# A new Canon ILC has hit certification



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 7, 2021)

> Hot on the heels of the recent lens certifications, Canon has now registered a new interchangeable lens camera with a Russian certification agency.
> The new camera is codenamed DS12856, for reference, the EOS-1D X Mark III had the codename DS126771. Cameras that begin with “DS” can also be for the RF mount and generally denotes an ILC. Unless there’s another Rebel in the pipeline, I would think that this is an RF mount camera.
> I have an idea of what this camera is, but I will need to confirm some information.
> I expect at least one camera announced before July, and this could be it.
> More to come…



Continue reading...


----------



## SteB1 (Apr 7, 2021)

I think we can have a pretty good guess that this is an RF 1Dx type camera. With the Olympics coming and a 600mm f4 and 400mm f2.8 about to be announced. If this camera isn't it, we can expect one. The only question has always been whether Canon had the technology they were satisfied with for a camera like this. That's because this type of camera has a long model life so it needs to hold it's own for several years.


----------



## DBounce (Apr 7, 2021)

Sounds interesting. I’ll take that Canon R1 with the global shutter please.


----------



## Mark3794 (Apr 7, 2021)

Why not the EOS R5C? Or it was already registered?


----------



## Atlasman (Apr 7, 2021)

SteB1 said:


> I think we can have a pretty good guess that this is an RF 1Dx type camera. With the Olympics coming and a 600mm f4 and 400mm f2.8 about to be announced. If this camera isn't it, we can expect one. The only question has always been whether Canon had the technology they were satisfied with for a camera like this. That's because this type of camera has a long model life so it needs to hold it's own for several years.


It would make sense to announce their flagship along with these long primes!


----------



## HikeBike (Apr 7, 2021)

R5 Mk II


----------



## DBounce (Apr 7, 2021)

Mark3794 said:


> Why not the EOS R5C? Or it was already registered?


Because Canon is expected to announce the RF 400mm f/2.8L IS USM and RF 600mm f/4L IS USM lenses this month. Those types of lenses are ideally paired with the 1D series equivalent body. The pending launch of these lenses all but guarantees that the soon to be announced body will be the R1.


----------



## edoorn (Apr 7, 2021)

SteB1 said:


> I think we can have a pretty good guess that this is an RF 1Dx type camera. With the Olympics coming and a 600mm f4 and 400mm f2.8 about to be announced. If this camera isn't it, we can expect one. The only question has always been whether Canon had the technology they were satisfied with for a camera like this. That's because this type of camera has a long model life so it needs to hold it's own for several years.


I certainly think they can at least match Sony and Nikon's offering


----------



## BPhoto06 (Apr 7, 2021)

HikeBike said:


> R5 Mk II


Probably not, as canon usually updates their professional series cameras every 4 years. We will probably see an R5 Mk ii in 2024.


----------



## TBRO08 (Apr 7, 2021)

Hopefully there may also be a teaser on the R7!


----------



## Billybob (Apr 7, 2021)

DBounce said:


> Sounds interesting. I’ll take that Canon R1 with the global shutter please.


I'm okay without a GS as long as the readout speed matches or exceeds that of the Sony A1. The fast readout, 45-50MP (okay, I won't sniff at 60-80MP) combined with quad-pixel AF will make for a phenomenal action/wildlife camera that will make Sony's A1 look like yesterday's news. Oh, add a body similar to the pre-announced Nikon Z9 and Canon has me for life.


----------



## Berowne (Apr 7, 2021)

And why is it certified in Russia?


----------



## HikeBike (Apr 7, 2021)

BPhoto06 said:


> Probably not, as canon usually updates their professional series cameras every 4 years. We will probably see an R5 Mk ii in 2024.


Yeah, I understand. I was absolutely joking on that one.


----------



## vladk (Apr 7, 2021)

Berowne said:


> And why is it certified in Russia?


The cameras have to de cetrified in every country where they will be sold.


----------



## vladk (Apr 7, 2021)

Billybob said:


> I'm okay without a GS as long as the readout speed matches or exceeds that of the Sony A1. The fast readout, 45-50MP (okay, I won't sniff at 60-80MP) combined with quad-pixel AF will make for a phenomenal action/wildlife camera that will make Sony's A1 look like yesterday's news. Oh, add a body similar to the pre-announced Nikon Z9 and Canon has me for life.


I hope the quad AF does not mean quad Bayer as well.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Apr 7, 2021)

Let's welcome the Canon 900D (unless it already exists)... hope for the worst, then you can never be disappointed.


----------



## John Wilde (Apr 7, 2021)

It will be something expensive. Canon doesn't care about affordable cameras anymore.


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 7, 2021)

5D Mark V /s


----------



## DBounce (Apr 7, 2021)

John Wilde said:


> It will be something expensive. Canon doesn't care about affordable cameras anymore.


$6,999 is my guess. If it’s the R1 spec’d as rumored I’ll preorder.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Apr 7, 2021)

John Wilde said:


> It will be something expensive. Canon doesn't care about affordable cameras anymore.



To be fair, thats because consumers have smartphones. The people that would buy a ILC under £1000 shrunk significantly due to smartphones computational photographing their way into images that on first glance look like or better than the image from a APSC.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Apr 7, 2021)

DBounce said:


> $6,999 is my guess. If it’s the R1 spec’d as rumored I’ll preorder.


There was a rumour (credibility unknown) that the R1 will be closer to $8500 as it may be well above the A1 and Z9. The R5 also pushed up market in price and specs.


