Canon High Megapixel Mystery (Its been rumored for almost 2 years!!)

Can anyone shed some light on this??

I have a 7D, and have been itching to move to the 70D. I just love lots of pixels ;-) ;-) ;-)

What is going on with this rumor?? My guess is that Canon has production/yield issues, or they simply have higher priorities for new products.

Many thanks,

ED-ITAMAR said:

I have a 7D, and have been itching to move to the 70D.

Click to expand...

Indeed. There are some very compelling reasons to make the switch. You just need to determine if the 70D's capabilities are more in line with how and what you like to shoot. (The 7D still retains some advantages in other areas).

ED-ITAMAR said:

I just love lots of pixels

Click to expand...

The 70D has more pixels and better pixels. You'll gain improved IQ, better noise characteristics, and deeper cropping ability. Not to mention all of the other goodies such as Dual-pixel AF, Touch shooting, killer video AF, etc etc etc.

I wake up every morning and just can't wait to get out and shoot with this camera. It's that fun.

R2

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

The Canon 70D sensor has 40 million photosites, a higher density than any other APS-C camera.

Canon is just using their high density sensor for something more practical then jamming megapixels on a sensor that aren't resolved by the lens anyway.

Once you pass 18-20 megapixels on an APS-C sensor, you gain very little in actual resolution, and simply inflate the file size.

TTMartin said:

The Canon 70D sensor has 40 million photosites, a higher density than any other APS-C camera.

Canon is just using their high density sensor for something more practical then jamming megapixels on a sensor that aren't resolved by the lens anyway.

Once you pass 18-20 megapixels on an APS-C sensor, you gain very little in actual resolution, and simply inflate the file size.

Click to expand...

I was thinking too that the sensor isn't the problem but the resolution of the lens(es).

And in case they go 24MP or so we get a lot of "my pictures are blurry" threads.

I believe what R2 and the rest are saying, is the whole story. I have heard directly from a at least 4 people that the 70D has a one stop advantage. Shooting at 1600 ISO where you before could only shoot at 800 ISO and have an acceptably clean image whether PP or not is huge. That alone to me is worth $200-$300 dollars over the 7D.

Nikon has managed much higher pixel counts and the crops do look very good. But the colors to my eyes are farther off what I perceive in person. Even when I used a WhiBal grey-card to white balance the sample images. That was a demo unit inside a retail store but still, the Canon was better.

Tomorrow the the Canon 55-250 STM is due to arrive at my front door. While I haven't shot with it I have spent hours with the 18-135 STM kit lens and poured over sample images and video I have taken with it and a 70D demo unit, and I was always very impressed, even on the far end of 135mm in not that good of light.

If those inexpensive lenses would resolve very high pixel counts I do not know. But they sure as heck do the processor and dual-pixel technology Canon has cooked up with the 70D.

I simply can not afford the 70D until about July 4th 2014. So I am making do with my EOS-M this spring. If I could I would have the 70D right now. And I am a picky ******* that really looks for flaws before buying and never almost never an early adopter. Do Google and YouTube searches for 70D and the lenses you want to shoot and you should be good to go.

I say get the camera and start enjoying it, resale on these guys is so good you will loose very little if you trade up again in the next year or so, even a three year drop spill warranty from SquareTrade can be cancelled and the remainder refunded to you. Spring is right around the corner.

The current number of MP, available in either the 7D or 70D, is OK for me. I am hoping the new flagship APS-C camera will have substantially better AF and less noise than the 7D. If it does not, I will keep using my 7D bodies until I can justify the expense of new full-frame. (I acquired pre-owned 5D and 1D Mark II N bodies, after already having my 7D bodies, so I have tasted both full-frame and APS-H sensors, though 2005 technology, not 2014.)

My understanding is that Canon has developed and is kind of sitting on their next gen sensor tech.

They are more prone to releasing innovative tech when forced, rather than innovating because they like to.

ED-ITAMAR said:

Can anyone shed some light on this??

I have a 7D, and have been itching to move to the 70D. I just love lots of pixels ;-) ;-) ;-)

Click to expand...

They've had the capability to make sensors with lots of pixels for years. They've promoted aps-h image sensors that had 52 and 120 MP over the past several years but obviously haven't put them in consumer cameras. And any high MP camera is likely to be 35mm and cost $4000+ so it won't be in an aps-c camera.

ED-ITAMAR said:

What is going on with this rumor?? My guess is that Canon has production/yield issues, or they simply have higher priorities for new products.

Click to expand...

Only those in Canon R&D division would know.

LeicaBOSS said:

My understanding is that Canon has developed and is kind of sitting on their next gen sensor tech.

They are more prone to releasing innovative tech when forced, rather than innovating because they like to.

Click to expand...

that's right because canon in the last 20 years has done that historically.

