This is the new 50MP Canon EOS 5DS full frame DSLR camera

Canon EOS 5DS camera
This is the first picture and specifications of the upcoming Canon EOS 5DS DSLR camera that just leaked online:

  • 50.6MP full frame CMOS sensor
  • There will be also a EOS 5DS R version that will be without low-pass filter
  • Magnesium alloy body, dust and water sealed
  • Dual processor DIGIC6
  • Regular sensitivity: ISO 100-6400
  • Continuous shooting 5 frames / sec.
  • High precision 61 AF points
  • EOS iTR AF
  • 150,000 pixel RGB + IR photometry sensor
  • New "fine detail" picture style
  • 1.3x and 1.6x crop modes
  • Customizable "Quick Control Screen"
  • Time-lapse movie
  • Interval Timer
  • Bulb timer
  • The official announcement will be next week

Update #1: the specifications of the EF 11-24mm f/4L USM lens can be found here.

Update #2: an updated and more detailed list of specifications for the new camera and lens are available here.

Via Digicame-info

This entry was posted in Canon and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • My gods… So it is real.
    Finally I can have a wallpaper in my room of my crappy photographs.

    • Legio XIII

      Hahaha!

    • Funduro

      Humongous cat image no doubt. 😉

  • love that Canon has finally put up something new.
    this would be excellent with the new Tamrom 15-30 which apparently can resolve high megapixel sensors.

    • fjfjjj

      Yes, the best way to leverage a sensor resolution almost nobody has ever experienced will definitely be to combine it with a lens almost nobody has ever used which can apparently outresolve it.

  • Spy Black

    No 4K?

    • Spy Black

      “New “fine detail” picture style”

      Brings up detail you can’t see with the human eye, but hawks can use it to find field mice in your landscape shots…

      • Nikon humor?

      • I think Canon might be trying to compete with the fact that Nikon recently added “Flat” picture control for extreme dynamic range videography, and/or the addition of a “Clarity” slider in all picture controls / picture styles. Either way, its’ nothing to get excited about, unless you shoot JPG or process using DPP.

      • TheInconvenientRuth

        Wait..What?! it leaves UV visible urine traces in your pictures? So basically it PEES on your pictures… (That’s how hawks find mice, they can see the UV urine traces in the field, like planes following the wake of a ship to find the ship…

        • Spy Black

          Didn’t know field mice were constantly peeing. Better not leave any trails when u pee in the woods then.

        • fjfjjj

          You’re the most fun, Ruth 🙂

    • true

      Fine detail = downsampling images to Nikon level

    • Ishmail

      Shut up with your 4k! Go buy a video camera!

      • As you can see, lately video cameras and photo cameras are merging more and more. Long gone are the days when a photo camera would take only photos.

        • whitecatcud

          *cough* Df *cough*

          • The Df takes video, just can’t record it. It couldn’t have live view without video.

          • 1 carmera in between 1231232131 cameras that take stills and video …

          • Funduro

            My Nikon D700 doesn’t do video, my D800 does but never used that function.

          • Dave Haynie

            Nikon was of course made the first DSLR that did video. But they’ve never been aggressive with it. They don’t have the high end video options to make it worthwile totake on Canon.

        • I disagree….Sony FS-7, Canon C100…. they merged and now they are diverging again. Camera companies finally figured out we both need different things.

          • Steven Burgas

            Precisely. Rolling shutter issues were causing far too many QC kickbacks.

          • True, but as Canon Mk2 proved to us, is that there is a market for cameras that can do both things and be cheap. For instance i don`t need XLR inputs or SDI output … i just need a small camera that can provide very good videos, and they proved that they can do this. But of course they will handicap the little guys to defend more expensive cameras like C100 / C300 … Just imagine a 5D mk3 with an SSD port .. RAW video in small format and cheap as well.. but they will never do this because marketing purposes

        • Steven Burgas

          Yeah, for the amateur and wannabe market.

      • 5DmarkIII

        Oh, they will. One of the Blackmagic cameras. The GH4. This list will only get longer and longer. At least Canon will sell some lenses to the Blackmagic guys who opt for the EOS mount.

      • Spy Black

        I guess you never got the memo about Canon revolutionizing DSLR video, didn’t you?…

        • Steven Burgas

          Again, fine for the amateur market.

          • Neroon

            Why on earth would you say Amateur?

          • teila

            That’s ridiculous- it’s not about amateur market, but rather the fact that many professionals use dslrs as a tool in their work, because a more tech heavy piece of equipment dedicated to taking video, isn’t worth the expense, and or doesn’t make business sense for what they’re trying to achieve.

            It’s like saying a $600 lens doesn’t work for professionals. It just depends on what the professional is doing with the lens (or recorded video).

            Think of it this way… generally speaking, one of my rules of thumb is: There’s always professionals in the world making a lot more money than you in your profession… using lesser equipment.

        • DrJon

          It’s a specialised camera to solve certain photographic issues in the best way possible, not a be everything to everyone camera, that’ll be the 5DmkIV. It’s nice to see Canon are doing some “best camera if you’re doing one of these 3-4 things” cameras (7DmkII is another example).

      • Dave Haynie

        It is kind of natural to expect 4K on a new 5D — the camera that, after all, launched the whole video DSLR thing. The challengers at Panasonic and Sony have 4K models. Then again, they’re pushing hard for a business Canon dominates, and they’re not trying to protect their 1D C and C500 equivalents. Because those don’t exist.

        That said, there’s no point in 4K on a 50Mpixel camera. Same reason Sony’s only offering it on a 12Mpixel model, Panasonic on a 16Mpixel model. The big sensor needs to optimized as a big sensor… video wants a much smaller one. In a pro market, there is no reason one camera should be a jack of all trades, master of none.