----------



## jam05 (Apr 7, 2021)

What camera is released every Olympic year? We all know. Despite what rumors exist. Past Canon history tells you.


----------



## usern4cr (Apr 7, 2021)

vladk said:


> I hope the quad AF does not mean quad Bayer as well.


*EDIT* - This post is about claiming 16 Quad Bayer pixels vs the normal 4 Bayer pixels. It is **not** about QP vs DP design.

I still don't see what benefit a Quad Pixel AF *"Quad-Bayer"* (16 Bayer pixels) could offer. For pixels in focus (where you would want extra resolution), phase detect DP or QP gives the same dual or quad values for all values (by design) so there's no benefit there. With out of focus pixels (where the QP values differ) , who cares about increasing resolution as it's just a smear which could be done in post.

So I only see "QP AF, *Quad-Baye*r" as marketing BS overclaiming of resolution which I hope Canon has the integrity to avoid.

Also, to be clear, I see QP AF *(by itself)* as a brilliant AF method and the #1 new feature which I *really* want to have in my next camera! I have fully given over AF (with my use of "spot focus" and "eye focus" back buttons) to the camera and QP would be a massive improvement over the already brilliant DP design in the R5.


----------



## AEWest (Apr 7, 2021)

HikeBike said:


> R5 Mk II


5DV?


----------



## canonmike (Apr 7, 2021)

Berowne said:


> And why is it certified in Russia?


Good question......


----------



## edoorn (Apr 7, 2021)

About quad pixel AF, here's a copy from an answer of this, that explains why it could be beneficial:

"Right now with dual pixel AF (DPAF) sensors, you can focus reliably while the camera is in the horizontal position and your edge of contrast that you are locking on are vertical. If the edge is horizontal (or parallel to the camera orientation) then it has extreme difficulty in locking on. This is because all the pixels are arranged in one direction for dual pixel AF. What Canon needs is a quad pixel, where the pixel is split up, not once but twice, allowing for different phase different arrangements."


----------



## canonmike (Apr 7, 2021)

Codebunny said:


> There was a rumour (credibility unknown) that the R1 will be closer to $8500 as it may be well above the A1 and Z9. The R5 also pushed up market in price and specs.


Will somebody please send me a winning lottery ticket please?????


----------



## sanj (Apr 7, 2021)

5D 5. I am confident.


----------



## vladk (Apr 7, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> I still don't see what benefit a Quad Pixel AF "Quad-Bayer" could offer. For pixels in focus (where you would want extra resolution), phase detect DP or QP gives the same dual or quad values for all values (by design) so there's no benefit there. With out of focus pixels (where the QP values differ) , who cares about increasing resolution as it's just a smear which could be done in post.
> 
> So I only see "QP AF, Quad-Bayer" as marketing BS overclaiming of resolution which I hope Canon has the integrity to avoid.
> 
> Also, to be clear, I see QP AF (by itself) as a brilliant AF method and the #1 new feature which I *really* want to have in my next camera!


dual pixel AF (left vs right phase detect) have issues focusing a pattern with thin perfectly horizontal lines being the only contrasting elements in the AF area. Quad pixel AF would resolve this challenge.


----------



## usern4cr (Apr 7, 2021)

edoorn said:


> About quad pixel AF, here's a copy from an answer of this, that explains why it could be beneficial:
> 
> "Right now with dual pixel AF (DPAF) sensors, you can focus reliably while the camera is in the horizontal position and your edge of contrast that you are locking on are vertical. If the edge is horizontal (or parallel to the camera orientation) then it has extreme difficulty in locking on. This is because all the pixels are arranged in one direction for dual pixel AF. What Canon needs is a quad pixel, where the pixel is split up, not once but twice, allowing for different phase different arrangements."


I completely agree. It's my #1 "want to have" in my next body. (just don't call it "quad Bayer" and claim 4x more pixel resolution than it really is)


----------



## CafferyPhoto (Apr 7, 2021)

Hopefully it's a EOS M1X! ....right?


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 7, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> I still don't see what benefit a Quad Pixel AF *"Quad-Bayer"* could offer. For pixels in focus (where you would want extra resolution), phase detect DP or QP gives the same dual or quad values for all values (by design) so there's no benefit there. With out of focus pixels (where the QP values differ) , who cares about increasing resolution as it's just a smear which could be done in post.
> 
> So I only see "QP AF, *Quad-Baye*r" as marketing BS overclaiming of resolution which I hope Canon has the integrity to avoid.
> 
> Also, to be clear, I see QP AF *(by itself)* as a brilliant AF method and the #1 new feature which I *really* want to have in my next camera! I have fully given over AF (with my use of "spot focus" and "eye focus" back buttons) to the camera and QP would be a massive improvement over the already brilliant DP design in the R5.



Surely the value is the same, only more so, that DP. You have the option to use the sum of those photodiodes to get more detail in highlights. With QP you have the potential to increase DR by two stops over a standard array.


----------



## DBounce (Apr 7, 2021)

Codebunny said:


> There was a rumour (credibility unknown) that the R1 will be closer to $8500 as it may be well above the A1 and Z9. The R5 also pushed up market in price and specs.


If Canon is going to ask that kind of money, this thing has better be near perfect... if it is, I’ll buy it happily. But if it falls short they will lose my business. This isn’t a luxury camera... it has to perform.