*rolls eyes*

LeicaBOSS said:

My understanding is that Canon has developed and is kind of sitting on their next gen sensor tech.

They are more prone to releasing innovative tech when forced, rather than innovating because they like to.

Click to expand...

ROFLMAO. Spoken like someone who's never been around a product development environment (or wasn't paying much attention). I'm certain they have at least their next 2 generations done and waiting for some real competition to show up. I mean why would anyone want to see any ROI on all that R&D anyway?

(Rolling eyes and anything else capable of rolling)

Do you immediately release a product when the proof of concept is done? No. Does competitive landscape and product lifecycle impact release timing? Yes.

Just because a company has something doesn't mean they immediately run out, retool the production lines and sell it.

Do you really think Canon could not or has not developed a new APS-C sensor since 2009? That they rehashed the same one over and over because they were incapable of making something new... or that it is more profitable not to?

It's obvious a couple people here don't understand the technology behind the Dual Pixel AF sensor, or its significance in future cameras.

edit: Unless my math is wrong, the 70D dual pixel sensor has a photosite density equivalent to a 63 megapixel APS-H sensor.

I cannot believe so many smart people took the bait with this "40 million photosite" language... right from the press release.

The sole benefit from this technology - which is clever - is autofocus in live view. That's it. This has zero impact on image performance. The images, more-or-less look the same as every Canon APS-C camera since 2009 (with small, incremental tweaks along the way).

This is like the Foveon people really believing that they actually have a 46 megapixel sensor in terms of linear resolution. At least the Foveon has a significant impact on image quality.

-----------

Remember, Canon announced in 2010 that they had a proof of concept APS-H 120MP sensor.

It is a little naive to believe that Canon is always attempting to sell the "absolute best possible camera" rather than "the least-featured (cheapest to manufacture) possible camera that people will line up to buy"

Why can't people understand that lenses limit resolution and that cramming more megapixels on a sensor simply increases file size.

Take an average lens like the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (non-ART) according to DxOMark's Perceptual Megapixel score the 20 megapixel Canon 70D and the 24 megapixel Nikon D7100 (without AA filter) both effectively resolve the same 10 megapixels.


Image from DxOMark.com used for educational purposes

Or with an excellent lens like the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART according to DxOMark's Perceptual Megapixel score the 20 megapixel Canon 70D effectively resolves 15 megapixels and the 24 megapixel Nikon D7100 effectively resolves 16 megapixels, so by adding 4 additional megapixels to the D7100 and removing the AA filter you gain only one additional megapixel of effective resolution.


Image from DxOMark.com used for educational purposes

Even on full frame cameras adding megapixels results in diminishing returns. Again using the excellent Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART lens, according to DxOMark's Perceptual Megapixel score the 22 megapixel Canon 5D Mk III effectively resolves 19 megapixels and the 24 megapixel Nikon D600 effectively resolves the same 19 megapixels, and even the 36 megapixel D800 only effectively resolves 23 megapixels. So for the 60% increase in file size of a 36 megapixel sensor you only gain a 20% increase in resolution.


Image from DxOMark.com used for educational purposes

If you want more resolution, the solution isn't adding more megapixels. If you want more resolution you need to go to the larger glass and larger sensors of medium format.

Canon has shown that it understands that more megapixels is NOT better. It reduced the number of megapixels in the Powershot G series, it reduced the number of megapixels of the 5D Mk III.

I'm sorry the 40 million photosite density of the 70D sensor is real, not marketing. Canon coming out with a 40 megapixel APS-C camera would be pure marketing because its effective resolution wouldn't be much more than that of the 70D.

The first mistake is using the DxO lens comparison tool and the fabricated pMP value to make a point about sensors. (Particularly as it's very likely most of the lens/sensor data is inferred or calculated rather than directly measured)

Having personally used Canon and Sony sensors side-by-side for some time (both APS-C and FF), often with the same lenses (Leica M, Mount-converted Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART) it's immediately evident working with the RAW files that the current higher MP sensors are not only providing modest gains in linear resolution, significant fine contrast and high-spacial frequency detail gains (esp at lower ISOs), but also significant improvements in dynamic range. The lack of AA filter certainly is a contributor.

Downsampling the 36MP files down to 21 or 24MP, with a careful progressive sharpening is an absolute revelation.

The psychology of being in the "small megapixel" camp, can be hard. I get that. Not having the "technical best" sensors for the current generation is also hard. But that goes back and forth all the time - Canon will probably take the lead next gen. The D800E was kind of a kick to the teeth this generation.

I can assure you that when Canon goes the high MP route, the most of the Canon folks will be on board that train. It will be awesome, and all this hand-wringing and excuse making will be over.

