Canon readying 22-megapixel mini 1DS Mark II?

You guessed it, this here is nothing more than somewhat believable rumor mill material, but it seems that Canon just might be readying a 22-megapixel beast of a digicam that would come in "around half the size of the firm's EOS-1DS Mark II." Unsurprisingly codenamed the 1DS Mark III, this DSLR is said to have been behind a few photo shoots seen in recent editions of Vanity Fair, and Canon is reportedly "hustling to make lenses that will work with what this body can resolve," not to mention the possibility of a "new mount for an entirely new lens design." While this certainly isn't the first big-name digicam to start in depths of shadows, we purportedly won't see it surface (or not) until this fall, as the elusive 1DS Mark III won't be shown to the public before the PhotoPlus Expo in October (if it's proven real at all).

[Via Image-Acquire]

[Nobuyuki Idei @ Feb 1st 2007 1:33PM]

Go Canon!

First post!

[P-Diddy @ Feb 1st 2007 3:50PM]

I am a professional sports photographer and I can tell you the idea of a camera at half size will not be embraced. The camera seems now the perfect size as it is a good size to hold with one hand. Remember, we are putting huge lens on this camera like a 400 2.8 or 600 4.0.

Finally, the idea of a new lens mount does not sit well at all! We have all put $20K, $30K in lens and do not want to switch.

Also, most of us don't need a 22MP camera. I have an 8MP 1D Mark II and the files are large enough doing the photojournalism work that I do.

[sabih @ Feb 1st 2007 1:44PM]

2nd post.. yay

[Seung-Hwan @ Feb 1st 2007 2:14PM]

So you base this off of some poster's words in a forum?
A wannabe insider?
Come on.

[ASTROBOT @ Feb 1st 2007 2:38PM]

I think 22-megapixel is overkill.

[Gautam Desai @ Feb 1st 2007 4:01PM]

Not a new mount, that's how I read it first, sounds like better quality glass that would allow you to resolve that detail without distortion... That resolution will expose glass quality, perhaps even with L lenses...

[Sinbios @ Feb 1st 2007 3:49PM]

And you would be wrong.

http://www.dansdata.com/images/d60/resolutions_big1024.gif

[Sinbios @ Feb 5th 2007 2:21PM]

And you would be wrong.

http://www.dansdata.com/images/d60/resolutions_big1024.gif

[Senor Pantalones @ Feb 1st 2007 4:14PM]

Not it you're shooting 40"x60" prints.

[EnhanceYourCalm @ Feb 1st 2007 3:45PM]

Very few of Canon's current lenses will even be able to resolve enough detail for 22MP. Absolutely nothing below 35mm focal can even reliably resolve 16.7MP at wide apertures. The corners will be an abomination!

If it's a 24x36mm sensor, the photosites will be quite small, and noise will also rear its head at high ISO.

I also shudder to think what Canon will be charging for this... think I'm cool with the 5D for the time being....

[David @ Feb 1st 2007 4:08PM]

Any new lens mount would have to be backward compatible with at least a substantial number of existing EF lenses or Canon knows they wouldn't sell the camera. So, such a lens mount would likely be an extension to EF, allowing EF plus a new lens type in the same manner that the 300D/350D/400D/20D and 30D all accept EF-S as well as EF lenses.

As for photosite size, 22Mpixels on a 24x36mm^2 sensor is equivalent to about 9Mpixels on an APS-C sensor, so we already have an idea from the 300D/400D/20D/30D what levels of high-ISO noise we could expect ... quite good levels.

[John Harrington @ Feb 1st 2007 4:13PM]

Of worthwhile note is this: http://photobusinessforum.blogspot.com/2007/01/keep-your-trap-shut.html

That talks about just how all this rumor-mongering starts and hits major blogs like Engaget here, and all from some guy who should have kept is insights to himself.

[Rick Lyon @ Feb 1st 2007 4:28PM]

I'll give back 10 megapixels for 10x zoom.

[Toholio @ Feb 1st 2007 9:29PM]

@Rick Lyon:

Huh? It's an SLR you can put whatever kind of lens you want on it to get the zoom you need.

As Bawheed said though, you've pretty much shown that this camera isn't for you.