----------



## usern4cr (Apr 7, 2021)

vladk said:


> dual pixel AF (left vs right phase detect) have issues focusing a pattern with thin perfectly horizontal lines being the only contrasting elements in the AF area. Quad pixel AF would resolve this challenge.


Yes, but my comment was about claiming 16 Bayer pixels instead of 4 Bayer pixels. I've already mentioned QP AF (by itself) as my #1 "want" in the next camera.


----------



## usern4cr (Apr 7, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Surely the value is the same, only more so, that DP. You have the option to use the sum of those photodiodes to get more detail in highlights. With QP you have the potential to increase DR by two stops over a standard array.


I don't see how existing technology DP or QP increases dynamic range. You haven't increased the total well count between 1 normal pixel, 2 half pixels or 4 quarter pixels (in fact with the added complexity you probably have reduced the total well count). And if the sub-pixels are all the same size (and sensitivity) then you haven't given different dual/quad sensitivity ranges between the sub-pixels to allow for oversaturation of the overall image in order to expand overall dynamic range in the entire image. If you do have different sensitivity of the sub-pixels then it will complicate the AF design substantially and possibly cripple it as you now have blown out sub-pixels being compared to non-blown out sub-pixels which will cause AF errors.

In summary, I see DP or QP having a massive benefit to AF (it's intended purpose) as well as offering the creation of depth masks to allow for computational algorithms to increase blur in OOF areas (both or which are truly great!). But I don't see DP or QP having an effect on dynamic range or signal-to-noise. If you want to increase overall image dynamic range by correcting blown-out exposure, then use different sensitivity sub-pixels which are not used for phase detect AF.


----------



## privatebydesign (Apr 7, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> I don't see how existing technology DP or QP increases dynamic range. You haven't increased the total well count between 1 normal pixel, 2 half pixels or 4 quarter pixels (in fact with the added complexity you probably have reduced the total well count). And if the sub-pixels are all the same size (and sensitivity) then you haven't given different dual/quad sensitivity ranges between the sub-pixels to allow for oversaturation of the overall image in order to expand overall dynamic range in the entire image. If you do have different sensitivity of the sub-pixels then it will complicate the AF design substantially and possibly cripple it as you now have blown out sub-pixels being compared to non-blown out sub-pixels which will cause AF errors.



Maths.






__





Canon Dual Pixel Technology: Gaining Additional Stop in Highlights


Let's take a close look at a dual-pixel raw file from Canon 5D Mark IV using RawDigger 1.2.13 The dual-pixel raw contains 2 raw data sets, we will be calling them main subframe and auxiliary subframe. We'll show that the difference between the main and auxiliary subframes is nearly 2x, or 1...




www.rawdigger.com


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Apr 7, 2021)

DBounce said:


> If Canon is going to ask that kind of money, this thing has better be near perfect... if it is, I’ll buy it happily. But if it falls short they will lose my business. This isn’t a luxury camera... it has to perform.



If it is markably more expensive than the Z9 and A1(Which becomes very expensive when you add the grip compared to the D6 and 1DxIII) I would expect it has some killer technology like a global shutter that sets it apart. Until then it is just speculation, but no more nor less credible than any other rumour.


----------



## DBounce (Apr 7, 2021)

Codebunny said:


> If it is markably more expensive than the Z9 and A1(Which becomes very expensive when you add the grip compared to the D6 and 1DxIII) I would expect it has some killer technology like a global shutter that sets it apart. Until then it is just speculation, but no more nor less credible than any other rumour.


Honestly, until specs are released it’s hard to say if it’sa buy... but I’m more excited about the R1 than any camera in the last 3 years.


----------



## jeliel (Apr 7, 2021)

Finally a compact full frame ? Like the Sony A7C ? Please ...


----------



## pape2 (Apr 7, 2021)

jeliel said:


> Finally a compact full frame ? Like the Sony A7C ? Please ...


Its possibe ,there isnt any small gripped R camera yet for asian small hands.
But they may still postpone it and make just one last M camera too.
Or making cheap mechanical ibis for M might be too unreliable and they jump straight to global shutter digital ibis R


----------



## Fletchahh (Apr 7, 2021)

I hope that this is either the R7, or if it's R1 that the R7 is not far behind.


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 7, 2021)

jeliel said:


> Finally a compact full frame ? Like the Sony A7C ? Please ...


Compact full frame = RP, R.


----------



## Bonich (Apr 7, 2021)

BPhoto06 said:


> Probably not, as canon usually updates their professional series cameras every 4 years. We will probably see an R5 Mk ii in 2024.


Usually they announce in strong correlation with Olympics. This year we face Tokyo "2020", this is the one and only date of birth for the R1 as professional sports camera.
Yes, the R5 will stay in program for some years but it might get some derivates (video focussed, 100MP, ....)


----------



## chasingrealness (Apr 7, 2021)

Berowne said:


> And why is it certified in Russia?


In mother Russia, Camera certifies you!


----------



## chasingrealness (Apr 7, 2021)

DBounce said:


> $6,999 is my guess. If it’s the R1 spec’d as rumored I’ll preorder.


I would pay that for an R1 as spec’d, too. Definitely worth every penny to have a camera that can shoot anything from super high res to super-fast, ‘regular’ res images.


----------



## jeliel (Apr 7, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Compact full frame = RP, R.


I already have the RP ... For instance the Sony A7C is more compact, this is what i'm expecting for ... Sorry for my english ... A compact FF that you can bring everywhere in a large pocket or in a small bag ...


