Is 18MP it?

Is 18MP the apsc sensor limit? Or at least for now or the next two years?

Canon has four apsc bodies w/ an 18MP sensor. I think this is the first time this has happened. Sony, Canon's main rival, can only go up to 16MP something for their apsc sensor. Does this imply anything to you? Or is this just a lull and before long 20MPs will be leaping right into our faces.

I hope 18MP will be the standard for awhile so the high clean ISO race will now begin. And when this high clean ISO quest will bottom out then the next race will be for making real cheap fast (bigger aperture) lenses.
--
slowshotmax

--
Unapologetic Canon Apologist

macky patalinghug said:

Is 18MP the apsc sensor limit? Or at least for now or the next two years?

Click to expand...

I doubt it, but who knows?

macky patalinghug said:

Canon has four apsc bodies w/ an 18MP sensor. I think this is the first time this has happened. Sony, Canon's main rival, can only go up to 16MP something for their apsc sensor. Does this imply anything to you? Or is this just a lull and before long 20MPs will be leaping right into our faces.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised.

macky patalinghug said:

I hope 18MP will be the standard for awhile so the high clean ISO race will now begin.

Click to expand...

The two "races" (megapixel and clean high ISO) are actually quite consistent. Higher MP sensors make clean high ISO easier. This has been repeatedly demonstrated, but some people still cling to the erroneous impression that more MP makes for more noise.

macky patalinghug said:

And when this high clean ISO quest will bottom out then the next race will be for making real cheap fast (bigger aperture) lenses.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't hold my breath. Lenses seem to be getting more expensive (and better).

macky patalinghug said:

--
slowshotmax

Click to expand...

--
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

More MP just aren't needed in a crop camera IMHO. Focus on more dynamic range and less noise (if the latter involves an MP increase, fine, but make less noise the goal, not more MPs).

Those who need more MPs should go FF.
--
If it's a Single Lens Reflex, why do I need so many lenses?

In this worldwide economic turndown, it's financially better for Canon to stretch this sensor as far as they can. The more parts they can share among cameras the better. New sensors are expensive, and since this one still competes quite well (at least in the specs that sell), Canon has little reason to replace it.

Right now Canon has only 4 sensors in place with their entire DLSR lineup. I'm sure the 12mp unit in the new Rebel 1100 is a derivitive of the old 450D sensor. Compare this to just a few years ago, where every DSLR Canon made was sporting a different sensor.

The good news is that DSLRs are now mature enough where the primary differences among bodies won't be in IQ but in features and performance.
--
Newest galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/portraits
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/architectural
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/interiors

yodermk said:

More MP just aren't needed in a crop camera IMHO. Focus on more dynamic range and less noise (if the latter involves an MP increase, fine, but make less noise the goal, not more MPs).

Click to expand...

You're probably right that more MP aren't needed in a crop sensor, but that doesn't mean they aren't useful. You also sound like you're saying that the manufacturers haven't already been focusing on less noise (apologies if this isn't what you meant). If you look at the history of Canon crop sensors, every new one has featured less noise than its predecessor (yes, even the 50D has less image noise than the 40D). Look at the 10D/300D sensor compared with today's 7D/60D/550D sensor (and, presumably, the 600d sensor). I used to use a lot of Noise Ninja at ISO 1600 on my 300D. ISO 6400 on my 7D is better than that, and only requires moderate Lightroom NR.

--
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

There is a funny thing about 18MP, one can get a 1080 HD signal by sampling 1/3rd of the pixels in both directions.

That is the only magic number associated with 18 MP.
--
Mitch

Technically no limits in megapixels - but a much more SENSIBLE thing would be more DR or / and higher ISO. Already my 40D had enough enough pixels...

Canon G 12 enthusiast PS shows that it is not always just the megapixels , perhaps the same trend will shift to DSLR department too - and i hope Canon provides me more dynamic range. Because that is what i really need...

--
Kari
SLR photography started in 1968, 40D since 2007, and now 7D !
60.21 N 24.86 E

gipper51 said:

In this worldwide economic turndown, it's financially better for Canon to stretch this sensor as far as they can. The more parts they can share among cameras the better. New sensors are expensive, and since this one still competes quite well (at least in the specs that sell), Canon has little reason to replace it.

