# Canon creates 120 megapixel sensor



## OrionsByte (Aug 24, 2010)

Freaking insane...



			
				http://www.canon.com/news/2010/aug24e.html said:
			
		

> TOKYO, August 24, 2010Canon Inc. announced today that it has successfully developed an APS-H-size*1 CMOS image sensor that delivers an image resolution of approximately 120 megapixels (13,280 x 9,184 pixels), the world's highest level*2 of resolution for its size.
> 
> Compared with Canon's highest-resolution commercial CMOS sensor of the same size, comprising approximately 16.1 million pixels, the newly developed sensor features a pixel count that, at approximately 120 million pixels, is nearly 7.5 times larger and offers a 2.4-fold improvement in resolution.*3
> 
> ...


----------



## Village Idiot (Aug 24, 2010)

There goes the neighbor hood.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 24, 2010)

They should slap that in their new G-12 compact camera.


----------



## tirediron (Aug 24, 2010)

In a word, "Wow"!  I'd be very interested in seeing some unbiased comparisons between this new sensor and those of the 1Ds Mk III and D3s/x as far as noise and high-ISO performance go.  I'd love to see the price-tag on the G12 with this bad boy in it!!!


----------



## Idahophoto (Aug 24, 2010)

And people thought I was crazy about the building poster comment I made. Real thoughts far more than needed unless like one person said when I read about it on Canonromors.com. Sure if you worked for NASA or some scintefic purposes might have use for it but the average Joe not even close. I'm very happy with the 15MP I get with the 50D and am only thinking of the 7D for the video otherwise I would probably just go with a second 50D which I still might do. Sure Ill take extra if I can get it, but the thing is not going to really add much to average pictures even ones top pros do and you will probably pay a nice chunk for it. I for one would rather have a better AF system. Still it's intersting.


----------



## OrionsByte (Aug 24, 2010)

Idahophoto said:


> And people thought I was crazy about the building poster comment I made. Real thoughts far more than needed unless like one person said when I read about it on Canonromors.com. Sure if you worked for NASA or some scintefic purposes might have use for it but the average Joe not even close. I'm very happy with the 15MP I get with the 50D and am only thinking of the 7D for the video otherwise I would probably just go with a second 50D which I still might do. Sure Ill take extra if I can get it, but the thing is not going to really add much to average pictures even ones top pros do and you will probably pay a nice chunk for it. I for one would rather have a better AF system. Still it's intersting.



Yeah I'm with you - I'd much rather have a 15 MP camera with higher usable sensitivity than an outrageous pixel count.  

I was telling a friend of mine that it kind of seems like the microprocessor race - AMD and Intel kept trying to one-up each other on processor speed, until eventually someone got the bright idea to split the processing on to multiple cores (I don't recall who did it first).  Now we're seeing triple- and quad-core processors, and speeds aren't really increasing all that much.

So I wonder at what point the camera industry will say, "Who needs this many pixels?" and start focusing (no pun intended) on making "better pixels."


----------



## davisphotos (Aug 24, 2010)

It's a crop sensor 120MP-that's some insane pixel density. The analogy to processor speed is very apt-I'm wondering if perhaps pixel count will level out somewhat and companies will start working on improving dynamic range, light sensitivity and overall image quality. Unfortunately, it's harder to market more subjective features like dynamic range and image quality than a nice solid number like pixel count.


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Aug 24, 2010)

Im no expert, but just because they reached this level, doesnt mean you will see it anytime soon. The military uses computers that go over 1.0 THz (instead of the common GHz) and yet we dont see them on the consumer market yet. Same with Intel, I heard of a guy that says he works for intel and the new chips they are working on, are years ahead of their time, and wont actually come out, for many years.

You may not see this sensor for another 10 years.

Just my 2 cents. Interesting though.


----------



## KmH (Aug 24, 2010)

I wonder what ever happened to the 50 MP, APS-H sensor they had in 2007?