----------



## Del Paso (Apr 7, 2021)

jeliel said:


> I already have the RP ... For instance the Sony A7C is more compact, this is what i'm expecting for ... Sorry for my english ... A compact FF that you can bring everywhere in a large pocket or in a small bag ...


Leica Q2 equivalent would be cute!


----------



## AccipiterQ (Apr 7, 2021)

Fletchahh said:


> I hope that this is either the R7, or if it's R1 that the R7 is not far behind.



I _think _they would do the R1 first....I really hope they buck tradition and it's the R7 though...


----------



## reef58 (Apr 7, 2021)

DBounce said:


> If Canon is going to ask that kind of money, this thing has better be near perfect... if it is, I’ll buy it happily. But if it falls short they will lose my business. This isn’t a luxury camera... it has to perform.


It could be the R1 is to the 1dx as the R5 is to the 5d. If that is the case I suspect it will come in around $7,000 to $7500.


----------



## dwarven (Apr 7, 2021)

With Sony and Nikon both having announced their pro level mirrorless cameras already, surely this has to be the R1. I'd guess the R7 as a close second.


----------



## usern4cr (Apr 7, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Maths.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you for the link, privatebydesign. It is an interesting read. There may be some additional dynamic range possible with some additional processing, but it is not clear to me from the information that it will give anywhere near 2x increase from DP data. It looks like there are a lot of unresolved questions regarding using this in real world conditions, but with what I understood from it I would be willing to agree that you might be able to get "some" DR increase if additional data is stored in the file and processed by your post software. Exactly what "some" is, I don't know.


----------



## edoorn (Apr 7, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> I completely agree. It's my #1 "want to have" in my next body. (just don't call it "quad Bayer" and claim 4x more pixel resolution than it really is)


Can’t argue with that!


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 7, 2021)

DBounce said:


> If Canon is going to ask that kind of money, this thing has better be near perfect... if it is, I’ll buy it happily. But if it falls short they will lose my business. This isn’t a luxury camera... it has to perform.


The bulk of sales will be to well to do hobbyists, not professionals. It will perform. To most, this (R1) camera is a luxury item. To professionals, a tool and luxury item.


----------



## slclick (Apr 7, 2021)

R1, R3, R7. 

What's the R3? It's the middleman between the 5 and 6. If you remember or know the EOS 3 you understand.


----------



## slclick (Apr 7, 2021)

canonmike said:


> Good question......


This is common, nothing to see here.


----------



## padam (Apr 7, 2021)

Here is the RF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM

SA control = spherical aberration control?


----------



## usern4cr (Apr 7, 2021)

padam said:


> Here is the RF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM
> 
> SA control = spherical aberration control?


Wow - it looks like you really got a photo of it! Thanks! I'm glad to see a 3-way switch for AF range (far/both/near). They should have that on all their zooms! I wonder if this has their 1:1.4x magnification?

Now I wonder if they're going to have RF macro primes like this in the 180+mm range?


----------



## Atlasman (Apr 7, 2021)

At the present time, Sony holds the crown for a flagship mirrorless camera. Canon needs to answer with something better—sooner than later. At the very least a development announcemen.


----------



## padam (Apr 7, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> Wow - it looks like you really got a photo of it! Thanks! I'm glad to see a 3-way switch for AF range (far/both/near). They should have that on all their zooms! I wonder if this has their 1:1.4x magnification?
> 
> Now I wonder if they're going to have RF macro primes like this in the 180+mm range?


Well, the MFD on the previous L version was 0.3m, now it is 0.25m so it is possible that it achieves that depending on the focus breathing, etc.

Highly unlikely to have a longer one, none of the mirrorless competition offers a lens like this (and Sony started it much sooner), so the demand is probably too low, maybe 3rd party manufacturers will offer such a thing.
Maybe the APS-C mirrorless model or the high megapixel model can be used in crop mode to get closer to that narrower FOV (although of course it will not change the blur or other aspects)


----------



## DBounce (Apr 7, 2021)

CanonFanBoy said:


> The bulk of sales will be to well to do hobbyists, not professionals. It will perform. To most, this (R1) camera is a luxury item. To professionals, a tool and luxury item.


I doubt that. I imagine most well to do hobbiest would sooner just buy a Leica. While I love Canon and feel they largely produce more technically advanced cameras than Leica, Canon does not come close to carrying the same panache as the Red dot. That said, after the depressing rumors of the R1 being delayed until next year, I starting 
seriously considering a Leica M10 Monochrom “Leitz Wetlzlar” with a Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH... While it only shoots monochrome, I’ve found myself thinking that perhaps less is more... and given that this is a Leica (with a price tag of $15,889.40 for the body and a single lens) well, less really is more:-D

So in my case whatever Canon prices the R1 at, it’s going to feel cheap. The truth is the Canon makes a lot more sense for me as I have lots of RF glass... but I gave away my R series bodies; So all I have now to shoot with is Sonys. I’m still waiting on my Komodo... no telling when that thing will ship. But even then, I know the R1 would see more usage. I was never without my 1DXMK2. That brick went everywhere with me.

I just had a thought. Could it be that in the long run the Leica is cheaper? Most old cameras are just considered outdated. But even old Leica are considered cool... indeed, many are sort after. Perhaps Leica is the cure to GAS? One camera... one lens... for life!

Damit... I’ll probably just buy both.


