Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
EOS R5 megapixels ...
#1
Assuming that the R5 offers 8K video - without cropping - does that mean it's 39mp for photo?

8k video = 7680 x 4320 = 33mp
Stil = 7680 *2/3 * 7680 = 39mp

It could be less due to mechanical vignetting. Or to phrase it differently - 16:9 could use a wider layout than 3:2.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#2
Nope. It is DCI format, as Canon has already indicated in various press releases. This means 8192 at the long end, or 8192 x 4320 for video. However, it is a 3:2 sensor, threfore full resolution must be 8192 x 5461 or 44.7 MP (say 45 MP).

See also here:
https://www.canonnews.com/did-canon-usa-...resolution

Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 1 zoom, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters, and a PhaseOne DF, P45+ back, SK 80 F/2.8 LS, 3 Mamiya lenses ...
#3
If so. the video format is slightly cropped - it could be wider. Albeit that doesn't really matter.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#4
(04-26-2020, 12:45 AM)Klaus Wrote: If so. the video format is slightly cropped - it could be wider. Albeit that doesn't really matter.
What do you mean by that, i.e., wider, Klaus?
It is cropped vertically out of necessity, because of video format vs stills format. I don't know what you mean with wider in this regard, hence the question.

Thank you in advance.

Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 1 zoom, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters, and a PhaseOne DF, P45+ back, SK 80 F/2.8 LS, 3 Mamiya lenses ...
#5
Nikon D1x in the past had a strange sensor pixels configuration
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond1x
However it delivered good results in standard format, unlikely Canon would go that way...
#6
(04-26-2020, 11:49 AM)wim Wrote:
(04-26-2020, 12:45 AM)Klaus Wrote: If so. the video format is slightly cropped - it could be wider. Albeit that doesn't really matter.
What do you mean by that, i.e., wider,  Klaus?
It is cropped vertically out of necessity, because of video format vs stills format. I don't know what you mean with wider in this regard, hence the question.

Thank you in advance.

Kind regards, Wim

Well, draw a circle - put the 3:2 image inside so that the corners touch the circle. Then crop the 3:2 rectangle down to the video format - you will notice that the edges of the smaller rectangle do no longer touch the circle.
Or in other words - it's an unnecessary crop costing a few megapixels.

As mentioned it doesn't really matter.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#7
Never in the history of video features in photo cameras has cropping talk involved circles. No crop always has meant "full width of sensor".
The imaging circle idea is wonky anyway, different rectangles will have different mp counts too.
#8
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panason...h5s-review
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#9
Ironically that camera also uses the full with of the sensor for video and crops the bottom and top off.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)