    • Legio XIII

      First thing that also came to mind. No 4K?

    • Russ Barnes

      Same base ISO as the D800E. I don’t think you’ll find many landscape photographers had a problem with that 😉

      • Spy Black

        The joke remains the same…

    • Candido Dessanti

      Dynamic Range and iso range dont relate each other

      • SH*T666

        In fact they are both related to pixel size.

    • Neroon

      Sigh, this is not meant as a video camera and this kind of resolution would be a total waste. This is a Camera, for taking Still Images. If I want to do video and stills there are a number of cameras targeted at that market. The SONY A7s comes to mind, of the G4H, or whatever Canon puts their energy into.

      • Spy Black

        I guess you never got the memo about Canon revolutionizing DSLR video either…

        • Steven Burgas

          STFU with that tired response already.

          • Spy Black

            History is what it is.

          • Steven Burgas

            In actuality, no, you’re talking nonsense. DSLRs have their place in film, but it’s a tiny percentage compared to dedicated movie/video cameras.

          • Spy Black

            You obviously know nothing about modern-day filmaking.

          • Steven Burgas

            Considering that I work in the industry and have for almost twenty years, I can only LMFAO @ your response.

          • Spy Black

            So let’s see your stuff.

          • Steven Burgas

            I guarantee you have, child.

          • Spy Black

            I didn’t ask to read distractions, I asked to see your stuff. Put up or shut up.

          • Steven Burgas

            Shut up, kid. You’re probably still shooting with still lenses on your crappy Canon and think shallow DOF looks ‘kewl’.

            Now, toddle the fuck off.

          • Spy Black

            Just as I suspected, a complete phony. Alright kid, back to your PlayStation.

          • Steven Burgas

            Ten features over the last twenty years, kiddie. Enjoy your amateur camera.

          • Spy Black

            Let’s see ’em, and let’s see your credits in ’em. Otherwise you’re a phony.

          • Steven Burgas

            Why would an established director like myself stoop to such nonsense? I’ve no use for you, or your crap 1920 DSLR images, replete with rolling shutter jello and color artifacts.

          • Spy Black

            A phony as I suspected.

          • greeneggsandhash

            He’s likely in the amature porn industry.

          • greeneggsandhash

            Porn doesn’t count

          • Steven Burgas

            Fuck off, troll.

        • Neroon

          I could also use a hammer to perform brain surgery. I realize the changed film making and have been a Canon shooter since 1988. I also know from a technical standpoint that using this size of sensor is a waste for many reasons: Heat, Wasted MP, Speed of processing, ISO response, etc etc. Canon will address video needs, they always have. This is not the Camera you are seeking. This is the camera someone like me is seeking. My only concern is the price will be too high.

          • Spy Black

            You also apparently don’t know what’s going on in modern-day filmmaking .

    • Joel Germain

      you want 4K… go buy a Sony A7S.

    • Dave Haynie

      Physics is a bitch. When you cram 50M pixels into the space normally occupied by 22M (5DIII) or 20M (6D), something’s gotta give. Less than half the light per pixel, you’re not getting usable crazy-high ISOs. Same reason Sony did 36M, 24M, and 12M versions of the A7. OK, sure, they also hope to sell you more than one 🙂

      • DrJon

        It’s about the same pixel size as Canon’s APS cameras and bigger than the Nikon/Sony ones, so not super tiny… It will be interesting to see how deep the pixels are and if the QE will help make up for the tighter CFA.

      • Dave Haynie

        The 50Mpixel at full frame translates to 31Mpixel at Canon APS sized… which is an extra ~10Mpixel over any Canon APS camera. And yeah, sure, Canon APS cameras take good photos. But no one’s getting the same kind of useful high ISOs from a 70D or a 7D as they are from a 5D mk III or a 6D.

        And that’s a pretty reasonable scaling. The 20.2Mpixel 7D mk II has a rather odd regular max ISO of 16,000… so that’s a stop and a quarter over the 6400 rumored for the 50Mpixel camera. Which is probably about what you’d expect with smaller-still pixels, unless they’ve also done something dramatic in the new technology area (backside pixels, lower chip noise, new color filtering techniques, etc… none of which seem to be part of the rumor just yet).

  • Terry

    Now you’ll have time to make dinner not just a cuppa, while LR processes the raw’s from a days shoot. That’ll keep the wife happy.

    • Isn’t this what we all said when the D800 came out?

      • Russ Barnes

        Yep, it is. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.

        • Garrett Gill

          It was a joke then and it’s a joke now.

      • Andy Aungthwin

        After the D800 I bought a D600. 36MP is way too many pixels for the overwhelming photos that I actually need.

        At 50MB per RAW image (on the D800) that’s 1GB for every 20 photos.

        Good luck with your hard disk drives and back ups on a 50MP camera!

        • saywhatuwill

          1GB? Wow! Just Wow!

        • ioannis pavlis

          You have an option for smaller Raw file

          • Andy Aungthwin

            Now we’re talking. That does make a difference.

    • Frank

      I’m sure you’re just kidding, but Lightroom won’t take long at all to process. I use the 40MP 645D with 7-yr-old PC and it’s fine. The only time I wait is importing and exporting, or stitching several 225MB files together, then things tend to, um, slooooow down.