Right now Canon has only 4 sensors in place with their entire DLSR lineup. I'm sure the 12mp unit in the new Rebel 1100 is a derivitive of the old 450D sensor. Compare this to just a few years ago, where every DSLR Canon made was sporting a different sensor.

Click to expand...

When the 10D and 300D were current, the other Canon DSLR's were the 1Ds and the 1DII. The 10D and 300D had the same sensor, so there were only three different sensors in the lineup then. When the 30D, 350D, 5D, 1DsII and 1DIIn were current, they had, technically, 5 different sensors, but the 30D and 350D had such similar sensors, they were basically the same (likewise with the 40D and 400D). The most they ever had current at the same time was about a year ago, when the 1000D, 550D, 50D, 7D, 5DII, 1DIV, and 1DsIII were all current models. That was still only 5 different sensors (550D and 7D have the same sensor, as, basically do the 5DII and 1DsIII). So, 4 different sensors in current models seems pretty standard, and plenty to choose from.
--
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

Alastair Norcross said:

The two "races" (megapixel and clean high ISO) are actually quite consistent. Higher MP sensors make clean high ISO easier. This has been repeatedly demonstrated, but some people still cling to the erroneous impression that more MP makes for more noise.

Click to expand...

Look under "Canon HD CMOS Pro Image Sensor"

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/camcorders/consumer_camcorders/vixia_hf_m41#Features

--
Bob

'Dominance struggles are a fundamental characteristic of biological systems' - George C. Williams

Alastair Norcross said:

gipper51 said:

In this worldwide economic turndown, it's financially better for Canon to stretch this sensor as far as they can. The more parts they can share among cameras the better. New sensors are expensive, and since this one still competes quite well (at least in the specs that sell), Canon has little reason to replace it.

Right now Canon has only 4 sensors in place with their entire DLSR lineup. I'm sure the 12mp unit in the new Rebel 1100 is a derivitive of the old 450D sensor. Compare this to just a few years ago, where every DSLR Canon made was sporting a different sensor.

Click to expand...

When the 10D and 300D were current, the other Canon DSLR's were the 1Ds and the 1DII. The 10D and 300D had the same sensor, so there were only three different sensors in the lineup then. When the 30D, 350D, 5D, 1DsII and 1DIIn were current, they had, technically, 5 different sensors, but the 30D and 350D had such similar sensors, they were basically the same (likewise with the 40D and 400D). The most they ever had current at the same time was about a year ago, when the 1000D, 550D, 50D, 7D, 5DII, 1DIV, and 1DsIII were all current models. That was still only 5 different sensors (550D and 7D have the same sensor, as, basically do the 5DII and 1DsIII). So, 4 different sensors in current models seems pretty standard, and plenty to choose from.

Click to expand...

Numbers may very, but never before has Canon had so many current generation cameras share the same sensor. Except for the newest base rebel and the 1D4, all APS-C cams share the same sensor and all FF models share.

This makes sense, as I never understood how Canon previously would introduce a new sensor and only stick it in one body. Sensors found in the 5D...why ony in one camera...ever?

--
Newest galleries:
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/portraits
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/architectural
http://www.pbase.com/gipper51/interiors

This from the Canon Expo last fall:
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/imageR.asp?rim_id=4106

scroll down for more info:
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-10055-10894

Bob Howland said:

Alastair Norcross said:

The two "races" (megapixel and clean high ISO) are actually quite consistent. Higher MP sensors make clean high ISO easier. This has been repeatedly demonstrated, but some people still cling to the erroneous impression that more MP makes for more noise.

Click to expand...

Look under "Canon HD CMOS Pro Image Sensor"

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/camcorders/consumer_camcorders/vixia_hf_m41#Features

Click to expand...

A. They're talking about a video sensor.
B. That's marketing speak.

C. They're wrong to claim that pixel size gives better image noise (if that's what they are claiming). Sensor size is what matters.

