Rumors: Canon’s 46MP camera will be a 1 series EOS

The rumored 46.1MP Canon DSLR will most likely be a 1 series body (similar to the 1D X and 1D C):

In an update to the high MP info, we're told [thanks] that a camera will eventually appear in a 1D X derived body, in the same way as the 1D C. The information said that the actual designation was not known, but it would essentially be a '1 series'.

This entry was posted in Canon and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Rob

    Well I hope for canons sake that they can get really good color and dynamic range with this new sensor, unlike the 5dm3 which was a bust for me.

  • Canon, Nikon, etc., please stop this utterly meaningless megapixel war.

    • fjfjjj

      Don’t worry. Fujifilm will make a medium-format digital rangefinder that’s smaller than a D4/1DX, and it will be over.

      • fjfjjj

        …and when I say “rangefinder” I actually mean “EVIL” of course. Bleh.

    • Ren Konkwall

      That’s Ok.

      Shocking as it may seem, you don’t HAVE to buy a 46MP camera…

      There. Problem solved.

      • Hallelujah!


      • I am still happy with the quality of 1DsM3, the resolution is plenty for my purposes. Expanding dynamic range, reducing noise and improving per pixel sharpness is where it all should be going. If by adding additional pixels would achieve all that, I might go for it, otherwise I will hold off.

    • Sam

      You’re kidding right? The D800 produces better images than any DSLR ever made up to about 12,800 ISO. These bodies offer possibilities we’ve never had and quality is determined by sensor size, not photosite size. Sensors like this won’t need AA filters in almost any circumstance. The perceived resolution is going to be incredible.

      The 100MP FF camera is only a couple of generations away. The NEX 7 sensor would be 54MP at full frame already.

      You can always downscale. The only reason te current flagships are pixel limited is the speed of processing and the need to deliver 10 fps.

    • Carola

      Totally agree with u Mr. Lee, especially that 3 years ago they were having a big advertising campaign saying don’t look for megapixel anymore, quality doesn’t mean a high megapixel. So what happened for this contradiction?

  • hiplnsdrftr

    At 46mp it’s really a niche camera anyways. Obviously for people shooting billboards or making large prints or those obsessed with cropping?

    I easily shoot 10,000 photos per job, the thought of using a 46mp camera is horrifying.

    I pity the fool that buys it because it’s the latest greatest thing and then tries to store and manage all those huge raw files.

    • Jesus_sti

      You know that some people just need 1 (maybe 20 crappy one(you can delete it)) photo for a job ………

    • bjrichus


      You don’t need 46MP for billboard shots. Two year sago, I was doing a series that were used to advertise events and were three stories high. Well into billboard territory – so what camera did I use? A Nikon D3 – which has nowhere near 46MP.

      If you think anyone needs that number of pixels, considering the low dot density of the printing used when you go to that size, you are seriously mistaken. Unless you shoot for a billboard 400 yards wide?

      • Hiplnsdrftr

        I typically use Pentax 67 scans or 1Ds3 for my billboard shots. Actually I’ve used them for advertising that covered 6 story buildings…

    • El Aura

      There are people who shoot 10000 pictures per shoot because there is a lot of things happening and changing. For those, a lower-resolution camera is probably better.

      But others shoot just a few images per shoot because they can arrange the scene.

      I pitty those that for some reason continuously assume that others are more stupid then them. If you are not fooled, don’t assume others will be fooled.

  • Ren Cockwell

    Such a mess! who the f..k needs 46 MP?!? c’mon, that is medium format size! Pixels
    getting all smaller each one with 46 MP on just 36x26mm Sensor Size….damn.

    • Ren Cockwell

      i meant 36×26 mm Fullframe Format…or FX.

      • Ben Wronkmore


        At that density the quality must be compromised at least a bit…

        NO WAIT!

        This is a Canon body? Oh… That explains it then.

        • haha

          nikon users getting worried

          • 4Dx

            Unless the 4Dx rumors are true.

          • D4x

            or D4x rather

          • Worried? Nope. Why not? Because what other people are using means shit to me.

            Plus, knowing Canon, it’ll cost 12,000 dollars or something outrageous like that.

      • LX

        36x24mm FF not 36x26mm

    • El Aura

      Yeah, why would anybody want to shoot MF-quality images for less than $10000 per camera body and with 35 mm-quality AF and lens selection? Really, who would want MF quality in cheaper, lighter and faster package?