      • …Try culling and color-correcting 10,000 RAW images per week for a post-production company, THEN you’ll see just how “fast” Lightroom is with high MP files… 🙁

        • moonunit1

          you’re so cool

          • I’m not saying that’s what I do, I’m saying there are people who have to do that, and I hear from them pretty consistently about Lightroom’s speed, or lack therof. Anyways, what would be cool about post-producing 10K images a week? Just another day job pretty much…

          • moonunit1

            Lightroom is slow with large batches of images when it needs to apply lots of adjustments, its also a nightmare for file management because it always wants to save files in multiple locations, or create its own folders in default settings. Bigger sensor is good for any photographer who needs to crop. Any still life photographer who experiences minimum focus issues and needs to back up on a small object, yet keep it big enough on the sensor to make a full size print, will benefit from added resolution. Also, most sensors that ignore video functionality tend to have better still sensors, so id see that as an improvement. Lack of a sensor filter on the R version will be a big improvement. Something Nikon did with the D800

          • Ed Bundy

            Lightroom doesn’t save files to multiple locations unless you want it to. Create it’s own folders?? I don’t think you are n experienced Lightroom user.

        • DStudio

          Time to consider different software, I guess. And possibly a more powerful CPU (e.g. Mac Pro or other socket 2011 system). With properly designed software, a good disk subsystem, and up to 18 CPU cores (in a single socket), you ought to be able to speed things up a bit.

          • Something tells me that all of that computing power still won’t make Lightroom as instantaneous as I’d like it to be.

            Not to mention the fact that a post-production team of 5-10 would require a fortune to equip.

            Either way, the problem could be much more easily solved by simply making Lightroom as lightning quick as it used to be in the days of LR3 and process version 2010…

          • DStudio

            Hence the potential need for new software. I don’t believe performance/computing efficiency was ever Adobe’s strong suit.

            A system built around the 8-core Intel i7 5960x is about the most cost effective computing you can get today. You could equip a team of 5-10 for about the same cost (or less) than any existing 4-core systems originally cost them. Just as long as you don’t mind running an OS other than OS X.

      • Ed Bundy

        7 year old PC?! What that tells me is that you have no idea how much faster things would be with a new computer. Your goal posts would definitely be moved if tried doing the same thing on a new computer.

    • thisisaname

      “Hey sweetheart, I am going to buy a 4000$ camera, so that you won’t have to cook dinner!”

  • Spy Black

    Canon Rumors is slacking off I see…

    • Global

      Our Admin just has a very strong track record; tough to beat.

      • true

        is he russian bear?

      • Spy Black

        According to the Canon Rumors site:
        “As first reported here…”

  • Global

    Why is “bulb timer” listed… did Canon seriously not have this before or something?? Or the list just needed to be longer..?

    I’m not a Canon guy, but I’d be interested in knowing how this looks at ISO 4,000 (full size, not down-sized). The Nikon D810 starts to feel rather stressed around ISO 4,000 (full-sized, but looks quite good down-sized). I think “Normal as ISO 6400” will probably be accurate, but like the D810, a lot of people won’t feel comfortable over ISO 3200.

    I just realized it doesn’t go down to ISO 54, like the D810. I wonder if that has any practical meaning. Can anyone see any relevant difference?

    • this camera looks like it will always be on top of a tripod.

      • That’s what they said about the d800… and about the 1Ds3/5d2 before the d800… and about the 1Ds2 before the 1Ds3/5d2 …

        • Ian Lindo

          Thing is, I remember reading real accounts from D800/E users about significant camera shake below 1/500 or so shutter speed. I wasn’t terribly sure about that issue, until Nikon addressed it in the D810 but redesigning the shutter to have a softer mirror slap. So, shutter vibration is a real concern with higher MP sensors, and hopefully Canon has taken that into consideration with this new camera.

          • Just people who didn’t know how to use a camera. Follow positive examples in life 🙂

          • Have you used a camera higher than 22 MP yet, hand-held at moderately slow shutter speeds? There’s more to it than simply “knowing how to use a camera”. 24-36 MP far out-stripped most people’s decade-old habits / rules-of-thumb for hand-holding, plain and simple. Just like 12-24 MP has done for crop sensors. Sure, there are plenty of people out there who say the whole thing is a myth, but they probably wouldn’t know true sharpness if it bit them. Try a Rokinon lens at f/5.6 using mirror lockup on a 5+ lb tripod in zero wind, THEN you’ll know what it means to truly take advantage of each pixel a sensor has…

          • true

            I’d say you’re right on this one. That’s why I think using lenses with IS is something people should start taking more seriously, especially if trying to shoot low-light with no available flash. One can shoot a tamron 70-300 VC @300 1/16 and still get moderate to good results. I think the VC might be better than it’s on the 24-70 but it too should prolly be very good lens in low light (you basically get more DOF with a 2.8 than you do with a sigma 50 1.4 art wide open, and shutter speed can be slower)

          • I’d rather have a 1.4 prime and fewer MP any day, actually. In fact I dumped a D800e in favor of a D750 for this very reason, and even 24 MP on full-frame is still a bit annoying WRT hand-holding technique, compared to the 12 MP full-frame that I was used to for photojournalism.

            But, I do see the allure and I do applaud stabilization in any lens it can be added to without harming IQ or lens build quality. As a full-time wedding photographer, I can definitely see the benefit of both features. I traded my un-stabilized 24-70 2.8 for a 24-120 f/4 VR recently, and I don’t regret that. But I use primes more than zooms anyways…

          • You must be new to camera forums if you have to ask that question 🙂

            Here’s the Shake Master Deluxe A7r with a stabilised 35mm (canon) handheld:
            http://www.flickr.com/photos/genotypewriter/tags/canon35mmf2isstabilisationtest/

            I’ve gone to 0.8″ with this lens with perfect sharpness and 100% rate for shake-free shots at 0.6″.

            I also shoot large format 4×5″ handheld.

            Again… learn to follow people who can do things… Not the whiny armchair photographers you get everywhere.