----------



## David - Sydney (Apr 8, 2021)

Craig, any ideas on the "normal" length of time between Russia certification and either announcement to shipping date?
Canon did get a thrashing on the teaser campaign for the R5 and whilst technically accurate, it really over hyped the video/overheating feature set. Still, a R1 would certainly have a development announcement together with lenses


----------



## Perio (Apr 8, 2021)

Berowne said:


> And why is it certified in Russia?


Both RF 400 and 600mm telephoto were also certified in Russia.


----------



## reef58 (Apr 8, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> Craig, any ideas on the "normal" length of time between Russia certification and either announcement to shipping date?
> Canon did get a thrashing on the teaser campaign for the R5 and whilst technically accurate, it really over hyped the video/overheating feature set. Still, a R1 would certainly have a development announcement together with lenses


I don't think they over-hyped it at all. It is a great stills camera and a superb video rig. What does it not do, shoot an hour of 8k?


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Apr 8, 2021)

Billybob said:


> I'm okay without a GS as long as the readout speed matches or exceeds that of the Sony A1


I do not think readout speed matters very much with a glocal shutter.
The entire image is captured by the sensor at the same time and is serialized.
The image processor can take its time reading it.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Apr 8, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> *EDIT* - This post is about claiming 16 Quad Bayer pixels vs the normal 4 Bayer pixels. It is **not** about QP vs DP design.
> 
> I still don't see what benefit a Quad Pixel AF *"Quad-Bayer"* (16 Bayer pixels) could offer. For pixels in focus (where you would want extra resolution), phase detect DP or QP gives the same dual or quad values for all values (by design) so there's no benefit there. With out of focus pixels (where the QP values differ) , who cares about increasing resolution as it's just a smear which could be done in post.
> 
> ...


The entire point of a global shutter is that it captures the entire image at once.
Once focus is achieved it does not seem to be a big deal to capture the image using the entire sensor including the focus pixels.
That would take twice as long and be 4 times the resolution which is exactly the rumored spec.


----------



## David - Sydney (Apr 8, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> Wow - it looks like you really got a photo of it! Thanks! I'm glad to see a 3-way switch for AF range (far/both/near). They should have that on all their zooms! I wonder if this has their 1:1.4x magnification?
> 
> Now I wonder if they're going to have RF macro primes like this in the 180+mm range?


Many of the zooms do have far/near/full focusing options. The macro in particular since the focal distances have a wide range ie close minimum focusing ability


----------



## David - Sydney (Apr 8, 2021)

reef58 said:


> I don't think they over-hyped it at all. It is a great stills camera and a superb video rig. What does it not do, shoot an hour of 8k?


Shamelessly recycling another post... over a 6 months worth of announcements which was the main issue. I contend that admitting there would be reasonable time limits eg 10 minutes for firmware 1.0 would have meant that the reviewers would have tempered their unrealistic expectations.

Internet: Canon could never put 8K full frame in to a mirrorless camera. They don't have the technical capabilities to do that. The last time they innovated was when 5d mkii was born.
Canon: Our next 5 series will have 8K and demonstrate what we are capable of.
Internet: (spits coffee on screen) Yeah right. Maybe 8K timelapse mode
Canon: No, 8K video
Internet: Er no, 8K like 15 second movie burst mode then, because you know overheating would happen in such a small body. Do Canon engineers not know anything about physics? That's why refrigerators exist....
Canon: No full 8K video
Internet: Yeah right.... hahaha. It's not possible. So no AF or IBIS then. You won't be able to use the full technologies of the camera/
Canon: No. 8K Full frame, AF and IBIS enabled.
Internet: It's not possible, because you know.... overheating is a thing with technology in such a small package. If it was possible then Sony would have done it.
Canon: Hold our beer.....

Post launch
Internet: I demand a full unconditional apology from Canon. I demand immediately that they give us unlimited 8K full frame video for $4.99 and stop hiding behind this "overheating" scenario to protect their other cameras. I’ve never felt so personally insulted by a camera company as I have by Canon. To me honest behaviour is very important. I recognize that the only person that is perfect is me and people make mistakes. The important thing is to admit that and not to sell us totally unusable technology like this…


----------



## Billybob (Apr 8, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I do not think readout speed matters very much with a glocal shutter.
> The entire image is captured by the sensor at the same time and is serialized.
> The image processor can take its time reading it.


Undoubtedly correct, but what does your response have to do with my post?

I said that I was okay _*without*_ a GS provided the readout speed is fast. If there is no GS--which was my point--then readout speed does indeed matter. To the point, a GS is much less compelling with sufficiently fast readout. rolling shutter is not a factor. Whereas I'm sure that are other benefits to a GS, eliminating distortion from RS is the most significant one to me.


----------



## TravelerNick (Apr 8, 2021)

It's not that it's certified in Russia. It's that the rumour is coming out of the Russian certification body. It's likely also been filed with the EU,Japan,FCC , Canada etc. But the Russians blabbed


----------



## David - Sydney (Apr 8, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I do not think readout speed matters very much with a glocal shutter.
> The entire image is captured by the sensor at the same time and is serialized.
> The image processor can take its time reading it.


Ultimately the read speed from the sensor will approximate zero if a global shutter is possible. For rolling shutter then the time between frames becomes the issue AFAIK. Sensor capture time will never theoretically be zero but could be close. We haven't had a global shutter before with still cameras so it will be interesting to see the specs and results when a manufacturer claims to have one. As opposed to video cameras where Arri etc do claim it ie the lack of rolling shutter = global shutter. Not sure if they claim global shutter in all frame rates though eg 120fps.


