R5 Pixel Shift rumor

Haven't seen this mentioned here yet, fresh rumor on top of the "major R5 firmware" rumor from a few days ago.

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-pixel-shift-coming-to-the-canon-eos-r5/

Don't know how possible this even is, but would be pretty amazing if it happened.

Ali wrote:

Haven't seen this mentioned here yet, fresh rumor on top of the "major R5 firmware" rumor from a few days ago.

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-pixel-shift-coming-to-the-canon-eos-r5/

Don't know how possible this even is, but would be pretty amazing if it happened.

It certainly is technically possible. It should be relatively easy if they do the correction off-camera. Some of the questions are:

1. whether it is true
2. whether they deal with motion in the scene,
3. whether they deal with camera motion, or if it requires the camera on a tripod,
4. whether the compositing is done within the camera or with external software (like the deal with focus stacking), or it is an option. 
5. whether they save RAW or JPEG or if it is an option
6. how many frames save, or if that is an option. More frames would support dealing with more complex motion (camera or scene). 

It really would be good for Canon to catch up with some of what cell phones have been doing for years. In many ways, I would prefer them to support off-camera processing at least as an option as better and more complex algorithms could be employed.

Karl_Guttag wrote:

Ali wrote:

Haven't seen this mentioned here yet, fresh rumor on top of the "major R5 firmware" rumor from a few days ago.

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-pixel-shift-coming-to-the-canon-eos-r5/

Don't know how possible this even is, but would be pretty amazing if it happened.

It certainly is technically possible. It should be relatively easy if they do the correction off-camera. Some of the questions are:

1. whether it is true
2. whether they deal with motion in the scene,
3. whether they deal with camera motion, or if it requires the camera on a tripod,
4. whether the compositing is done within the camera or with external software (like the deal with focus stacking), or it is an option.
5. whether they save RAW or JPEG or if it is an option
6. how many frames save, or if that is an option. More frames would support dealing with more complex motion (camera or scene).

Good questions. #5 would certainly be a concern for me (I like to have RAW for all cases), and to some degree #3.

It really would be good for Canon to catch up with some of what cell phones have been doing for years. In many ways, I would prefer them to support off-camera processing at least as an option as better and more complex algorithms could be employed.

Ali wrote:

Karl_Guttag wrote:

1. whether it is true
2. whether they deal with motion in the scene,
3. whether they deal with camera motion, or if it requires the camera on a tripod,
4. whether the compositing is done within the camera or with external software (like the deal with focus stacking), or it is an option.
5. whether they save RAW or JPEG or if it is an option
6. how many frames save, or if that is an option. More frames would support dealing with more complex motion (camera or scene).

Good questions. #5 would certainly be a concern for me (I like to have RAW for all cases)

I guess thinking about this a bit more, even if Canon did add Pixel Shift to the R5, it seems highly unlikely they would add a new RAW mode for the new pixel count images that would generate.

Ali wrote:

Ali wrote:

Karl_Guttag wrote:

1. whether it is true
2. whether they deal with motion in the scene,
3. whether they deal with camera motion, or if it requires the camera on a tripod,
4. whether the compositing is done within the camera or with external software (like the deal with focus stacking), or it is an option.
5. whether they save RAW or JPEG or if it is an option
6. how many frames save, or if that is an option. More frames would support dealing with more complex motion (camera or scene).

Good questions. #5 would certainly be a concern for me (I like to have RAW for all cases)

I guess thinking about this a bit more, even if Canon did add Pixel Shift to the R5, it seems highly unlikely they would add a new RAW mode for the new pixel count images that would generate.

What new pixel count? If they are shifting one pixel to get around the Bayer issue, you'd have the same number of pixels. Because of the AA filter, I doubt a half pixel shift would gain anything useful. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong about that.

chipman wrote:

The OM-1 has this -

• High Resolution mode (Tripod) - Shoots eight images with 1/2 pixel offsets to boost resolution to 80MP. Processed in camera, and can include Raw
• Hand-held High Resolution mode - Shoots twelve shots using image stabilization. Gives up to 50MP resolution. Processed in camera, and can include Raw

and the GH6 -

The camera's 8-shot high resolution mode, which delivers 50 or 100MP images, now gains a hand-held mode, in which the camera aligns and combines images even if there's some camera movement between shots. What's interesting is that this is combined with Panasonic's existing motion correction processing, meaning you can capture 100MP images, hand-held, even if things move within the scene.