          • true

            I think most of the complaints were due to bad mirrorbox or something? And that the D810 has better handholding capability than previous ones? I know I’m taking better shots with my newer camera than previous.

        • Joel

          And it stands true. Images shot on my D800 at anything less than 1/80 always exhibit some small degree of shake (when examined at 100% zoom) solely due to the mirrors motion. Clients rarely ever see it however as they’re not asking for A1 prints.

          • I’ve shot the d800 slower and can’t remember it being an issue at 100%. I don’t settle for shakey photos. With the 21MP 5D2 and a stabilised lens i remember the limit being around 1/15 when the lens allows for slower.

    • For a long time Nikon’s base ISO was 200 and i heard no one complain… in fact they said it’s an advantage 😉

      Is iso64 a hardware iso on the 810?

      • Ian Lindo

        Not sure what you mean by hardware ISO, but if by that you mean native ISO, then yes.

      • true

        yes, native iso 64-12800
        on d800 it was 100-6400

    • @Global, the reason Bulb Timer is listed as a new feature is the same reason it was “new” on the 7D mk2 – they actually let you program a specific time using the menu, so now you no longer need to hold the shutter down the whole time, you can just program in a long, astro-landscape exposure and not worry about your intervalometer’s AAA batteries dying. 😉

      • Les

        It’s also a strong hint that the camera will not be very noisy at long exposures. That matters a lot to a very few people.

        • That is another good point, Les, and is also something that was pointed out about the 7D mk2 by astrophotographers. Apparently the 7D 2 has some of the best dark current (?) noise ever, by a factor of ten or something.

          Clearly Canon is doing big things with their new sensors, but they just haven’t put DR at the very top of their to-do list in the last ~10 years…

  • Native max ISO 6400, and 1.3x / 1.6x crop mode on a system that doesn’t accept crop-sensor lenses? Sorry, Canon, you’re losing it…

    • All FF canons can use aps-c lenses… just not their own EF-S ones (not sure about new EF-S). Have you used a canon camera before?

      • lol, I review cameras for a living, so I’ve probably used more of ’em than most Canon owners… 😉

        I was indeed referring to the short-sighted decision by Canon to restrict mounting of their own EF-S lenses on their full-frame bodies, a decision that they claim was to allow smaller lens design and/or better images, but seems to be complete BS considering Nikon, Tokina, Sigma, and Tamron have all managed it just fine.

        In fact, I know a handful of friends who shoot video with the Tokina 11-16 at 16mm on their 6D’s quite beautifully.

        • “I was indeed referring to the short-sighted decision by Canon to restrict mounting of their own EF-S lenses on their full-frame bodies”

          You can indeed mount them. Haven’t you tried it, Mr. Professional Camera Reviewer? ;D

          You don’t also understand the intentions… some efs lenses have protruding rear elements and some/most don’t. You dont want to let photographers figure these out the hard way because people dont read manuals before mounting a lens on a body.

          • Yes, I’ve tried mounting an EF-S lens on an FF Canon before, but when the official company spiel is that you could break your camera by doing so, something’s not right. SO, which is it? Is there, or is there not, an EF-S lens which could protrude deep enough to break a mirror? And if not, why has Canon’s official line been a lie?

            My question is, why add 1.3x and 1.6x after all this time? If they magically re-engineered the 5Ds mirror to accommodate all EF-S lenses, then bravo, party like it’s 2007 Canon, you now have a feature that Nikon has had since day one of its FX lineup. Maybe Canon decided it was time to offer this feature since Nikon has finally gotten around to offering mRAW, but if so, I guess nobody told Canon that Nikon mRAW is a joke, and the real feature you want for buffer savings is 12-bit and/or lossy compression. 🙂

          • “SO, which is it? Is there, or is there not, an EF-S lens which could protrude deep enough to break a mirror? And if not, why has Canon’s official line been a lie?”

            1. I can’t remember off the top of my head but there is at least one out there. Which is why i said most lenses likely don’t have issues with the rear element. However, typical ef-s lenses have the baffle though.

            2. It was a forward thinking design decision that didn’t probably pan out as anticipated. Does anyone say Nikon F mount is a lie for having screw drive and compatibility issues with their own lenses due to chips… and Canon bodies are compatible with them? Hehe

            “My question is, why add 1.3x and 1.6x after all this time?”

            Why not? Nikon waited 5 years to do full frame, 10 years to do diffractive optics, 26 years to put fluorite in a modern lens and 35 years before they decided to release a 24/1.4… all just to play catch up with Canon 😀 Nothing wrong with that, is there? 🙂

          • “Why not? Nikon waited 5 years to do full frame, 10 years to do diffractive optics, 26 years to put fluorite in a modern lens and 35 years before they decided to release a 24/1.4… all just to play catch up with Canon 😀 Nothing wrong with that, is there? :)”

            Touche, touche. I should know better than to argue against the company that was at the forefront of autofocus, stabilization, CMOS, and full-frame. 😉

          • Niaz Dokrat

            the 1.3x and 1.6x crop modes doesn’t mean using ef-s lenses… it just means automatically cropping the image in camera down to maybe 30mp to give an equivalent fov of using a cropped sensor. similar to what the t3i and 70D do for their 3x zoom for video. They don’t enlarge the image, they crop out the center since 18mp is much larger than 1080p

    • Ernst

      I doubt crop lenses can resolve for the 50mp sensor.

      • In 1.6x crop mode, actually, it’ll basically match the current 1.6x sensors.

        • true

          That feature is good for crop-lenses no doubt, but it’s also very useful when shooting fast movement, especially if the said feature allows boost of FPS with or without battery grip (D810 can do 6FX and 7DX with battery grip), because you end up cropping the images in PP afterwards anyway, so it doesn’t matter if some happens in-camera.

          and for those situations, you want to have better glass in front of it

        • Dave Haynie

          Current crop-sensor cameras top out at 20.2Mpixel for Canon. This crop would be 31Mpixel… so, smaller pixels.

