Canon has a global shutter camera in the pipeline
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Yes, we know. They've been lagging behind for nearly 15 years. How they manage to stay in business, much less continue to dominate the market, is a mystery. Well, to some.
Upvote
0
The A9III is fantastic for video. Perhaps Sony’s best sensor. The exposure latitude matches the Red V-Raptor-W. The only thing that lets it down is the less robust internal XAVC-S codec. That said, it’s all most need. The external raw removes the limitations. FYI: I own both the R1 and A9III.
Upvote
0
As I own both I can tell you, the A9III seems to work in almost all lighting conditions without flicker. It works exceptionally well with LED walls, with no artifacting. The R1 works in most conditions, though cheap LED lights will cause flicker and LED walls must be shot in Raw to avoid artifacts. The global shutter makes these otherwise challenging conditions a non-issue.
Upvote
0
You shouldn\'t see banding like that at anything at or below the flash sync speed of whatever shutter mode you\'re using.
Global shutter certainly is one way to eliminate that banding, the other is to just keep making the electronic shutter readout speed faster, until it\'s \'fast enough\' for most of us. R1 has an ES flash sync speed of 1/320, so you would have been almost there.
Global shutter certainly is one way to eliminate that banding, the other is to just keep making the electronic shutter readout speed faster, until it\'s \'fast enough\' for most of us. R1 has an ES flash sync speed of 1/320, so you would have been almost there.
Upvote
0
That certainly looks like LED banding. Very interesting, indeed. Thank you for providing that picture.
Upvote
0
Great pics for comparison
Thx for sharing! I do actually like the first pic better because it has warm light and the colors. I don´t know if this is due to the cameras or the lighting on stage.
Upvote
0
The photos are unedited RAWs screenshotted straight out of LR, but the R3 did choose a warmer white balance for this scene than the A9III. That said, I would caution against making any generalized IQ comparisons based on that alone.Great pics for comparison
I do actually like the first pic better because it has warm light and the colors. I don´t know if this is due to the cameras or the lighting on stage.
Upvote
0
"What if they introduce one in an APS-C camera first?... a videographer focused hybrid camera."
That makes sense to me.
That makes sense to me.
Upvote
0
Each pixel is at least 14 bits of resolution (to provide the DR) so the result is 15.6GB/sec (24E6 pixel * 14bit/pixel / 2.7msec). However, that's after the A/D converter. Most likely they have multiple ADCs converting in parallel and a wide databus (say 16ADC and a 16*14bit =224bit databus, but now they have 1/40sec - 2.7msec = 22.3msec to store the entire image in memory, so a ~67MHz conversion rate and databus speed would suffice).
Upvote
0
It didn’t. Canon called it ‘silent shutter’ even for live view, but with the advent of electronic shutters (the 1D X III was the first 1-series with it), Canon said on DSLRs like the 1D X II it would be better referred to as ‘soft shutter’.
Upvote
0
Going for APS-C sized sensors first may also be a yield issue in the fab ie smaller sensors are more likely to have a higher yield during the manufacturing process vs full frame. A R7ii (or R7gs) at a higher pricepoint than the R7 could be possible.
Canon have history bringing out new features in lower level cameras first but most of that is gone with regular firmware updates assuming the hardware doesn't need to change.
Canon have history bringing out new features in lower level cameras first but most of that is gone with regular firmware updates assuming the hardware doesn't need to change.
Upvote
0
I have similar issues in some indoor sports locations with ES on my R5. No way to fix it in post. The lighting shouldn't be dimmable though.
Going to anti-flicker slowed down the shooting speed way too much so I stick to mechanical now.
Upvote
0
Huh, this would jive with the "R7 is going upmarket" wouldn't it?
I feel like an APS-C global shutter would be a perfect compromise to get started with the tech, since no one is choosing APS-C for "image quality" in comparison to full frame models. That way, the R1 still is the "highest-speed, highest-quality" option, even if the R7II outpaces it with a global shutter.
The 70d also introduced DPAF back in the day, so I feel like introducing a global shutter in that market is on par with the advent of DPAF, which really changed the game in terms of AF.
I feel like an APS-C global shutter would be a perfect compromise to get started with the tech, since no one is choosing APS-C for "image quality" in comparison to full frame models. That way, the R1 still is the "highest-speed, highest-quality" option, even if the R7II outpaces it with a global shutter.
The 70d also introduced DPAF back in the day, so I feel like introducing a global shutter in that market is on par with the advent of DPAF, which really changed the game in terms of AF.
Upvote
0
Fair enough. I'll stand corrected on that one. 8 bits to a byte. 24MP * 14 bit/pixel /8 bits/byte / 2.7 msec.... 15.6 GB/sec coming off the R1 sensor. But, the proportions I think hold comparing larger MP if you want fast readout speeds.
As for the 22.3 msec to store the entire image...do you think the process might be a bit faster including AF between images? And, how many times does it AF between images. This is the stuff I wonder about.
I'll add LCD flickering to my definition of "fast action."
Another valid point. I am mulling the benefits of Global shutters vs rolling shutter with 2.7 ms readout speeds. Ok, LCD flickering and flash sync speed. But even global shutters are going to hit a bottleneck at some point, Demosaicing? A/D converters? Perhaps a GS is not that expensive compared to a rolling shutter so it is just a matter of time for Canon to work out the IQ?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