Any links to test images?

Victor Engel wrote:

Ali wrote:

Ali wrote:

Karl_Guttag wrote:

1. whether it is true
2. whether they deal with motion in the scene,
3. whether they deal with camera motion, or if it requires the camera on a tripod,
4. whether the compositing is done within the camera or with external software (like the deal with focus stacking), or it is an option.
5. whether they save RAW or JPEG or if it is an option
6. how many frames save, or if that is an option. More frames would support dealing with more complex motion (camera or scene).

Good questions. #5 would certainly be a concern for me (I like to have RAW for all cases)

I guess thinking about this a bit more, even if Canon did add Pixel Shift to the R5, it seems highly unlikely they would add a new RAW mode for the new pixel count images that would generate.

What new pixel count? If they are shifting one pixel to get around the Bayer issue, you'd have the same number of pixels. Because of the AA filter, I doubt a half pixel shift would gain anything useful. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong about that.

I don't know, you may be right.

I was thinking if pixel shift was done to increase the resolution. Isn't that what most cameras which do pixel shift give you?

And even if it's done for better clarity, wouldn't we still want the generated RAW to include all captured info, from all the pixel shifting?

Ali wrote:

Haven't seen this mentioned here yet, fresh rumor on top of the "major R5 firmware" rumor from a few days ago.

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-pixel-shift-coming-to-the-canon-eos-r5/

Don't know how possible this even is, but would be pretty amazing if it happened.

There is that rumor and also a rumor that you can turn off ibis to avoid the video wobble. I do think care so much either of these but they do seem to be important to many shooters. Another rumor is that this version 1.8 will be free like all the other recent updates. Some remember back many year ago when some video firmware software enhancements were purchased from Canon.

I want them to make the R5 autofocus more similar to the R7 for ease of interchange. I also want the ability for drive speeds of 5/10/20 in ES like I have R7. I guess Canon has been developing these for the R5 to compete with the features of the Sony A7R5 and Nikon Z8

Victor Engel wrote:

Ali wrote:

Ali wrote:

Karl_Guttag wrote:

1. whether it is true
2. whether they deal with motion in the scene,
3. whether they deal with camera motion, or if it requires the camera on a tripod,
4. whether the compositing is done within the camera or with external software (like the deal with focus stacking), or it is an option.
5. whether they save RAW or JPEG or if it is an option
6. how many frames save, or if that is an option. More frames would support dealing with more complex motion (camera or scene).

Good questions. #5 would certainly be a concern for me (I like to have RAW for all cases)

I guess thinking about this a bit more, even if Canon did add Pixel Shift to the R5, it seems highly unlikely they would add a new RAW mode for the new pixel count images that would generate.

What new pixel count? If they are shifting one pixel to get around the Bayer issue, you'd have the same number of pixels. Because of the AA filter, I doubt a half pixel shift would gain anything useful. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong about that.

As you wrote, there would not be a need for a new pixel count or type of raw; just tag them as going together. It would be like focus or exposure bracketing.

The half-pixel shifting is not to get around the Bayer pattern. The shifting would be half a pixel sensor (i.e., half of one color sensor). If it were to address the Bayer pattern, it would shift by a whole "pixel."  Even with an AA filter, there will be some effective resolution gain. Likely about 1.5x in each direction and not the full 2X. It is roughly the same thing done by many projectors today but in reverse.

It would be great if they could do it.

Something like 80MP (in real resolution) equivalent from a tripod would be nice.

Stephane SHG wrote:

It sounds good but it's not that useable in real life. I have this on my olympus cameras and barely use it...

What are the reasons for that?

I agree that this wouldn’t be thing I’d reach for all the time, but like HDR, it would occasionally come in handy. I use in-camera HDR once every 3-6 months maybe, and sometimes the results are nice enough that I am glad I have the feature and I remembered to use it.

And for those who regularly do landscape, say, it seems like it could be a useful feature. Assuming it works well.