          • What math are you using to get from 50 MP to 30 MP in 1.6x crop mode?

          • Dave Haynie

            Chinese, clearly. Sorry about that. The right answer is (~50MP/1.6^2) = ~20MP. Damn, APS sensors really do have less than half the area of FF. But it does suggest that the pixel size isn’t a new problem for Canon, much less Sony. As for the 6400 ISO quoted? Well, it is a rumor. Could be that there’s more noise on the sensor. Maybe some other technology issues we don’t know about.

  • Carlos J. Matos

    Same resolution as a Phase One IQ150 in a smaller/cheaper package. Very interesting indeed.

    • SH*T666

      Yes and some compact cameras with tiny 2/3″ sensors also have in a “smaller/cheaper package” the same or more resolution than some 4/3 and APSC sensors.

  • true

    This is really nice move of canon if it turns out to be real. Dual DIGIC6 processors? That means it’s a leap forward even over their 1DX! So it might have very nice buffer too (unlike Nikons…)

  • Arn

    With such small pixel pitch and Canon sensor tech, prepare yourself to be disapointed…

    • true

      small pixel pitch? like in d7100? not that far away from their 7d2

      • Arn

        Absolutely, but d7100 don’t use Canon tech…
        Sorry.

      • Unless Canon has indeed paired with Sony for this sensor, we can indeed expect image quality along the lines of a 7D mk2. Which is to say, …how come the 5Ds “only” does 6400 natively?

        I smell a fake rumor, or at least a slightly fake one. Something’s not right about a 50 MP full-frame sensor all of a sudden maxing out at 6400, it should at least be able to pull off 12800 natively.

        • true

          maybe they’re “lagging” behind? I recall that D800 did only 6400 natively.

        • Robert Martinu

          It’s a matter of target audience – If you’re willing to accept enough noise reduction to crush the details down to 1DX(II?) levels, then you’re better off using that camera in the first place.
          If I take the 7D2(for being Canons newest Sensor tech) or D8x0(for being in the same segment) as a baseline I’d consider ISO 800 the highest native and everything above as H levels… 🙂

          • If you’re hesitant to shot above ISO 800 on either of those cameras, you’d be missing out on a whole lot of awesome opportunities! Although I guess it always depends on what you shoot…

          • Robert Martinu

            I just use a different camera – in such situations either one of the bricks or an A7s are more suitable in my book. But the D8x0, or this cam, would be paired with some strobes or at least high powered movie lights most of the time – being basically the sensor to capture a well planned and orchestrated frame. The same role that MF camera takes, but while sharing lenses with the other body.

        • Joel

          With the way that Canon rate their usable ISO, it’ll probably be native all the way to 25k, but usable to 6400.

        • Spy Black

          It’s too early to confirm these specs, I’d just wait and see.

    • Neroon

      You seem to have missed the fact that this is a Sony sensor…

      • Arn

        Is there any proof ? I don’t read any info about that in the photorumors article.

        • Neroon

          All the rumors ahve pointed to a joint project between the two and the rumors have shown up on Sony rumor sites.

          • Arn

            Ok, but at this time it’s only a rumor.

          • raphaelzydek.de

            So this shows again that it doesn’t matter in any case whether you buy nikon or canon. Its all the same same factory… the only thing you need to consider is whether the grip or menus suit your needs. Does this influences the quality of your photos? Maybe.

          • Ken Elliott

            Far from it. The Nikon D8xx series produces better images than the Sony A7r, even though the are said to share the same sensor. Differences in microlenses, color filter array, analog to digital conversation, and the processed all add up. Its not just the sensor.

          • Spy Black

            You forgot the processing engine.

          • Dave Haynie

            I’m shooting raw. How much does the camera’s software (aka, processing engine) actually matter? Obviously the black equalization has to be applied (each pixel being measured twice, once in total darkness, to establish a per-pixel zero point as an offset to a photodiode’s natural dark current). But what else needs to be processed?

          • Spy Black

            I don’t really know for sure, but there’s certainly data processing done to the raw signal. It is after all an analog signal that is digitized.

          • Dave Haynie

            Which means nothing. Yes, it’s an analong signal. There’s a PGA (programmable gain amplifier.. where your ISO comes from), and then the ADC. That does the digital to analog conversion. Now you’re digital. The previously captured dark current offset is applied, then you’re done, or at least sould be, far as raw capture goes. Anything else that could be done in-camera coukd also be done when processing raw, only better, since it’s wasting time and power being done on-camera. And whatever algorithms could run on-camera might improve some day. You want that raw data captured before any software comes to play.

            Certainly, they’re adding faster video DSPs to do better image processing prior to JPEG encoding (noise makes JPEG compression much worse). And faster JPEG, faster/larger/better video. That all nakes sense. But none of that shoukf affect raw. Unless there’s something done prior to raw… maybe some companies don’t actually deliver raw. Well, other than Sony, their lossy compression on raw is already well documented.

            I hear it spoken, comparing Nikon tonSony using identical sensors, that the processor has an effect. No one has ever said exactly what… and this isn’t magic, this isn’t rocket surgery, it’s relatively simple electronics engineering. My profession. I understand that each company can use their own microlenses and color filter matrix. The ADCs are on-chip, so that’s the same. System noise may be different between them.., that can be measured, if you’re really serious ( you have to get to the PCBs). Raw compression is another salient difference.

            But signal processing on something that’s not supposed to be processed at all… that’s a big deal, if that’s the actual difference. And seemingly something they wpukd gavevreverse engineered ages ago.

