

PS, another interesting tidbit is that the 3D tracking in the Nikons are experiencing similar issues to what some 7Dii users have mentioned.

That's all I know.

P.S. if you doubt my credibility, I can totally understand. But do note that this is my first time I have ever been privvy to a pro on this guy's level and he is quite an accomplished tog


----------



## Maximilian (Jul 10, 2015)

Sabaki said:


> ...
> That's all I know.
> ...


Thank you for sharing this inforamtion, Sabaki.

To me it is even more interesting to know about the sensor design. 
Hopefully Canon is able to bring new developments into the design increasing its performance.

PS.: Maybe your friend could share a few impressions about equipment and support after been 'brought over'


----------



## NancyP (Jul 10, 2015)

My wishes: 18 to 24 MP, significantly improved DR and signal processing (significantly exceeding high ISO low light characteristics of 6D, which is my current FF camera), interchangeable focusing screens (I like superfine), 1DX level AF, at least 8 fps, 5 fps silent mode, rugged build, weight similar to or less than current 5D3. The sensor is the big thing. Focusing screens are a smaller issue, but why can Canon put user-swappable screen in 6D but not 5D series?


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jul 10, 2015)

The T6i and T6s got 24MP, but the 7D-II only got 20MP. :'(

The 6D mark-II got __MP, but the 5D-IV only got __MP. :-X


----------



## tron (Jul 13, 2015)

Pitbullo said:


> rfdesigner said:
> 
> 
> > Pitbullo said:
> ...


Yes, because obviously there is a need for a 42 and a 50 Mpixel camera...


----------

