A7R successor

Discussion in 'Sony Alpha E-Mount News and Rumors' started by NickCyprus, Jan 26, 2015.

  1. unlo

    unlo Sony ******

    Jan 19, 2014
    But will they have fixed the shutter shock is the real question.
  2. davect01

    davect01 Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Aug 20, 2011
    Fountain Hills, AZ
    50MP seems a bit excessive
  3. TedG954

    TedG954 TalkEmount Hall of Famer

    Nov 29, 2014
    South Florida and NE Ohio
    Ted Gersdorf
    • Like Like x 5
  4. WoodWorks

    WoodWorks Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Dec 12, 2012
    Ashland, OR, USA
    I wonder... are there any FF lenses on the market right now that can resolve a 50 MP sensor?
  5. quezra

    quezra TalkEmount Top Veteran

    Aug 22, 2012
    24 MP on APS-C is 54 MP on FF with the same pixel pitch, so the current FE lenses should resolve the 50 MP sensor about as well as they do an A6000.

    However, I'm more worried about data bottlenecks with such resolutions: It needs USB 3.0, faster SD cards, etc. and buffer is going to be horrible. For me, I'd happily upgrade to a 36 MP camera if they simply had PDAF and EFCS on it.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. xXx1

    xXx1 TalkEmount All-Pro

    Jan 15, 2013
    There will be if there are sensors capable of that. 50 MP is about 6000*9000 pixels and that makes one pixel about 4 um square or about 10 wavelengths of light.

    I think that these lenses are going to be big, heavy and expensive.
  7. rbelyell

    rbelyell TalkEmount Regular

    Jan 18, 2015
    did anyone have resolution/clarity issues at 24mp FF? i sure didnt! my issues were downloading/uploading/editing 24mps and justifying the additional time vs results...too much of a good thing becomes no longer a good thing.
  8. quezra

    quezra TalkEmount Top Veteran

    Aug 22, 2012
    I don't either, but I do like the idea of a perfect APS-C crop sitting inside my FF sensor. 36 MP (16 MP APS-C, 9 MP M4/3) would be really nice, or even a little higher (54 MP FF would be 24 MP APS-C/13.5 MP M4/3). Imagine the FE 55/1.8 turning into a virtual 55-110/1.8-3.6, or the 70-200/4 turning into a 70-400/4-8. Wonderful!
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. WestOkid

    WestOkid TalkEmount All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jan 25, 2014
    New Jersey, USA
    That does sound interesting. But why are you doubling the aperture? the F-stop is the F-stop from a light standpoint. The DOF will be different however.

    In any case, I see this camera as a landscape, macro, still life type of camera where tripods come into play. Although I don't have a A7R, my understanding was that it wasn't only about shutter shock it was about the high-res sensor being unforgiving to the slightest movement. This caused many people to shoot higher than normal shutter speeds to get sharp handheld pics. This was why over at DPR many questioned why Sony released an A7II vs an A7RII with IBIS, since the later needed it for day-to-day shooting. I would imaging without IBIS on this 50mp sensor shapr images will be a challenge, so I hope it's included.
  10. tomO2013

    tomO2013 TalkEmount Veteran

    Dec 11, 2014
    It's an interesting idea and in many ways effectively makes existing FF solutions overlap even more so with medium format.

    Regarding lenses - Olympus have been making tack sharp lenses that resolve a pixel pitch even smaller than the rumored 50mp FF sensor in this camera. I've no doubts that all FE mount glass have been designed with such resolutions in mind.
    However the bigger question for me is whether IBIS will be included. Having all that resolution does not mean much if you can realistically achieve that resolution in a very narrow shooting envelope. It makes the camera a niche product. Ming Thein wrote an article on this a while back where he speculated that hand held he was only able to resolve 22mp of the 36mp in a D800E. IBIS for such a camera may not even be an option, it may be a necessity.

    The other thing that I was thinking about is noise performance at higher ISO's. My guess is that the smaller pixel pitch may benefit from a BSI type architecture (similar to Samsung NX1) which would theoretically allow a 50mp to achieve similar levels of high ISO performance relative to Sony's 36mp sensor. Yes there are those that will say that you can down-sample a high resolution image and achieve equal ISO performance to a smaller resolution camera. In theory for noise levels it gets you closer to the fatter pixeled camera, but in my experience I've certainly not found that tonality, color depth, dynamic range from a down sampled image comes anyway close to the big fat pixels from the same generation sensor etc...