          • fjfjjj

            If you have any doubts about the significance of the analog-to-digital stage in your camera, just compare the Nikon D3x with the Sony A900. Same image sensor, but a huge difference in raw output characteristic.

          • Dave Haynie

            Not the slightest question about the analog stage here, that’s the PGA and the ADC. And these days, they’re on-chip in state-of-the-art CMOS sensors. So, ok, not technically part of the sensor, depending on who makes it. Either way, I guess that’s somewhat fair to include in “processing engine”, though as phrased, I associate that with the digital side of things. Which should not matter.

          • Dave Haynie

            According to Nikon, they’re not the same sensor. They claim it’s a Nikon design, albeit made in a Sony plant. Not true?

          • Dave Haynie

            Also, the mirrorless is always viewing through the sensor, thus heating it. Modern cameras have done pretty well at cooling yech, but a DSLR is always going to gave a slight edge over a mirrorless, all else being equal. Heat == noise.

          • sickheadache

            You get the Oh My Lanta Award. We all knew that Sony had this 50mp for 6 months..Where have you been? Oh wait..i see your lil bus coming..get on it.

          • Arn

            Ok, but at this time it’s only a rumor.

        • Brandon Klemets

          Canon said they were partnering with sony for the sensor yesterday.

        • Brandon Klemets

          Canon said they were partnering with sony for the sensor yesterday.

          • fjfjjj

            No they didn’t. It’s only a rumor, and it’s not even a fresh rumor.

      • Russ Barnes

        There has been no announcement to that effect. Everyone is still talking about a 53MP sensor and going on this spec list it’s not going to be 53MP which pours a lot of cold water on this being a Sony sensor too.

        • DrJon

          I thought they said 53MP with 50.6MP used (sensors usually have more pixels than make it into the image).

    • DrJon

      Canon sensor tech is as good as anybody’s, their issue is noise added off-sensor as they don’t digitise on-sensor like Sony. This shows up at low ISO (and so screws the DXO rating) but doesn’t have an impact at high ISO where you probably care more. E.g. the 6D sensor has 15.5 stops DR, throw in some noise off sensor and you get just over 12 stops at base ISO for the whole imaging pipeline.
      Canon have had a much more advanced sensor fab for some time now, I wonder if this will be the first commercially sold sensor made in it. (I doubt it would be a Sony sensor, that would eat into the margin and if there’s one thing Canon do better than any other camera company it’s make money. Not saying it’s impossible tho…)

  • Joseph

    Sony’s sensor technology right? Same deal with the RX-100 I suppose?

    • Probably… considering how the admin didn’t shoot this down because he’s a chronic nikon fanboy and a canon hater lol

    • Les

      What I got from yesterday’s rumor is that Canon is using Sony’s fab for their own sensor. Makes sense, it would cost Canon billions to set-up a new fab for this generation of sensors.

      In a sense, it’s a Canon sensor at the conceptual level and a Sony sensor at the fabrication level. Those who really believe that these things matter will be torn-up over this…

  • Joe Hockey

    Eat a dick, Nikon! Canon’s 5D-S has almost double the megapixels of the slow and widely panned D810! Finally the 5D-S will rightfully return to the top of DxO Mark’s list which BTW you fraudulently flooded with your crappy cameras.

    • true

      D810 can do 7 frames per second in crop mode (with battery grip). It’s not slow imo

      • A wheelchair with a v8 is still a wheelchair.

        • Arn

          Well, the Canon 5ds should be more like a Ferrari with a Lada motor…
          I prefer the wheelchair with the V8, i’ll go faster than a ferrari with a crappy engine 🙂

          • Yeah might as well cut to the chase and race in the wheelchair because you’re going to end up in it anyway 🙂

        • Considering that the D810 has everything going for it other than those last 2-3 FPS that could make it an olympic sports camera, I’m not sure where you’re going with that analogy.

          The bottom line is that an extra 14 megapixels over the D810’s already gargantuan 36 is going to mean squat if Canon can’t pull off 14-15 stops of DR.

          For the record, I have faith that Canon can pull it off, especially if they’re working with Sony even in the smallest way.

          I had hoped that they had picked that 53 MP number, or whatever it was, (52?) because it pixel-bins perfectly to 12 MP and thus 4K video. This would effectively deliver three cameras in one; a D810 killer, (if they can pull off the DR at 50 MP) …a 5D 3 successor, (if they can fix mRAW banding and deliver clean ~22 MP in mRAW) …and last but not least, an A7S killer. (If they can perfect sRAW pixel-binning to create a high-DR, high-ISO 12 MP sRAW file, plus maybe throw in a feature or two that mirrorless folks have been bragging about, such as focus peaking)

          Unfortunately, it sounds like Canon may be falling short of this triple-threat dream camera. I’m not gonna count this chicken before it hatches though, because some of the specs still sound a little hinky. We’ll see.

          • Moby Khan

            Working with Sony for their sensor and A7s killer ???? that is funny

          • Why not? It has worked for Nikon and Sony for years. Sony gave Nikon the D3X sensor, and it wiped the floor with the Sony A900 / A850. Sony gave Nikon the DX 24 MP sensor, and it beats the A6000 sensor. I could go on, but…

          • Reggie

            I thought Nikon’s 24MP DX sensors were all Toshiba sensors. Which are Sony?

          • They may be fab’d by Toshiba, but I think they were originally Sony designs. I’ve personally tested the Sony A6000, Pentax K-3, Nikon D5200, Nikon D5300, and Nikon’ D7100, all which share a 1.5x 24 MP spec. The image quality, to me, looks far too similar to be completely different from the ground up, there has got to be at least one common factor among them, and the only possibility is Sony.