----------



## mclaren777 (Apr 8, 2021)

5DV! 5DV! 5DV!


----------



## reef58 (Apr 8, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> Shamelessly recycling another post... over a 6 months worth of announcements which was the main issue. I contend that admitting there would be reasonable time limits eg 10 minutes for firmware 1.0 would have meant that the reviewers would have tempered their unrealistic expectations.
> 
> Internet: Canon could never put 8K full frame in to a mirrorless camera. They don't have the technical capabilities to do that. The last time they innovated was when 5d mkii was born.
> Canon: Our next 5 series will have 8K and demonstrate what we are capable of.
> ...


That sums it up pretty well. That being said the internet fire storm(pun intended) was a bit of a feeding frenzy for clicks. I know the firmware helped but people have actually own the camera to use it don't have many issues. Some camera lockups seem to happen. You can't shoot 8k or downsampled 4k indefinitely.


----------



## Rumourhasit (Apr 8, 2021)

Exactly, I can tell you 90% of my YouTube subs are over 45, anyone younger is using a smartphone and only a small percentage are interested in an ILC and the only ILC bodies that will have features to beat a smartphone and AI computational photos will be expensive


----------



## Ozarker (Apr 8, 2021)

DBounce said:


> I doubt that. I imagine most well to do hobbiest would sooner just buy a Leica. While I love Canon and feel they largely produce more technically advanced cameras than Leica, Canon does not come close to carrying the same panache as the Red dot. That said, after the depressing rumors of the R1 being delayed until next year, I starting
> seriously considering a Leica M10 Monochrom “Leitz Wetlzlar” with a Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 ASPH... While it only shoots monochrome, I’ve found myself thinking that perhaps less is more... and given that this is a Leica (with a price tag of $15,889.40 for the body and a single lens) well, less really is more:-D
> 
> So in my case whatever Canon prices the R1 at, it’s going to feel cheap. The truth is the Canon makes a lot more sense for me as I have lots of RF glass... but I gave away my R series bodies; So all I have now to shoot with is Sonys. I’m still waiting on my Komodo... no telling when that thing will ship. But even then, I know the R1 would see more usage. I was never without my 1DXMK2. That brick went everywhere with me.
> ...


Um... okay. The R5 and R1 are priced for the great unwashed masses, not the well to do. Of course, the poor rich get Leica. The rich rich get a Hasselblad or something.... Jeeves! Jeeves!


----------



## usern4cr (Apr 8, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> The entire point of a global shutter is that it captures the entire image at once.
> Once focus is achieved it does not seem to be a big deal to capture the image using the entire sensor including the focus pixels.
> That would take twice as long and be 4 times the resolution which is exactly the rumored spec.


I don't understand how your reply regarding global shutter has anything to do with my comment about whether to claim a single QuadPixel gives you (the usual) 4 pixels vs. 16 pixels(which I think would be bogus). To me, they are completely independant issues which have nothing to do with the other.

By the way, I do agree that having a global shutter is indeed a great feature, and if you have it then the readout speed is (probably) not as critical. But there will be those that want high frame rates for video or high FPS stills which will still require a high enough speed readout (whether or not there is a global shutter). However if a global shutter has 2 image buffers (one being exposed and one already exposed and being read out) then the speed of the readout can be much slower and still give even better overall FPS performance. But a global shutter might have only 1 image buffer - we'll see. But again, this is a separate issue from what I posted.


----------



## usern4cr (Apr 8, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> Many of the zooms do have far/near/full focusing options. The macro in particular since the focal distances have a wide range ie close minimum focusing ability


My comment about 3 way switches vs 2 way switches is because on the RF 70-200L and RF 100-500L they both have only 2 way switches, which I think is a very bad (and needless) decision, and one I have to live with. If you're going to have a distance switch, you might as well make it a 3 way switch (far, both, & near) so everyone is happy. Hopefully Canon will see their mistake and not repeat it in the future.


----------



## koenkooi (Apr 8, 2021)

usern4cr said:


> My comment about 3 way switches vs 2 way switches is because on the RF 70-200L and RF 100-500L they both have only 2 way switches, which I think is a very bad (and needless) decision, and one I have to live with. If you're going to have a distance switch, you might as well make it a 3 way switch (far, both, & near) so everyone is happy. Hopefully Canon will see their mistake and not repeat it in the future.


Or add a software limiter where we can pick the range ourselves.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Apr 8, 2021)

David - Sydney said:


> Sensor capture time will never theoretically be zero but could be close. We haven't had a global shutter before with still cameras so it will be interesting to see the specs and results when a manufacturer claims to have one. As opposed to video cameras where Arri etc do claim it ie the lack of rolling shutter = global shutter. Not sure if they claim global shutter in all frame rates though eg 120fps.


I have been told the document in this link is for the sensor used in Komodo.








Rolling Shutter vs Global Shutter sCMOS Camera Mode- Oxford Instruments


This article outlines the differences between Rolling Shutter vs Global Shutter camera modes. Discover the mode that best suits your needs




andor.oxinst.com




It can flip between rolling and global shutter.
The only reasons I can think of for using the rolling shutter mode is to save energy or to get a faster exposure which leads me to believe there is a minimum exposure time for the global shutter.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Apr 8, 2021)

TravelerNick said:


> It's not that it's certified in Russia. It's that the rumour is coming out of the Russian certification body. It's likely also been filed with the EU,Japan,FCC , Canada etc. But the Russians blabbed


I can only assume that registration is public information in Russia.
Registration there always seems to hit the news.