> *3 Canon's highest-resolution commercial CMOS sensor, employed in the company's EOS-1Ds Mark III and EOS 5D Mark II digital SLR cameras, is equivalent to the full-frame size of the 35 mm film format and incorporates approximately 21.1 million pixels. *In 2007, the company successfully developed an APS-H-size sensor with approximately 50 million pixels.*


----------



## Markw (Aug 24, 2010)

Did they also come out with a 250GB CF card to go with it?  Youre going to need something ridiculously enormous like that if you want any chance of keeping a few hundred pics on a card.  Its hard to say if that would even be close to enough.  The thing will need 8 card slots. (I know..exaggurated, but those pictures are just ridiculously large, _waaay _more than anyone will ever need.  You'd need to buy land to need a print that big.

Mark


----------



## emh (Aug 24, 2010)

davisphotos said:


> It's a crop sensor 120MP-that's some insane pixel density. The analogy to processor speed is very apt-I'm wondering if perhaps pixel count will level out somewhat and *companies will start working on improving dynamic range, light sensitivity and overall image quality. Unfortunately, it's harder to market more subjective features like dynamic range and image quality than a nice solid number like pixel count.*



Bingo! It's much easier to sell a single number than some unquantifiable "goodness" that the average Joe couldn't care less about. After all, all Joe cares about are the bragging rights that come with having more megapixels than the average Jane next door.

To be fair, there are some extremely specialized, super-niche markets that could probably make use of sensors with gazillions of pixels. So I'll withhold criticizing Canon until this shows up in a G13 or a T3i.



prodigy2k7 said:


> Im no expert, but just because they reached this level, doesnt mean you will see it anytime soon. The military uses computers that go over 1.0 THz (instead of the common GHz) and yet we dont see them on the consumer market yet. Same with Intel, I heard of a guy that says he works for intel and the new chips they are working on, are years ahead of their time, and wont actually come out, for many years.



Are you sure you are not mistaking Tera FLOPS for THz? There are no computers of Earth-origin that operate at anything even close to 1 THz... at least not in the general sense of a computer (there are very specialized circuits that operate at THz speeds but they are no more computers than your average microwave oven is). In fact, a lot of military-specific electronics tend to operate a lot slower than cutting-edge consumer stuff -- sometimes because they were designed many years (or even decades) ago and sometimes because of higher reliability, longevity, security etc. considerations.


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Aug 24, 2010)

emh said:


> davisphotos said:
> 
> 
> > It's a crop sensor 120MP-that's some insane pixel density. The analogy to processor speed is very apt-I'm wondering if perhaps pixel count will level out somewhat and *companies will start working on improving dynamic range, light sensitivity and overall image quality. Unfortunately, it's harder to market more subjective features like dynamic range and image quality than a nice solid number like pixel count.*
> ...



Could be wrong, but the F22 raptor has a processor like the one I mentioned. Blame history channel if im wrong. ha!

Hmm maybe it is flops, i have no idea the difference -.-

interesting quote though: "Also in 2004, Cray completed the Red Storm system for Sandia National Laboratories.  This has processors clustered in 96-processor cabinets, a theoretical  maximum of 300 cabinets in a machine, and a design speed of 41.5  teraflops."

Another interesting quote:
"Today, the F-22's Common Integrated Processor main mission computers  operate at 10.5 billion instructions per second and have 300 megabytes  of memory.  These numbers represent 100,000 times the computing speed  and 8,000 times the memory of the Apollo moon lander."

if "instructures per second" is Hz, then thats 10.5 Ghz? still a lot faster then consumer CPUs that hit a ceiling around 4-5GHz? i think -.-


----------



## emh (Aug 24, 2010)

Apologies in advance for going off on this non-camera tangent...



prodigy2k7 said:


> Could be wrong, but the F22 raptor has a processor like the one I mentioned. Blame history channel if im wrong. ha!
> 
> Hmm maybe it is flops, i have no idea the difference -.-


Ummm... yeah. No way a Raptor has a THz "computer" 
FLOPs (floating point operations per second) or OPs (operations per second) is a measure of total compute capability. That can go well over a Tera FLOP when you put lots of processors together in one computer. In fact, the most powerful computers these days are up to a few peta Flops (1 peta FLOP = 1000 tera FLOPs), but with 1000s of processors in them.