    Data-throughput.... Internal memory pathways would not be my concern here. Sony could use dual memory card slots, separate memory bus and a fast processor/controller to achieve reasonable framerates. That being said, how many people buying a Hassleblad HD3 or HD5 do so to shoot sports ;) Such a potential A7rII and Nikon D900 (assume the same sensor in an equiv Nikon) really are the poor man's equivalent from a resolution perspective.
  11. quezra

    quezra TalkEmount Top Veteran

    Aug 22, 2012
    Well yes, I'm doubling it because DoF works differently once you crop. But on top of that, noise doubles every time you crop the image. If I crop the FF camera's image (e.g. f/4, ISO 800) to 1/4 the size, the image looks like it was shot at double the aperture and double the ISO (f/8 (for DoF) ISO 3,200 (for noise)) when resized to the same dimensions. Now EXIF might still show ISO 800, but the image is not a FF image, but (virtually) a M4/3-sized image. And your lenses and noise output don't work the same way, so you can condense the entire calculation by simply multiplying the lens aperture by the crop factor. This is what is meant by "equivalent" settings.

    For a more detailed overview, you can read up the excellent article on equivalence over at DPR.
  12. WestOkid

    WestOkid TalkEmount All-Pro Subscribing Member

    Jan 25, 2014
    New Jersey, USA
    I am very familiar with the premise, but I don't want to change the idea of this thread.

    Sorry Nick.
    • Like Like x 1
  13. tomme

    tomme TalkEmount Regular

    Apr 9, 2014
    Tom Erik Sivertsen
    Optical zoom will be better then digital zoom ( crop ), doesn`t it ?

    Edit, was meant as an reply to quezra.
  14. quezra

    quezra TalkEmount Top Veteran

    Aug 22, 2012
    Yes, it is better by far. But I have been shooting professional portraits for people and discovered that crop/zooming actually is quite amazing at these megapixels with a good lens.
    • Like Like x 1
  15. tjdean01

    tjdean01 TalkEmount Regular

    Jan 14, 2015
    There are hundreds of them. I shoot m4/3s which is appx a quarter the surface area of a FF sensor. That is 16mp. Multiply by 4 and you have 64MP. The Sony will have no problem if you have, say, a 1970s 50mm f1.8. Modern lenses will be even better and able to resolve much more.

    As a side note, these same lenses did NOT perform well on the tiny sensored Pentax Q; however, native Q lenses were also crap.
  16. xXx1

    xXx1 TalkEmount All-Pro

    Jan 15, 2013
    I think that no legacy lens will resolve 50 MP. Zeiss Makro Planar 100mm/2 is valued at around 3500 LW/PH and that is pretty far from 6000 pixel image height from 50 MP sensor.

    It is much easier to produce lenses for smaller sensors so there isn't so big difference with modern lenses if we think about final resolution. Same optical principles could be used with larger sensor but lens size, weight and cost would be high.

    I think that something like 70 lp/mm was considered excellent in the film days. That is only 3300 pixels in height with ff.
  17. riskinstrument

    riskinstrument TalkEmount Regular

    Nov 20, 2014
    Dallas, Texas.
    Well, they're running out of February and nothing yet.
  18. Hawkman

    Hawkman TalkEmount All-Pro

    Sep 10, 2013
    Virginia, USA
    Well, SAR is now saying that the FE 24-240 is coming March 12 (in Japan) with an announcement on that "within days", and announcements on dates and pricing of the other 3 new FE lenses around April (though I wonder if that's release on those in April with corresponding earlier announcements). Then SAR also mentions indication of more announcements in March, likely for new cameras, perhaps the mythical A7Rii and A7000.
    • Informative Informative x 1
  19. tjdean01

    tjdean01 TalkEmount Regular

    Jan 14, 2015
    Not trying to argue but maybe I'm confused. I currently use all kinds of vintage glass on my 16MP camera and they resolve splendidly, many comparable with native m4/3s glass. The Vivitar 28mm f2, for example, is every bit as good as the modern Sigma 30mm f2.8. Now, granted, I'm only using the center of the image circle, but still, the old glass (a 50/1.8 that is) is for all intents and purposes, no worse than modern glass. Or, am I missing something? You quoted resolution scores so, is what I'm seeing (or not seeing), something that can't be seen with the human eye? That doesn't make sense though because all we have to do is view at 400%, etc.