[Bawheed @ Feb 1st 2007 5:01PM]

"I'll give back 10 megapixels for 10x zoom" Somehow I don't think this camera is for you Rick

[Dustin @ Feb 1st 2007 5:04PM]

I'm not entirely sure that pros will want a downsized camera. For many, the integrated battery grip (the motor drive of yesteryear) is more necessity than luxury. Pros don't necessarily want pocket cams. I wouldn't be suprised to see a bit of weight loss or some trimming here or there, but I'd be personally shocked if it was "half the size."

Also, the new Canon lens mount rumor has been around for a while, too. I find it hard to believe that they would switch out of the EOS system when I'm not aware of any huge downfalls it has. When competition is so strong from other companies, it's not a good time to make your users buy new glass if they want a new camera. For pros, this could reach into the tens of thousands of dollars.

And I hope it gets here before October. The Mk. II is more than crusty.

[monkeyb @ Feb 1st 2007 5:55PM]

"I think 22-megapixel is overkill."

Maybe a bit, but when you’re using the images for large format printing, billboards, signage etc...it really helps out to have the extra pixels to work with.

What’s with the Canon logo up there? It looks like it was colored in with crayons.

[Porkchop Flavored Cupcake @ Feb 1st 2007 9:28PM]

You know why I know this rumor isn't true?
Because it isn't exciting any of the pros.
In fact, it's pissing many of them off.

Either it's deliberate disinfo.
Or Canon's feeling braver than ever, and feels that the confidence in their user base is unwavering.
I don't think they'd operate under that assumption.

Anyway, PMA 07 hits before PPE.
Look for things to start dropping late February and early March.
Not just from Canon, but from everybody.

[P-Diddy @ Feb 1st 2007 10:25PM]

"I'll give back 10 megapixels for 10x zoom"
Yeah buddy, you are looking at the wrong kind of camera b/c that came out of left field.

I want to go back to the 22MP thing that I mentioned above. There is no way I would utilize that much resolution. In fact, given the volume of photos that I shoot, it would require an ridiculous amount of storage. I can easily shoot 1,000+ photos at a football game. Since many photographers transmit on deadlines, the time it would take to injest all the photos at that MP would take too long.

There seems to be an never ending quest to increase megapixels. And consumers are fixated on megapixels. But there are other things that I feel are more important:
* First on my list: Faster flash sync speeds. (professional sports photographers who shoot on strobes in high-ambient arenas know my pain of the Mark II and its 250 sync speed)
* Work on a sensor that eliminates moire.
* Work on eliminating noise even more (but hey, the 1D Mk II ain't bad). How crazy would it be to have noiseless 3200 ISO?
* Better (i.e. more accurate) flash technology.
* Built in Pocket Wizard transmitter. How phat would that be?!

If Canon really is coming out with a 22MP camera, I hope they come out with a lower cost and lower MP camera for photojournalist types like me. Same as they did with the 1D and 1Ds.

[quis @ Feb 2nd 2007 2:50AM]

The weight of a big camera like Canon's existing one series is also good to balance out the weight of a big fast zoom—stops it being too front heavy.

If these rumours are true then it'll be something really radically different, perhaps not an SLR at all.

[Chris @ Feb 2nd 2007 6:55AM]

This doesn't sound like a believable rumor. I have a hard time believing they are going to do away with the form factor of their current top model camera. I am fairly confident that most people that use these cameras professionally appreciate the current size and would feel off balance using a larger lens with a half size 1Ds Mark III. I think there might be a smaller 22MP camera but it will be in addition to their top model, not replacing it.

[rbirnbach @ Feb 7th 2007 11:53PM]

In response to P diddy comments about not needing that much resolution I shoot mostly in studio for furniture clients. The added resolution would be a bonus and help me migrate from higher end more expensive phase one backs. I think the issue with the camera mount has to do with chip size a 22mb chip the way I understand it is too large to fit in the current configuration of the camera so i doubt the body will be smaller. I am not sure how they would make a larger mount backwards compatible.

Also the greater the resolution the less likely the chance of moire.

[Liam Dalzell @ Mar 7th 2007 10:57AM]

Promising. Anything to give me an alternative to a $22,000 digital back for my Hassy.

http://www.liamdalzell.com