> interesting quote though: "Also in 2004, Cray completed the Red Storm system for Sandia National Laboratories.  This has processors clustered in 96-processor cabinets, a theoretical  maximum of 300 cabinets in a machine, and a design speed of 41.5  teraflops."



42 TFLOPS won't even crack the 100 most powerful computers in the world today.



> Another interesting quote:
> "Today, the F-22's Common Integrated Processor main mission computers  operate at 10.5 billion instructions per second and have 300 megabytes  of memory.  These numbers represent 100,000 times the computing speed  and 8,000 times the memory of the Apollo moon lander."
> 
> if "instructures per second" is Hz, then thats 10.5 Ghz? still a lot faster then consumer CPUs that hit a ceiling around 4-5GHz? i think -.-



"Instructions per second" is not Hz. For example, AMD ship a 12-core processor you can buy today with each core clocked at 2.3 GHz. Even at 1 instruction per cycle per core, that's 27.6 billions of instructions per second. But each core can issue multiple instructions per cycle. And you could easily build computers with multiples of these in one box. So the 10.5 billion instructions per second number is a lot lower than what's already available on the open market today. In fact, a high-end GPU today will single handedly (single-processoredly?) get you 10x to 100x more compute power than the  number you cited for the F22.


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Aug 24, 2010)

emh said:


> Apologies in advance for going off on this non-camera tangent...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ahh thats right! i remember graphics cards have a lot of "cores".
hmm, interesting...thanks for clearing that up XD


----------



## cfusionpm (Aug 24, 2010)

Rather than reading _about_ the sensor, I'd rather see images taken _with_ the sensor.

Not sure why ANYONE would be concerned with high ISO/noise issues in a camera like this.  That'd be like dogging a 60MP Hasselblad H4D because it tops out at ISO400.


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Aug 24, 2010)

I also think its possible this sensor is just for science, to learn new things, overcome new obstacles, and see if they can do it kind of thing. Im sure they have learned many things along the way that will help produce smaller MP chips in the near future. Again, im no expert but thats what it sounds like...


----------



## shaunly (Aug 24, 2010)

so in 2007, 50MP was already available and we still haven't seen anything more than 24MP now, when is 120MP will ever be available or even practical.


----------



## cfusionpm (Aug 24, 2010)

^Practical?  Never.  This is like the Concord or the Bugatti Veyron: built as a technical marvel just because they can.


----------



## pharmakon (Aug 24, 2010)

cfusionpm said:


> ^Practical? Never. This is like the Concord or the Bugatti Veyron: built as a technical marvel just because they can.


 
... or that Gottlieb Daimler and his silly motorized buggy...  I mean really, GET A HORSE MAN!!!


----------



## pharmakon (Aug 24, 2010)

oh, and digital will never replace film.


----------



## djacobox372 (Aug 24, 2010)

I wonder how high the resolution actually is.  Megapixel count is not everything.

I have a nikon 2.7 megapixel d1h that has a higher resolution then my cheap 6 megapixel point and shoot.


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Aug 24, 2010)

djacobox372 said:


> I wonder how high the resolution actually is.  Megapixel count is not everything.
> 
> I have a nikon 2.7 megapixel d1h that has a higher resolution then my cheap 6 megapixel point and shoot.


what?:scratch:


----------



## Garbz (Aug 25, 2010)

cfusionpm said:


> ^Practical?  Never.  This is like the Concord or the Bugatti Veyron: built as a technical marvel just because they can.



Bad analogy. The Bugatti Veyron is frigging fast, whereas a sensor with 120mpx in a APS-H sized form factor is utterly pointless.

Not the least because your diffraction limit will be at f/1.6 So not a single canon zoom lens has the power to resolve more than this sensor, not now and not ever until the fundamental laws of nature are broken. That's not even beginning to take into account manufacturing a lens that sharp. 

At least a Bugatti will get you laid, whereas a 120mpx camera will likely scare away potential mates due to the insane nerdyness.


----------



## Mike_E (Aug 25, 2010)

If they wanted to impress me, they'd come out with a printer with that kind of resolution.

:/


----------



## haring (Aug 25, 2010)

Just imagine! Soon we will deliver 120 megapixel wedding photos to clients....