    • an onymous

      Everyone knows you are impersonating _Ken Rockwell_ by user name although a bit modified, pleas stop these silly nonsense before someone sues you, it’s enough that someone just recognize it, me for instance, and it can be used as proof in the court!
      I for one don’t care too much but it’s simply immature and ridiculous!!!

      • If you really didn’t care, you wouldn’t even be mentioning it and getting mad about it.

  • Lou

    I’d go for a Medium Format tool if they had affordable telephoto lenses….
    There are none, so… I’ll be going for a 36 Mpix Nikon, or 46 Mpix Canon.
    It looks like it will be the Nikon. That “boat anchor” possible from Canon is
    just too big and clumsy for field work, and couple it with a really big telephoto
    and it will be hard to lift, and no way you’ll hold it for an hour or so.

    I DO REALLY BIG PIX, 40X60 INCHES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • fjfjjj

    The beauty of a 46Mp sensor is 11.5Mp RGB raw mode.

  • Z

    If you need one more reason why its better to be Nikon fanboy than a Canon fanboy, this is it.

    If the rumors are true, then Canon’s logic is that it’s better to put the 46mp sensor in a 1 series body than a more manageable (size-wise) and affordable MKIII type body. OK, why does studio guys need bulletproof, machine gun body for what they do? Or can you imagine lugging this monstrosity up the mountain for that scenic shot? Oh my …

    If Canon fanboys wanna crow about how their camera has more mp than say D800, then Canon is going to make you pony up for 1 series body price. What is that about 8 grand maybe?

    Definitely sucks to be a Canon fanboy now … first, underwhelming 6D specs (it’s all they got to go on for now … unlike D600), and now this. Well, maybe Canon will reconsider their strategy. I’m sure more Canon fanboys will pony up for a gussied up MKIII than 1 series. Why don’t they try something really useful like improving DR on MKIII sensor instead of getting in a mp pissing match with Nikon?

    • Hiplnsdrftr

      I’m getting a Fuji XE1 to use when I climb a mountain or say walk down a street…

    • nycPete

      It doesnt really matter to me, I make alot of money. = )

      • hiplnsdrftr

        = mountain of hardrives… have fun with that.

        • There is a thing called sRAW. Can’t RTFM? 😀

          • Z

            Oh yeah, sRAW, what, that’s like Canon’s version of RAW light … less filling …

  • Rusty Cardores

    If this style of body is not for you, if you don’t need 46mp, or if storage is a primary concern then FFS don’t buy it…. buy something that suits “your” needs! It’s not rocket science.

    That said, there are those of us who would be all over this like stink on a pig, as it would be the ideal tool for “our” needs.

  • Pointless war.

    This is a pointless war for Canon and Nikon (Well not so much for Nikon).

    As soon as Canon releases this, Nikon releases something like the D4x. Then the megapixel war will keep climbing until Canon or Nikon realizes that they need to improve sensor performance like DR and most likely it will be Canon first.

  • Michael

    I have to agree with a couple of the above comments. A 1 series body limits the usefulness of a high resolution camera because of size and weight, not to mention price. A high resolution camera is going to be appealing for studio work, architectural work, weddings, landscapes and other field work. Sports, journalism, and event photographers favor speed and low light capability over resolution. By my count, a monster brick of a camera, whatever the resolution and dynamic range, will lose many photographers who truly have a use for the resolution. Most of my work is done in the field and carrying a 1 series all day is not an option. The irony, of course, is that a vertical grip can always be added to a camera without one, but you can’t take it off if it’s built in. If Canon truly does release a high resolution camera only in a 1 series body, then I suspect it’s their marketing department calculating that they couldn’t charge over $4k for a smaller body because of the D800’s aggressive price point. To stay with Canon would mean for many buying an $8k camera that doesn’t fit their needs. I think they will lose many photographers whose work is primarily in the field.

    • Michael, you’re whining about the weight difference between a half-body DSLR and a full-body DSLR because you don’t know of anything better. People who are serious about resolution carry cameras that are Kgs heavier than any full-body DSLR out there.

      Also… you need to hit the gym:


      • Michael

        genotypewriter, there are more than a few assumptions in your post. I have or have used several of the cameras in your flickr link and people who are serious about resolution can also be serious about other things, such as mobility. When holding on to a rock face 500m above the valley floor, size and weight do matter. I think you will see quite a few negative comments about Canonites having only a 1 series option for high resolution, just as Nikon did for several years with the 3Dx.

  • lunar Eclipse

    Whats the difference between X and C?

    • Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

      C has 4k video

  • Guy

    Admin is using a stereo picture!

  • Alex zender
  • Back to top