CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Larger pixels can collect more light per pixel in a given time. 16mp in a given area of sensor is going to collect more light per pixel than 50 mp crowded into the same area per pixel can. With such small pixels in low light (which would be the only reason to use high ISO) you are going to get a lot of noise, and lose dynamic range. You can see the limitation of dynamic range in the smaller sensors with large pixel counts as in the cameras that have the 1/2.3" sensors. The fx sensors have a much greater dynamic range with tha same pixel count.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

I feel your pain. I actually saw Bigfoot! And my camera was set to 800, but it was not enough! I ended up with a dark shot that kinda looked like an out-of-focus picture of Mel Gibson.

Or maybe it was really an in focus picture of Mel Gibson. He and Bigfoot do hang aout at the same bars. Or so I hear.

imagesintime Loc: small town, mid-America

Yes.

Rumored to be announced late 2015.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Cat, but that's assuming the exact same technology in the photocells. That tech probably changes daily at this time in digi tech evolution. Photocell design is improved in every new generation of sensor. So not all cells are created equal. In Canons, the 5Dmkl had the largest cells of any Canon ever made, yet I'll bet that it's cells are not as efficient or as noise free as the smaller cells on a 7Dmkll and certainly not as good as the 5Dmklll. It's why the ISO keeps getting higher and higher. ;-)
SS

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

ds, a real photographer would know to toss the DSLR aside in a critical once in a lifetime shoot-moment like that and whip out the cell-phone. Had you used an iPhone..., that shot of BF would have been sharp-clear-and you a rich man! :lol: :lol:
SS

PS: I thought these days Mel hangs out behind bars, not in them?!?!

CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

Of course. The best low light camera is undoubtedly the one with most recent technology. But the fact remains based on pure physics, that as you make the sensor elements smaller and smaller and crowd more and more of them into the same space, there will be a tipping point where further gains in resolution will be overcome by losses in dynamic range and noise. Everything is a compromise. So the most efficient sensor will be the largest sized, most modern sensitivity element, in the largest sensor area. In other words, a 24 mp sensor is likely to have better low light performance than a 50mp sensor of the same size, assuming the identical technology. This IS the challenge of digital imaging technology.

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

My wife was calling me at the time, so I could not use the phone. :oops: :oops:

OonlyBonly

:thumbup:

canon Lee

Wonderful exposure. How noise free is it at 8x10 or larger? I love the scene that you captured, but the lens distortion is a bit disturbing. What lens where you using, & at what focal length & aperture?

Newsbob Loc: SF Bay Area

The lens distortion is from the Canon 16-35mm wide angle, shot at 24mm. As I said, my 5D3 was set at ISO 5,000. I was shooting at 1/30 at f4.

I haven't printed it, but have enlarged in Photoshop to view the pixels, and it's pretty clean. I can't remember if I ran it through any de-noising software, but I use Topaz, DxO and the Lightroom slider, depending on the photo and coffee or no coffee that day.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The most common use of the 5DS will be by pros or very advanced amateurs already using or wanting to use medium format digital cameras, which up to now have had even more limited ISO, less range of shutter speeds and with systems that offer fewer in the way of lens selection, not to mention cost a whole heck of a lot more (figure $20,000 US body only for something in the 40-50MP range, upwards of $30,000 US for 60-80MP models). The 5DS will be a "medium format killer". Watch out Mamiya/Phase One and Hasselblad!

Folks working with MF digital are most likely already set up to deal with 50MP files and all set with plenty of lighting gear, if needed for the type of photography they're doing.

It's not going to be a "wedding photographer" camera. But an architectural photographer commissioned to make interior shots of the same church the wedding was in may well use it.

The 5DS is certainly not a "consumer/prosumer" camera. It also isn't intended for video work. That will be the 5D Mark IV that's rumored might be released in August, will likely be between 24MP and 36MP, and will be much more video-oriented.

Someone who just gotta have it and insists on 5DS for their all-purpose "point n shoot" camera also can use 19MP APS-C crop or 30MP APS-H crop modes, rather than the 50MP full frame size, if that's overkill for a particular purpose.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

If I were those companies, I'd be more concerned by the Pentax 645Z (weather resistant body for $8500) 50 MP with ISO range 100 - 204,800

Nightski

Wonderful use of light.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Rehess, if I were those companies, I wouldn't be to worried about a camera that cost more than twice as much with a fraction of the lenses available and a minuscule infrastructure.
A top-end product pro I know had been using a $25,000, MF 25 mp back for many years. When it was obvious that it was starting to die, he looked at the new MF backs and I loaned him a friends nikon D800. He took two shots with it and pixel peeped them, and knew in 60 seconds and with only two shots that he didn't need to spend the money on a New $30K, MF back.
That story is getting repeated over and over in the pro photo community.
Rehess if I were Canon, I would have designed all my new mkll lenses to throw a 25% larger circle, then in the future release a jumbo-sensor FF camera and I'd already have lenses for it. ;-)
SS

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

So far this thread has generated more heat than light.

These new cameras from Canon are an interesting experiment. Before this thread began, we knew that the new cameras would have roughly the same pixel density as a 20MP crop sensor camera. Now we will find out how well Canon's hardware and software can deliver dynamic range while keeping noise down ... if they do well here, maybe they can even deliver better images to those of us who don't have $5K+ to spend on a camera system.

Meanwhile, presumably Sony is watching.