----------



## inTempus (Aug 25, 2010)

...which leaves the question, "why"?


----------



## jake337 (Aug 25, 2010)

maybe for the next gen hubble or something.like  someone else said, Its more than likely they did it just to do it. Learning along the way to develop cameras for us the consumer. maybe they're making something similar to the leica m9.


----------



## inTempus (Aug 25, 2010)

jake337 said:


> maybe for the next gen hubble or something.like  someone else said, Its more than likely they did it just to do it. Learning along the way to develop cameras for us the consumer. maybe they're making something similar to the leica m9.



Canon doesn't need to learn how to make 120mp sensors, they need an experimental 24mp sensor that shoots clean low noise images at ISO 102,400.  Or perhaps a 24mp sensor with 3x's the dynamic range of the current generation sensors.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 25, 2010)

Garbz said:


> cfusionpm said:
> 
> 
> > ^Practical?  Never.  This is like the Concord or the Bugatti Veyron: built as a technical marvel just because they can.
> ...



If it says Canon on the front of the camera/photocopier/printer, there will be buyers. It'll sell in Indiana.


----------



## Garbz (Aug 26, 2010)

jake337 said:


> maybe for the next gen hubble or something.



Exactly the opposite. The hubble is an instrument which requires the absolute lowest noise taking exposures of months at a time. Light capturing ability is the king here, not resolution. Up there making a panorama is trivial so resolution is limited by optics, not sensors.


----------



## Village Idiot (Aug 26, 2010)

inTempus said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > maybe for the next gen hubble or something.like someone else said, Its more than likely they did it just to do it. Learning along the way to develop cameras for us the consumer. maybe they're making something similar to the leica m9.
> ...


 
Well if they can make a 120mp APS-H sensor that has clean high iso performance, then they should be able to take the technology and apply it to a smaller APS-C, APS-H, and full frame sensor with even greater results.

I mean, the government experimented with rockets, zero G space studies, and the likes of which 99.9% of the population will never get to see or experience first hand, but most of which will benefit from in their day to day lives.


----------



## inTempus (Aug 26, 2010)

Derrel said:


> If it says Canon on the front of the camera/photocopier/printer, there will be buyers. It'll sell in *Indiana*.




Someone has a chip on their shoulder and can't let it go.  Poor little fella.


----------



## MrLogic (Aug 26, 2010)

I didn't catch that at first.


----------



## inTempus (Aug 26, 2010)

MrLogic said:


> I didn't catch that at first.


I'm sure he thinks he's slick.  Next up, he'll deny he was talking about me.  

If nothing else, he's predictable.


----------



## cfusionpm (Aug 26, 2010)

I think I read it too fast first time.  I was confused why people in India would be so excited for Canon....


----------



## Derrel (Aug 26, 2010)

inTempus said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > If it says Canon on the front of the camera/photocopier/printer, there will be buyers. It'll sell in *Indiana*.
> ...



That's a hilarious comment from my own, personal internet stalker, Tim Harmsen, aka InTempus.

InTempus has been stalking me all over the internet for months on end, and he even writes a blog dedicated to slandering me...

He calls it "Derrel The Douche"...thanks InTempus, for your creepy stalking behavior...I think eveyody here ought to know about what a disturbed fanboy you really are.

Derrel the Douche

Poor litte fella indeed...InTempus cares so much about what I write that he dedicates a blog to trying to refute almost anything I happen to write!


----------



## inTempus (Aug 26, 2010)




----------



## inTempus (Aug 26, 2010)

cfusionpm said:


> I think I read it too fast first time.  I was confused why people in India would be so excited for Canon....


Hey, I'm going to India next month.  Maybe he's psychic.


----------



## Derrel (Aug 26, 2010)

People in India are excited for the next Canon photocopier, and the next Canon printer, but they tend to use other brands of cameras, like Kodak, Casio, Panasonic, Nikon, Samyang,etc, in preference to Canon cameras.


----------



## Chris of Arabia (Aug 26, 2010)

Will you two please give the rest of us a break - please use ignore on each other will you.


----------