----------



## pzyber (Apr 9, 2021)

My bet is on an R replacement. The Ra is listed as discontinued everywhere here in Sweden. The R seems to be order only now and noone seems to stock it anymore, same status as Ra had a couple of months ago.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Apr 9, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> I have been told the document in this link is for the sensor used in Komodo.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Does changing to rolling shutter increase the dynamic range in this case? I have heard that global shutter can lose you around 1 stop of dynamic range


----------



## rwvaughn (Apr 9, 2021)

mclaren777 said:


> 5DV! 5DV! 5DV!


Honestly, with the rush to discontinue EF lenses left and right do you really think a 5Dv is likely?


----------



## rwvaughn (Apr 9, 2021)

sanj said:


> 5D 5. I am confident.


I've a feeling you are going to be greatly disappointed.


----------



## BPhoto06 (Apr 9, 2021)

Bonich said:


> Usually they announce in strong correlation with Olympics. This year we face Tokyo "2020", this is the one and only date of birth for the R1 as professional sports camera.
> Yes, the R5 will stay in program for some years but it might get some derivates (video focussed, 100MP, ....)


This is true, but if Canon adds derivates of the R5 they will be the R5s and R5c. This camera might be the R1 as it includes the EOS 1Dx name.


----------



## BPhoto06 (Apr 9, 2021)

This camera could be the new R1 as it includes the name Canon EOS 1Dx in the certification. This could mean that they are certificating the mirrorless replacement to the 1Dx Mk 3.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Apr 9, 2021)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> Does changing to rolling shutter increase the dynamic range in this case? I have heard that global shutter can lose you around 1 stop of dynamic range


There is not really a technical reason to be true in theory but it does tend to be true in practice.*
C70 has a rolling shutter plus DGO yet it has pretty much the same dynamic range as the similarly priced RED Komodo.
If the C70 had a global shutter it would lose DGO and 3 EV of dynamic range but that is only because the underlying sensor has 3 less EV than the one in the Komodo.
Canon has a patent for a global shutter with a whole 20 EV of dynamic range but Canon could theoretically make a C70 that could switch between DGO and Global Shutter.
That would be pretty bad-ass.

*In theory, everything works in practice. In practice, everything works in theory.
-Yogi Berra (Maybe. It has also been attributed to Einstein and a bunch of other folks)


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Apr 9, 2021)

rwvaughn said:


> Honestly, with the rush to discontinue EF lenses left and right do you really think a 5Dv is likely?


pzyber: The Ra is listed as discontinued everywhere here in Sweden.​
Well, If discontinuing a few things means Canon is dropping the entire line then I can only assume Canon is dropping their RF line next.

/I have to admit that Canon is discontinuing some seemingly important EF lenses but many of them have no viable RF replacements.
//I really have no idea what Canon is doing or why.
///Nikon seems like the most predictable camera company right now.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Apr 9, 2021)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> Does changing to rolling shutter increase the dynamic range in this case? I have heard that global shutter can lose you around 1 stop of dynamic range


OK, one more thing to reinforce what you heard.
Rolling shutter mode only turns on the lines of photosites on the sensor that are being read.
This creates less interference in the form of image noise.
Global shutter mode has a higher noise floor which I imagine would result in the loss of a stop or more.
(16+ stops was probably enough for RED to disable rolling shutter mode.)
The exposure time is also double which should never really be a problem for video.


----------



## sanj (Apr 11, 2021)

rwvaughn said:


> I've a feeling you are going to be greatly disappointed.


I am joking. I have no interest in DSLR anymore. My RF does great and am waiting to see what R1 will bring.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Apr 11, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> OK, one more thing to reinforce what you heard.
> Rolling shutter mode only turns on the lines of photosites on the sensor that are being read.
> This creates less interference in the form of image noise.
> Global shutter mode has a higher noise floor which I imagine would result in the loss of a stop or more.
> ...


Very interesting, thanks for the insight.


----------



## Ph0t0 (Apr 11, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> pzyber: The Ra is listed as discontinued everywhere here in Sweden.​
> Well, If discontinuing a few things means Canon is dropping the entire line then I can only assume Canon is dropping their RF line next.
> 
> /I have to admit that Canon is discontinuing some seemingly important EF lenses but many of them have no viable RF replacements.
> ...


Well discontinuing one product isn't exactly the same as starting a line with a new mount and discontinuing a whole bunch of lenses 

But yeah when Canon launches another full frame mount, starts aggressively releasing lenses and cameras for the new mount, discontinues about 15 RF lenses without releasing newer RF versions and when Canon officials say that they are fully commiting their resources and R&D to the new mount. Then you can safely assume that Canon is dropping their RF line next. 
But as long as they only have one camera model (the one that was a bit niche anyway) listed as discontinued in Sweden I wouldn't worry to much.


----------



## zim (Apr 11, 2021)

Ph0t0 said:


> Well discontinuing one product isn't exactly the same as starting a line with a new mount and discontinuing a whole bunch of lenses
> 
> But yeah when Canon launches another full frame mount, starts aggressively releasing lenses and cameras for the new mount, discontinues about 15 RF lenses without releasing newer RF versions and when Canon officials say that they are fully commiting their resources and R&D to the new mount. Then you can safely assume that Canon is dropping their RF line next.
> But as long as they only have one camera model (the one that was a bit niche anyway) listed as discontinued in Sweden I wouldn't worry to much.