I agree that Canon only does what they think will make the most profit. A rehash of a rehash of the rebels . A 6D that should have been in the 70D body and AF system. No new 7D for years. Sigma and Tamron making glass that is either as good or better than what Canon has to offer. The trick is to make better equipment and keep the prices down. Not many people can afford a to tenK lens, A twelve hundred dollar lens like the tamron 150-600, that sounds great. And Ill bet Tamron will sell a ton of them

Jerry-astro said:

LeicaBOSS said:

My understanding is that Canon has developed and is kind of sitting on their next gen sensor tech.

They are more prone to releasing innovative tech when forced, rather than innovating because they like to.

Click to expand...

ROFLMAO. Spoken like someone who's never been around a product development environment (or wasn't paying much attention). I'm certain they have at least their next 2 generations done and waiting for some real competition to show up. I mean why would anyone want to see any ROI on all that R&D anyway?

(Rolling eyes and anything else capable of rolling)

Click to expand...

Some people read all the science articles they can and then wonder why all that wild new technology doesn't show up in products the next day. Some people realize that even if you can make one sensor with stunning new technology, that is a long, long way from being able to make it at a profit in the commercial world if it is even possible at all. Many things can only ever exist in private industry use or government use because they are the only ones that can afford to be on the bleeding edge of technology, and only then when there is enough volume to make a profit or enough lives to save.

howardroark said:

Jerry-astro said:

LeicaBOSS said:

My understanding is that Canon has developed and is kind of sitting on their next gen sensor tech.

They are more prone to releasing innovative tech when forced, rather than innovating because they like to.

Click to expand...

ROFLMAO. Spoken like someone who's never been around a product development environment (or wasn't paying much attention). I'm certain they have at least their next 2 generations done and waiting for some real competition to show up. I mean why would anyone want to see any ROI on all that R&D anyway?

(Rolling eyes and anything else capable of rolling)

Click to expand...

Some people read all the science articles they can and then wonder why all that wild new technology doesn't show up in products the next day. Some people realize that even if you can make one sensor with stunning new technology, that is a long, long way from being able to make it at a profit in the commercial world if it is even possible at all. Many things can only ever exist in private industry use or government use because they are the only ones that can afford to be on the bleeding edge of technology, and only then when there is enough volume to make a profit or enough lives to save.

Click to expand...

Oh, yes... quite right. I simply thought the notion of having something developed and ready to go but remaining on the shelf in a highly competitive market was pretty laughable. The technology pipeline behind a ready to introduce product (particularly semiconductor based) is very long. Spent the majority of my career in that industry, so am painfully aware of that reality.

Jerry-astro said:

howardroark said:

Jerry-astro said:

LeicaBOSS said:

My understanding is that Canon has developed and is kind of sitting on their next gen sensor tech.

They are more prone to releasing innovative tech when forced, rather than innovating because they like to.

Click to expand...

ROFLMAO. Spoken like someone who's never been around a product development environment (or wasn't paying much attention). I'm certain they have at least their next 2 generations done and waiting for some real competition to show up. I mean why would anyone want to see any ROI on all that R&D anyway?

(Rolling eyes and anything else capable of rolling)

Click to expand...

Some people read all the science articles they can and then wonder why all that wild new technology doesn't show up in products the next day. Some people realize that even if you can make one sensor with stunning new technology, that is a long, long way from being able to make it at a profit in the commercial world if it is even possible at all. Many things can only ever exist in private industry use or government use because they are the only ones that can afford to be on the bleeding edge of technology, and only then when there is enough volume to make a profit or enough lives to save.

Click to expand...

Oh, yes... quite right. I simply thought the notion of having something developed and ready to go but remaining on the shelf in a highly competitive market was pretty laughable. The technology pipeline behind a ready to introduce product (particularly semiconductor based) is very long. Spent the majority of my career in that industry, so am painfully aware of that reality.

Click to expand...

And capitalizing on it as soon as possible is highly advisable since the second someone else comes to market with a technology that captures imaginations or is simply better than what you have the battle has been lost.

rickyred said:

I agree that Canon only does what they think will make the most profit. A rehash of a rehash of the rebels . A 6D that should have been in the 70D body and AF system. No new 7D for years. Sigma and Tamron making glass that is either as good or better than what Canon has to offer. The trick is to make better equipment and keep the prices down. Not many people can afford a to tenK lens, A twelve hundred dollar lens like the tamron 150-600, that sounds great. And Ill bet Tamron will sell a ton of them

Click to expand...

And somehow amidst all that "incompetence", Canon still manages to sell a few cameras and lenses. Amazing, isn't it?

I definitely respect what Sigma and Tamron are doing and clearly they're getting better. And, based on recent STM lens introductions, Canon doesn't seem to be completely sitting still either. It's nice to have choices.