          • Dave Haynie

            Nikon briefly used a Toshiba sensor… maybe just one of the lower end 24Mp models. They switched back to Sony.

          • Moby Khan

            I am a Nikon user. But I’ll give Sony the credit for letting Nikon use their sensor which put Nikon much higher in sensor rating than Canon (DXOmark) and also compete with Sony’s Alpha DSLRs and Mirrorless. If they decide to keep few top of the line sensors for Sony cameras exclusively, no one can stop them doing so. By the way Sony is leading the way with their mirror-less cameras which is the future. It is only the matter of time when the technology enables the mirrorless to have the same auto-focus performance as the DSLRs or even better. Then the compact, lightweight, retro-looking, and more advanced mirrorless camera will smoke the DSLRs in the fire same as the SLRs did to TLRs.

          • Yeah we all want more DR. No question.

            A 3:2 sensor that bins perfectly to QHD would be ~39.3MP.

            Agree… best to wait and see. Canon hasn’t delivered a high end body that was crippled in the recent past… im pretty confident this will be a decent contender in the first generation of 50MP sensors.

          • Don’t forget the crop from 2:3 to 16:9? I dunno why I thought ~52 MP pixel-binned perfectly to 12 MP…

          • Robert Martinu

            51MP would be about 8500px wide, you’d have to cut off a bit for clean binning. Or use the borders for electronic stabilization – well, very theoretical,considering lenses and the protection of the cine line.

          • To bin 2×2 to QHD (3840×2160) you need 7680×4320 from the 16:9 area of a 3:2 sensor with a resolution of 7860×5120 (39.3MP) sensor.

          • VivaLasVegas

            Ha ha….your dreaming is too “hinky”

          • sexyjon

            And if this new Canon can do none of this it will probably only be a Canon killer 😉

    • You sound very proud of keeping the megapixel race alive, good for you. 😉

      • true

        It’s better to keep it alive. That means less traitors jumping into medium format

    • Ian Lindo

      Genuinely not sure if troll. inb4 11.2 EVs of dynamic range and disgusting shadow banding.

      • Joe Hockey

        Canon wins. End of argument.

        Not troll.

        Or am I?

        :p

    • Ken Elliott

      I hope they teach multiplication in your school today.

      Hint: 36 x 2 = 72.

    • Dave Haynie

      If Sony has 50MP, soon enough Nikon will have it. If Canon’s sensor IS the result of a Sony collaboration, mayve not. If Canon’s just OEMing Sony’s sensor, expect anyone else to have it soon enough.

    • Focuspuller

      Widely panned? Don’t tell me FOXNews is reviewing DSLR’s now!

  • Michael – Visual Pursuit

    No global shutter, no multilayer RGB imager, less high ISO performance. Not what I had hoped for. Oh well……

  • Barbu
  • Amir Makar

    The 50.6 megapixel sensor is only as good as the lenses used. The L-lenses are sharp, but are they 50.6 MP sharp?

    • Andrei

      I can read this same comment about lenses over and over again.
      The sensor density is still smaller than micro 4/3 and APS-C.
      So, if the lenses can resolve those sensors, they should be more than fine for 50MP.

      • HF

        No. Pixel pitch is not as small as for m43. Lenses for m43 need to resolve higher detail than FF lenses (since lp/mm is multiplied by sensor dimension to get lp/ph).

    • And here we go again…. You’ve fallen into the false logic trap (sorry, English is not my native language). Do the math. If you take a 7D II, it has 20mp. A full frame sensor is 2,56x the area of Canon APS-C. You get 2,56×20= 51,2. Boom! 7DII has smaller pixels than this camera, and we don’t hear about problems with resolving.

      • HF

        No. FF lenses were designed for FF sensors in mind. To use the full resolution wide open you need to reduce CA extremely, for example (Otus). Beyond 5.6 diffraction sets in and reduces your effective resolution.

        • If that’s an answer to me, then I’d say it depends on the lens. A full frame lens that resolves the 7D2 sensor will also resolve a 50mp full frame sensor without problems (in the center of the frame at least) simply because the pixels would be roughly the same size.

          • HF

            Problem is, there are not many providing the necessary performance between f1.8 to f4 from center to corner (I don’t need the resolution in the center only with a 50MP camera, For landscapes I get a real benefit only if I can make use of the corners, not just at f8-f11 with diffraction reducing resolution already). I like to use f1.4-f2.8 most of the time. So the Sigma Art lenses are possibly very good performers. But buying a camera like this requires most probably the best glass, too.

          • Les

            If your goal is “high res photography,” then of course you need the best glass! That’s not something new, it’s been the case since Daguerreotypes.

            At least Canon now gives you the option. I’ve butted-up against sensor resolution a lot with their 20-22 MP cameras. You get to the point where there’s still resolution left, but it’s messed-up by the Bayer pattern.

          • fjfjjj

            It wasn’t true with Daguerreotypes because there was no enlargement. I think you’re speaking out of the wrong end.

          • Les

            Little known fact: Daguerreotypes have resolution down to molecular level. They can shame even modern lenses if you look at them with a magnifier.

            It’s not at all uncommon for them to be displayed with magnifiers for that reason. I’ve seen it done in world-renowned galleries and museums, both in Europe and in North America.

            So my point stands.

    • fjfjjj

      “The L-lenses are sharp.”

      Hah, what? First-generation 24-70/2.8L? 17-40/4L? Dogs. I have a red plastic ring to sell you.

      • dummy

        Hah, what? 16-35 f/4 IS L? 24-70 f/2.8 ii? 70-200 f/2.8 ii? 85 L? 50 L? 135 L? 100-400 ii? 500 f/4? 600 f/4? 200-400 f/4?