D. Results matter. Today's higher MP sensors have less image noise than the lower MP sensors of even the very recent past.

--
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

I overhead a Canon rep talking to my local shop owner the other day and according to him Canon is actually going to back pedal a bit. He didn't say what body, but he said a new body will be announced soon with a 12 Mpx sensor with very little to no noise at ISO 6400 targeted at sports shooters.

All hear-say I know, but it's an interesting idea.

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/m_summers/

victorian squid posted links below that show the direction of the technology for CMOS sensors. Thanks for that VS.

The 1D sensor is a full frame 21 Mp CCD - more pixels than the APS-C 18 Mp CMOS, but with larger pixel pitch. I suspect if the pixels are made much smaller, we might just be getting a better shot of our lens irregularities.

It seems to me that resolution in photography only matters if you can SEE a difference, printed at 300 (or sometimes 600) dpi. Without heavy image processing, better printed photographs result from better lenses. I think photographic technology advances would help us more in high lens quality than in resolution.

I will go for the noiseless 12MP sensor without a doubt

Alastair Norcross said:

Bob Howland said:

Alastair Norcross said:

The two "races" (megapixel and clean high ISO) are actually quite consistent. Higher MP sensors make clean high ISO easier. This has been repeatedly demonstrated, but some people still cling to the erroneous impression that more MP makes for more noise.

Click to expand...

Look under "Canon HD CMOS Pro Image Sensor"

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/camcorders/consumer_camcorders/vixia_hf_m41#Features

Click to expand...

A. They're talking about a video sensor.
B. That's marketing speak.

C. They're wrong to claim that pixel size gives better image noise (if that's what they are claiming). Sensor size is what matters.

Click to expand...

No, they are correct. Larger pixel photosites have a larger full well capacity, leading to larger DR and as such, a better noise floor.

Alastair Norcross said:

D. Results matter. Today's higher MP sensors have less image noise than the lower MP sensors of even the very recent past.

Click to expand...

You're confusing the issue. If Canon went back and did a FF 10D Mk2, with 6mp, it would have the benefits of improved processing and microlenses, and as such, have far better noise and DR.

Alastair Norcross said:

--
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

Click to expand...

Vortex1999 said:

I will go for the noiseless 12MP sensor without a doubt

Click to expand...

A 12mp sensor with clean iso 6400 or 12,800, with a 14-16 stop DR at base iso. That would be interesting....especially as it would trickle down to a 24mp sensor within 5 years.

Yup, I'd go for that too...and I'm not a sports shooter. If going to higher pixel counts does nothing to alleviating noise then it's a waste of time. Now perhaps the drive to 'picture perfect' high ISO is the new race?
--
Beauty is NOT just skin deep.

"6MP??? Are they crazy?? 4 was MORE than enough. These (100% crop) high ISO shots are WORSE!!"

"8MP??? Are they crazy?? 6 was MORE than enough. These (100% crop) high ISO shots are WORSE!!"

"10MP??? Are they crazy?? 8 was MORE than enough. These (100% crop) high ISO shots are WORSE!!"

"12MP??? Are they crazy?? 10 was MORE than enough. These (100% crop) high ISO shots are WORSE!!"

"15MP??? Are they crazy?? 12 was MORE than enough. These (100% crop) high ISO shots are WORSE!!"

"18MP??? Are they crazy?? 15 was MORE than enough. These (100% crop) high ISO shots are WORSE!!"

.........and so on and so forth. And every damn time, for arbitrary reasons a million and one non-technical armchair engineers can't fathom, people collectively complain about a concept of somehow there being a number of pixels that's "too many." Yet high ISO performance continues to go up and memory continues to become cheaper and in larger formats to handle the deluge of added bits. There is absolutely no reason, until we're literally at the precipice of entirely new non-pixel-based technology or cannot physically make the photosites smaller, that this trend would stop.

And somehow, someway, 18MP will someday seem quaint and inadequate and we'll be using 40MP+ cameras that everyone will be okay with it. And of course some yahoo will come on here and complain about the 50MP camera on the horizon being overkill...

--
http://andymcelroy.smugmug.com