5DMII- Will it play the megapixel game?

Do you think Canon will go after the best high ISO performance it can as with the original 5D or will it play the mpix game and use a 16mpix sensor?

Which would you prefer, more mpix for larger prints and cropping or the best in ISO performance?

It should be both The 1d-III matches or exceeds the 5d for ISO performance/noise. Its over a year later, so if they match the density(about 16mp), they should be able to match or beat the 1d's ISO performance.

If they ever built it, it'll be 15-16mp, iso6400 boosted to 12800. Just like the rumors & speculation have been saying for over a year.

Better ISO performance. Keep the same resolution/ pixel pitch. 16mp can't justify the ISO hit and Lens performance hit. D700 is a very good example of what Canon needs to do. If this was a P&S more megapixels might work. I'd like to think we don't fall for that kind of kiddie marketing. If Canon resolves to that they might as well go the extra mile and do this http://paradoxoff.com/​terapixel-digital-camera.html
This is not 2001 anymore. Resolution figures are mature, features on the other hand do have a long way to go.

Even if they do manage to increase the ISO performance while decreasing the pixel size Lens performance will suffer.
70-200 f/2.8 IS L on 5.7µm (40D)
http://www.dpreview.co​m …_2p8_is_usm_c16​/page4.asp
vs
70-200 f/2.8 IS L on 8.2µm (5D)
http://www.dpreview.co​m …_2p8_is_usm_c16​/page5.asp

JC4 wrote in post #5828893
It should be both The 1d-III matches or exceeds the 5d for ISO performance/noise. Its over a year later, so if they match the density(about 16mp), they should be able to match or beat the 1d's ISO performance.

If they ever built it, it'll be 15-16mp, iso6400 boosted to 12800. Just like the rumors & speculation have been saying for over a year.

I agree.

5D has the same pixel density as 1D Mk IIn, so I expect 5D Mk II to have the same pixel density as 1D Mk III, that is, 15-16 MP.

Also, it will be 1.5 years after the introduction of 1D Mk III, so it is possible to also expect a 1 stop improvement in the ISO noise per pixel over the 1D Mk III. (1D Mk III improved ISO noise by 1 stop over 1D Mk IIn with 25% increase in pixel counts).

If they do increase the MP (which they never have updated a camera and not increased the MP count [except 30D, 1D2n, which weren't really new updated cameras]) then they alteast need to keep the same AA filter on the camera.

This is the 5Ds shining feature (for me atleast), is that the AA filter is so weak, it's just as sharp as the 1Ds2, almost 1Ds3.

JC4 wrote in post #5828893
It should be both The 1d-III matches or exceeds the 5d for ISO performance/noise. Its over a year later, so if they match the density(about 16mp), they should be able to match or beat the 1d's ISO performance.

If they ever built it, it'll be 15-16mp, iso6400 boosted to 12800. Just like the rumors & speculation have been saying for over a year.

the 1DIII exceeds the 5D's high ISO performance, but only by a small margin. Perhaps 1/3 to 1/2 stop. I would expect that the next rendition of the 5D if Canon decides to build one, will have a sensor based on that of the 1D3.

I hope Canon is not going to play the Meg-Pix game, Nikon didn´t with the new D700 .... they are clever enough ... they got a sensor to be exploited in a different camera range ... like the car´s manufacturers and a new motor design on a new car model.

Only if Canon it´s able to present a camera/sensor combination with High ISo capabilities and 15,3 Mp it will be nice ... if not, personally I should prefer to stay at 12 Mp. and a good ISO6400 performance + good pixel density over all ... But it looks like when Canon increase the MP .... the resolution power of the camera is also decreasing ... not good for a FF

The problem now for Canon is that Nikon has moved first ... until now, the Nikon & Canon models interlaced between them with no direct straight comparative of each one ... (we, the users & magazines, are the only ones trying to pair up model to model; and make comparatives putting at the same level bodies that not ) .... But know Nikon has strike directly into the 5D specs with new stuff .... so let´s wait and see what Canon is reserving for us ... but it´s estrange that having a market alone for them for more than 3 years, the Canon answer to the long expected 5D renovation still is not announced ... something is going wrong I am afraid .... they have had time enough to set up the 5D MkII .... unless changes at last time are forcing to change the specs ... and redesign the body ...

The last rumored 6D & 3D can be the answer ... but also Nikon has marked the price tag ... good for us ... anyway ... the costumers.
Actually I don´t think there are much people to pay 1000$$ / €€ more just for only 2-3 Mpx .
For that difference you can buy a nice new second body like the 450D and paly also in the FF field !!
(the competence is always welcome ... )

Give me pixels for cropping, so I can save money on long glass....I am happy enough with the 5Ds ISO performance.

Neilyb wrote in post #5832854
Give me pixels for cropping, so I can save money on long glass....I am happy enough with the 5Ds ISO performance.

The problem is when more pixels don´t give you more resolution and sharp images .... you crop and magnify blur images ...
See Dragos post above ...

Yes it is a compromise, agreed, but some of us don't have the dosh for 500 f4 lenses...

^ liar. Mr Big Spender!

Neilyb wrote in post #5832992
Yes it is a compromise, agreed, but some of us don't have the dosh for 500 f4 lenses...

I think overall you might be much better served by a 450D or a 40D for birding. And at a much lower price. I'm not being ironic. For the 5D successor to compete with the 450D for pixel density it would require at least 32MP (just to match it).

He likes FF mate, and who could blame him. It'd be nice to have one FF camera with a high enough resolution to crop down for wildlife, instead of carrying a FF camera and a crop body for different purposes.

I would love Canon to take a close look at some of the new Nikons. They have some very clever focussing technology, for example, in which the camera can track the selected focus point that you have chosen - a subject would therefore always remain in focus even if they are moving across the frame.

Also a higher flash sync speed would be great.

Some of the higher end Canons have had issues with either the chips or viewfinders not being perfectly horizontal. I have a suspspicion that I also suffer from this with my 5d, so maybe this QC issue needs attention.

I would welcome seeing a greater dynamic range, instead of just more pixels....

Cheers - Geoff

RichNY wrote in post #5828681
Which would you prefer, more mpix for larger prints and cropping or the best in ISO performance?

Tough to choose because I want them both... If forced I would say ISO performance only because I shoot low light so much. Medium format I think is where all the ISO 200 and lower crowd is headed.

I just wish Canon would sell their non-tracking pro AF for less than $8,000 in a Full Frame package. Nikon has done this now...