        • fjfjjj

          Oh, so now you proved L means sharp. *eyeroll*

  • Neato!

    so many pickles.

  • Gravande_medborgare

    Canon´s development staff is back after its +5 years cryosleep.

    • Joel

      And they’re buying Sony components 😉

  • raphaelzydek.de

    More megapixels pls.

  • Ian Boyd

    Hmmmmmmmmmm Canon 5Ds,if it’s true it will cost a fortune ffs.

  • The Future is Coolpix

    First the 7DII, now this.
    Nikon is toast in the DSLR market.
    No, that’s wrong.

    Nikon is totally toasted.

  • sickheadache

    Well Well. Canon finally got into the big leagues. Now..my contacts in Japan..Anita Dick, and her thin friend…Anna Rexxa..Told me..that Canon for over a year..tried to produce a high end Sensor..it was around 42-46MP…they failed. So the President of Canon…Mr. Akizero Canon agreed to talk to Sony about their upcoming 50mp. Though Sony will produce the same 50mp for Nikon’s D860/D900…and Also Sony new Mirrorless A9/or 7rll. Exciting times for all Fan Boys. Canon Finally seen the light and discovered They Truly Made Shitty Sensors!

    Wait there’s more…But first..I feel a sick headache coming on..I need to lie down.

    • Eric Calabros

      That would be the most humiliating “we couldnt” message a company might send

  • DrunkenRant

    Pricing will be about $100/MP

  • DouglasGottlieb

    I’m interested in seeing Canon’s 50MP image compared with Olympus’s 40MP sensor shift tech. No doubt, Canon will have an edge. But will it justify the price, size and weight?

    • true

      Definitely. The extra pixels means extra cropping for birds. And with the AF system of canon, it should be birders dream.

  • sasa208

    But does it have a bigger (hybrid) viewfinder? (at least 2 times the size of a normal DSLR) And does it have crop modes? If not, no buy.

  • MonkeySpanner

    I think this same rumor site, in the same post of the 5Ds rumor – also confirmed that a EOS M3 is coming as well.

  • MonkeySpanner

    I think this same rumor site, in the same post of the 5Ds rumor – also confirmed that a EOS M3 is coming as well.

  • D800GUY

    Canon just dropped the ball on D810! What up homie!

  • ohheelyeah

    came here for the bullshit comments; left satisfied

    • Paul H.

      That, sir, might be the best comment of the year (so far)…

  • MEC

    Id rather have a Hassey

    • fjfjjj

      A digi Hassey? Why not a Leica S?

      • raziel28

        Because it is the right thing , Leica is fashion and status symbol. 🙂

        • fjfjjj

          The Leica M is. The Leica S is anything but. Have you ever used one?

      • MEC

        that too!

  • Funduro

    Canon fans will now have bragging rights to “my is bigger then yours” claim ! Anyone planning on buying one better brush up on shooting with very good techniques, this 50.3MP monster sensor will demand it !

    • Ian Lindo

      Although, technically, the sensor is not physically larger, it just has more mega pickles.

  • Guest

    The higher the pixel on a chip, the smaller the pixel size. That is how it works. 50 MP packed on a 35mm sensor will result very tiny pixel with very little capacity to gather light. That means ISO needs to be boosted but that results a lot of electronic charge that results in the noise. That is why the flagship professional cameras ( 1 Dx, 4 Ds etc) do not have very pixel count but much cleaner images and can perform under very low light conditions. Even D750 has better low light performance than D810 because of the larger pixels on the former ( check DXOmark). No wonder 50 MP has a ceiling of iso 6400. Even the medium format cameras with much larger sensor with 50/60 MP do not have very good noise performance and are mostly be used in the studios where lighting is good.

  • Moby Khan

    The higher the pixel on a chip, the smaller the pixel size. 50 MPs packed on a 35mm sensor will result in very tiny pixels with very little capacity to gather light. That means ISO needs to be boosted but that results in a lot of electronic charge and consequently a lot of noise. That is why the flagship professional cameras ( 1 Dx, 4 Ds etc) do not have very high pixel counts but much cleaner images and can perform under very low light conditions. Even D750 has better low light performance than D810 because of the larger pixels on the former ( check DXOmark). No wonder 50 MP has a ceiling of iso 6400. Even the medium format cameras with much larger sensor with 50/60 MP do not have very good noise performance and are mostly be used in the studios where lighting is good.

  • Benn Brown

    i use 2 miii’s for weddings and if they do this monstrosity i will go to nikon. 50mp is a joke, how about better sensors with less noise and better dynamic range?

  • 100 mega pixel DSLR would have been better. I will not need any zoom lens now. ha ha..

  • Neopulse

    Is this a Sony or Canon sensor?

    • David

      Rumor has it Sony – Canon doesn’t have the sensor process technology to go there right now.

  • Beat Bieler

    I don’t see WIFI in the specs ????

  • David

    Sony seems intent on ‘owning’ both Canon and Nikon. Bound to make both of them a bit nervous.

  • Neopulse

    Wondering why the bulb timer. How long can it actually go for? Is temperature possibly a problem for such a jampacked sensor? I remember medium format digital backs (Leaf Aptus and Phase One P45+ I think) not too long ago had to have special ventilation on the side to help with long exposure and the temperatures it provoked. Can someone inform me about modern day heat dissipation technology in 35mm sensors?

  • DennisonBertram

    Groan. More of what we don’t need- less of what we do. If there is still USB 2.0 tethering on this camera I don’t know what I’ll do.

  • sasa208

    No optical viewfinder twice the size of a regular finder with ultra accurate digital focussing aid = no buy

  • dbltax

    But, will it blend? That is the question.

  • Back to top