I take it you meant EF for the first and last mentions of RF!


----------



## Ph0t0 (Apr 11, 2021)

zim said:


> I take it you meant EF for the first and last mentions of RF!


No.


----------



## SteveC (Apr 11, 2021)

zim said:


> I take it you meant EF for the first and last mentions of RF!


pzyber was sarcastically saying "gee they dropped the Ra, maybe they're going to kill the RF mount now", and he was responding to that--under what circumstances would one be able to claim RF was on the chopping block.

Basically, those are NOW the circumstances EF is going through, but just a couple of weeks ago only one or two lenses had been dropped, and people were already starting to panic. I even told one of them they were being a bit premature; further events showed I was wrong.


----------



## zim (Apr 11, 2021)

SteveC said:


> pzyber was sarcastically saying "gee they dropped the Ra, maybe they're going to kill the RF mount now", and he was responding to that--under what circumstances would one be able to claim RF was on the chopping block.
> 
> Basically, those are NOW the circumstances EF is going through, but just a couple of weeks ago only one or two lenses had been dropped, and people were already starting to panic. I even told one of them they were being a bit premature; further events showed I was wrong.


Ok thanks for taking the time to explain that went right over my head!


----------



## pape2 (Apr 11, 2021)

Maybe they invented transparent sensor and putted mirror behind it .
And now going back to old. RF lenses werent smaller and didnt gave better image quality becouse shorter flange distance . 
Complaint storm from blind photographers about rear caps been too much , even guide dogs cant turn them right on.


----------



## Peet30 (Apr 11, 2021)

Im hoping for the R7 for a very long time now. Please announce it


----------



## Billybob (Apr 12, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> OK, one more thing to reinforce what you heard.
> Rolling shutter mode only turns on the lines of photosites on the sensor that are being read.
> This creates less interference in the form of image noise.
> Global shutter mode has a higher noise floor which I imagine would result in the loss of a stop or more.
> ...


Okay, so why do we want a global shutter for action/bird photography? I know GS eliminates rolling shutter distortion, but Sony has shown that fast readout does the same without increased noise and a hit to DR. I suspect GS if it is fast enough and if it has sufficient DR is probably the end goal, but the KISS principle suggests that very fast readout gets us most of the way (all the way?) there with existing and proven technology.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Apr 12, 2021)

Billybob said:


> Okay, so why do we want a global shutter for action/bird photography? I know GS eliminates rolling shutter distortion, but Sony has shown that fast readout does the same without increased noise and a hit to DR. I suspect GS if it is fast enough and if it has sufficient DR is probably the end goal, but the KISS principle suggests that very fast readout gets us most of the way (all the way?) there with existing and proven technology.


The main advantage to a global shutter is that it is like a mechanical shutter with no moving parts and infinite actuations.
DR is sacrificed at the maximum burst speed for a rolling shutter as well.
CMOS GS in proven tech at this point.
The documentation that was provided in the link I posted up-thread is the best comparison between rolling and global shutter since it is the same processor that can switch between modes.
The rolling readout is 10ms which is crazy fast and the global shutter DR has 16+ EV.
By the way, for long exposures, a rolling shutter would have the same noise and DR as a global shutter since the entire sensor will be on most of the time. There also would be no rolling shutter works.
Also, the whole sensor is on when using a mechanical shutter.
It still turns the sensor on one line at a time but the entire sensor is on before the shutter opens.
Thanks for making me explain this.
It made me realize that a global shutter does not 100% replace a mechanical shutter.
Canon uses the shutter to protect the sensor so I do not think they will remove it unless they want to swap it for internal ND.


----------



## Billybob (Apr 12, 2021)

EOS 4 Life said:


> The main advantage to a global shutter is that it is like a mechanical shutter with no moving parts and infinite actuations.
> DR is sacrificed at the maximum burst speed for a rolling shutter as well.
> CMOS GS in proven tech at this point.
> The documentation that was provided in the link I posted up-thread is the best comparison between rolling and global shutter since it is the same processor that can switch between modes.
> ...


I didn't read your article, but I did find one at B&H. So, GS tech does exist, the problem seems to be that it is very expensive to build one once sensor size gets large. The problem seems to be heat, noise, and yes cost (I don't know what your 16+ EV means; everyone seems to have a different DR measure. At DXO, I think 14 is the max, and on PhotonsToPhotos, 12 EV is the max; so I'll just take your word that GS is capable of good DR). 

So my personal preference is for whichever method gets us there--low/nonexistent rolling shutter distortion--with the greatest reliability and affordability.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Apr 13, 2021)

i will take a wild guess and say that Canon is making a new camera called the R3. You heard it here first. RayRumors


----------



## EOS 4 Life (Apr 13, 2021)

Billybob said:


> everyone seems to have a different DR measure.


There is no standard way of measuring dynamic range but it seems pretty easy in theory.
Just have a scene with a wide range of T-stops.
(I have no idea why so many test with F-stops)
There is testing equipment that goes up to 20 stops but the stops in the test have to line up with the stops in the camera which if you knew you would not need to do the test.
Next, the dynamic range of the lens has to match.
There is no true dynamic range test though there are so many people who claim that they know the true dynamic range and all of the camera companies are lying.


----------

